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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Stock Picking - 2003 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (71)	1/5/2003 10:28:38 PM
From: Mike McFarland	Respond to of 383

Well, it is an interesting discussion anyway--you will remember, that when I started this several years ago, I specifically said a "HEALTHCARE RELATED CAUSE". Maybe that should still be in the golden rules (though I admit, now that the pledges are in, there really is no going back...) You will also note, that I did not have many other rules. It worked pretty well that way--not that I mean to criticize our current moderator who has done a very fine job these past couple years in what has been a mind-numbingly horrible market. Subject 32555 Here is an interesting tidbit: MLNM appears in 2/3rds of the portfolios. One to avoid this year like BTRN? Another tidbit: With something like 26 pledges, with, say, an average pledge of $250--we are not talking about a lot of money. More importantly, I think it provides a chance to expose other people to charities or causes that are important to us. If Athiesm is important to Ron, heck, why not? I have to say, the reason I pledge OCD, is not because I think $6 grand is going to cure obsessive compulsive disorder--but because I want to post the link and perhaps help in a very small way to increase awareness. And certainly when I sent my check to the ALS assn when you won, I read their newsletter when they got me on their mailing list...--a good thing to consider others' charities. I thought the Lane County homeless charity was very good too. If Ron should happen to win (and I don't think it is in his nature to come back to the thread even if he his un-banished) you can all give to the OCD foundation. I intend to be runner-up:-)

To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (71)	1/5/2003 10:58:55 PM
From: John Metcalf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 383

Twice again, I agree with MZ. I wrote checks to the charities of last year's winners. I intend to do the same again, perhaps to my favorite charity (slim chance). The bet is to lose the amount of my pledge, with 100% odds of success. In _comity_, I can support the organizations favored by others who are participating in good faith, and I will write a check at the end of the contest. I don't object to atheism. Some of our contestants are non-believers, and some have faiths other than Christianity. I grew up in mostly Asian societies, and find value in oriental religions. The reason I won't support an atheist organization is personal, and I will hold it even if no one agrees. I believe that every person has a spiritual dimension, with or without a specific belief in a manifestation of God. I can't support organized attempts to deny this truth. Mike McFarland has shown caring and empathy, though he does not have a belief in "God". Because he shows respect for others and participates in our community, I hope he will not object to being my example of an atheist with spirituality. In re: the invitation to participate: "comity" has a second meaning in addition to "friendly social atmosphere". The second meaning is "avoidance of proselytizing members of another religion". http:www.m-w.com The root word is "comis" (courteous), not "comoedia" (farce). Finally, there are a zillion charities, doing many kinds of services to people. Education, healthcare, treatment centers, social services, disease-specific organizations, research organizations, scouting, environmental organizations. I suggest that a person participating in a charitable contest should be able to find the name of a suitable organization in his/her check register. If my choice of a charity is offensive to anyone, I can easily find another. There is so much to believe in!

To: Miljenko Zuanic who wrote (71)	1/6/2003 3:53:19 PM
From: michael_f_murphy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 383

<<We entered contest with OBLIGATION>> Exactly. Perhaps an unfashionable view of honorable behavior, but in complete accord with my own. It is repugnant to pose a moral dilemma to a total stranger. It has nothing to do with what one believes (I tend toward agnostic) and everything to do with what one asks of others. Scott/Ron has been unbanned after some private mail setting forth my expectations. As to "rules": they originally started out as (wry after rye :-))notes to myself such as the "Florida Ballot" version of "close enough for charity work". Little did I know that it would be invoked. Regretably, I overlooked the "healthcare related" charity direction from the first contest. Regards, Michael