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.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (43737)	12/28/2005 9:36:38 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 90947

Hang on. I need to hear about a matter from Admin.

To: SiouxPal who wrote (43737)	12/29/2005 12:52:26 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 90947

This is a PM I received from Admin Dave and which I have his permission to post. It probably represents as close as we can get to the truth of this matter: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To: Lazarus_Long (who wrote) 12/28/2005 6:50:07 PM From: SI Admin (Dave) Well, that wasn't as simple as it first appeared. The 16th had already scrolled out of your outbox, so I ran a DB query for messageids from you to him on the 16th and plugged them into the URL. I suspect this was much ado about nothing... i.e., semantics. siliconinvestor.com I suppose that factually one could call that a threat but obviously the context was not provided when it was referred to as such. Makes quite a difference, eh? I didn't look for the "I told him to get lost." post since I don't know when that occurred and the 16th+ has scrolled from your outbox. No doubt irrelevant if that PM is the "threat" he was referring to. If this isn't the event in question, someone can let me know. Otherwise, it's probably best chalked up to a misunderstanding of terminology. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This was my reply: +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ FOUL! :-) Wait a minute. With a few exceptions (using the courts to harass) a statement that you will take legal action is legally no threat. For example, if I say I will sue you if do not repay money owed me, that is not a threat. In fact, it is legally required--it's called "demand for payment". Similarly, a statement on my part that if you set foot on my property, I will call the police is not a threat. It's the first step to a trespassing charge. Calling that a threat is a distortion of the English language. A statement that I will refer matters to Admin under such and such conditions is not a threat. Admin determines what happens, not I. If I go beyond any determination made by Admin, then I may have crossed the line and committed a crime, depending on what is done. (Beating the piss out of the guy obviously would qualify; going to court to get a subpoena to be served on SI requiring you to provide real name and address would not.) Let's see what SiouxPal answers to my posts about letting you look at his PMs. I am not surprised that you found nothing looking at mine. And it is possible that SiouxPal made a major restatement of what was said there and passed it to Santiago. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++