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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rkral who wrote (59738)	2/4/2007 5:01:32 PM
From: GPS Info	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197347

Ron, Not me, and I think it's reckless unresponsible speculation? I guess you meant irresponsible. There are many things about our idioms and expressions that I don’t understand, for example, it wasn’t until college that I clearly understood “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.” <ng> I understand how leaving a baby in car (while the parent shops) is irresponsible, but I don’t understand how a comment on a message board is irresponsible. Are you concerned about the market’s reaction on Monday to Jim’s comments? If you can expand my understanding of the definition of “irresponsible speculation,” it would help me interpret other comments on the web – because this is not the first time that I have seen this comment. If you also have the time to define “reckless” comments on a message board that would help too. I have often thought that members of the Kennedy family were reckless, but I haven’t seen a case where I thought comments from Jim were “reckless.” There is so much speculation and hearsay on these boards that I sometimes have to re-read comments three or four times just to make sure I understand the sentence structure and terminology, let alone whether the comments were potentially "reckless." TIA and warmest regards