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.

SI - Site Forums : Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SI Dave who wrote (3805)	10/20/2012 10:55:54 PM
From: pcstel	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4890

<SI has passed through multiple asset sales, i.e., sales of the assets and not the liabilities. So that argument is moot.> I think you should inquire with legal consul about your position on this, I think you will be surprised. Only if the asset sales went through "bankruptcy" were a judge vacates the rights of the 'unsecured creditors', that's me. Imagine if I started a health club, and sold "lifetime memberships" for $99, then decided to sell the assets of the club to my brother, who then claimed that he bought only the assets, and not the liabilities of providing the services associated with contracts that were sold. That is called a SCAM, and people go to jail for perpetrating such designs. You can not simply vacate liabilities because you have decided that you don't like them anymore. Call your Credit Card company and tell them you have tired of the monthly bill, and you have decided to simply dissolve their rights to collect the money. You can file for bankruptcy, and petition a judge to vacate the rights of the "unsecured creditors" due to insolvency. But, you just can't dissolve a paid lifetime membership because you have decided that you don't like the liability. >Moving on, as I recall the genesis of this issue was a posting reaction on a single board? That is clearly permitted in the Terms of Use.< The genesis was when I was informed that my posting on SI was a "privilege", not a "right". My position is that I paid for a Lifetime Subscription to post on SI. Hence, it is my right to post here. Others may post here as a privilege as they have no subscription agreement. > If a user wishes to revisit some posting restriction, their sole recourse is to take that up privately with the appropriate staff.< The only posting restriction I received from SI administration was when I disagreed with the discretion of one of your moderators here. Message 28448311 Message 28448335 This moderation "hot potato" game was handled poorly IMO, and when I noted such, I was banned for a short period of time, how long I don't really know due to my vacation in Hawaii, and it really doesn't matter. PCSTEL

To: SI Dave who wrote (3805)	11/21/2012 9:12:11 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4890

Hey the SI clock is ahead by close to 2 minutes.

To: SI Dave who wrote (3805)	10/18/2013 9:50:47 PM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4890

><SI has passed through multiple asset sales, i.e., sales of the assets and not the liabilities. So that argument is moot.> "I think you should inquire with legal consul about your position on this, I think you will be surprised. Only if the asset sales went through "bankruptcy" were a judge vacates the rights of the 'unsecured creditors', that's me. Imagine if I started a health club, and sold "lifetime memberships" for $99, then decided to sell the assets of the club to my brother, who then claimed that he bought only the assets, and not the liabilities of providing the services associated with contracts that were sold. That is called a SCAM, and people go to jail for perpetrating such designs. You can not simply vacate liabilities because you have decided that you don't like them anymore. Call your Credit Card company and tell them you have tired of the monthly bill, and you have decided to simply dissolve their rights to collect the money. You can file for bankruptcy, and petition a judge to vacate the rights of the "unsecured creditors" due to insolvency. But, you just can't dissolve a paid lifetime membership because you have decided that you don't like the liability. " Looks like your "viewpoint" is not as MOOT as you incorrectly stated? siliconinvestor.com Upcoming changes to SI Effective November 1, 2013, Silicon Investor will begin to display banner advertisements to signed-in users. This is a necessary steip for us in order for us to be able to financially sustain our web site, or community and our message boards going forward. [snip] 1. Any Memeber who has purchased a PAID LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP over the 18 year history of Silicon Investor shall have the ability to disable these banner advertisements on our message boards beyond Novermber 1st. Sure seems as though there is still a record of who the PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS ARE? You claimed that SI had changed ownership several times and that the "liabilities of LIFETIME MEMBERS" were somehow vacated through the process of the asset sales. I informed you that you were 100% WRONG, unless the liabilities had been vacated by a Bankruptcy Judge, to which, I had never received such notice from the courts. Why does SI now provide "ONLY PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS" the option to disable the Banner Ads? Because it was part of the contract that was provided to "PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS" at the time the money was accepted by SI? If the liabilities owed the "PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS" were not transferred over the various levels of ownership from 1999/2000. Then why are "PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS" excluded from the requirement to accept these banner ads? I believe the answer is quite simple. As I explained to you before. There are many users of the SI Community that post on these message boards as guests. They are here at the "good will" of the respective owners of SI, and their ability to post here is a "privilege" Those of us that are "PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS" post here as "paid subscribers", and have a "right" to post here which is provided by our "PAID LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP". We MADE A ONE TIME PAYMENT FOR THE RIGHT TO POST over the lifetime of SI, or until the RIGHT is vacated through Bankruptcy! As PAID LIFETIME MEMBERS with LIFETIME SUBSCRIPTIONS, we take issue when "Hot Head Moderators" representing the company chose to Ban us for posting for a period of time because they "disagree" with our viewpoint, even though no TOU was violated. I don't see disagreeing with a Moderator as a TOU violation. Message 28448311 Message 28448335 If you have questions.. I suggest you speak to the actual OWNERS OF SI who can explain the contractual requirements associated with PAID LIFETIME MEMBERSHIPS and figure out who are the MEMBERS and who are the GUESTS. And so it goes, PCSTEL