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: The Philosopher who wrote (47424)	5/15/2002 2:22:28 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

You want to convince someone? Let's start here. "Hi, Poet. I understand that you've been missing me. Sorry, I've been kind of busy recently, and not able to post to you as often as you might like. But I will have some time free shortly, so will be able to resume our discussions... " Was this some kind of joke? Or were they the taunting words of a sick stalker? Then proceed to: Message 17422314 Another joke or more sickness? After that, you need to explain how you answered the request by St. Bill to leave his wife alone. Did you ignore it, or perhaps you PMed him to tell him it was a little joke, or did you defy his wishes altogether? You need to do a little more explaining to convince those on this thread not blinded by naivete.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (47424)	5/15/2002 2:35:01 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"Is this the dilemma facing some here?" NO. You face the abyss; you face the chasm. The rest of us are in the arena of "normalcy". You claim you are not stalking Poet; but your actions and commentary suggest either that, we are all insane...or that you are.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (47424)	5/15/2002 2:35:10 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

It is clear that you can be ejected easily if you screw up. Of course, Poet's wishes will have some bearing.....

To: The Philosopher who wrote (47424)	5/15/2002 3:52:10 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

"But that would involve the risk that maybe they'll find out that they were wrong. Is this the dilemma facing some here? It is embarrassing to find out that you are wrong. It is imperative (for reconciliation) when you do find that your are wrong, that you recognise your mistake, take action to correct the wrong, and hopefully save some face and strengthening of character, by joining the right in the process. This is not the current dilemma as I see it. Poet has vacated the SI premises, leaving notice (via E) that she is following advice not to return to her old participatory modes of involvement...(probably legal advice). You can not move this issue one way or another (On SI) without one of you agreeing to totally accommodate the other. Poet's absense makes accommodating her outside the accessable boundaries. SI, Laz etc. could take any action they choose at this point and the issue would remain in the status of dilemma. So we are now seeing some pretty serious posts regarding court testimony, test case, etc. I cautioned you about this some time ago. If we are indeed moving in this direction, then damages or extent of damages is more at issue than what SI, Laz etc. do.