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.

Non-Tech : The Critical Investing Workshop -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	8/31/2000 11:43:05 PM
From: Dealer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

<font color=red> RE: Mr ElPolvo---being pissed--!!!! You are so cute when ya mad!!!!! This too shall pass! Polvie, I love ya but you are in a big time minority on this one. That's OK. Sometimes we find ourselves in a minority..... But you do believe in the majority rules.....don't ya?? I will never understand you on this one polvie, and it is not necessary that I do or even that anyone on the board does. You certainly have a right to your opinion as does all other porchers. A consenus was taken on the porch last night polvie..........most regular porchers where on the board. The consenus was, we want our old board back. Polvie this is the same board that attracted you and the friends you bought over to the porch from Yahoo. There were no testing of how far you could push SI or the other porchers.....as has been done in the last few weeks. You are a pretty special person to me and I feel like I know you pretty well. You have voiced your opinion and we have logged it. Now I am hopeful that you will not let your differences in opinion come between you and I and the friendship we have developed. I also hope that your difference of opinion will not keep you from posting as you have in the past.... BTW polv where did you find time to voice that opinion..... I thought you were very busy getting ready for my arrival tomorrow. See ya at the airport and I do not want to talk about Voltaire's Porch till I return home on Tuesday. We gonna have a blast. Did ya see Red yet......??? Love ya polvie just like everyone else on this board. Tomorrow!!! &heart; dealie ps Ya better pm me and tell me fer sure ya gonna be at the airport.....how pissed are ya...???? :-)

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	8/31/2000 11:47:17 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

FWIW, it was never about certain words for me. It was about personal attacks & verbal assaults, with many of the accusations being baseless. It was about hiding behind political correctness when the real deal was personal agenda. Maybe I missed something, but there was no military maneuver on UF's part that I am aware of. If anything b-i-a had been headed for an ugly confrontation for some time. She chose last night to give it both barrels. I stand behind every word I posted last night. Polvie, I have a deep respect for you. I know your post was heartfelt & serious. Please tell me, am I missing something here? I realize that certain incidents regarding questionable language were brought into the battle. I saw that as more of a side bar to the prevailing issue of personal attacks & verbal assaults & the merit, or lack thereof of said attacks. FWIW, the porch should be a place where we are free to express ourselves, but it is a thread where the focus is on learning, sharing & stress free living. Disagreements are going to happen. Getting personal is not about stress free, particularly when the position taken is of questionable merit. Please elaborate on you thoughts polvie. I'm really interested in your POV buddy. Tim

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 12:12:21 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 35685

In the abstract, I see your point. I found the incident ugly, too. But SI believes in community standards, and if a particular thread is tolerant of obscenity, they don't get involved, so freedom of speech was not abridged. I find it inappropriate the fact that the Porch was used as a medium to test free speech and the right to harass Voltaire and his friends. The Porch was never intended to be a laboratory in which to test the limits of social or personal freedoms. Rather, it was dedicated to affection for Voltaire, and created as a place for him to share his insights about life and investing. Because of the destructive way BIA deported herself and intruded on that charter, it became necessary to poll the Porch determine if there was a consensus on that question, and she damaged herself during that process. I'll change the thread header shortly now the issue of use has been agreed upon. Only one person objected to it until now, and while I understand the reasoning behind your stance, I have no sympathy for her's. It is clear that the overwhelming majority of Porchers are unwilling to tolerate that type of behavior. The fact that you love me doesn't mitigate the fact that you dislike what I've done, Polvie, since it is merely a commentary on your nature and commitment to universal love. I respect you on balance because of your wit, intelligence, sensitivity, and concern for all living things. uf

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 12:17:23 AM
From: DepyDog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

PolvitoNeato, ah am at a loss for words to express what ah feel. No one, IMHO, disagrees with anyones right to an opinion. Howevah, who wants to listen to and be beaten up by outright bashin and personal attacks? Not me. I for one defend anyones right to opinion but let it be based as that...not as a personal vendetta to descimate someones character. You know how awful it has been when the Clownkillers came on board and began their diatribe. It is one thing to tolerate opinions and quite another to put up with out right trashin others on the Porch. What possible "good" comes from that? Always your friend, Depy

