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 : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (8040)	4/16/2005 12:15:18 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12465

Oh gawwd. The patented rrufff reverse-psychology "You're obviously upset" turnaround. No, I'm hardly upset -- I just cracked an Airplane joke. You're just pulling out misdirects because the thread chain has once again exposed your fallacious arguments. I'm well on record for years now on my consistent A@P position. Check Advanced Search. It'll have that. re: "Anthony was convicted of extorting to call off the dogs. He was a basher. He was paid." You're struggling to re-define your words. Of course, the common connotation of a "paid basher" is that they're being "paid" by a hedge firm or an MM or something like ... to be "against" the company. In your struggle to sew a cloth of logic out of the thread which showed your error, you're now putting the pieces together that extortion = payment from the company in question, so therefore, Anthony's "paid bashing" means a POS company itself was "paying" for A@P's bashing? Extortion for non-bashing would be a "Paid Non-Basher". That's not the way it works. Paid Basher Local #314 expressly forbids it. You can't have an agreement with the Company, you have an agreement with the Tools of Satan shorters. Please review your Tools of Satan A + B = C's.