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 about the Let’s Talk About Our -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Dave who wrote (1315)	3/16/2005 12:27:14 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 5290

"Like I said: childish." I find that comment to be OTHERWISE OJECTIONABLE. Now that you have repeated it ad nauseum, I also am feeling a bit TORTURED by it. Please stop HARASSING the gentle posters who inhabit this realm with these ABUSES ... And suspend yourself for a suitable period of time. I recommend from 3 days to six months but will leave the specific period up to your Admin discretion. TOU: * Use Silicon Investor for illegal purposes or for the transmission of material that is unlawful, harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortuous ("tortious" or whatever -- you know what we mean), improper or otherwise objectionable. Thanks in advance, jewel

To: SI Dave who wrote (1315)	3/16/2005 12:46:29 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Respond to of 5290

"The "they ban we don't" is a flimsy soapbox. Some of the people who preach the loudest about that were in fact the most pre-ban issuers when that was allowed. Do as I say and not as I did?" Straw man arguments are an even flimsier soapbox, Dave. But now I'm beginning to understand you. Criticism is childish, you say? I submit that an inability to take criticism, like an inability or unwillingness to consider opposing viewpoints, is the thing that is lacking in maturity. Whining about it to admin only proves the immaturity, especially when the thing they're being criticized (or ridiculed) for is their own childish temper tantrums, rants and "I can't hear you - I'm not listening - you're a big mean stupidhead" whining. Not that I'm criticizing you, of course. Or ridiculing you. Wouldn't want to test implied threats. I do, however, think it's kind of funny that someone actually gets paid to call people childish for engaging in criticism and ridicule of a bunch of other people engaged in criticism, ridicule AND whining. OK, maybe I AM ridiculing. Hard to tell, sometimes. ;-)

To: SI Dave who wrote (1315)	3/16/2005 3:07:24 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5290

The "they ban we don't" is a flimsy soapbox. Some of the people who preach the loudest about that were in fact the most pre-ban issuers when that was allowed. Do as I say and not as I did? You talking about me? Subject 54350 Nothing prevents users from starting their own threads, moderated or otherwise, to discuss the subject if they are banned or disagree with a moderator's methodology. Do we, their banned, not also have then the right to discuss their posts on our own threads- -particularly if they are not banned and can comment as they please on OUR threads? I would suggest that those who prefer criticize and ridicule others versus carrying on civil discussion are the ones shouldn't be posting on public message boards. Do you include the "deer hunter post and Granny's 1996-8 posts among those "civil discussions"? By the way, I can give you a 2005 reference by Granny to those very posts if you want it. What say you now?