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.

SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: laura_bush who wrote (20386)	3/8/2004 9:43:42 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32871

Not quite sure what your point is. However, it seems to me that there should be a rule against taking an "alias" or nome de plume of the first lady. If that's not TOS, it should be. Some would argue that the use of a purloined name might be adjectival rather than nominal. I'd suggest instead a clearer verbiage, such as if you changed your first name to Hairy. So should I be allowed to take the name "John Kerrry" and then go on to rant and rave like a lunatic? Interesting.........

To: laura_bush who wrote (20386)	3/8/2004 10:14:21 PM
From: SI Dave	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32871

"laura_bush", You are well aware that I answered that question by responding to the person who had standing in the matter. I also responded to you, in a fashion, despite your lack of standing other than as a daily source of the type of "harassment" that seems to be the focus of your complaint. If you think you are going to wag the dog by bringing your rhetoric out of political threads and onto this one, think again. You've been dancing close the edge ever since you rejoined this site in your current persona, but the edge is getting rather frayed. If you want to continue dancing with SI, you'd be well advised to not step on your partner's toes anymore - they have already reached their limit of abuse. A "boot" will be the next remedy, if necessary. *** The "policy" decision was intentionally left open last week in my response to the" thread naming" issue. A follow-up will be provided in that forum shortly.