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: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (41209)	12/13/2008 1:08:58 PM
From: gronieel	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

*Now last I checked, "owners" have every right to post whatever they want at their own sites.* That's not exactly true. I know of at least one person who has been banished from his last two sites because he thought he "owned" them and could post whatever he wanted...including personal spam. It seems to me "your" two sites would be subject to the same limitations.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (41209)	12/13/2008 1:44:56 PM
From: EQ	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

> David's FINE summary of the outstanding Niall Ferguson Moneytalk interview > BTW: David's summary contains 3223 words. He misspelled ONE WORD. How much time did it take eq to search through those 3223 words to find one misspelled word? Sick? I think so.... Honey, If DK incorrectly identifies THE TITLE OF THE BOOK (twice within his commentary), one must wonder how FINE (your word) the summary of the interview is. Has SK given you an update on when we can expect the performance figures he promised (about 6 months ago?) Cheerio! Elan

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (41209)	12/13/2008 6:51:49 PM
From: octavian	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

honeybee said: <<First of all, eq just plain lied about me "spamming" David's FINE summary of the outstanding Niall Ferguson Moneytalk interview "all over the net.">> --Honeybee, I have to agree with you on this one. Since David Korn has a newsletter devoted to Brinker, his comments are appropriate for ANY Brinker board, IMO. I can't see why Korn's article on a Brinker interview could be considered spam by anyone. However, to any reasonable person, blb's follow-up comments about Korn were also perfectly appropriate for a Brinker board. How can anyone possibly believe that korn AND kirk, two semi-competitors of Bob and two of his very biggest critics for many years, are not fair game on a Brinker board? Yet the piglet saw fit to banish blb's perfectly appropriate post to the so-called "trash bin," which is, at least, better than deleting it or banning the author. IMO there was NO reason to move that post. <<BTW: David's summary contains 3223 words. He misspelled ONE WORD. How much time did it take eq to search through those 3223 words to find one misspelled word? Sick? I think so....>> --You're wrong on this one, honeybee. The "one word" was part of the title of the book being discussed!