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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ronald Ashkenazy who wrote (83388)	6/24/2002 3:11:14 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

Ronald, People on this thread might want to try practicing random acts of courtesy and respect for their adversaries. It does take more talent to disagree and to persuade without using caustic language, but it is a distinct part of the old fashioned American values of respect, diversity and fairness which I, for one, fondly miss. Good post. Joe

To: Ronald Ashkenazy who wrote (83388)	6/24/2002 3:25:37 PM
From: greg s	Respond to of 275872

You're dreamin', Tex (and I mean that friendly-like, not caustic-like). The AMD/Intel battle will continue to be waged, regardless of how low their stock prices go. I know, I know ... those fine folks at the Alamo didn't resort to backstabbing whilst Federales attacked, but we're dealin' with a different breed here. Happy trails, greg

To: Ronald Ashkenazy who wrote (83388)	6/24/2002 4:14:04 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

No. But in a country overrun with liberal judges, where it would be difficult to convict the sky of being blue, Americans have to go to extreme measures to prove the obvious. In any event thank you for your flawless execution of self-incrimination. What remains to be seen now is if you are ever sufficiently reprimanded for violating the thread rules re: no insults, personal attacks or name calling. You are overreacting here in the extreme. People on this thread might want to try practicing random acts of courtesy and respect for their adversaries. It does take more talent to disagree and to persuade without using caustic language, but it is a distinct part of the old fashioned American values of respect, diversity and fairness which I, for one, fondly miss. And you have displayed that old human trait of hypocrisy. You have said nothing whatsoever to those who have insulted me. You have to call em both ways to be fair and you come up short. I was raised in Texas in the 50’s where I learned from a very young age that a man’s word was his bond. Where million dollar deals were frequently done with just a handshake. Where respect for friends and strangers alike, from all walks of life, was always the order of the day. Big hat, no cattle. EP

To: Ronald Ashkenazy who wrote (83388)	6/25/2002 12:23:17 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Ronald, "In any event thank you for your flawless execution of self-incrimination." That would be not the first time. The guy likes "to play" with truth, and admits that, e.g.: Message 17254611 "It was a taunt. My post was a play on that and didn't mean it was or wasn't true. - EP" You also wrote: "The routine acerbic behavior of people on this thread, on both sides of the aisle, is despicable and classically un-American. Ad Hominem attacks don’t win debates. They often are simply symptoms of arguments gone dry. People on this thread might want to try practicing random acts of courtesy and respect for their adversaries. It does take more talent to disagree and to persuade without using caustic language" I think you are too naive here. The SI is not a place for scholastic exercises or theoretical debates for many. There is an opinion that the big business is a contemporary form of war. For many, this board is a sideline of that battlefield, where they push their own agendas to survive economically in the market-battle, to help themselves to buy low and sell high to "other suckers". In this environment there is no "debates", only goals, at any cost. You can figuratively spit facts in the face of a guy like "Elmer" or "Whortso", but they would just wipe themselves and continue to push their agendas. You cannot win any "arguments", because their goals are beyond any "persuasion". Eventually they would hide from you with "ignore button", end of "debates". Regards, - Ali