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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mani1 who wrote (26599)	1/27/2001 11:34:12 PM
From: richard surckla	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani... I'm glad my email to you does make a bit more sense now. You are right with this statement, "About 3 weeks ago, I got an email message from Richard, telling me to go fck myself..." I figure that in a private email one can say pretty much anything they want depending on the circumstances. I felt my circumstances were appropriate. What I don't understand in your post is the following statement you make that I have highlighted in bold... "About 3 weeks ago, I got an email message from Richard, telling me to go fck myself and much more profane personal attack to my character. I simply deleted that email and used the Yahoo's ingore future on him." Mani, what is the much more profane personal attack...? This is an outright lie and you know it. You may have deleted your copy of my email, but I didn't. Here it is... Subject: si Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:53:36 -0500 From: richard surckla <#########@#########.com> To: manisd@yahoo.com Why don't you and the Moderated AMD Thread go fck yourself! That being said, why am I suspended? What rule did I break? Being opposed to your bullsht? Just curious. Thanks Richard Surckla You have admitted to the following... "I do how ever reserve the right to ban someone who is in clear violation without a vote like I did with Tony@pacific. This is a change I had to make due to time constraint." Based on this admission I believe you deliberately banned me from this board for personal reasons of your own. Had you not made that admission I would have let it go, thinking that maybe (slight chance) that it was a glitch. BS, either you conspired with others or you took it upon yourself to take the banning action. As far as I am concerned this mater is now closed. I have had my say and made my point. Those that choose to believe you is just fine with me. But you and I know now that they will always be suspect. If anyone attacked your personal character... it was yourself.

To: Mani1 who wrote (26599)	1/27/2001 11:50:43 PM
From: richard surckla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani... A few last questions. Why did you take it upon yourself to terminate Tony@Pacific without a vote? Breaking your own rules because of a time constraint is not a valid explanation in my book. At the time was the board told of you action and the time constraint problem? What did he do that made you decide to take the action that you did? Were you worried that you wouldn't get the necessary votes to accomplish your desire to ban him? How many on this board knew that you arbitrarily took this action? How many days, weeks passed before you told this board what you had done? What didn't you like about Tony@Pacific? If there were a vote today to have him reinstated do you think he would be if the board had truthful answers to my questions. Quite a guy Mani... keep up the good work!