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 : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (90232)	12/1/2004 12:12:51 PM
From: E	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Here are his three last posts in reverse chron order. Message 20765243 Message 20765246 Message 20765252 Here's grainne's post on the subject: Message 20769880 Personally, I think G would have liked him to stay but that he didn't want to. Edit: Do you think he would have liked to stay? Or would post within the rules if invited back?

To: longnshort who wrote (90232)	12/1/2004 12:28:30 PM
From: E	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

I should acknowledge that I have never figured out why Jewel was banned. The word "rube" was involved, but surely that wasn't it. I have wondered if the reason could be that maybe ionesco indicated to Grainne that she wasn't posting here because Jewel was, and Grainne made a choice. I can't know that, but it has occurred to me as an explanation, since I was unable to find a post of Jewel's that violated thread rules. In fact, I'll pose that question, since I've wondered. Grainne, was there any PM indication by ionesco to you that she had left the thread because of Jewel? Or are there name-calling posts of Jewel's I've simply missed? (I checked quite few of the last of his posts here and found no violations in those.)