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 (37696)	11/20/2001 11:48:43 AM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

LOL. Remember that last night I predicted that you would squirmingly evade? The post you made to Poet that got you suspended, the one containing references to personal information and her family, and that was removed, was a violation of the TOU, was it not? Of course my posts are distressing to you! It should be distressing to you to be caught in lies! And imagine how comparatively even more distressing it was to Poet to have been lied about by you. But the offensiveness is not in pointing out that someone has been disseminating slanderous lies, it is in disseminating slanderous lies, Christopher. Here is the first threat to sue SI you made on Ihub: investorshub.com Here is the second, in which you mention money, writing, "SI is going downhill, and could be gone after they pay the damages on my suit. <bg>" investorshub.com And furthermore, regarding your lawyerly, disingenuous pretence that your litigiousness had nothing to do with your winning the right to send unwelcome posts to Poet, SI Jeff wrote to Poet that he had "had to" lift the agreement, and responded neither to Poet's begging to keep the agreement in place nor to her request for an explanation for why he had so suddenly had to do that. I look forward also to an end to this discussion. Please provide any evidence whatever that your calumny against Poet was not a plain lie. You can not. Poet has never made a post either on SI or IHub deriding our troops, and has never since September 11 made any post not in support of military intervention. As for the "removed" posts of Poet's on IHub that you are pretending contained some kind of substantiation of your lie, I know exactly what they contained and will give the detail if you want. They did not reference our troops. I will owe you an apology if you can produce any evidence that Poet has ever, in any way, "made negative inferences about our young men in uniform." If you can't, you owe Poet an apology for the calumny in the perpetration of which you invoked your son. I will be happier than you to end this conversation. But what you want is the right to hit-and-run. This is not your finest hour. Christopher, take responsibility for your actions and and your words. This lie you have promulgated about Poet is further proof that the ban against your posting to or about her should not have been rescinded in spite of your litigiousness on the issue.