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 (45222)	3/7/2002 3:29:38 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Hey! Nice dodge. You asked me if I would honor your request. I gave you my terms. You honor Poet's request and I will honor yours. Period. End of story. Not negotiable. Yes or No? JLA

To: The Philosopher who wrote (45222)	3/7/2002 4:03:13 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If you prove that you believe in "do not post to or about" deals by stopping, NOW, from ANY posting to or about me, or posting about anything I'm posting about, and keep it up for six months without a single respite, then at the end of that time, you having shown the way, I will agree to the same deal vis-a-vis Poet. And no indirect posting through proxies. Total, absolute separation. Of course you put in "or posting about anything I'm posting about" into this so it makes no sense. How about making me that offer but making it that I can post on a topic under general discussion, taking up points made by others or making points of my own without any reference to you or your posts, and no third-party, indirect engagement, and no quoting or paraphrasing of you. Simple. No to, no about, no engagement at all. Topic yes, engagement, direct or indirect, no. The reason I say topic yes, is that it works that way standardly on SI, and there's no reason for it not to work that way with us. Okay? Give me the offer with that modification? After all, no one ever proposed that you couldn't post on, say, capital punishment, if Poet had posted on it. They just proposed that you restrict your responses to non-Poet-connected posts, not alluding to her or her posts.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (45222)	3/8/2002 9:37:16 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

You say:If you prove that you believe in "do not post to or about" deals by stopping, NOW, from ANY posting to or about me, or posting about anything I'm posting about, and keep it up for six months without a single respite, then at the end of that time, you having shown the way, I will agree to the same deal vis-a-vis Poet. And no indirect posting through proxies. Total, absolute separation. I am afraid that this tends to belie your claim of having no intention of posting "to or about" Poet. If you really mean to leave her alone, why the conditionality? JLAs version makes more sense: He will leave you alone if you agree to leave Poet alone.