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 : Gold and Silver Mining Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lbs1989 who wrote (2808)	10/20/2001 10:33:40 AM
From: loantech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4051

I,I,I,I,I. Who does this remind you of? Insidious: Characterized by treachery, Insolent:arrogance, Insipient:not wise; stupid, Inscrutable: to search carefully that that cannot be learned or understood,Imperious: overbearing; arrogant; domineering;dictatorial. Inough said. Move on.

To: lbs1989 who wrote (2808)	10/20/2001 11:26:02 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4051

Lbs, you are being illogical. I am NOT committing pump and dump violations of the 4 tenets template mentioned earlier on this thread. Therefore, you are insisting the "wrong person" bring closure. There are consequences for such violative actions by posters. I didn't make the rules, I just try to abide by them so I can keep the profits I make which is why I'm in this sector to begin with. Closure has many forms, not just the one you are insisting I provide you. Educate yourself and then hold him and others like behaving as he has and does to the regulations set out in our laws. Again, bring up a G&S stock you are interested in, regardless of the geographic locations of the "home office," measure the responses, publically and privately by the 4 tenet template mentioned earlier. I'll join you if the stock is of interest to me. Ditto, others. Selah

To: lbs1989 who wrote (2808)	10/20/2001 3:40:02 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4051

If she had anything on the object of her envy she'd specify soon enough ... under the Is - insinuation ... driven by inquina, which is spanish for 'grudge' ... and 'ill will' ... incontinent in style .... also ill-informed - she thinks PricewaterhouseCoopers is part of TDW, lol .... i kid you not, when she first crashed this thread about three weeks ago she cited the 'connection' as being reason for dislike of TDW .. [edit - #reply-16432194 ] ... well i'm their client and i can tell you there are much better reasons than that, lol Iniquity - check out the accidental signature on this post - #reply-1148953 ... ever notice how that poster backs her up on the most ridiculous points? ... funny how that goes, eh Good luck trying to sweet-talk her into becoming a productive member of the community, i've tried it, doesn't work ... well before the toilet-paper absurdity on Claude, way back months ago when russ neglected to genuflect in her direction on GPM ... how could he have known the necessity? - the nutcases are likely more civilised in his neighbourhood, or locked up, or both Perhaps this is the inevitable future of open threads - some whacko comes along and dominates the place, then the contributive posters who made it worthy of the attack go elsewhere ... this thread is history as far as its topic of purpose goes ... she's got what she wants, time to recognise that, change the title to All About Rosie

To: lbs1989 who wrote (2808)	10/20/2001 3:43:41 PM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4051

<"Pump and Dump" issues YOU raised> What else can we expect from an individual who is practiced in the "Sen. Joseph McCarthy" school of mud slinging. The modus operandi is to just throw out unsubstantiated and very vague, angry allegations out, and just see what might stick to a target. And then, hope nobody calls her on it. Well, I think you have called her on it, and rightfully so. And her "answer" and "evidence" back should now speak for itself. The retort for you to "call your broker's compliance dept." (uh?) is really a classic.