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: E who wrote (56319)	9/1/2002 3:24:25 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Will you please stop trying to put whom ever I was referring to on the spot? Because in the process you have let us know whom you Pm'ed and the substance of those pm's- presumably without permission. I will not give you a list of people with whom I correspond. Never. That is simply not going to happen. And if you ask me about each poster individually I will simply ignore you. Any such list would be disclosing what I consider to be private information. That you obviously do not consider such things private, does not change things for me. Now, on to your "confessions." I did not share them with anyone, not even my closest friend, nor did I keep the pm or email or however they were sent. Nor do I actually remember what you said exactly. More than anyone can expect from any confidence given to you, you have gotten from me, (IMO) but there you are. You are getting good coin, even though you do not, or cannot give it yourself. Please do not continue to harass people on this thread, or bother me, for personal details that are really none of your business. I could have declined JLA's desire to have "proof"- goodness knows no one else furnishes much. And in future such proofs will not be on offer, if I am ever so foolish as to post something that chums the water in this way again.

To: E who wrote (56319)	9/1/2002 4:11:07 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

I assume you engaged in PM's with X and possibly others in CH's camp, but they were of a different tone--one more congenial to you. E, there was nothing uncongenial in our PMs and almost nothing uncongenial in any of the ones I've exchanged with people on all sides of this subject. I'm sorry if I left you with the perception that I was suggesting otherwise, particularly in your case. I thought we were communicating well. I was trying to be helpful in my post. As so often happens, that backfired. I was trying to give you a little perspective on this aspect of the issue. That you respond to me with the standard assumption that those who are not on your bandwagon, ideologically pure, are "in CH's camp" demonstrates how badly perspective is needed. There is a big difference between failing to agree with you that CH is a rabid pervert and being in his "camp." I was trying to give you a view of what it's like to be judged by that kind of black and white thinking. Remember how you felt when making your points on the Laundry thread and how you were received. I hope you will try to see how much alike the two scenarios are as you stand on the other side.