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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maried. who wrote (46840)	5/7/2002 8:26:39 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

"You appear to be the only one who thinks that SI Jeff is so intimidated by CH that he would not be completely truthful in his post to the thread." I am quite confused by SI Jeff's official position on the overall issue here, which appears to have enabled and emboldened CH to continue from his perspective. I don't see where E accused SI Jeff of being less than truthful. I am assuming he's holding some cards close to his chest which I know nothing about...but who knows.

To: maried. who wrote (46840)	5/7/2002 8:49:47 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Why do you think I have accused Jeff of being untruthful in his assertion that CH did not report the second account? I did not say that. I am sure that CH didn't use his account -- if he did it -- and that Jeff TRUTHFULLY reported that he knew that was the case. This is such a simple point! Why isn't it getting through? I have also said that I don't know for a fact that CH did it. I know he did worse, and did things that have caused a great deal more suffering to Poet than a couple of weeks off SI will cause. But I don't know he was the one who reported the second account. As I've said. I don't even think it's very important. I can think of scenarios that wouldn't involve CH, of course. Say, someone who knew told someone else who told someone else who had a grudge against Poet and decided to make some mischief by doing something at a time when CH was menacing Poet and making clear he intended to continue doing so even in the face of her husband's asking him to stop it. Such suspicions as mine happen when a suspicious character with a bad, long record including threats to make a victim miserable until he gets something he wants is at the scene of an event in which the victim is made miserable. Someone PM"d me that CH had certainly better hope that nothing happens to Poet, because the cops would certainly be combing through CH's hard drive and other records, whether he did it or not. If CH didn't do it, it's too bad he has behaved in a way that makes him look like the one. But it's really NOT a big deal, compared with what we KNOW he's done, because we have been eye witnesses. IMO SI has caused all this by letting CH do whatever he wanted where Poet is concerned since he threatened to sue them. There are TOU prohibiting such behavior, and they should have been enforced.