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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: eims2000 who wrote (78118)	6/17/2002 8:05:16 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

No, EIMS, what I've simply done is level some criticism at some of the tactics used by shorters. Do I get a meaningful dialogue in return? Instead I'm seeing the same kind of terms the short team uses when it takes the field. Is criticism only a meaningful if it comes from convenience? Few, if any, have considered what I've written. The collective response has been pretty much a verbal pigpile. And, really, the gist to what I've been writing about is that some innocent mom and pops got harmed by some of the tactics which were full-force employed by 'big-time' and well organized shorting campaigners. Instead, a surprising marjority of you deny it ever happened or could happen. I mean who has the rights over who does in mom and pop the worse: longscamsters or shortscamsters? I always believed a tenet of justice being that nine guilty walk free rather than falsely imprison the one innocent. But in the unjuried fervor of shorting over scamsters and whatnot, this ideal seems not applicable. Anyway, EIMS, think what you like. I wish you luck.