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.

Technology Stocks : Creative Labs (CREAF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Ya Who	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

Your words echo my observations of his statements and posturing. Keep up the good work and please continue to keep the faithful informed. BTW I'm Long 30K at 21.5

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 11:27:00 AM
From: The Rooker	Respond to of 13925

DrRisk, Just wanted you to know that most intelligent SI readers can see through Vanni's remarks and you need not defend yourself from him. The Rooker

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 11:33:00 AM
From: Jon Tara	Respond to of 13925

"Since most people know that psychiatry does not really work" And we have living proof, right here... ;)

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 1:13:00 PM
From: RCVJr	Respond to of 13925

Dr Risk - I want to echo the sentiments of other posters here - I appreciate your insight along with many others here on the thread. I am long 1k of CREAF at ~ $20/share. Please continue your insightful posts and ignore the problem children who post here.

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 1:26:00 PM
From: Curbstone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

DRRISK, I appreciate the level II info that you give to this thread and generally enjoy reading your posts. I have learned a lot just lurking on this thread and I have people like you to thank. But in the name of balance I want to say that you seem to be very quick to get defensive. I have noticed that in some situations, especially with Vanni, you flame first and ask questions later. If you look back I think you'll see that while your posts are far more interesting and informative, Vanni is more civil. Mahalo for the freedom to post my 2 cents, Mike.

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 1:36:00 PM
From: Howard	Respond to of 13925

Well said DrRisk. I, as an avid lurker and occasional poster on this thread, sincerely appreciate all of the constructive contributions that you have provided. Mindless, antagonistic, trouble makers like Vanni are an irritant and not taken seriously by participants of this thread. I wish there was a way to make "it" go away so that we don't have to be subjected to all the worthless garbage that "it" spouts. Unfortunately, this being the greatest free country in the world, we cannot keep "it" from expressing "it's" garbage. As I have posted in the past, let's keep the faith of all the positive, forward thinking, serious CREAF posters and totally ignore the garbage spouted by the likes of brain-dead attention seekers like Vanni. DrRisk, keep doing the great job that you have been doing. Contributions posted by yourself, Jon Tara, Bzooka, Savoirman, PR, Taxi, etc., are sincerely appreciated by myself and the serious CREAF supporters. Please, don't waste your time or energy by paying any attention to idiots like Vanni or "it's" worthless posts. Best wishes to yourself and all CREAF longs and thanks again for doing a good job. Howard

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: Nazbuster	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13925

DrRisk, I want to add my personal thanks to all the good info and hard work you have put in for us CREAFers. Re: Vanni, as you may know, I've had my own wars with him and have complained both to him and Jill over his past behavior, but mostly some remarks he made directly about me which I thought were way over the line. Nevertheless, I think that it was wrong to post his private message to the thread. Somehow, no matter how objectionable a message, if it is offerred privately, it should be dealt with that way. If messages become inappropriate or abusive, you can alert Jill. I would hate to see a "chilling" effect brought to private messages because of the threat of publication. What's your thought?

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 5:14:00 PM
From: Vanni Resta	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

I apologize to everyone that DDrisk has brought what is purported to be our private conversation out in public to clutter this thread. I think everyone will agree that I have done my utmost not to get involved in flaming wars for the past month, because what was going on before, which was meant by me to be a harmless joke, turned in to something that was a waste of everyone's time and unproductive. DDrisk and several other posters want to continue the old flaming war, by continuing to say "LIES" every time I post, even though they have no proof that lie, which I don't, and never have. If you don't like their continued harrassment of me, then complain about them to SI. I think it is about time they found more productive ways to deal with their hostility towards me and CHIP, rather than to waste everyone's time. Here is another suggestion. Let's just all agree that DDrisk and Tara think everything I post is a lie, and disagree with everything I say. If we all agree about this, then they will not have to post five messages a day saying so. Apologies again. I am really trying. Happy Investing! Vanni

To: DRRISK who wrote (9797)	2/16/1998 5:36:00 PM
From: Vanni Resta	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13925

Response to DDrisks attacks on my accuracy and motives: DDrisk wrote: "He was then very uncomfortable and clarified that the GSCO post was not necessarily accurate and that they may have been head faking their selling to effect price. Which IMHO is exactly what they were doing." Absolutely wrong DDrisk. I never said my post was not accurate. It was 100% accurate. GS was on and off the sell side several times during the afternoon. Yes, they were also on the buy side. I never said they weren't. I just thought that was obvious, since they had basically staked out that territory for two days. The news was that they were also appearing on the sell side. Which I posted, because no one else had, and it was interesting. The curious thing, which you have not answered, is why you stated they were NOT on the sell side, in response to my post, when they really were. As for what they were doing there, yes, it might have been a fake out. But since none of us know, there is no point in speculating. DDrisk wrote: "Vanni then trys to impugn my posts when he knows that it is himself who is manipulating on behalf of WHOM I do not know?" This is ridiculous. I am trying to "manipulate" the stock for anyone. And it is really a stretch to think that a person could use a post at SI to manipulate a stock that has 5 million share volume in one day. DDrisk wrote: "He then takes no responsibility for his actions and hides behind some pathetic representation of not knowing who GSCO..." Well yes, it is true, I was not sure what GSCO was. So I asked. That's what you do when you are not sure, you ask. Right? Anyway, apologies to all for the space all this has taken. I never meant for DDrisk to flame me like this and waste everyone's time. I think when someone attacks you like that, you have a right to defend yourself. That is only fair. I also apologize that he clutter the thread by posting what purports to be private conversation. Sorry everyone. Happy Investing! Vanni