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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Smiling Bob who wrote (5211)	12/6/2005 9:18:16 PM
From: ravenseye	Respond to of 5425

Scott, SI Admin (Dave) seems to be considering some ban changes. ... Just don't question SAME EVANS if you get back in the a@p gated community! lma(zz)o I'm not wanted there, but the defense sure wanted that SAME EVANS to testify! Message Boards \| Welcome to SI : New SI Interface Discussion To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (4090) 11/25/2005 8:07:36 PM From: SI Admin (Dave) Read Replies (1) 4091 of 4141 Currently planned and subject to change: - Tiered limits on how log bans can be placed. - Self-expiring. - No [re-]ban until user posts [again]. - Reasonable basis for the ban. (For example, being negative on a stock is not reasonable basis unless the board is titled "For Longs Only" or somesuch.) Not to worry, though; the Politics and quite likely Coffee Shop boards will probably be exempted from the "enhancements". Message 21918655 Message Boards \| Welcome to SI : New SI Interface Discussion To: Dale Baker who wrote (4094) 11/26/2005 9:20:07 AM From: SI Admin (Dave) Read Replies (1) 4095 of 4141 Relax isn't really the correct term; reduce would be more appropriate. There are simply too many bans of members who post contrary opinions or questions on investment boards which are titled to be for open discussion of the stock. It is perfectly acceptable if a moderator wants to style a board for positive (or negative) content only. Then it would be reasonable to ban someone for consistent contrary posts as being off-topic. However; other users and readers of the board would know from the title that the purpose of the board is for cheerleading and not meaningful exchange of differing views. The Coffee Shop boards don't really need the increased requirements for issuing bans, and the political forum boards by their very nature are titled and typically operated as partisan and therefore don't need it either. Message 21919292

To: Smiling Bob who wrote (5211)	12/6/2005 10:44:12 PM
From: ravenseye	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5425

I posted the ban list 11/4/2005 for the Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony board. Since that time the three following names have been removed: feminvstr Gidget jmhollen (previous list) Message 21857063 (current list) siliconinvestor.com Oh them changes! lma(zz)o the a@p_moderator was appointed a month and a few days after the trial started because someone else was banning people while tony is incarcerated! Imagine that, someone was using tonys account, but after it was noticed and mentioned an a@p_moderator appeared like Magic! PSSSST I noticed itilis2003 and Raymond Duray are both banished but are still on the list.