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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (19630)	8/22/2002 4:00:02 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

<font color=red> THREAD: A proposal on the floor. See the post I'm responding to.

To: jlallen who wrote (19630)	8/22/2002 4:04:45 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Voting to end tonight at midnight Pacific time. Er, what time would that be in the Florida panhandle?

To: jlallen who wrote (19630)	8/22/2002 5:13:54 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

I have some objections to your proposal, and a request: His posts are largely vacuous, intended simply to incite, make no meaningful contribution to the discussion, are non -replies and nothing but noise. He is apparently incapable of carrying on a meaningful conversation and posts here simply to cause trouble I went back and looked at the last few posts of TP's and could find nothing obscene, abusive, improper, no evidence of stalking, nothing except some posts that often disagree with the positions of most of the posters here including mine. The characterization that they are "vacuous" and "make no meaningful contribution to the discussion" and are "nothing but noise" is completely and entirely a personal reaction to the content of his posts. IMO TP is provocative but his posting doesn't come anywhere near a violation of either the letter or spirit of the TOU and are, especially for a "boxing ring," way, way within those limits. I would like to formally request more time for this discussion that until midnight tonight. There is no disadvantage to the process in giving it one full week for discussion. Including a weekend is an especially good idea, imo, because, well, people have lives 'n all. For one thing, this is important (insofar as anything that happens on SI is important) (it will set a precedent, and change the nature and spirit of this thread drastically) and deserves to be considered and discussed among many more participants than those on your list; and people's 3D lives take them away from SI from time to time. A few hours is not enough for this issue. TP has a right to defend himself, and to have the time to do it in. I can't be here tonight unless I can steal time I shouldn't steal from pressing duties, and not at all tomorrow, until the evening, if then. I also point out that there is something distinctly questionable about the prosecutor picking the jury. And also that the definition of "regulars" by which you assembled your list of jurors is very different from mine. I speak, of course (in the interest of disclosure) as one who has been banned by you from both thread of yours on which you had the ability to ban me.

To: jlallen who wrote (19630)	8/22/2002 6:10:57 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I don't think we could call it a boxing ring if we ban people for trying to incite. TP isn't exactly my favorite person on SI, but I don't see why he should be banned. Tim