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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael P. Weber who wrote (35466)	1/10/1998 10:03:00 PM
From: TideGlider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Michael: Excuse me for using you post to MK for my response. I do not mean to speak for him. However, I believe one of the problems may be the definitions. MK has provided much information on RMIL that appears to be negative. If it is true or false it will never hurt the company. The company and their business achievements or lack of them will mean the survival of the stock. What MK has provided may not be considered "bashing". Comments of information received are constantly posted. Are only the ones that are posted by supporters of the stock not Bashing? This is a message board for discussion of stock. Not a private club for owners of the stock. The difference may very well be your definitions. TG

To: Michael P. Weber who wrote (35466)	1/10/1998 10:16:00 PM
From: FTJoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

I lied I'm back. Pugs is doing what he feels is necessary to not only protect his investment but to also protect others. Maybe in doing so it will pave the way to prevent this from ever happening again to another group of investors like us. But it's on the premise that it's because it's a broker bashing RMIL. Excuse me for being mundane, but that seems a little picky in and of itself. The fact that he is a broker is an excuse, IMO, for being outraged enough to file. Do you really think Michael's comments have any more weight or he has found anything out that another Nay couldn't? If the answer is yes, then we differ on opinion and this argument is shot. If the answer is no, then it is indeed just an excuse to file. Hey, if the issue is it's because he's a broker, then lodge complaints with the proper authorities and leave it at that. Otherwise, this is a civil suit which really has nothing to do with Michael being a broker, only with a dislike for someone who bashes the investment. Where does it end, am I next for these comments? To answer your questions, is it fair, I don't think so, is it ethical, apparently not, is it irresponsible, I don't know. What I do know is only my opinion that it does not warrant a civil suit.

To: Michael P. Weber who wrote (35466)	1/11/1998 1:18:00 AM
From: (Bob) Zumbrunnen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Pugs is doing what he feels is necessary to not only protect his investment but to also protect others. Would it me more EFFECTIVE if pugs simply provided proof that Mike's assertions are wrong? YES!! It would be much better if he'd attack the message instead of attacking the messenger.