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.

Biotech / Medical : Zonagen (zona) - good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dauntless who wrote (3429)	4/17/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: Arthur Radley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7041

If you two don't stop, Jerry Springer will be contacting you soon to be on his show. Let me know, I want to watch.(:>)I heard he was hard up for new guest with interesting personalities and problems. I guess my choice of words could be better, but I bet he would have the largest audience ever with this debate subject.

To: Dauntless who wrote (3429)	4/17/1998 11:24:00 PM
From: Linda Kaplan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7041

Dauntless, Amazing that you use words "all due respect" when you're being disrepectful of both the truth and therefore ALL readers, including myself. When I postulate a THEORY I say that's what it is. I suggested a possible scenario as a question. When the question was answered negatively (it couldn't happen that way) I was the first to report it and I dropped it. You never heard me ranting about this theory the way I hear you ranting about unproven concepts as if they are facts. That you dare compare the two is an indication of how seriously you are distorting truth, You yourself admitted today that you did not make any attempt to verify that the extensive story that Fortune printed was lifted from some rag where it was previously printed in December. You've admitted that you simply "heard "this was true, FAILED to make any attempt to verify it, but have continued to post it as if it's true even after admitting that you don't know for a fact whether it's true or not. You don't say in your subsequent posts that it might be true or that you heard it was true, you post <b.that it's true. As a result, I find your posting on this subject to be intentionally dishonest and misleading. You could go to prove that it's true and after that you can post that it's true as often as you like. Till then, you won't go unchallenged by me when you post it as fact. It's a smear right now; not a fact. You ask me why I don't challenge others. I do. I call them as I see them. I took on TokyoVD for his behavior towards a member here. I took on Myron for attacking all shorts as homosexuals. I choose my issues. It's MY call what to take on and what to let go. Some things are so obviously vapid they don't require a challenge, in MY view. I asked you to provide proof for your statement as fact. You admitted you were repeating hearsay. While this is something easily proven, you've chosen not to obtain evidence, but instead to continue to present your smear as fact. I don't like this any more than I liked what TokyoVD did that day. I didn't hear you telling me to let it go when I took him on for behavior I felt was unethical. As for your being here to please me, whoever thought you were? What are you here for, I wonder. You're spreading untruths and whoever you are, I don't like that! Linda