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: epicure who wrote (102175)	4/27/2005 1:22:19 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Oh. I shouldn't have said that this lawyer (for the claim on IHub that he was a preacher with a flock was a lie) was imo violating the ethical rules of his profession with his threats, sexual stalking, etc? Why not? I said I thought he was, he denied it, I ascertained that it was the case and corrected him. (Anonymously: I did him no harm.) I also said repeatedly on SI that he was violating the TOU of SI. (You said he wasn't.) Did you ever say that you thought his posting about Poet's family situation, and children, was scary? That it was scary that he threatened to post private emails that he (mis)characterized as "intimate" unless she continued their "relationship," a relationship she denied existed? That it was scary to threaten to sue in the courts to regain the "right" not to have his sexual harassment hampered? That it was scary for him to refuse in the face of pleadings by Poet's husband, an SI member, that he stop? Those are all minglings of SI and non-SI. I don't recall your finding them scary. I recall your mocking those who did. What "private message" did I post? You mean the one I wrote myself? My own? The one that CH had, w/o my permission, posted a misleading paragraph from? Tell me you're kidding.