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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (150265)	6/2/2001 8:32:35 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Dear E, >>>>> If it's proved that you lied, just pretend it didn't happen. It's nice to see you posting your methods. But what I find really funny is how that you take trivial to torturous tedium. you all have a nice day now hear. tom watson tosiwmee

To: E who wrote (150265)	6/2/2001 10:12:29 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Ok E, I have a little time now to fully dissect where your faulty thinking has occurred, and potentially explain why. First of all, don't delude yourself any further. It was you who made up quotes I supposedly said, and then argued over them in a tedious way, until I was forced to go out of my way and embarrass you with the truth. I really didn't want to do it, but you just couldn't recognize the opening I was giving you and let it die. siliconinvestor.com "so it was wrong of me to understand it that way; and in any case, it was certainly an error to put in quotation marks, which would indicate that it was a single phrase, both the words "numerous times" and the word "multiple." Of course, your ego just couldn't let it go after having made such an obvious false claim regarding my post, then being called on it and having to admit you were wrong. So, you had to search and search in order to make another false claim that I inferred something I haven't, then pretend it was an egregious assault, and demand an apology too. Since inferences are a subjective area in which to make a claim. An outsider just catching glimpses of our conversation might actually believe there was some merit to it. Nice try, and if you hadn't gone on and on in a petulant way, I may have ignored it and let it hang in cyberspace under a cloud of doubt. I am sorry I made you look so foolish that it's been eating at you this long. If I had to do it again, I would certainly consider trying harder to ignore your badgering and let you go on believing you got the better of me. Big whoop, I really don't care at the level you seem to about what is said here. I make mistakes occasionally and try and own up to them and move on. It appears you have a very difficult time with this concept. As to this latest supposedly horrible inference I've made regarding you threatening someone else. That's all in your mind, and I challenge you to find one substantive post in which I implied, asserted, stated or otherwise made such a remark. Just because your sensitivity meter is pegged to the stratosphere, because, you now deeply need to find something in which to recover your fragile ego with. Doesn't mean it's tuned to reality, or what an objective person would believe is an implication of reality. I did however say you threatened me. I said it because it was a fact. A fact you admitted to, then called a joke. Here's your exact quote... "I will haunt you forever if you don't post the number you think is numerous and multiple, hehe. Scary music." I explained to you it's sometimes difficult to tell a joke threat from a real threat. And at first you seemed to accept that, until I was forced by your repeated diatribes to embarrass you and point out your made up quote, "multiple and numerous threads.". Call me a liar or any other childish name if you feel it will settle your injured ego. I really don't care, as long as you don't spam this thread with nonsense, I probably won't respond any further. Talk about not letting a dead-horse die, Jeez!