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: John Curtis who wrote (5299)	12/5/1999 5:50:00 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10293

Can you both either discuss specific stock ideas or take that into privacy? Thanks, but no thanks to such utter crap.

To: John Curtis who wrote (5299)	12/5/1999 6:52:00 PM
From: Mama Bear	Respond to of 10293

"Trust me, Bill isn't going to bother with your little schoolyard challenges." Funny how my attempts to get at the heart of his lying and spreading of false information is somehow construed by you as "schooyard" The really tiring thing about this entire argument is the careless manner in which you and your playmates throw around words like "lying" and "false information" when the truth is the entire thing is a difference of opinion. In all the words that have been wasted on this and the GUMM thread, that's what it comes down to. You and your playmates dislike Bill's opinion, but only time will tell if his opinion or yours is correct. Your contingent has done nothing to prove that GUMM is legit. All of your arguments and personal ad hominems have been presented with equal weight on the threads of many other stocks which have later proven their detractors fully correct in their skepticism. The only way your flawed argument works is if it is your contention that it is not Bill's opinion that GUMM is a fraud. That's the only way that he can be said to be lying, is if he knows for a fact that the company is legitimate, and is for some perverse or diabolical reason lying about his opinion. It doesn't even matter if GUMM is a fraud or not. If his opinion is indeed as he has stated, then he is being honest. The fact that you look at the same set of facts and come to a different conclusion is irrelevant. No position in GUMM here. I looked at it, and it bored me. But it doesn't bore me half as much as this incessant nonsense that those who seem to have fallen in love with the company. Regards, Barb