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 (34214)	3/30/2001 12:25:45 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

check your PM

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 12:28:18 AM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

Mani, wow! all fairly close votes, especially #5. Thanks for taking time to do all the dicifering of emails (if mine was a representative example) and adding stuff up etc. Joe

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 12:43:48 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani, There was hanging chad on my ballot. Scumbria

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 1:48:44 AM
From: FJB	Respond to of 275872

I did not vote previously on item #5. I vote NO! I guess the time limit is up. I don't care, count my vote. It's not fair. I didn't think it would be so close. Just kidding! I would have voted no on #5, but did not think it would pass. Ha, ha... :-) I was irresponsible by not voting. I apologize. Bob

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 2:05:31 AM
From: eplace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani...this is kind of awkward since I thought my vote counted for something. I only voted once and wasn't trying to stuff the ballot box, but you counted me twice in the voting. That would make item 5 stand as a dead heat. I'm sure we all don't want the "Florida" thing again, but you may either have to do a recount or open that issue up for a another vote. Regards Ed P.

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 7:25:28 AM
From: aburner	Respond to of 275872

Mani, I voted NO for #5! Maybe you mistook me for ajbrenner ... Kind regards, ABurner

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 8:55:59 AM
From: dale_laroy	Respond to of 275872

I believe that a board has to retain the right to ban posters. But such an action should require more than a simple majority (unless the issue is hot enough that everybody chooses to vote). I think it would be fair to require a 2/3 majority to invoke any ban.

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 12:50:59 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re Item 5. I abstained but I might have voted yes if Mani's direct and immediate bans where for a shorter period (a week or even a few days) wither without a vote or pending the results of a vote for the two week ban. Mani - You might want to update the thread header if two people are banned now. Tim

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/30/2001 7:17:48 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani, I would like to second Dale's motion: I believe that a board has to retain the right to ban posters. But such an action should require more than a simple majority (unless the issue is hot enough that everybody chooses to vote). I think it would be fair to require a 2/3 majority to invoke any ban. -fyo

To: Mani1 who wrote (34214)	3/31/2001 11:09:53 PM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: <font color=red>VOTING RESULTS</font> In the fine tradition of the Florida butterfly ballot controversy I DEMAND A REVOTE ON ITEM FIVE!!!!! I think that, as I conveyed to you with my PM ballot, we were given a binary decision when a ternary set of choices should have been presented. The third choice, which has the pleasant, for you, consequence of lightening your burden, is for all posts responding to pauL englE never be considered for disqualification of any otherwise productive participants on this thread. As I noted to you, he is the antagonist who brings on the rancor that, as I have observed over the years, he well deserves. Do note that had he not made certain highly provocative posts in the first place; all of this other disciplinary crap never would have happened. I realize well that you are trying to treat us all equally. Equal treatment, however, is not justified when one person stands out as the obvious source of antagonism that pE has become. If you want to treat us adults as misbehaving children, do. But please allow us a recess and freedom so that we can work out our own problems among ourselves. pauL is a rude and provocative bully just asking to be kicked around. When he actually gets the beating that he so well has earned, he runs to the teacher and cries for help. He did that with me when I gave him the deserved, in my opinion, title of Thread Clown, which, to this moment, I think that he so richly deserves. End of tirade. Comments from others are sought. Patient Regards, DARBES