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.

Pastimes : G&K Investing for Curmudgeons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (3966)	7/21/2000 2:07:53 AM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 22706

On this thread, it's understand that the grins are implied, but on other threads, we should make sure to use them since normal people need to understand that we are trying to be humorous, not destructive. I think that's precisely the issue (except, that is, for the times you and DS actually are being NMOJA's). That's why I usually make my off-thread curmudgeonly comments broader than ever, so the implied grinnie is pretty obvious. Also, I try to restrict the japes to familiar faces; newbies and outsiders are less likely to get, or appreciate, the joke. BTW, haven't seen this comment from today's WSJ mentioned (maybe it's in the interview, which I haven't listened to): "Analysts remained generally bullish on [QBOMB]. 'I believe if investors own only one stock, it needs to be this stock,' said Mark Roberts, an analyst at First Union Securities. 'It's increasingly clear that every third-generation roll-out will be based on Qualcomm's CDMA patents.'" ctb/A

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (3966)	7/21/2000 9:29:38 AM
From: areokat	Respond to of 22706

since normal people need to understand that we are trying to be humorous, not destructive. When was the last time a normal person was sighted on any of the G & K threads. That date should be preserved. cak@whydoyouthinkDr.ID operateshere,certainlynotbecausethereareanynormalpeopleabout.med

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (3966)	7/21/2000 9:41:15 AM
From: DownSouth	Respond to of 22706

I think our group think decision to avoid grinnies is at the core of our social problems...On this thread, it's understand that the grins are implied, but on other threads, we should make sure to use them since normal people need to understand that we are trying to be humorous, not destructive. IMO, the use of emoticons is at the core of the internet discussion boards' social problems. People are no longer able to use the written language to express themselves. The defacto standard here, on this thread, is that you say what you mean. So if you are trying to be humorous, then write that way. Before television, writers were humorous even though you could not see their face. Before electronic mail, letters were humorous without emoticons. So, don't be limp and lazy here. Say what you mean in the way that you wish to say it without limpy little grinee thingees. Your use of the double grinee thingee after refering to narrow minded jackasses was not necessary, btw. I have become conditioned to that reference and it no longer has emotional connotations to me. You weren't funny anyway, even with the double grinee thingee.