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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Amateur Traders Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sharck who wrote (18954)	4/28/2002 8:35:53 AM
From: Paul A	Respond to of 19633

Sharck- I have no desire to step into this as its one of the few times that I really had too much else happening to get involved in the 'fun' stuff.. but this comment caught me, and I just want to set the record straight since we all work very hard over on the free(forever) private site: "In one final note, our site IS free, but yes, we are evolving into a nominal fee based room. Looking at the two calls that were made in your room that started all this, IE holding OSIS from 24 to 17, while we went long at 17, and sold at 21, and your SSs on OVER where we were long, 26 to 35, is a perfect example of "getting what you pay for" and adds strength to our case." You obviously dont follow our group often if you think we all took a beating on OSIS.. 90% of the folks on Toms site are not day trading a stock.. OSIS was a position trade, and as such- nothing changed on Thursday/Friday when the stock plummetted other than it created a great buying opportunity. If it had plunged further into the low teens? you would have seen some of us take loses and move on, and you would have seen others add and play the position. You can go back to Thursday morning and you will see that a good 5 or 10 of us posted REAL TIME buys at 18 and below.. We also posted REAL TIME sells in the 20s not 3 minutes later as some of us cleared our positions for fantastic profits.. Anyhow- lets all just move on and put this behind us.. One thing you need to keep in mind is that a good portion of the investing community have seen the likes of Jenna(barb simon), Kimberly, Anthony Elgindy, Tokyo Joe, Future superstock, Waako kid(Gayle Essary), etc etc.. some good some bad, not saying which falls into which category beacause they are all sue happy peoples.. but my point is, there have been a LOT of scammers out there over the years.. paid promotors, trashers, criminals.. and joe-six pack investment thread junkies like myself have been burnt over and over by their lies and criminal activities.. We have assembled a group of people who are tired of it, and have found that by putting our heads together we can do quite well.. and we have.. Just the very thought of a pay site sickens some of us and brings back memories of scammers who cant make money on their trading so they create a different way of pulling cash from the street : ) I think yourself and all the other pay sites in cyber land would be real surprised with the average returns most of us achieve in our group.. I wont even begin to tell you the money I have shelled out over the years for pay sites and never made the returns IM making now..

To: Sharck who wrote (18954)	4/28/2002 8:48:29 AM
From: JustTradeEm	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19633

Sharck, I had hoped like Tom, you'd have the class to let this go .... I see not. Now, you have my Irish up .... and I feel badly for interjecting in your and Tom's chat, it's not my place ... but damn, it's hard not to ... We all < meaning all the "scumbags" > on Tom's site know exactly what transpired Friday .... so do you .... if you'd like cut and paste to remind you and all of SI, I'll be happy to oblige you, just ask. I don't know how many of us other than Tom, qualify as "master class traders" or "top gun" traders ... there are no overinflated egos on Tom's site, most especially Tom, that I know of. Your spamming of your business venture was clearly not appreciated ... everyone on Tom's site takes their cues from Tom ... I believed you were treated quite fairly to be candid. I know many bit their tongues out of respect for Tom, not you. If you noticed, Tom never commented on your posts ... not until this weekend when you threatened another member. Tom has earned respect here, you've lost more. Now, I'm going to ask you something for a third time that I asked you twice Friday and you refused to answer although I know you read the posts. Based on your spam, were you getting DA ROOM long on OVER at 35.70 premarket ? Based on the timing of your post, that's my guess. You are quite aware that Tom's site was short OVER mid 35s premarket .... easy couple o points ... were you playing against Tom's call ? Is that why you're there in the first place ? Damn, we're all "scumbags", what could we possibly bring to your table ? Document your winning call Sharck ... I'm sure your streak of 749 straight calls is intact ... or lack all professionalism and refuse to answer this very clear question for a third time. The choice is yours ! Tom, I apologize for interjecting, I'm catching PaulAitis I think ... lol. JB