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 : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (46601)	5/2/1998 1:12:00 PM
From: joseph krinsky	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

are we going to the drinkers tread tonight, if so i will be there after work. joey

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (46601)	5/2/1998 3:32:00 PM
From: Just My Opinion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Matty: I think he should be allowed back. He may have said some banana head things, but IMO he is not much worse than anyone else. How about someone who pumps and dumps? How about people who post innuendoes and lies to make a profit from people's scared selling? How about daytraders who hype a stock up just to get interest, then sell into a rise? Why not the drive-by guys, who just post a snide remark about a stock, just for their own kicks, and know basically nothing about the company? Matty there are a lot of reasons people should be disciplined, IMO. Pugs may have been misguided, or whatever you want to say, but I think he was being Pugs. He has money in this, and he was defending or trying to defend his investment any way he could. He IMO, is not wrong for that. I hope he gets to come back. al

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (46601)	5/2/1998 3:49:00 PM
From: DJ Byrne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

matty, If this was truly the case even you would be posting no more.. dj

To: I Am John Galt who wrote (46601)	5/2/1998 4:32:00 PM
From: Rich_1	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 55532

Matty, you are wrong. These are nonshareholders who have relentlessly egged on shareholders into confrontation for the last 8 months and they have not gone away. If I was short, I would demonstrate with the same behavior on and off of this thread as they have. I would also relentlessly complain to SI about the Shareshaker's thread until it got removed because this would hurt my short investment. Look at the several 300 share trades which is, no doubt, designed to make shareholders feel lousy about their investment. If I was a nonshareholder and a shareholder of any stock hurt my feelings, I might say my pitch once, and then be gone for good. I would not fight it since I would have far better things to do with my time. IMO, all of this has back fired and has contributed to further evidence that a huge short position here exists. In Pugs situation, it's too bad SI has a double standard in clear favor of certain Neys/Shorts as they have been instigators of trouble here all along. Rich_1