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 1:08:00 AM
From: synchro_fan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35685

Polvie: I do not agree with you that there were innocent victims here. To me, your words do not compute. Is there some type of other agenda happening here, ....perhaps. Free speech is important to me. However, when folks like roserrsp and bia engage in nasty banter or degrade people as bia did to me on something called the Yahoo Rick board, the free speech boundary has been stepped through. I support Uncle Frank on this and hope the spirit of the new header is embraced. Good nature is the cheapest commodity in the world as I have read somewhere.... JMO, Syncie

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 5:57:41 AM
From: cowgirl-ona-1eyed-horse	Respond to of 35685

Mornin' polvie, I understand what you've said, but IMO there is no excuse for the blatant rudness and personal attacks exhibited by BIA. Words ARE building blocks. BIA professed (bragged) on many occasions that the use of words are her 'forte' (professional writer). It was not the words that she used that I objected to, but her intent. I believe her words were chosen deliberately and in such a manner to be hurtful. It is possible to disagree and yet maintain civility. BIA chose a different tack. The old truism- 'It's not what you say, but how you say it' applies here. JMHO on the matter None of this changes how I feel about you You know how I feel about you :o) luv, jesse

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 8:03:22 AM
From: Percival 917	Respond to of 35685

Morning Polvie, I am sorry to find out that you feel the porch has been hurt by the last day's goings on. I am surprised that you feel that personal liberty was a casualty here. I wonder if you would have felt the same way if it was KISS or one of the other clown invaders that had done what BIA did? Bonus has been somewhat of a mystery ever since she came on the porch. I for one always wondered if there was a secret agenda on her part for coming on board. I believe we saw what that agenda was a few days ago. I think Jill expressed it the best we she stated to BIA that she had been leading up to this grand outburst for some time. I feel that if the porch en masse found her actions questionable to downright offensive, then the overwhelming majority saw something wrong and voiced their protest. BIA in my opinion never expressed any reasonable counterpoint, she just kept up the personal attacks. Apparently she couldn't take the heat in the kitchen so she got out. I am all for free speech as the next person but if the vast majority found something offensive or abusive, then we have the right express our opinions also. I don't think that kills free speech or regulates it either. Go back and review the posts again and if we are wrong here, please show us where we erred Thanks, Joel

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 8:32:15 AM
From: Jill	Respond to of 35685

whether i'd want to read them or agree with them is another matter That's the point. You can go find those words elsewhere on the internet if you want & have all the free expression you desire. SI is a stocksite and this particular thread is meant to be a friendly discussion of stocks along w/ congenial banter. The porch was looking good last night. Jill

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 9:27:49 AM
From: abstract	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 35685

I want to acknowledge Polvie for having the cajones to express himself on such a volatile subject. I appreciate his wisdom and view on the big picture. I am very conflicted about the removal of BIA from this thread. She was intentionally obnoxious. We should not have to put up with that kind of abuse. On the other hand, I think her forceable removal constitutes censorship. Censorship is wrong. We, this thread, American citizens, German Jews, whatever group you want to focus on, are like a forest. At the extremes we have the thin warrior trees protecting the core from the elements; the wind, the rain, the slings and arrows. The core frequently does not respect the perimeter, the edge, the extreme; those that challenge us. By exercising censorship, we deplete the protective stature of those at the extremes (those that protect us), and we at the core, by default, are moved closer to the edge. We become more vulnerable, more at risk and more prone to having our individual freedoms jeopardized. (Ask not for whom the bell tolls, . . .) Harmony is nice. It is not always constructive. Bia was annoying. I am sorry she is gone. I do not miss her. I hope we grow from this experience before we forget it. Paul

