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: one_less who wrote (12741)	5/10/2002 9:56:15 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

I can not understand why you are taking issue with me. Okay, the posts from you that I have responded to today all have been focused on "who turned Poet in." I have been basically saying, what difference does it make, since it doesn't appear to be in contention that she did violate TOU. This latest post of yours seems to have abandoned that issue, in favor of "some insidiousness in the process," which I take to mean something along the lines that SI itself, or SI-Jeff in particular, is out to get her. Maybe it would help if you stop beating about the bush and come right and say what you think. Is the your problem with the whistle-blower ? Is your problem with SI ? Is your problem with SI-Jeff? Or is your problem with all of the above, acting in a conspiracy against Poet? Just saying something like "it sounds fishy" doesn't advance things very much. I think you need to spell out how you know (other than hear-say) that Poet had been treated differently than others who have committed a similar violation. Moreover, what good does it do to try and convince me? I don't hand out the suspensions. What are you doing to convince SI?

To: one_less who wrote (12741)	5/12/2002 11:25:07 AM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 21057

it "could" involve some incidiousness in the process. I came into TOU vilolations for a short spell. I made some carefull checks into past posts of myself and others. I placed about a dozen people on ignore and there seemed to be no more trouble. I don't actually know where to go to see who I have ignored so I just notice by the response to some messages. I find it interesting that people show up as ignored that I don't recall at all, indicated that they have changed their "handle" in the meantime. My conclusion: there are some people who have learned to "game the system" and harass with technical TOU vilolations until SI-Jeff or someone else gets frustrated. TP