Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Daytrading Canadian stocks in Realtime -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: VisionsOfSugarplums who wrote (16746)	6/16/1999 12:35:00 AM
From: keith massey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 62348

Toowit Good post... I don't argue the fact the B.S alone can move a stock up or down like wildfire. We have all watched it happen a hundred times and most of us have been suckered in at least once in our trading life by hype/lies (myself included e.g. Hawkeye Gold a few years back). The longer you trade the better your B.S indicator works and the faster you can separate fact from hype/lies/pumps/etc. Should a company go after the individuals posting negative campaigns? - absolutely, if it is justified I agree that groups like the one mentioned in the last new release deserve to be punished since they are the scum of the earth. However if I post that I think a director is scum and a crook for repricing his options after a huge market crash that was caused because of his complete incompetence should I be held liable for slander? By the rule of law I could be sued for such a statement. Do I not voice my opinion on the internet or do I just watch every word I type? I just have a really problem with how they are going to enforce these new "rules" of the internet. There is a very fine wire between free speech and enforcement. I just don't want to see the hammer swing to far in the wrong direction. Best Regards KEITH

To: VisionsOfSugarplums who wrote (16746)	6/16/1999 1:02:00 AM
From: Ed Pakstas	Respond to of 62348

Excellent post...T...ed

To: VisionsOfSugarplums who wrote (16746)	6/16/1999 1:44:00 AM
From: Rampant	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 62348

Toowit: This is an excellent example of negative/damaging posting. Both at the company and the Directors. (V.Gab) I can't agree wiht the free speech argument in this case. As it turns out it is an ex-employee(seriously disgruntled).It dissuaded me from buying for now. How many others has it influenced? The director answered back on S.I. saying as you did that it's not worth the trouble. Did this poster know this? Like a juvenille offender knowing that there will be no penalty? Just an opinion. Rampant Message 9911557