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: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (2684)	4/4/2002 11:33:35 PM
From: mmmary	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

RE: "anonymous posters must be hiding things" >If I understand the case properly , at one point in time the judge made the comment, ( I am only repeating what i have read else where) " Anyone who needs to be anonymous on the internet, must be hiding something " If this is true than this case will be overturned. Judges who personally believe this are the biggest threat to freedom of speech cases. They are clueless. If people cannot anonymously comment about stock scams or other items in the public interest, no one will ever comment about these things and the public will be fleeced. If the government pays for witness protection, applauds whistle blowers, they should be FOR anonymous posters protection as well. The judge in the ATEL case stated this same thing in court. I would love to force these judges to post their full name, address, phone number on various mafia stock scam message boards while posting honest negative items copy/pasted from SEC documents. THEN let's see if they feel the same way after they're sued for no reason, have to pay $15K to hire an attorney for a frivolous case, have their families, business partners, neighbors harassed and threatened. I'm sure they'd change their tune. I know I sure regret not being anonymous. I thought if I post the truth, what do I have to worry about. PLENTY and then some!