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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: d:oug who wrote (51861)	4/23/2000 6:28:00 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116764

On Topic:He who makes the SI rules also gets to interpret the SI rules. I remain steadfast in my "no fear" of SI-Admin (Jeff) who IS the last word in this matter of what is okay in SI's eyes and what isn't okay to post...not in YOUR interpretation of SI's TOS. End of Discussion ...that is unless you wish to expand your understanding of what does and does not constitute scrap gold tonnage (660 to 1,110 in 20 years) ...there are TWO lovely pixs of several heavily gold encrusted as well as DISCARDED SOLID GOLD alloyed items in the photograph and documented in the article via members.aol.com to ignite your imagination. Most people's concept of gold scrap is the "left over wedding ring" from a previous marriage, or perhaps a gold dental crown. Au contraire And you would deny folks the valuable information as to where to find "other discarded gold rings/coins/brooches/trashcans/belts/belt buckles/teeth, etc." simply because you aren't interested in what constitutes scrap or how obscenely cheap (between $2.50 and $20 per troy ounce) it is to recover and resell that scrap gold back into the "CB Cornered Market?" And these horrendeous supply numbers of ABOVE GROUND scrap gold being recycled and "returned to service" dwarf by a margin of 2:1 the current annual rate of BOE gold dumping auctions, let alone what the Dutch are supposedly dumping, and nearly 4 times what the Aussies dumped 2+ years ago. These stats are all according to the Australian Article copied verbatim by your GATA HERO who displayed BLATANT disregard for copyright laws currently enforceable. You see, because ole Murphy, instead of cooperating w/the "Fair Use doctrine now governing Internet posting/printouts, etc.,and classroom posting and discussion group posting/dissemination, MURPHY is CHARGING for the material he is copyright infringing upon by his very dissemination, by your own admission and suggestion that everyone within the sound of YOUR voice pay $99 to hear Bill plagarize material and fancifully construct unsubstantiated tales of collusion. So, unless you are now claiming to be SI-Admin(Jeff) and speaking "in cathedra," I'd suggest, one more time, that you quite making such a sad spectacle of yourself and your erroneous application of all things pertaining to SI's TOS. You, Doug are responsible for things as they are able to be received by your filters. You are not what is the correct interpretation as passed down by SI-Admin (Jeff). Using the US Separation of Powers illustration: SI-Admin (Jeff) is CONGRESS: (makes the TOS rules) SI-Admin (Jeff) is SUPREME COURT (interprets TOS rules) SI-Admin (Jeff) is EXECUTIVE BRANCH (enforcer of TOS rules.) I don't see your name on that list anywhere, Doug. Do you? So pardon me all to hell while I abide by SI-Admin(Jeff), deal?