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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/21/1999 1:39:00 PM
From: 16yearcycle	Respond to of 152472

Michael, reread the post you referred to today and tell me where i made any reference to your actions. Thanks.

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/21/1999 1:49:00 PM
From: Kayaker	Respond to of 152472

Well the same rules apply to all. Honesty and integrity are very important to me. It is good to see that Gregg volunteered to end his charade. The same laws and rules apply to all, not just everyone else. You seem to be suggesting that because Gregg Powers signed a message with GJP rather than his full name, he is somehow dishonest and lacks integrity, i.e., he should have used his full name? The same rules apply to all? Honesty and integrity are very important to you? Why do I not see your last name at the bottom of any of your posts? Most of the folks on SI and Yahoo chose not to post with their full real names. Each person has their own reasons for doing so, and whether you like or not, it's their right, and it's none of your business.

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/21/1999 1:53:00 PM
From: DownSouth	Respond to of 152472

Michael, I don't understand why you think it was your role to cause GP to "come clean". If he had compromised himself, then it was done. Why take the action you did? If GP wants to preach ethics to Q employees, then so be it. I doubt he would chose to report them to their bosses or their peers! I have watched GP recently and he as avoided conflicts of interest very effectively. Do you think he has not? Do you think that anonymity is unethical on these boards? Do you think that owning stock and posting here is unethical? Please don't protect my interests and enforce your personal standard of ethics and honesty on others. Protect your own interests and stand by your own standards, but, gosh, I hope your standards don't include forcing those standards on others here. You imply that somehow GP viloated "laws and rules". I find it offensive for you to make such unsubstantiated implications. Please refrain. Good investing.

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/21/1999 1:53:00 PM
From: Voltaire	Respond to of 152472

Some peoples Security is built on the Insecurity of others, Nuff said. Have a nice day. Voltaire

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/21/1999 2:21:00 PM
From: freeus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Just curious: Is it ALWAYS a nice day?????

To: Michael who wrote (42080)	9/22/1999 3:58:00 AM
From: John Biddle	Respond to of 152472

Let me add my 2¢ to the chorus of negative feedback you have received on your crusade to "out" Gregg on Yahoo. It was an abominable mistake and you deeply deserve every virtual spank you got. Gregg has been a consistently valuable poster, both for the incisiveness of his opinions and the quality of his writing. Though he has access to management, he never revealed anything which compromised anyone. Sometimes he even removed himself from our discussions and the consensus of opinion was that he knew things and couldn't comment (our guess, he didn't confirm). To equate his use of an alias on Yahoo, where his posts were similar in content to those he made here on SI, to the behavior of a Q employee who made public things learned in a private Q employees meeting is ludicrous. Though I prefer real names to noms de plume, I respect everyone's right to be cautious in this scary world. Use of a handle is not an honesty or integrity issue. You yourself don't use your full name. The Q employee, on the other hand, was using his anomymity to shield execrable behavior, actions which surely would and should get him fired if they could be attributed to him. While I agree with you that his handle on Yahoo didn't hide his identity from anyone familiar with his SI postings, you should have just kept quite about your knowledge, or at most pointed out to him your thoughts in a PM. It doesn't seem that you have learned from your mistake yet, but I hope you do.