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.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (3047)	6/30/1999 11:26:00 PM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4711

Finally, I found a place that can answer this question: What the heck does sic mean? I know what it is used for, what does it actually mean? Thanks.

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (3047)	7/1/1999 12:36:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 4711

One question I have is how it is possible to slander somebody over the internet. I suppose if they published Real Audio files, maybe that would count. But slander is spoken defamation. Hard to do in chat rooms!!

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (3047)	7/1/1999 12:38:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 4711

Then there's Illegally shorting of That's a red mark for grammar.

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (3047)	7/1/1999 12:44:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4711

The Judge, after preliminary examination of the submitted document, requests a response to the following questions: 1) What the hell kind of 8-K was that? 2) How can one "commit emotional distress" (as in: "intentional infliction of emotional distress and conspiracy to commit emotional distress")? The significance of this sentence appears to be that the persons named in the suit inflicted distress on others, and then proceeded to do the same to themselves; in which case, the two actions will be ruled as having cancelled one another out. 3) What does "illegally shorting of non-marginable securities" mean? And what is the relationship of these non-marginable securities to the non-securities mentioned in the following clause ("conspiracy to commit illegal shorting of non-securities)? 4) Was the interference with "prospective economic advantage" tortuous or negligent? The court fails to see how it could be both. 5) Is it forbidden by law to "annoy"? It is actionable to harass, defame, or injure; but to annoy? That could lead to everyone in this country being sued. And what does it mean to "cyberstalk"? 6) Are these people in their right minds? And do they have a lawyer? <signed> Judge jbe