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: TimF who wrote (129716)	12/15/2000 12:33:50 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571016

Tim It would be easier to manipulate with a manual recount. It would? With 200 million people watching? Got me on that one. But if I suspected my r. back may have stepped out of bounds, I would ask for a photo replay....if its true, then I would accept the decision of the refs. There can be no other way.....you can never win by cheating. I can agree with the not winning by cheating idea, but I would not consider refraining from calling attention to a bad call cheating. Bribing the ref to make the bad call would be cheating... Its only cheating when you get caught? You and I have a different understanding of morality. ted

To: TimF who wrote (129716)	12/15/2000 1:27:15 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571016

I can agree with the not winning by cheating idea, but I would not consider refraining from calling attention to a bad call cheating. Bribing the ref to make the bad call would be cheating... Give me a break. This is not football, where the consequence of a bad call ends the next day in a few newspaper articles. We are talking about the legitimacy of the US presidency here, in the eyes of the nation and the entire world. Al