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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (44538)	11/29/2001 10:55:06 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Thanks for the kind words jpgill. I have to admit jp, ole polvie pushed the right buttons & played his hand as well as any I've seen. If it weren't for the fact that I had to run an errand, I may have bit hard. In his original message he did say I had a 13 minute time limit to respond, which did work to get my dander up (I don't respond well to being pushed around & polvie knows this well). It also was a big clue (as described in my post). Fortunately for me, I was able to put 2+2 together (the original message was another clue - it was in character, but it was untypical in that the message was a bit over the top for polvie). I'm sure you know that I never hesitate to take issue with polvie on a number of issues & often I don't mince words in making my point. Lately, my replies to polvie & clappy have been more forceful & fairly pointed. I always have had a deep respect for him & like him very much regardless of our differences - we both want essentially the same end result - we just differ on how to get there. Once I realized what he was doing, I knew I had to respond appropriately. My reply was completely original FWIW. Polvie gave me the opportunity to sink or swim with the path I chose to take. Apparently the appropriate path was taken. Ö¿Ö