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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: long-gone who wrote (92695)	1/18/2003 9:44:02 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116796

Too bad that 70 million isn`t going to the people that got fleeced instead of all the lawyers ,judges ,costs . looks like those guys are all clear to start up again ,another name another bunch of (suckers). If you took all the money away from the rich and gave it to the poor ,it would take about 5 years for them to get it all back again ,leaving the poor ,poorer than they were before sam

To: long-gone who wrote (92695)	1/19/2003 3:33:55 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116796

Didn't Datek have something to do with SI about 6 years ago? I recall something about people complaining bitterly about getting the old SI boot when they complained about bad order execution on the Datek thread, right around the time SI was changing hands. It was about that time that I formed the opinion that the flexibility/fairness of management, a factor usually related in direct proportion to the contained honesty and plain dealing co-efficient -- was low. Guess all those unfilled and late orders somehow were a product of the manager's use of the very same small-order system for their own needs. Tsk tsk.. sounds like the roots of a class action suit to me. EC<:-}