Sharks in the Septic Tank 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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (56025)	8/30/2002 8:55:22 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (3) of 82486

What do you call it? Remember that you asked. So I'll answer. I call it bulls---t. CH says he didn't threaten to sue, but we'll leave that aside. If he uses the threat of enormous legal expenses. What the hell are you talking about? Where would enormous legal expenses come from? Let's say CH sued to get his full posting privileges restored. Do you envision this as a case that is going to the U.S. Supreme Court? Do you imagine that Alan Derschowitz, Barry Scheck, and Johnnie Cochran are going to become involved? Do you see the case dragging on for years, going from one courtroom to the next? Do you think CH would be awarded millions of dollars? (The only way CH would get a dime would be if he was proved right, and you wrong). There are lawyers on this site who have been suspended and took it like men. When was CH suspended? Overblown rhetoric ... yeah, I'd call it bulls--t. IMO, the simple truth is that SI didn't think the complaint was worth pursuing because the alleged violation was vague and without convincing proof. After trying a half-hearted solution that didn't work, they decided it wasn't worth their further time or trouble. Which is basically what many other posters believed then, and now.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next