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.

Pastimes : SI vs. iHub - Battle of the Boards Part 2 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Phil(bullrider) who wrote (4717)	8/30/2003 8:56:07 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5315

Hi Phil, I'm not sure what you mean by the phrase "the act". Should I interpret that to mean Bux's actual post? I didn't think that there was any question as to whether or not Matt had the authority on I-Hub. It's fairly well known that Matt is the System Administrator on I-Hub, and widely understood that the System Administrator has the ability (some might even say "obligation") to suspend or terminate a subscriber's posting privileges for violating the Terms of Use. As far as Bux's post(s) goes, it was merely the instrument that provided for an alleged violation of the Terms of Use. Nothing more and nothing less. (By the way, I'm not saying that Bux's post was an actual violation. I was under the impression that this is the gist of the dispute: Did (or did not) Bux's post violate the Terms of Use on I-Hub? As the System Administrator, Matt alleges "yes". Bux counters with "no". And, as far as I know, that's the gist of the dispute.) KJC