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 (241)	5/29/2000 6:57:00 PM
From: PMS Witch	Respond to of 4895

YOU MORON!!! Now that I've got everyone's attention and have moved the post toward the 'exciting' goals those in authority are aiming to achieve, I want to say that I agree with your position. People can, and do, debate the merit(s) of their position(s) in a polite, respectful, and civilized manner. The name calling, profanity, and personal attacks DO NOT serve any useful purpose beyond trying to attract the typical nano-second attention span of the MTV crowd: a demographic we can get along just fine without -- at least until they mature. I hope your post causes some reflection on what's encouraged and viewed as acceptable. You expressed the opinion of many quite well. Cheers, PW.

To: Dale Baker who wrote (241)	5/29/2000 8:21:00 PM
From: mr.mark	Respond to of 4895

well said. bob may not have articulated exactly what he wanted to say. but even if he does prefer exchanges on the heated side, i'd like to think that he has a certain duty to those of us who don't. fact is, i believe that many who find themselves in the civilized camp are quite capable of venturing over to the 'heated exchange' side. i'm not so sure that it works the other way around, though. :) mark

To: Dale Baker who wrote (241)	5/29/2000 11:02:00 PM
From: Frederick Langford	Respond to of 4895

Dale, I agree wholeheartedly with your post. I couldn't have said it better. Fred

To: Dale Baker who wrote (241)	5/30/2000 12:37:00 AM
From: SI Bob	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4895

Thanks for this opportunity to clarify, Dale. You get called in for the personal attacks, profanity and schoolyard behavior that detract from an interesting stock discussion but generate a lot of page views. I phrased my statement rather poorly. In retrospect, I stick by what I said, but should've added the following for clarification: "I like this stock." "So do I. It's a nice stock." (what I mean when I say "too civil") would be breathtakingly boring and completely useless. I've said before that I learn more from those who disagree with me than from those who agree with me. That applies to the stock market and SI more than anywhere else. Or, at least, the stock market is where I think one should pay the most attention to those who disagree. If I say I expect earnings to come in at such-and-such an amount and am long the stock because of it, but you expect earnings to be much lower and are short because of it, we're going to disagree and need to discuss it. The ensuing conversation (within the site's rules of engagements -- no vulgarity, no personal attacks, etc) will be enlightening to everyone who reads it and hopefully to one or both of us. Ideally, many will participate, and all of us get a good idea of overall market sentiment based on the exchange. And hopefully we all learn something we didn't know before. Anyway, civil is good. We can have an outright argument and still be civil about it. I like to think that a major part of this site's appeal is the breadth of knowledge of the participants and the learning that happens when experts who disagree with each other start trying to convince each other. But it is never acceptable (or necessary for mature people) to drag playground-like conduct into it. Speaking for myself as a person, when I see it I dismiss nearly anything that person has to say. We know what my position on it is as an Admin(). If someone presents a view contrary to mine without calling me an idiot in the process, I pay very close attention. Bob PS. Contrary to popular belief, I have no idea how hit rates are going for the site and do not concern myself with it. It's a stat I'd rather not know. Of course, I want the site to be successful, but the fact that an argument full of personal attacks might be "interesting" is irrelevant where I'm concerned. It violates the rules and I try to squelch it, hits or no.