Brian: STOP! STOP! STOP!
I think your intentions are admirable but I would like to voice a very serious cautionary note. But first, let me state that I believe I may be the person primarily responsible for squashing the rumors surrounding Docucon (see my post techstocks.com ). I did get caught up in the story initially but it became rapidly evident that it was bullshit. I spent a lot of time composing this declaration and I believe it caught the attention of many (especially since I was determined to do this a soon as I had a chance). And I really do believe it had a positive effect.
And the fact that a shareholder in a company where events such as this were swirling around responded in this manner (obviously I'm not the only one who has done this sort of thing) is the beauty of this system: it is rapidly, fiercely, and effectively self-correcting. My point is that within less than 24 hours we had policed ourselves. I would be extremely hesitant to contact any form of Web police, either the webmasters or (especially) the SEC. Do you really want these jokers sifting through our mail? It's a precedent that I find patently offensive and that you do not want to set.
What I find most disturbing about your post is the assumption of our collective gullibility. While the Docucon incident indicates were all prone to wishful thinking, THIS IS A FREE AND OPEN FORUM. IT IS NOT, REPEAT NOT, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EITHER THE SITE PROVIDER OR THE GOVERNMENT TO DETERMINE HOW FOOLISHLY WE SPEND OUR MONEY. The very next step of your actions, and its a small step on a slippery slope, is to restrict access. I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE 100, NO, 1 MILLION, FRAUDULENT POSTS, THAN FOR THE SILICON FORUMS TO BE PUT UNDER SOME WATCHFUL EYE. People should and must use their own judgment as to the truthfulness and worthiness of anything posted here.
SINCE THIS IS A FREE AND OPEN FORUM WHICH PEOPLE ENTER UPON THEIR OWN VOLITION, WE DO NOT NEED NOR WANT INTRUSIVE OVERSIGHT.
|
