THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (5754)	3/30/2002 12:38:17 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) of 21057

This is what Ish said: "He just threatened my via PM. He's a real pervert." Message 17263305 This is the applicable rule: 1. Revelation of intimate, personal, or private information about other posters or posting PMs containing such or threatening to do so or alluding to the existence of such IS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED! This specifically includes assertions involving cyberflirtation. Whether the assertions made are true or not is irrelevant. The assertions need not have been made on this thread if the other party is a poster on this thread. No warnings will be given prior to banning for this offense. Ish's post does not: -reveal intimate, personal, or private information about other posters -He does not post a PM containing such -He does not threaten to post a PM containing such -And he does not allude to the existence of a PM that contains intimate, personal or private information -He does not refer to any existence of cyberflirtation Though I do see similarities to the situation that caused the rule to be in affect, the way the rules are written, Ish has not violated them. IMO.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next