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 : GTIS - Will it be a Phoenix or not ? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scott Miller who wrote (1599)	3/2/1998 1:33:00 AM
From: V.	Respond to of 2319

Scott, Hope this is short enough to maintain your interest. I tried to help you, point out a few things to you, and also have some fun with you, but you have proven once and for all that you are not only arrogant, but exceedingly rude and ill-mannered as well. It is obvious now why things have gone so poorly for GTIS this past year if you are an example of the sort of person with whom they are dealing. Since you will not even read much of what is written to you, you can never hope to understand what others are trying to convey. You could have left this thread with some shred of decency by apologizing for your insulting remarks and wishing us well, but instead you throw another punch on your way out the door. From what I have seen from your posts, you are not a likable person. You are not a nice person. You are not a giving person. You are not a considerate person. In fact, you are a class-A jerk. You are depriving a village somewhere of an idiot. In other words, you are rock hard stupid, Scott. Of course, you wouldn't understand that last comment, since you say that you never read my posts completely. They say that ignorance is bliss and that may be the only source of happiness that someone like you will ever find. So, go for it. You will reap what you sow. V.

To: Scott Miller who wrote (1599)	3/2/1998 11:33:00 AM
From: Franklin M. Humphreys	Respond to of 2319

>>>>>>>My very first post stated clearly--or so I thought <g>--that I would not reveal insider information, but that I would give inside info that may not be publicly available simply because we've not made it so. I've never said I would reveal "insider info."<<<<<<< Well, of course! Anybody can see that is what you meant. I mean, why get hung up on semantics when it is clear as mud? Why would anybody of normal intelligence confuse "inside" information coming from an insider with "insider" information coming from an insider when you clearly stipulated that it was merely outside information which the insiders had decided to make available to outsiders on the SI thread ahead of making it available to all outsiders via the media. POC (that stands for Piece Of Cake, all you techie jerks) Shame on you Victoria!<G> Frank