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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BelowTheCrowd who wrote (3352)	8/27/1999 11:00:00 PM
From: Phil(bullrider)	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10293

MG, As much as I like Anthony, this statement is not reality: That's the reason they have been tolerating an unbearable level of spammers lately. People who would have been kicked out in a day last year are allowed to freely post their drivel on dozens of threads simultaneously. This thread is proof that SI Admin poofs posts if and when reported: Subject 25505 Now, when it comes to TOU violations, I have gone to bat for several posters that I felt were suspended or terminated unjustly. I feel SI is liberal in enforcing the TOU. This is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship. Like it or leave it. Do I like it? Yes. Would I like it better if Anthony and Bill Wexler had not left? Yes. Did both of them leave voluntarily? No. I can tell you one thing though. The more people like Anthony and Bill SI loses, the less true value SI will be for the investment community. Why? There always has to be a reality check on investing. The reality check on SI and on the market in general are the short sellers. The corrections would certainly be far harder and more severe if it were not for them. If SI becomes a haven for hypsters, which it seems like it wants to be, I will be the next one to leave. Will it matter? In the short term, probably not. Long term? Will I be the only one? Have fun, Phil