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.

Pastimes : Brokerage-Chat Site Securities Fraud: A Lawsuit -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dr.MensaWannabe who wrote (513)	7/1/2001 11:24:33 PM
From: CountofMoneyCristo	Respond to of 3143

First of all, are you the SI member known as "leeza ze viphre" (rhymes with Le Chiffre I imagine)? I think from now on in terms of these kinds of questions, I am going to direct you to Tim. Tim has not met you, as I understand it. I think perhaps you should simply answer the following questions. They really are quite straightforward: 1. Are you working on behalf of brokerage firms or chat sites, or a law firm representing brokers/sites, or anyone affiliated with such? 2. Are you currently employed by a brokerage firm or chat site or an affiliate of these? 3. Are you attempting to mislead SI Members about this case and about myself personally? 4. Have you ever met me? 5. Have you ever used multiple aliases simultaneously on SI? 6. Have you ever attempted to secure Counsel for this case at any time? 7. Why did you imply that I might become a defendant in this case? Do you have evidence of any wrongdoing on my part? (If not you commit libel.) You began here by immediately attacking my statements, my career and my intentions as regards other plaintiffs in this case. Others joined you. You have called me a potential defendant in my own case (perhaps, if defendants wish to counter-sue, though that opens them up to being sued for malicious prosecution). You have made very clear your (and Lisa's, if that is a separate person) intention to interfere in the relationship I have with Counsel. You have thrown out loaded legalese terms in what I perceive to be an effort to draw me into statements that are out of place here. I have ample reason to question your motives here and now. I am telling you,flat out,in all sincerity that it would behoove you to stop going down this road and focus on the big picture instead of ranting and raving about me. "Rantng and raving"? I believe I have remained quite calm, while you seem to be on the verge of something terrible about which you feel compelled to inform myself and other SI members. Let's see here: remember the e-mails from Jenna and PaloAltoTrader? They described me as alternatively: 1. sicko 2. psycho/delusional 3. in need of mental help 4. sick 5. demented By the way, both of these individuals stated the following: Ms. Simon: Stay away from me. Steve Bell: Go away. Now you have today stated: Message 16020190 Ollie, just leave me the hell alone until such time as you meet the my parameters to answer your questions You also called my statements "ranting and raving." You know, not only the above, but many others who are involved in this racket have behaved exactly the same way: anyone at all who questions their activities is a psychopath and belongs in a mental hospital. Why all this talk of mental illness I wonder? I have studiously avoided analyzing members of this field in this manner, but I am beginning to speculate that this does need to be addressed at some point, though not by me. I am sorry but I am beginning to detect a pattern. Day trading is all about patterns, and I have no problems with applying the knowledge I have gained watching stocks to commentary I see here. O.A.