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: The Philosopher who wrote (37592)	11/20/2001 12:08:21 AM
From: Rainy_Day_Woman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

hmmmm I debated posting this to you, but I felt it has to be said why would you want to post to someone who doesn't want you to? did you ever think by asking SI to rescind that order it might open the door for other posters who have restraining orders to seek having theirs removed? I doubt if they push the issue SI is going to discriminate personally? I wish you would have let the entire thing alone

To: The Philosopher who wrote (37592)	11/20/2001 1:45:10 AM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

In my eyes, insisting on posting to someone who has begged you not to makes you look like a bully. All it says is that you have had the power with your law degree to make protecting one of their members too costly to SI, and thus to be able to force your posts on a woman who finds you frightening and distasteful. That, above, was my original language, and I believe, on the basis of the circumstantial evidence plus having a knowledge of how the world works, and having also the knowledge of your IHUB threat to sue them, that it was very close to precisely accurate. "They reached quite an amicable agreement with me"? Indeed they did--- you are a lawyer, you threatened on a thread inhabited by many SI people, to sue them, the threat was sent to them (this is known to me as a fact) as you surely knew it would be, and what did it cost them to say, Okay! Not worth being sued! We will change our minds!? Nothing. Of course they said, Do what you want, it's no biggie to us, not worth a lawsuit by a litigious poster who can sue real cheap. "Without any need for litigation." That disgusts me. Litigation over you getting to post to a woman who is creeped out by you and whom you posted to vilely in the past. I'm going to bed. We will discuss the matter of your lies about Poet tomorrow. Or should I say, I will discuss it, you will squirmingly evade it. When what you should do is cite your emotional state, with which we would be sympathetic, and apologize profusely to Poet for getting carried away and as a result lying about her.