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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mmmary who wrote (84108)	5/20/2003 12:39:05 PM
From: SI Bob	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 122087

Your past has no current relevance? My past is quite relevant. You intentionally remain ignorant about my past, even turning a blind eye to things on your screen about it, like that WSJ article you grabbed the picture out of. Bob, I don't think it's nice that you tried to write an obscene word. I am offended. Please delete your post. (bit-slapped) Educate yourself. Bit-slapped is a common phrase among the computer-literate.

To: mmmary who wrote (84108)	5/20/2003 12:52:52 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

You write: Once a scammer, always a scammer. So even if I agree with you that generally spoken a liar remains a liar, same goes for a convicted felon, - so you only can apply it to bob if he fell in the convicted category. Of course you could have suggested that Bob (not in his capacity as sheriff) is indeed a scammer, much like Goelo and others are. But I don't go even that far to think that this might have been your intention. But what I can not agree with is this blunt form of simplification you use here.