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.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: username who wrote (11576)	3/19/1998 6:32:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

>>OK, Duncan or Zoltan or whatever your real name is, the last messages you sent me were antisocial, but you were merely snide on this one, so I'll respond to you. Poor victim. Amazing statement for someone who only shows up on this thread to cast aspersions on me. You have also done that repeatedly on other threads and many people have made that known to me. Until last night I had decided not to respond in kind to you. >>You are assuming that it's me under Peter Powell's indentity; you are mistaken, never heard of him before yesterday. By assuming I am talking to myself, you are dramatizing your own delusion. No, just highlighting yours. I know that he is a fraud. The fact that you agree with that personality is instructive. >>If you honestly believe that your personal conclusions regarding my character are shared by others, you are in error; Gee, my personal mail doesn't seem to support your singular reality. >>The primary difference between you and me not intelligence, we are both intelligent; it is not education, we are both educated; it is simply our intentions. You keep saying that as if saying it would make it true. Some time ago I responded to someone's post that stated that no one cares about the Clinton scandals. I took issue and replied that smart people do care. You replied that you are smart and that you don't care. I responded that you are granted an exception. My way of getting rid of you. What you have since demonstrated is that you are neither that smart nor very balanced. Why do I say that? Because you have lamented that I and others have ruined this thread by turning it serious. Seems to me that you have an argument with yourself: For all those who feel the compulsion to get into a serious discussion* about the global ramifications of the Oval Orifice, no need to clutter up the rest of the site; this thread is for you.* exchange2000.com Before I even entered this thread you harassed me off the ASND thread because I responded to others' mindless defense of Clinton's corruption and you told me to come here. Much later I got into an unrelated argument with Sty Pit on the ASND thread and there you were again attacking me despite your ignorance of the situation. Since that time I have held back while you have repeatedly tried to insult me. >> I know who you are and what your intentions are. Ominous. Your "friend" Peter Powell made that same comment. But do you? Your first sentence states otherwise, but why should I insist on consistency from the demonstrably inconsistent? Intentions? We know that you are a censor - you have ably demonstrated that intent. My intention is to continue to discuss the evolving Clinton scandals and respond to others who want to do so too. Humor is certainly intinsic to that endeavor but certainly not the main thrust. You have added nothing of substance or attempted humor on this thread since early February. If you want a total humor thread, fine, but you're going to need to develop a sense of humor very late in life. >>We are not on the same team. I agree. I play on the sane team. >>This is my last note to you. Adios, dude. I hope that includes all the "personalities" too.