<<<I am wondering through all the wild emotional reactions, "Where's the real threat????" So JW posts a "reward" for info on "Pluvia". So what? It wasn't "Dead or Alive". I suppose if someone were posting anonymously for valid reasons, they would be harmed by exposure.>>>
A nom de plume allows a person the freedom of expression without fear of bodily harm, reprisal or harassment. It protects privacy and safety.
If you visit almost any stock board and post news that is negative, you will likely be met with a nasty reception. The fact that the information is true has no bearing. When people have money riding on a stock most people act differently -- they become a "different animal" so to speak.. In the past, in cases where I was constantly right about facts and events, I was still regularly threatened and harassed.
Everyone has a different style of investing, mine involves choosing stocks I feel have little downside risk and great upside potential. I would rather miss out on 3 winning trades than make one losing trade. Knowing the risk factors and understanding the worst case scenario is much more important to me than knowing the best case scenario.
Without a nom de plume, persons posting any contrary opinions as opposed to bull hype, could and IMO would be harassed. And not just on the stock boards, in their real life. Threatened. Harmed. Intimidated. I know, its happening to me right now.
Westergaard's reward has caused people to call my business contacts and tell them I was posting fraudulent information about a stock, and trying to manipulate the stock price to make money. The inference of fraud and stock manipulation is mud that doesn't wear off.
Even though many of you here support the freedoms of privacy and expression, and are appalled by Westergaard's "Reward" stunt which certainly is a form of harassment that takes away my freedoms, most will likely remember me as the guy that Westergaard offered the Reward for and you never really knew if I was committing fraud -- you will probably remember I was accused of it.
Exposing my identity from my pen name now, further harms my reputation as Westergaard's allegation of fraud will spill over and tarnish my true identity and every aspect of my real everyday life. Just the implication of fraud or impropriety is enough to ruin a person -- look at Richard Jewel.
But how can that be? Westergaard accused me of CRIMINAL wrongdoing, but has failed to show even one shred of evidence to support his damaging lies? That's life in our world today.
For those that say -- "hey why not let people put out bounties to get information on people who are committing fraud -- heck if they have done nothing wrong they'll not be hurt." I disagree. If any of you had to endure what I am going through right now, I think you would agree with me.
I think we need to make sure Westergaard's form of harassment is stopped and never happens again. As many here have suggest -- there needs to be concrete proof before serious allegations such as Westergaard's are made.
IMO using a nom de plume allows a free flow of information -- whether it be good or bad, the information will at least be on stock boards to allow us to make our own decision as to its validity.
Eliminating a nom de plume IMO, will not improve the quality of information or remove the hype from stock boards. It will IMO allow posters to be harassed by the nuts out there who want to harm and harass instead of participating in civilized debate.
Steve, the very worn out SI poster |
