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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IngotWeTrust who wrote (24122)	5/3/2000 3:15:00 PM
From: Mike 2.0	Respond to of 54805

OT re search engine hulla-baloo... 49er, your point re the search engine is well taken, but rather than trying to herd content based on whether it fouls up the limited SI search engine, which has & will merely result result in all sides bickering, I urge you to take this to our dear friends of SI (and I mean that genuinely, I think the people who make this website a reality are the water-walkers of the web!) as a much-needed enhancement. No question, the search engine needs work...AFAIK no boolean logic is possible (surely being able to submit a search like +ELON -"G&K" solves the problem at hand), nor are quoted phrases allowed. That is the real solution to all this, versus trying to herd content. And I have no doubt that SI is working this issue right now, in between walking on water and performing other internet miracles <g> Cheers Mike

To: IngotWeTrust who wrote (24122)	5/3/2000 4:01:00 PM
From: Apollo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Wow 49r, that is quite a post..... If you would additionally consider my valid points/and alternatives in a fuller way I stated your point was valid. Because the next Survey won't be done (by me) for 6-12 months, I just didn't see a need to consider anybody's ideas immediately Just because my voice is an "apparent" minority, does not make it less valid I indicated the different points of view were each valid. I never indicated that your point or any other was less valid. I find it extremely revealing ABOUT you that you felt it necessary to wait for "verbal to'ing and fro'ing" before you penned your response, i.e., felt the need to include your need for observing the ensuing tiny tidal wave, ...that you felt it needed to be even included as a criteria for replying. Do you always conduct a survey before you reply to any direct communication or are you capable of forming your own independent opinions before surveying those with "piles" and sarcastic barbs before feeling strong enough to respond? My first response is: "Huh?" My 2nd response is: No 49r, I've been known now and then to form one or two independent opinions, especially here on the Day Job, but also on G&K. As I age, particularly when reading posts such as yours, I've learned to sometimes let a little time go by so that my response is more thoughtful and less emotional. By waiting 24 hrs to reply to you, I was not being rude, but was thinking about your question. I am sorry that you would interpret that effort to thoughtfully answer you as an evil attempt to stall and hope someone else could provide an answer for me, as if I am incapable of intelligent or original thought. I didn't wait for verbal to' and fro' 49r, I only indicated that I had read it (along with the rest of the thread from that day) before replying to you. As a matter of habit, I always try to read the whole thread before jumping in on responses. BTW, before you reject out of hand my claim to 'utter annihilation" of the G&K Thread Search Engine as I claim, did YOU by ANY CHANCE select say, ELON which figured so prominently in your "conclusions" and search for G&K thread comments about this stock just to see what happened? Care to "dispute" that finding of fact. I wonder if you read my message carefully enough, or if my message wasn't well worded by me. 49r, I never disputed your point. Hence, I felt no need to double-check the veracity of your point. I believe you re: the search engine. From where I sit, especially since I did NOT get caught up in your #1 Observation/ELON hyperbole and osmotic fever that spread from [closet momo?] posters on this thread that pose as G&Kers in order to stir emotional wallets and fleece and run, jacking that stock higher and higher w/out proper foundations to support that degree of entropy % ralley,... ...I'd think that discovering why the #1 pick went tits up recently would be of paramount importance to those claiming intense interest in your primary survey finding. My, you do have an interesting style of prose. OH and ONE MORE THING: I frankly do NOT care whether or not I come on strong OK, I believe you; you do not care. Got it! In suggesting you "come on a little strong" 49r in my post, I was trying to gently indicate why you may have received some strongly worded or even unfavorable posts yesterday. Having been on this thread for the past 13 months, it is my belief that the posts you received yesterday were motivated by the way you word things as opposed to the valid message of your post itself. I think it was more the style than the substance. But since you don't care, I fear I was just wasting your time, and I hope you'll accept my apology for that. 49r, I don't know you very well, but you sound like you're pretty smart. I'll be frankly honest with you and say that your style, for me, is a little strong. Some might find it offensive, for example, to refer as you did to "tits on a boar hog" or ELON going "tits up". It is a public board after all, and I wonder if public courtesy shouldn't require some basic consideration of the many who post and lurk here, from all walks of life, and from all around the world. Finally, maybe you would do me the kindness of teaching me something. You signed off Selah. I noticed Voltaire does this too. Honest question: What does this mean? Good luck to you, hope you soften your tone, Stan

To: IngotWeTrust who wrote (24122)	5/3/2000 5:42:00 PM
From: chaz	Respond to of 54805

I'm going to jump in here just this one time....please...give it a rest! You're off on a toot, and if I see one more word of it, you're on "ignore"...which I do not issue lightly. We care about our investments, and I fail to see how your posts, essentially all of them, have helped me see them better. It's not being an innie, or an outie, it's being relevant or superfluous. You are missing the much larger picture with this crap. Thucydidies

To: IngotWeTrust who wrote (24122)	5/3/2000 6:57:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

ole 49r: Most of us learned long ago that the worst choice is to reply to someone like yourself, particularly with patience. But your diarrhea of the mouth and posts is such that it is too tough to just hunker down. The 49r's would be ashamed you use their label. Bye. Cha2

To: IngotWeTrust who wrote (24122)	5/3/2000 7:48:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

>> BTW, before you reject out of hand my claim to 'utter annihilation" of the G&K Thread Search Engine as I claim, did YOU by ANY CHANCE select say, ELON which figured so prominently in your "conclusions" and search for G&K thread comments about this stock just to see what happened? Try the search again using "echelon" instead of "elon" and you'll avoid virtually all of the 117 portfolios. This conversation has gotten well out of hand. I'd be very appreciative if it were abandoned by all parties so we can get back to debate in a framework of polite discourse. Thanks in advance, uf