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.

Technology Stocks : e.Digital Corporation(EDIG) - Embedded Digital Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PartyTime who wrote (14202)	8/18/2000 1:30:57 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18366

Now, back to sharing intelligent material: ragingbull.altavista.com

To: PartyTime who wrote (14202)	8/19/2000
From: Jon Tara	Respond to of 18366

PT, I have no problem whatsoever with Todd's interpretation of the conversation. And, if RP concurs that that is what he said, that is fine too. In fact, all of the above supports my original point. I had commented on RP's characterization of the nature of the relationships with the "double-digit" OEMs. Todd initially objected to my point, though, by saying that RP didn't actually say that. Through all the mess that follows, it is still unclear what RP said, since Todd STILL refuses to answer with a simple "yes" or "no" whether or not RP said what Todd said he said. Todd can't have it both ways. He can't object to my argument by saying that RP didn't say what I was commenting on and then, once the argument has been neatly dispatched, and he is called on inaccurate reporting, come back and say "oh, well, he really DID say that!"