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.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mmmary who wrote (2355)	1/17/2002 10:43:06 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

Mary, laws regarding SS#s changed sometime around the end of June of last year as I recall. It's now illegal for any site on the net to display a SS#. Also, prior to then, while it used to be legal to offer SS#s for sale, the requesting party had to stipulate they were asking for it under certain narrow guidelines. Obtaining it for other uses, such as to harass people like Dobry did, was always illegal. - Jeff

To: mmmary who wrote (2355)	1/17/2002 10:48:31 PM
From: (Bob) Zumbrunnen	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 12465

I wonder if credit information is also just as easily obtained. On RB, he posted the name of one of my banks and some other credit-specific stuff. And he was real stuck on the meaning of "associated with" in the context of credit reports. He thought that since my wife's SSN was "associated" with me, and her ex-husband's was "associated" with her (and he correctly identified him as a broker at a reputable firm), that I was actually all 3 people. I hasten to stress that he was convinced I was a broker. He also was convinced I was some other person who's name didn't ring a bell, but I'm thinking he may've been the cop to whom I sold a house of mine several years ago as a non-qualifying assumption, which might've left me "associated" with him since if he defaulted on the loan, the house and payments would fall on me. He also went on and on one night about how he "knew" that I had called his unlisted number and hung up. It was a riot! He claimed to have called and filed a report with a non-existent police department. I busted him on it and he persisted in insisting it was me for a while, then suddenly just pretended like the accusation never happened. To date, he's the only person I've every dealt with who I'd classify as "malevolently stupid". I mean, he's easily the most stupid person I've ever encountered, and one of the most purely evil.