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 : Bob Brinker, Moneytalk and Marketimer -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1429)	10/7/2007 4:40:57 PM
From: queenleah	Respond to of 2121

Thank you honey. Now we have James' confirmation that he did indeed post something from the Marketimer which James seems to believe was "fair use", (and Brinker may not agree) and additionally, he confirms that he posted something uncomplimentary to Brinker. Plus, we have James' suspicion that it was the uncomplimentary comments that did it rather than the inappropriate "sharing" of the Marketimer and the fair use issue. Plus we have James suspicion that it could happen to honey as well, although we don't know if honey subscribes. 1. We still don't know what the "shared" information was or whether it rightfully comes under fair use or not, and we perhaps never will. 2. We still have only suspicions and opinions, and perhaps always will, as to the "real" reasoning behind the reported cancellation. 3. I understand from what Kirk says that Brinker and his people are free to cancel anyone they wish to, and return the subscriber's money. Personally, I don't believe Brinker wants to cancel any valued subscribers, I don't know why any publisher would... but as Kirk says, he's free to do so, no crime, no breach of ethics. And others are free to profit from Brinker's work. And others are free to continue to toss their slings and arrows, First Amendment remains uncompromised.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1429)	10/7/2007 5:28:12 PM
From: EQ	Respond to of 2121

honey beer ose said: So one might conclude that the Bob Brinker's are so insecure that a they take offense when a subscriber exercises his First Amendment right to say that he finds the newsletter to be "vague" and ripe for "spin." Quatro says: .great .OK .sounds good to me, whatever. <<snoring sounds>>

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1429)	10/7/2007 6:19:03 PM
From: octavian	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2121

honey said: <<So one might conclude that the Bob Brinker's are so insecure that a they take offense when a subscriber exercises his First Amendment right to say that he finds the newsletter to be "vague" and ripe for "spin.">> --Good work honey. I'm glad someone finally had the ambition to ask James if he had been posting newsletter info on the internet. So now we have a denial by James. Now the questions are: a) Was brinker justified in cancelling James's subscription simply because he had been bashing him? b) Why in the world would someone like James WANT to subscribe to Brinker's newsletter. That would be kind of like ME subscribing to kirk's newsletter. In my case, it ain't gonna happen!