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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russwinter who wrote (166)	10/13/2001 5:58:19 PM
From: gold$10k	Respond to of 39344

Hi Russ, I haven't been paying the closest attention to all the latest posts on this thread because I'm not interested in GEO, but my general feeling is that this thread is ok as is. I don't believe that you need to conduct anything on this thread except to slap somebody on the wrist when they get clearly out of line or excommunicate them if incorrigible. Other than that you can just be one of the gang. Even good ideas don't necessarily make money and everybody needs to take responsibility for their own investment decisions. If you feel the need to include a disclaimer in your posts, you could just modify the initial "welcoming post" of the thread to include it. I have the greatest respect for you, Russ, and place a high value on the information that you provide here. You were the one who got me interested in this esoteric little corner of the investing world by your posts. I would definitely feel a sense of loss if you were to stop posting here. The instantaneous move to this thread by many others indicates to me that I am not alone in that respect. Best, vt

To: russwinter who wrote (166)	10/13/2001 8:33:54 PM
From: Bruce Robbins	Respond to of 39344

Cheer up russ- it's only money ;) You have contributed quite a bit to SI on mining. Looking forward to seeing more.

To: russwinter who wrote (166)	10/13/2001 9:22:02 PM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

"... anybody here [interested] in this model..." Russ, "It's about how I utilize this format: for investing. ... not so sure I want any responsibility whatsoever for any investing ideas, good, bad or indifferent, unless those on the other end are very like minded, independent and have some degree of sophistication..." No need to wave like a flag in front of those who post here the TOS Terms of Service each Silicon Investor member agreed to upon joining, which included the agreement to allow Silicon Investor to change add delete modify the TOS agreement with the understanding that if a member choose not to accept such that the member should leave upon the completeion of their membership. If not, then they will be terminated upon activity by them in TOS violations. For sure the TOS stated up front as i remember years ago when i became one of the first to join after a period of time that only a few experienced people used SI for a while, that the TOS spoke about responsibility etc. My long babble here Russ is just my way to point out to you that this moderated form of thread was created because many Si members like ole49r/gold_tutor would violate not the letter of the TOS, but would it's spirit. So to me Bob Johnson has a false impression on the nature of a moderated thread like this, as it is not to lessen the freedom of speech, but to ensure that all have it under the condition that a ole49r/gold_tutor type will abuse the rights' of others. Most moderated threads place limits so that a certain agenda of the creator of that thread can be exercised, of which i am a good example with the Tyhee thread that i have banned about two dozen Si members prior to them evn trying topost there for the simple reason that i want pro-Tyhee & pro-friendly posts only, which will be changed once Tyhee become successful or goes belly-up and ceases to exist. Mt reasoning is that currently there is very little good hard concrete facts or news to counter that bashing and off topic type posts many folks find a desire to do. For you to create this thread as moderated had as upfront purpose the exclusion of ole49r/gold_tutor as a person which damaged the type of thread which you desired to post on. Yes, and it was a good and proper move by you to obtain for your own reasons a place that you decided was proper for your usage, and Hellooooooooo World, everyone except Bob followed you here. Golly, if ole49r/gold_tutor's activity as so "correct" as she stated, plus her telling us all of her greatness and value, then proof in pudding hopefully with lots of REAL whipped creme, that oopsie what she discovered was a NOT. Hopefully Bob Johnson is seeing that this thread's moderation is not a refusual to allow a flow of ideas, but only to fense in the ole49r/gold_tutor(s) that destroy and damage in THEIR name of RIGHTs. Yes, we all have rights and sometimes to protect them we have to deny the rights of others so that we can keep and exercise ours. Bob will say innocent until proven guilty this ole49r/gold_tutor, which sounds not only good but something i hope will apply to me also, so yes i want it to apply to all everywhere all the time. But oopsie Bob, the activity on the Gold & Silver thread over these past few days after this thread was created has been a sort of trial with ole49r/gold_tutor's activity as evidence, and yes found GUILTY. ok Bob, now come on over, the vote has been taken on-going and so far Not Guilty = 1 (lorne) and Guilty = all others(?) ok, sorry Bob, i understand that you have trouble, find it very hard to accept that a moderated thread is as i say. But Bob, think of it this way, ole49r/gold_tutor was found GUILTY and rather than send her away to JAIL we all except you left, and think of the Gold & Silver thread as HER jail and we all came over here to Russ's new thread and placed ourselves OUTSIDE the jail area. Soooooooooooo Bob, its as if you choose to "remain" inside a Jail'ed area. not good Bob no not good some of us visited this jail area and yes, Yike(s) "... ideal forum model for me would be conducted by a Jim Steele or Claude Cormier (maybe both?) to a smaller group of liked minded PM investors." Sounds great for those "inside" this group, but since Claude and Jim already obtain fees from what is their profession to sell this info type you identify as being inside this forum, then legal issues might appear. Would Jim and Claudes activity in the group with you be viewed as an Union or Intersection model with their subscriber activity? Would you ever ask Jim or Claude to exclude any info you present in the group from making its way to their subscriber base? Seems like it would happen unless you exclude your activity in areas that you wish info not be made public through their subscriber base. "... the classic twenty or thirty smart, focused people that can get much more done together than any of us could do alone... be a constant mutual learning curve." The following url investor site would not allow "be secretive" but could deliver a better forum for you v Si. investorshub.com d:oug

To: russwinter who wrote (166)	10/14/2001 4:10:17 PM
From: I_C_Deadpeople	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Well, those are all valid points. For me personally, I have used this forums for various purposes. When I became interested in the PM market, I used the forums to glean any and all info I could. I took some foolish risks by believing comments made by certain people without doing my own homework. Lessons learned the hard way (is there an easy way to learn lessons?). Now, I like to hear others approach to investing such as yours, Claude's and a few others. As for a more moderated forum, I suppose that could be done via a seperate forum where the moderator kept control over who could participate. For general stock info, this type of forum is available at bearforum.com (simply an example). The only problem I could see with such a forum is you may not get the necessary new input or contrary opinion that we get here. For example, would a E. Andrews be allowed "in" to provide some tough questions? Would someone like myself with limited geological knowledge (but am trying to learn) be allowed "in"? Having said that, I believe that your "perfect" model is , well..perfect. A small group of like minded people would be a good alternative to the wide open SI. Perhaps someone like Claude or Jim could manage this through their own web site as long as the contributors paid a small annual fee to defer the cost and time to manage the site. Personally, I would not mind doing it myself. If there is enough interest, I can look into it. I have the computers, etc. to do it and I an check around for some "forum" style software.

To: russwinter who wrote (166)	10/15/2001 11:37:54 AM
From: Fishfinder	Respond to of 39344

I can definately see where you are coming from Russ. As I am a guilty party to lack of participation. Accept for the digesting of the research and knowledge you and Claude etc, offer on this rather public web site. I don't have the knowedge any of you do and haven't found the time to learn enough although am trying. I thank you. An improvement to this forum might be to simply have little tolerance to certain posters and knock them out with the ignore button. It is part of the service included and should be acknowledged by all participants on SI. Regards Scott