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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proton who wrote (24115)	11/3/1997 2:17:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Peter: I like to refer to it as the doggone report:-). What difference does it make if some of us amuse ourselves while we wait by arguing with Mr. Charters? As you say, it makes no difference. Besides, even if nobody responds to him, he still comes back. You mentioned 95% of the posts have been by, to or about Charters and you are probably right. I would submit the other 5% are by the would-be thread police, whose posts are probably even more futile than those trying to reason with Mr. Charters. There is always the NEXT button.

To: Proton who wrote (24115)	11/3/1997 7:58:00 AM
From: Dave Bissett	Respond to of 35569

HERE, HERE, Peter, man of the hour.... pounding on the table in agreement. Dave

To: Proton who wrote (24115)	11/3/1997 8:58:00 AM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35569

Peter, Do you really think that people (other than EC) are so stupid that they don't know what they are doing? Everyone is waiting for results. Has there been anything new about IPM other than the stock price over the last few weeks? There wouldn't be anything new on this thread if people only posted on-topic content. We have ask for people to not respond to EC, but they are free to do as they please, whatever turns them on. I am now convinced that E Charters couldn't give an informed opinion on snot. Sorry to say he gives experimental evidence that there is basis to not being able to teach old dogs new tricks. Maybe he is just possessed as was the evil twin of Grandish? Since he keeps craping up the IPM thread with his nonsense, maybe people should reciprocate on his very own thread. To stay with the thread theme: GO IPM!!!!!!!!!!!!

To: Proton who wrote (24115)	11/3/1997 9:10:00 AM
From: Joe Hartenbower	Respond to of 35569

Peter... There are sure a lot of Cyber Sheriffs and Deputies out there. I think they should leave the policing up to Jill and limit their attacks or rebuttals to facts, explanations, projections, etc. At least Jill isn't rude, crude and insulting. Obviously the "shorters" love confrontations. It draws attention to them. In their anger, posters are actually giving the shorters credibility. I'm still impressed by Lew's investigations, Ann's trips to Phoenix, etc. I like Otter's refusal to take EC on as a client. If you are new to the thread or a reporter, that's the kind of stuff that destroys a "shorter". Yes, I do believe that IPM has an obligation to have put out some news prior to this late date. We may be fortunate in that bigger, better, etc. news will be coming soon. However, this obvious manipulation of the news does create a credibility problem.

To: Proton who wrote (24115)	11/4/1997 2:20:00 AM
From: Theo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

<<What... matters is THE REPORT.>> Yep, in the meantime a little entertainment at Erics expense is sort of a pre-celebration. You have to admit that in could be fun if everyone responded. We dont have anything better to do, and he deserves it! I see that all his followers are starting to realise what he really is. A promoter! A salesman of worthless properties. If they were worth anything, wouldn't he mine them? Him being the miner for 35 years? Think about that. Talk about scamsters. Theo