flickerful,
i am astounded by this universal reluctance
to identify the cancer & to take steps to remove it....
does anyone truly believe that should this happen,
they, too, might then...
be all too easily banished from the kingdom?
I agree with you 100%.
This petition asks SI to enforce the existing rules - the rules we all agreed to abide by when we joined SI. When I read the terms of use, I was under the impression that the rules would be enforced. After all, the terms of use do say:
D. You agree that Silicon Investor in its sole discretion may remove posts by you or terminate your account if it believes that you may have in any way violated the Terms of Use.
We know that SI has exercised its discretion in the past, and on occasion has:
1) Removed posts
2) Suspended users from posting for varying lengths of time
3) Terminated accounts
I think that the rules are being applied inconsistently in this case, since Emile is still allowed to post to SI. I would have thought by now they would have booted him for his repeated blatant violations of clause "B".
When I joined SI, I assumed that the discussion would be primarily about stocks. That's why I come here. I never expected to be reading material of the nature that Emile is posting for crying out loud.
This sort of revisionist clap trap does not belong on SI. SI has given Emile far too many opportunities to broadcast his warped arguements to the world. By allowing him to continue to post, SI is aiding Emile in publishing his messages of hate, and giving him a much larger audience than he would otherwise have (or deserves).
Furthermore (from the W S J story) For its part, Silicon Investor says it does not actively patrol its boards, but will investigate complaints from board participants and delete posts or ban people it deems to have run afoul of its rules -- most often for the use of foul language, personal attacks, spamming, solicitation or hyping a stock."
I agree with TLC's petition.
Regards,
John Sladek |
