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.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (7852)	8/8/1999 1:52:00 PM
From: bearcub	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

to your name calling and absurd contradictions in your first post to me, you are now threatening me, for the second time, only this time by sic'ing your wife on me with a m-16? My my my. if you can't remember what you posted, and someone, ANYONE points out the absurdity in your historical contradicting statements, or points out that you have enormous holes in your experiental knowledge on the very same day, that you, obviously male, for example, claim to be an expert on the PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF MENSES or COMBAT, or WATER PURIFICATION, or GAO or anynumber of other experiences, then you need a reality check. ron, you post your gapping holes in your logic and memory recitation and ethereal recommendations all over si so i have observed in the last several months. i notice that others respond to you and you just keep on coming back. others keep reponding to you, and so will i. so will everyone else who feels like you are worth the effort to debate. that is what you want isn't it? back and forth and debate? funny how everytime someone makes a point that you overlook, you call it harrassment and go running to si bob claiming they are picking on you. not guilty, this time or ever. if you need a refresher course by me reposting your very first reponse to my first ever post to you, i'll be happy to go get your banshee insults, repost them and refresh everyone's memory one more time. could it be that just once, when you are embarrassed by getting caught in one of your y2k fabrications du jour you would have sense enough to just remain silent instead of continuing to dig your illogical and contradictory hole deeper by absurd responses and feigned wounded cries of harassment? you sure have a strange definition of debate. you beg me to answer. i do and you don't like it. i do it civily and you like it even less. i'm here for the duration as long as i play by the rules, and i'm a playing by the rules my young, confused, bureaucratic friend. oh, just a friendly tip from an older man: when you are quoting me, be sure and leave that quoted portion in context. deal? go purify somemore water or whatever it is you are doing out there on the potomac while monitoring the latest display of free speech in MY nation's capitol. you don't get to "demand" anything on SI. you can whine, name call with impunity, ridicule and falsify, and threaten with bodily harm, and get away with it, it would appear. but don't get to deny the existence of your historical or very fresh as today's commentary, illogical or contradictory postings and then demand people not respond to you, either publically or privately. i know you are trying to set a trap for me and for anyone else on si who disagrees with you. but i refuse to fall into it, ron. now, cool off, and try again to see if you can play nice, without M-16s.