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 Beta Site Launch - 7/01/99 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (1624)	8/10/1999 12:01:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2340

Supposedly, you can't vote more than once. What makes you think the ballot box has been stuffed? Was the Petition thread "stuffed" as well, in your opinion? Joan

To: David Lawrence who wrote (1624)	8/10/1999 12:09:00 AM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2340

That's a heck of an accusation. Present your evidence. I suspect you're just having us on. Tell me - which is more likely - if the ballot box were stuffable, that you would publicly disparage it, or that you, RTev and your fellow G-Yahoo proponents would quietly be stuffing the "No" end of the poll?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (1624)	8/10/1999 12:27:00 AM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2340

BULLSHT The poll tracks IP address and uses cookies to help prevent people from voting more than once. There are ways to cheat, like logging on with another new IP address and clearing cookies, so it's not 100% infallible. I hope that with the calibre of people on SI, that they would not try and find ways around the measures put in place and cheat. If SI would have run a poll, having only one vote per member things would be a lot more fool proof. But they wouldn't, I had to set up the poll myself.* Are you going to say the petition was stuffed as well??? So in the event that people were voting more than once, can we say the people in favour of the new SI found ways around the anti-cheating measures and posted more than once as well?? Did you vote more than once in favour of the new site?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (1624)	8/10/1999 12:39:00 AM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2340

Maybe I should have put a disclaimer on there: Accurate +5 or -5 percent. (For the possibility that someone could cheat) So are you saying that SI members are a bunch of cheaters?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (1624)	8/10/1999 12:47:00 AM
From: mr.mark	Respond to of 2340

someone posted yesterday (and i reposted it because i liked it so much) that they paid a lifetime membership for SI classic, not beta. that is such a great point. it's almost like breach of contract. changing the product and service AFTER the payment is received. then a guy today said last time he checked, we weren't getting paid to test software, we were paying them for membership. and we shouldn't be expected to do their darn beta testing on a pay site. two great posts. :) mark