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: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 5:14:32 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"Now, if others think it is worthwhile to continue beating the moldering carcass, they may carry on........" Whatever. I just want to get one thing straight today. I am never going sailing with you.

To: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 5:26:35 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Hmmm. Looks like all those who thought I needed a visit with a shrink have had their concerns addressed.

To: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 6:35:33 PM
From: bonnuss_in_austin	Respond to of 82486

You need to use paragraph breaks, fer starters. Your 'prose' is basically unreadable. You know...that's the 'enter button' on your keyboard. Insert the graph breaks as subject/idea changes occur. Makes it more readable. Not effective, necessarily ... but READABLE. Just am editing tip from 'pro to pro,' you understand...... -g- bia

To: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 10:09:43 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"Laying out the case" is a bit much to ask at this point. It laid itself out, has been explained over and over, and in fact is being laid out up to and including today, by CH. As I said, the question of who turned Poet in for her violation of the TOU has turned out to be a godsend to CH. A change of subject is always good when you've behaved disgracefully. I tend to believe what people say unless I have awfully good reason not to, and find myself believing CH's denials, and JCD's, on the subject. And, as I've said, the issue is not one of importance as much as it is of irony: Poet violated the TOU a year ago. She has been the victim of a long-term violation of the TOU that continues to the present day. The irony is less literary if her harasser isn't the one who got her suspended, but it remains. Oh, btw, before I reply further to this post, this news: Poet just got her acceptance to the Bread Loaf Writers' Conference 2002! Fewer than 20% of those who apply are accepted. It's an honor. In the last few weeks, she had that reading on the bill with Dunn, got a poem accepted in a poetry journal, and was accepted into this competitive program. More later about CH and his continued unwelcome addresses to with Poet, including a few reminders. Note: Message 17463334

To: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 11:38:13 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I want to be sure you've read these. They are OT: Message 17463535 Message 17463564 This is so strange to me: Message 17463416

To: Neocon who wrote (47142)	5/13/2002 11:46:59 PM
From: Constant Reader	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Here is a road map. Those who wish to can connect the dots: Message 16209902 Message 16210024 siliconinvestor.com Message 16229180 Message 16243008 Message 16278923 Message 16280201 Message 16280585 Message 16281074 siliconinvestor.com An SI "No to or About" was thereafter in-force until: Message 16672729 Message 16674154 Message 16674951 siliconinvestor.com Message 16690296 Message 17388001 Message 17389766 Message 17389875 siliconinvestor.com Message 17390777