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/1/2000 10:28:08 AM
From: Clappy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35685

el poe, I admire you, dude. I think the thing I like about you the most is that over the past few years that we've known each other, you've taught me more about your "loving" philosophy than anyone has taught me about stocks. I've witnessed several occasions where you were able to avoid conflicts with aggressors by showing them love rather than hate. Not only did this prevent the aggressor from bothering you, it perhaps taught that person a new way of thinking. If you were being chased by a ferocious lion, I picture that you would stop in your tracks, and turn around. The lion would proceed to jump on you and begin chewing on your hand. With your other hand, you'd gently pet the large feline and begin tickling it's belly. The lion would stop chewing you up and then you'd give him a big ol' hug and a kiss on the forehead. After all, why should you be angry at a lion for being a lion. Beating it with a club would not change it's angry nature. Perhaps showing it love would have changed it's nature... Perhaps it would become a vegetarian... ...and convince other lions to join him... If not, at least your method stopped the lion from eating you. I wonder what the effect would have been if we had all surrounded Bonnie with love, kind thoughts, and pleaded with her to stop being an antagonist. Whould it have been equally effective? In a sense, I guess we did. We all told her what we didn't like. However, perhaps a little more love is all she needed to hear from us. Then this place would not have been such a mess. It would be stain free. Hopefully next time I'll think about using love rather than harsh words. I tend to fight fire with fire. Perhaps I'll start giving the fire what it wants and craves. Loving Water. Thanks for opening my eyes over the past few years. This is only chapter one of what you have taught me. Thanks for the enlightenment. -Clappy P.S. I'm heading up to the Adirondacks today. Need some of that fresh air, cool clean water, and breath taking views. It energizes me. Everyone have a wonderful and safe holiday weekend.

To: elpolvo who wrote (31462)	9/6/2000 5:04:10 PM
From: Dealer	Respond to of 35685

QCOM--News release stirs up QCOM buzz Investors hesitant to embrace word from the Asian front By Shawn Langlois, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 4:10 PM ET Sep 6, 2000 NewsWatch Latest headlines SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) - Uncertainty surrounding the future of wireless standard CDMA's Asian presence has kept Qualcomm longs and their erstwhile profit machine in check over the summer. And there hasn't been a whole lot of news of late to quell those concerns. On Wednesday morning, shares of Qualcomm (QCOM: news, msgs) shot out of the gates while the rest of the tech sector fell victim to another wave of selling. Remember that China has flip flopped on CDMA more than George Bush Sr. flip flopped on taxes and almost more than Slick Willie has flip flopped on, well, you name it. This news could be contradicted tomorrow. Choey The Motley Fool Why? Well, that was the question of the day in cyberspace. And when links to a ChinaWeb story reporting that China Unicom "should re-launch CDMA project as soon as possible" began to materialize in the chat rooms, the posts started to pile up at a feverish pace. But the tone was still one of cautious optimism. The skeptics, like Plunkett in the CBS MarketWatch Community, were out in full force: "With all the unknown surrounding CDMA in China, I'm not putting too much faith into this release. Of course, I'm enjoying the stock's reaction in this saggy market, but before I get too excited about the Asian effect, I'd like to start seeing some numbers." Over on Silicon Investor, MarvinB felt the same way: "No offense, but with China Unicom (CHU: news, msgs) it's never a done deal. Wait until actual vendor contracts are signed and delivery begins. Sorry, I just don't trust CHU." In keeping with a common "All Aboard" theme, AmazinLarry donned his cloak and dagger on Yahoo: "This news just means that the Chinese government is done accumulating QCOM stock at these depressed levels and now they are ready to roll with CDMA and have the rising QCOM stock price make them all rich. Politics man, it's all politics." Yet, amid the hoopla, MySlot and the rest of the "Q" faithful posted their continued support: "No matter how sick we all are hearing facts and rhetoric about CDMA, we can't ignore it. CDMA is and will continue to penetrate existing and newer markets. "For example, in Europe, a land where people rely on mobile phones due to need, GSM is NOT doing well. People here are ALL complaining about the poor level of service. Their GSM phones are now kicking out all the time. I see CDMA entering this market in a BIG WAY, VERY FAST. "Developing nations also know this. China can't afford to install an inferior GSM system. Unlike the USA, people don't have good private and public transportation and rely on wireless communications out of necessity. CDMA is 'the' answer to this immediate issue." Can't really blame folks for being a bit leery considering the fickle nature of China's political situation ... not to mention the remaining fallout from the Emulex hoax. See previous All Aboard. However, one thing is crystal clear - the Quillionaires love their stock, and it's going to take a whole lot more than a soggy stock price and an unsettled future in China to change that.