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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (117923)	6/27/2000 7:01:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573630

Elmer, RE:"consider the facts as they are available to you. #1 Albert showed up and called me a liar regarding my Put writing posts. #2. I asked Albert for proof of his claims. Albert presented nothing. #3 I posted a history of events as I recalled them explaining how Albert got kicked off the thread. #4 Albert said it was BS. #5 I found the original posts and presented links to them that you or anyone else could read. The links confirmed exactly what I said happened and exactly what Albert claimed was BS. You can go to that location and read for yourself and see who was telling the truth and who was lying. As I have stated before, except for times when I was joking and not expecting anyone to be so stupid as to not know the difference between truth and jest, I have never lied here. You decide if Albert was lying or not." ----- You know that Paul, Yousef, Stockman and myself have had some vicious encounters over the years...but not once did I ever turn them in to SI...not once... I agree that Albert came back with a chip on his shoulder but turning him in to SI was not necessary. No matter what side your on...people tire of the fighting. So I suspect that if you would have given it more than a day.... Way to go! Jim

To: Elmer who wrote (117923)	6/27/2000 7:28:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573630

OT, Elmer, re: <#1 Albert showed up and called me a liar regarding my Put writing posts. #2. I asked Albert for proof of his claims. Albert presented nothing.> Albert emailed me twice several months ago that you must be exaggerating the quantity of puts you claimed to be selling because your quantity was greater than the total volume for the day. Albert has access to the best information, so I doubt he was looking at a single exchange to determine this. Lets take a look at one of your posts from April 13 -- #105000. "Wrote May $60 Puts. Got 2 5/16s. Bought shares @74 and sold May $80 CCs. Got 5 3/4s." Assuming you bought 200 shares with the proceeds of your puts (the minimum possible for you to sell "May 80 CCs" -- you would need $14,800 of "put proceeds" since this is an IRA account which doesn't allow margin. Since you claim you got 2 5/16 or $231 for each put, that means you had to sell at least 65 puts to get the $14,800. Since you admitted that the rules of the IRA account require 100% margin for naked put sales, you have to have a cash balance of at least $80 x 100 x 65, or $520,000 in your IRA account. Since you claimed back then to have two additional short put positions, as well as owning Intel shares and being short Intel puts in your account, it must have a cash balance in the millions to support your short positions. In fact, I remember at least one post there you claimed to have written calls on your "free" shares obtained by writing puts, and then bought more shares with the proceeds of that sale. That would require a $5M balance. I find this difficult to believe for a conventional IRA with $2,000 contribution limit. Petz

To: Elmer who wrote (117923)	6/28/2000 12:15:00 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573630

As I have stated before, except for times when I was joking and not expecting anyone to be so stupid as to not know the difference between truth and jest, I have never lied here. You decide if Albert was lying or not. EP, First I did not say that Albert was free of guilt...but usually there are two sides to a story. And I was trying to hear the other side to get a better understanding of what went on and how it led to Albert's debarment. Frankly I am unclear what is going on here. Last year certainly there were posts by yousef and to a lesser extent Engel that were rude, vulgar and incredibly demeaning. Certainly some of your exchanges with Kash were of that caliber as well. I can't imagine that Albert got much worse than any of them. So I guess what I am asking is why did yousef and Albert go, while Engel and to a lesser degree you and Kash were permitted to stay? What was the difference in those cases? You may not have the answer. I simply am curious. ted