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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Arcon Energy (MIDL Presently) The Ultimate Sleeper -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: H-Man who wrote (3581)	6/16/1998 5:59:00 AM
From: Ga Bard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4142

I have had to make a retraction on being told there was a warrant which I did because I did not verify it. what the compnay states and I state is two different animals. However I can clear state who told me what so I am not worried. But none the less it is best to keep to the facts we know and be done with it. A lot is about to come light ... going to get interesting. GB

To: H-Man who wrote (3581)	6/16/1998 9:22:00 AM
From: out_of_the_loop	Respond to of 4142

I have to disagree. From what I can gather quickly, the SI person served was a well-known Canadian options authority allegedly accusing the Toronto Stock Exchange of impropriety and served by the TSE for such. Libel law (writing damaging things about someone is "libel", saying something "damaging is "slander"), as I understand it, includes the necessity to prove harm and intent, along with the falsehood of content. I, personally, want to know if a CEO of a company I have MY money invested in is accused of an impropriety related to the business. While I may think he's a bad person if he were convicted of DWI, it would not make me re-evaluate my investment position. If I knew he was accused of, for example, changing a design of a product (keeping a dangerous car gas tank design in order to save money, for example) or stealing all the R&D funds resulting in possible cessation of publicized company plans, it would make me review my investment more critically. That is part of DD - and I am not referring to DuPont. And it only makes sense. I can safely bet that the TSE is not going to serve an average small American investor schmuck for libel and neither is our own SEC. Generally people sued are in positions of "authority" ; otherwise their is no harm that can be proven. I could go on but I won't. Prudence and knowledge are your power for investment decisions. Don't give them up.