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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (23338)	8/20/2001 1:55:52 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

<<<(I know only one SIer who claims to have met her in person) >>> "Claims"? Are you entertaining the possibility and raising it here that Rambi lied about this? I believe that Rambi did meet her. I have no reason to believe she didn't. From what I know of Rambi's posting history here, I believe she is truthful. But do I entertain the possibility that Rambi lied about this? Of course. Are you saying it's NOT POSSIBLE that she lied about it? Or that she met somebody else who claimed they were X but really weren't? If you make that statement, on what basis? I believe that Rambi did meet her. And does know her. But do I KNOW that Rambi met her in person? No, I don't. So if I said that, I would be saying something I don't know to be true. And you would jump all over me for that. I mean, I expect you do think people say things on SI that aren't true. Or do you think when X said "I revel in meanness" that that was true? Is that who X is? Or only who X once claimed to be? Maybe the word "claims" was the wrong word. It does, now that you raise the question, have a more dubious tone than I had intended. It would have been better for me to say "says," or "reports," or "appears to have," or something suchlike. So I will withdraw the word "claims" and you can substitute whatever word you think is appropriate to apply to a statement made by someone on SI that you believe to be true, but don't KNOW of your own personal knowledge to be true. I hope that is sufficient clarification. While we're chatting, I just note that you never responded to the post where I gave you numerous direct quotes from X which seem to contradict the view of her which some of her more ardent defenders posted here. Obviously, you're free not to respond to any post you want to ignore. As I was free to ignore this post. But I accepted that you had a valid point that deserved response, so I did. Maybe you will feel the same way about my post.