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.

Technology Stocks : ACII - AmeriChip International, Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Bob who wrote (39)	7/26/2005 9:17:28 AM
From: Marshall001	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4616

FWIW....... I agree with the moderator on this one for the simple fact that the banned member apparently only created the account to come here and stir up trouble. The user in question has only posted 5 times. 4 posts here on this board and then the one to you. Seems there was an agenda in the line of questioning that was going on. IMO someone so "new" to SI would be a little more reserved to start off. Its unfortunate that there is not a member rating system so opposing viewpoints can be expressed and weighted based on the member's rating. This might be a better alternative to the banning of members. The main thing is that I don't want SI to be a free-for-all like Yahoo or RB. IF the banned member had been around longer and provided value to other boards then I would not agree with the quick ban. This instance seems a little too convenient. my 2 cents..

To: SI Bob who wrote (39)	7/26/2005 10:39:09 AM
From: jmhollen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4616

On the day I read the post in question, I had reasons to suspect that there was "..3rd party manipulation.." of this Board going on. And, I'm certain you know exactly what I mean. Further, SI has had a plethora of "..re-runs.." of previously terminated members lately. Here is the guy's profile/post list: Member 9102561 Does it not appear to you he has "..a single and interestingly focused AGENDA.."?!? My impression, after reviewing his post list and PRIOR TO BANNING HIM, is that he is one of those recently terminated bash aliases from RagingBull and/or perhaps from SI as well. I believe I sent SI_Admin(Dave) a copy of the guy's profile [link] to review. If I didn't, in this case, I must have just been too busy at the time. Isn't it also interesting that he knew exactly which Board to go to to whine to you, without having to ask anybody on SI for "..directions.." or expressing his "..outrage.." elswhere. And, he knew exactly which button to push "..regarding income to SI.." New SI Interface Discussion From: BarclayDonaldson 7/25/2005 7:49:03 PM Read Replies (2) of 3826 How does one become a moderator? This jmhollen character is OUT OF CONTROL with his bans. And the administrators expect people to pay for this service? How in the SAM HAIL would this 5-post freebie-membership newbie have any idea who else had been BAN'd on SI, ..who might have banned them, ..and whether or not I was 'out of control' -- unless he was being spoon-fed by someone else with a personal beef to pursue, has a case of 'joemonkey' disease, dates a lady with a PT-Cruiser in California, has friends in jail in NY, is on the payroll of someone like Cornell Capital, or whatever...??? With your considerable experience in online stock BBS, it would certainly seem that you would recognize when you are being manipulated..!!! And, with the exotic WWW "..data tools.." supposedly available to SI_Admin(Dave) [who must be on vacation], have you not determined who this individual is and where is ISP comes from...??? I would be very surprised if this person isn't someone you have already dismissed from iHub or SI under other aliaii. But, I'm certainly willing to receive such info via PMs - so it doesn't embarrass anyone or take up public Board space in the process. The question regarding Jaffe's email could clould clearly have been worded in a manner that would have been less provocative. It was not simply a statement of fact, it had no link that people could refer to, and it's intent appeared to infer that I had received some Pumpo email and thus started this Board - which is not the case. There was no query such as, "..Did you (..or does anyone..) happen to get the advisory Pumpo emails from 'X-Y-Z' about ACHI.."??? Or, "..Have you seen this [link].."??? Every SI member has the option of starting their own Board on any subject or the "..same subject..", which is a considerabale improvement over iHub. If the discussion, the people on the Board, the person creating and contributing to to the Board, or some other issue displeases a reader - they have the immediate option of starting a competitive subject and seeing if anyone will join them. The best example of that is the dozens of Boards here on Bush, Kerry, Hillary and other related topics - where the BAN lists thereon are extensive. Now that you have clearly threatened me here on the Board, instead of inquiring via a PM, I will unBAN this particular individual of personal interest to you for the time being - presuming he's had some time to consider who and how he wants to phrase his "..bashes..". But, if I get another post from him including what I interpret to be personal innuendo again, the BAN will be immediately reinstated. You get a lot of hard "..unpaid.." work from people on the Boards I create, Bob. I'm amazed that this particiular case was worthy of so much of your time - and, in such a public framework. John :-) .