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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5926)	3/30/2002 6:00:34 PM
From: Chris land	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Don't believe the rumors, I have never been terminated!!!! You go to the person that told you that rumor and you demand they reveal their source. I DESPISE RUMORS!!!!!!! Chris

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5926)	3/30/2002 6:11:03 PM
From: Neenny	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Laz, Being that I have not been shy about calling C. Land on the carpet for things I feel he misrepresents. I think by that same standard, I need to say that I do not recall him being terminated using this alias.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5926)	3/30/2002 6:14:50 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

My oh my, Chris's posts on the Pray for Edwarda thread have been deleted but not SI Bob's. I'll send you that one in a PM. You have my permission to do whatever since it's published on SI. What was odd, It was the Pray for Edwarda thread. Chris, instead of praying for her soul, wanted her or thought she would go to hell. Odd thing for a Christain to root for.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (5926)	3/30/2002 7:56:47 PM
From: (Bob) Zumbrunnen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

FWIW: 1. It was brought to my attention that it's rumored that I terminated Chris Land's account when he was posting really vile stuff about Edwarda when she died. I didn't. I re-read the post that probably led to that speculation, and I know me well enough to know that's a "You're suspended" post, not a "You're terminated" post. Actually, I didn't think I'd suspended him until that post was pointed out to me. 2. Unless the rules have changed (and I have no idea whether they have), "posting the contents of a PM or email, while horribly tacky, is not a violation of the Terms of Use unless the contents themselves are in violation." I put that in quotes because that's the standard answer I always gave to that query. In other words, if what's posted includes private info, it was considered a privacy violation. If it was vulgarity, it could be considered a vulgarity violation. And the person who posted it would be the one held accountable. But if all it did was break the confidentiality of private communication (something I personally frown on, but my feelings on it are even more irrelevant now than I held them to be before <g>), it was not a violation. Regards, The SIer formerly known as SI Admin (Bob) but currently known as the prexy and code-monkey at a different site. Edit: Jeeees..... Is SI always this slow even on weekends? Can't believe how long it took to submit this post and navigate around a bit then come back and edit this.