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 : AREE - Formerly TVSI -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dennis Levenson who wrote (793)	2/13/1998 10:18:00 PM
From: s martin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6528

This is a non issue to me. He posted it. I didn't "accuse" him of anything as you can see, I simply reposted his post, he then edited his post. He may have thought better of it.. because it was in jest, who knows. Pugs isn't even the one who made an issue of it, others did.

To: Dennis Levenson who wrote (793)	2/13/1998 10:35:00 PM
From: TopCat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6528

<<PROOF that PUGS is innocent>> Is he innocent of selling at .30.......Of course. His post was just in jest...or put another way, just another in his long line of BS. I don't believe much of anything Pugs says including those things that might support by position about him. Is he innocent of posting the "original post." No, I saw it along with many others. Additional proof is that Pugs has not come out and directly denied it.....because he knows that it can be easily checked. The post itself has been the issue here....not whether he sold at .30. The only one that really got excited about it was Grumby who then began to attack s martin and accusing him of changing Pugs post. Enough people saw the original post, and said so here, that there shouldn't be any question by now that Pugs' original post was as shown by s martin. This whole thing has been so irrelevant, I can't believe it has occupied this thread all day.....but, on the other hand, the company hasn't provided any more substantive information to chew on.....so why not? TC