SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : The truth about SI and IHUB -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 12:19:16 AM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 124
 
YOUR FULL OF IT MATT investorshub.com

TO THE VERY END.



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 12:46:01 AM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 124
 
I THINK JEROME ARMSTRONG SECURITIES VIOLATOR SUMS UP THE PROBLEM. THE PROBLEM IS THEY NEEDED A PLACE WHERE THEY COULD CONTROL THE MESSAGE BOARDS TO RUN THERE SCAMS. INVESTORS HUB WAS SUCH A PLACE.

DO I DARE ASK ABOUT "CLAIR" AND 100 DAHLIAS'? investorshub.com

By: Fatt_Matt
08 May 2000, 01:34 PM EDT Msg. 1562 of 3837
(This msg. is a reply to 1547 by Jerome..Jackson.)
Jump to msg. #  

Jerome and FG!

One of you guys email me. I have been long working on a solution to your problem/request.

FG,, waazzzup buddy! Long time no talk...Give me a holler-
matt@investorshub.com

FM

By: Jerome..Jackson
07 May 2000, 11:24 PM EDT Msg. 1547 of 3837
(This msg. is a reply to 1545 by Francois+Goelo.)
Jump to msg. #  

We just agree to put them on ignore, pretty simple imo.

But a nice DD posting site would be great, and I think if it were easy to use and functional, and hostile to shorters and bashers, it would make for a quick exiting of RB by the DD posters, with the crowd following... it can happen quickly too, look how fast SI has become vacant following its sanctioning of these pests.

But the solution is not just another corporate run message board place, it's got to be long, bullish investor friendly, and short, bashing poster hostile.

--------------------------

sec.gov

8. On March 6, 2000 and after, Jerome Armstrong ("Armstrong") promoted BluePoint on the Raging Bull internet site, which carried hundreds of posts about BluePoint. Armstrong received undisclosed compensation from Markow and Goelo in return for his posts.

9. In the weeks and months after BluePoint started trading, BluePoint's price and volume steadily declined from its all-time high of $21. Nonetheless, the Promoter Defendants continued to sell at a profit, having paid Tsai only pennies for their shares. The Promoter Defendants never reported any changes in ownership when they sold their BluePoint shares in any filings with the Commission.

10. Tsai, directly and indirectly, has engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the registration provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") [15 U.S.C. §§77e(a) and 77e(c)] and Sections 13(d)(1) and 16(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§78m(d)(1) and 78p(a)] and Rules 13d-1(a) and 16a-3 [17 C.F.R. §240.16a-3] thereunder.

11. Markow, directly and indirectly, has engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §77q(a)], Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") [15 U.S.C. §78j(b)], and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5] thereunder; or in the alternative, Markow has engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute aiding and abetting the other promoter's violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §77q(a)], Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") [15 U.S.C. §78j(b)], and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5] thereunder.

12. Goelo, Yang, Luo, and the Broker-dealer Defendants, directly and indirectly, have engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §77q(a)], Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") [15 U.S.C. §78j(b)], and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5] thereunder.

13. The Promoter Defendants, directly and indirectly, have engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §77q(a)], and Sections 13(d)(1), 13(d)(2), and 16(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§78j(b), 78m(d)(1), 78m(d)(2) and 78p(a)] and Rules 13d-1(a), 13d-2(a), and 16a-3 [17 C.F.R. §§240.10b-5, 240.13d-1(a), 240.13d-2(a), and 240.16a-3] thereunder.

14. Sierra, directly and indirectly, has engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the broker-dealer anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically Section 15(c)(1) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §78o(c)(1)]. Geiger and Richardson, directly and indirectly, have engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute aiding and abetting violations of the broker-dealer anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 15(c)(1) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §78o(c)(1)].

15. Armstrong, directly and indirectly, has engaged and, unless enjoined, will continue to engage in acts, practices and courses of business which constitute violations of the touting provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically, Section 17(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §77q(b)].



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 6:31:25 AM
From: John Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 124
 
Those research reports are crap, in hindsight. I was wired and got very excited.

Are you "wired" and "very excited" about iHub and SI now? If so, will what you say about iHub and SI now be considered "crap" in hindsight?

pretty crappy at trading (still am)
I now trade much better


Which of the two statements above is the truth, and which is the lie? Or is this just more a case of you saying whatever is convenient at the time?

What were you doing when you were 16-20? Drugs? Drinking? Sex? Partying? I wasn't involved in any of that.

Hmmmmm, perhaps therein lies the reason for your current up-tight holier-than-thou attitude. Perhaps if you had participated in some of those activities earlier you'd be a bit mellower now ... too bad!

Still not involved in any of that and never will.

Never will?!?!?!?!? Have a talk with your mom and dad Matt ... if they had practiced what you preach (and NEVER engaged in sex) where would you be right now?



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 10:21:23 AM
From: mmmary2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 124
 
Matt, you were young? that's your excuse?

I believe you did get shares from promoters to help them hype. I've heard this from one of them. You most certainly got 144 shares from a promoter to run his tout ads on ihub. So why did the SEC call you up and want to talk? Hmm?

So it's okay to commit securities fraud if you're a teenager? It's better than taking drugs? When I was your age I wasn't committing fraud, lying, cheating or stealing. I went to school, got great grades, was on the swim team, had a job, volunteer at my church. I didn't do drugs either.

How can you not regret committing securities fraud? I sure would. Your posts got people to invest in scam stocks. You aided and abeted criminals like goelo. For you to think you did nothing wrong makes you very messed up. YOU DID BAD THINGS. You commited sins, securities fraud. You have no sense of morals if you don't see this.



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 10:21:37 AM
From: mmmary1 Recommendation  Respond to of 124
 
Matt, you were young? that's your excuse?

I believe you did get shares from promoters to help them hype. I've heard this from one of them. You most certainly got 144 shares from a promoter to run his tout ads on ihub. So why did the SEC call you up and want to talk? Hmm?

So it's okay to commit securities fraud if you're a teenager? It's better than taking drugs? When I was your age I wasn't committing fraud, lying, cheating or stealing. I went to school, got great grades, was on the swim team, had a job, volunteer at my church. I didn't do drugs either.

How can you not regret committing securities fraud? I sure would. Your posts got people to invest in scam stocks. You aided and abeted criminals like goelo. For you to think you did nothing wrong makes you very messed up. YOU DID BAD THINGS. You commited sins, securities fraud. You have no sense of morals if you don't see this.



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/2/2003 11:28:06 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie1 Recommendation  Respond to of 124
 
Matt,
don't feed into her fantasies. She has stepped over the line with both you and Bob.

She has stated things as facts that are very defamatory and are causing you damage. If you are going to let her post on your sites, at least collect things that look like they may meet the legal definition of libel and hand them over to a lawyer.

But for God's sake, stop giving her material with which she can perpetuate her fantasies.



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)6/3/2003 6:25:52 PM
From: Mark Johnson  Respond to of 124
 
Weak to say the least.....What do you think about Zeev's 100% miss on the Nassacre...



To: Matt Brown who wrote (20)2/25/2010 12:20:52 PM
From: average joe1 Recommendation  Respond to of 124
 
Great post Matt!