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: E who wrote (12287)	5/7/2002 12:13:42 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Does she know how this came to Jeff's attention?

To: E who wrote (12287)	5/7/2002 2:12:15 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

I have fantasized about doing this. I think it would be great fun to wade into one of the boxing ring debates wearing two distinct outfits. Of course I would expect to be suspended, if I got caught doing that. I know of one other case where a guy did it on the Clinton Sanity thread and he got suspended. There was a third party (Neocon) who was harmed by the incident so it was very different than Poet's case. And it was more complicated than just playing with an extra sign on. If I remember right, the guy was under suspension for pretending to be Neocon and got an extra name to begin posting while still under suspension. It does seem like there should be a statute of limitations especially if there is no claim of harm (no harm no foul and ancient history). However, I don't see the irony; unless you are associating this with Poet's recent complaints about her treatment on SI. In that case I see more than irony. Is SI suggesting that there is something inherently dishonest about Poet's position regarding her complaints? Did they have these issues with Poet in the past and is there a connection with not having taken action on her recent complaints? Or, is this the fulfillment of the blackmail threat posted a while back? Is SI being objective or have they gotten some of the mess spashed onto them. SI seems to have had no hesitation to act in this case. Why has SI been so quiet on the other major issue that is consuming the majority of at least two other threads. Does SI have substantial reasons to doubt Poets credibility otherwise? If so this is the first hint of it.