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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (50450)	6/11/2002 8:35:56 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

listen laz. you can not join an insufferable event with brief and consise comments like that. Now get with the picture.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (50450)	6/11/2002 9:11:14 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

When it contains a pejorative. And the pejorative was "outside agitator?" If it was the connotation of that word that made it look like an accusation to you, I could understand that, although I didn't intend it to be pejorative, only descriptive. I think I mentioned a while back that I only used that phrase because someone else had used it a bit earlier. I prefer "gang." Which, of course, some people would interpret as pejorative, as well. Want to find an "outside agitator"? Look in the mirror. Well, or course. I try to butt into things that aren't my business only rarely, only when I think I have some added value to bring to bear and the issue is worth the trouble. I don't feel the need to defend myself from that term even though it's clear that you framed it as an accusation. I'm generally cautious about intervening and do so only with the best of intentions, but sometimes my interventions don't help or make things worse. When that happens, I don't mind people mentioning it. Unless their intention is clearly non-constructive, of course.