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: E who wrote (12383)	5/7/2002 6:28:23 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (2) of 21057

You are beating this poor horse into an unrecognizable corpse. The language you cite from TOU is impossibly vague. "Improper"? Was it "improper" for you to quiz me on my opinions of sex acts? Was that "vulgar"? One could easily say so. How many times do you have to say you disagree with the SI interpretations in the CH case? What does it matter? If you think CH turned Poet in, directly or indirectly, then you must give him credit with coming up with a charge that would stick, because there is no ambiguity to it. That would make CH smarter than you, because (if true) he accomplished something.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next