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.

SI - Site Forums : Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (187)	4/29/2000 3:41:00 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4893

SI aliases are easy to abuse. If I switch to an alias, a few months later you won't know I'm the same person you were exchanging views with today. I don't disagree with your post, Dale. I believe that SI has tried to set itself over and above RB and Yahoo in that it makes it more difficult to switch aliases and it also enforces (perhaps selectively) its rather detailed TOS. My suggestions would be to have clear statements of rules and clear guidelines for enforcement, guidelines which are followed irrespective of the popularity of the poster. When someone admittedly flaunts a TOS, then give that poster the penalty that is outlined. I'm not looking to set up a police force, but some of these guys are open and notoriously manipulative, threatening, and making personal attacks. (I noticed some of your similar comments, which I applaud, on another thread when one guru tries to show he is "better" than another.) Yes, it's easy to say "buyer beware" but as you pointed out very eloquently there are the sheep and the lemmings who follow many of the gurus here into a field where they are slaughtered. Front running and scalping takes place both long and short, with these boards used as effective implements. I don't think that others, whether it be the average poster-observer, the administrators or the SEC should look the other way because it is supposedly "First Amendment" territory. It's long been established that wrongful conduct in the guise of "speech" is still conduct that is not protected by the First Amendment. Of course, the devil is in the details. BTW. I enjoyed reading your site. Keep us posted as to your future plans.