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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (5771)	3/30/2002 3:19:27 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

I go back to the posted relevant rule (below): The focus is on the revelation of intimate, personal or private information about other posters. or posting PMs containing such intimate, personal or private information about other posters. or threatening to PMs containing such intimate, personal or private information about other posters. or alluding to the existence of PMs containing such intimate, personal or private information about other posters. ---------------------------------------- Agreed that a PM is private communication, but it does not follow that it is per se Personal Information. The question then becomes the allusion to a PM that contains "private information". And that a threat in PM is considered "private information" and that it is on par with "cyberflirtation". Considering the context, I am going to concede the argument.

To: epicure who wrote (5771)	3/30/2002 2:01:43 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

If someone threatens you, your only protection short of calling the police is to make public the fact that you have been threatened. If anyone threatens me by PM, they are sure on notice that their PM will be posted publicly! LOL! It surprises me that the difference between posting "I have intimate PM exchanges from so and so that I may post" and "So and so has threatened me by PM" isn't perfectly clear to everyone. It makes me laugh! Sometimes results-oriented reasoning so defies common sense as to be merriment-inducing! You really think you owe a threatening-letter writer keeping his threats secret? Why, to protect his reputation? That's hilarious.