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: DanZ who wrote (4159)	10/5/1999 1:07:00 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

If this is his reason, then I'd have to add immature to his questionable character. What does that make the person who keeps falling for it, I wonder. accusing respectable companies and their management of criminal activity Respectable in your opinion. Not necessarily anyone else's. <I don't know the accusation to be false.> Exactly! Huh? I think you misread me. Again. Not to mention he hasn't even provided any reasonable evidence to support his accusation. You know, I've lost count of how many supporters of now-bankrupt or near-bankrupt companies have made that exact same comment. Be honest here, you have no intention of changing your mind about GUMM regardless of what anyone says here. So, why should we bother presenting evidence to one predisposed to disbelieve it anyway? One of the precepts that this Country is built on is innocent until proven guilty. Here we go... It is very un-American to accuse someone of a crime that they haven't been found guilty Then I guess being a prosecuting attorney must be tantamount to treason in your book, eh? That little piece of brain-damage on your part aside, it may additionally come as a surprise to you that this is a message board, not a court of law. And that the purpose of this message board is not to prove guilt or innocence, but to determine good or bad investments. And I truly regret to inform your that "good investment until proven guilty" is not a terribly sound policy. By the time guilt is proven, it's too late to sell. GumTech isn't responsible for comments posted on a public message board by investors. Yet the idea had to have come from somewhere. And who would stand to benefit most from people being misled into believing GummTech has cured the common cold, hmm? Call that Exhibit A.