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: epicure who wrote (63684)	10/24/2002 7:17:25 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"Now if she were emailing me repeatedly I'd have a good case for harassment. But on SI- it is SOL." I do not see a substantial difference. I click delete for 95% of the emails I get. Mostly marketing. However, If I open one that looks deceptively like a friendly personal letter, I consider the sender a perpetrator of fraud...and more depending on the nature of the content. I can, of course, open every email sent to me and have every right to do so. Does that absolve the sender from any attempt to harm me through deceit, fraud, etc.? PS: I can of course answer that for myself if you like.

To: epicure who wrote (63684)	10/24/2002 7:21:39 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

What happened to your argument that the reason what CH did to Poet all those weeks was okay was that she could have put the threatening slanderer on ignore, and you couldn't put email on ignore, so you had to threaten in 3D? LOL, X. You decided for reasons of your own not to see a violation of the TOU. Something is seriously wrong with your thought processes, imo. Here's some TOU, pasted. If you do this, you're subject to suspension or termination, or in CH's case, to a toorabout, until he threatened to sue so he could keep posting threats and lies to and about Poet. (Are you sure you want to rehash this, too?): ...harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortuous, improper or otherwise objectionable. </i.

To: epicure who wrote (63684)	10/24/2002 7:47:49 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I never saw a post by Ch that violated the TOU. There might have been some, but I did not see them if there were. If there had been, you can be damn sure they would have used them to boot my butt from SI. No, I never violated the TOU. SI violated them, and got caught out doing it. But not I.