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: Hank who wrote (3811)	9/20/1999 11:25:00 PM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Why don't you reread Dan's post when you are lucid and see how stupid your comment was. Hint: 200 is more than 100..... I_i_t. eom.

To: Hank who wrote (3811)	9/21/1999 12:16:00 AM
From: DanZ	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10293

<So what you're saying is that a test population of 100 people is even MORE significant than a test involving only...blah blah> No, you're putting words in my mouth. What I said is, I presume that the Annals of Internal Medicine would not have published a study on the effect that zinc lozenges have on the common cold if they didn't think 100 people was statistically significant. I inferred that because the Zicam study had 200 subjects, that it should be even more statistically significant than the study on zinc lozenges. <What would you know about good results in the stock market when you buy stocks like GUMM?> Actually, GUMM has performed relatively well since I started buying it. It is unfortunate that I didn't buy it at 5, however. My average price is about 11. <Always profess to be an excellent stock picker. When confronting a short, always insist that you bought at the bottom> Putting GUMM aside, most of my personal trades are recorded on SI since I joined in 1996. While I'm not always right, I have an excellent track record dating back many years before I found this website. As for my claiming that I bought at the bottom, you are describing someone else. I'm rarely lucky enough to buy at the bottom although I did buy a lot of GUMM below 10, and this has been it's recent low. Your attempt to discredit me leads me to point out the reasons why my name appears on the most PeopleMarked list on SI. Number one, I'm honest. Number two, I don't condone hype and liars like Wexler. Number three, I'm a very knowledgeable trader and investor. Number four, I make more money than I lose. Number five, I am very giving with my time and help others as much as possible. Number six, I explain my opinions in enough detail so people can understand my rationale and come to their own conclusions. Number seven, I tell you if I don't like your stock even if you are my friend. Number eight, I get along with most people and am courteous to those who are courteous to me. The fact that I don't get along with the bozos on this thread is because some of you are completely unprofessional and unreasonable. Go back and read the first few posts that I made on this thread and the responses that I received and you'll see what I mean.