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 : BASHERS POST THEM HERE!!!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (293)	7/12/1998 4:42:00 PM
From: Dave Gore	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 390

Thanks, Janice...mostly solid response... let's keep the quality high and let me ask you some more questions to clarify what you said and play devils advocate. YOU SAID: "I've never had anything to do with INFE, but like MTEI and DGIV, it's a "Rocketeer" stock. The blame for what happened to all of them rests squarely on the shoulders of the hypesters who touted these issues insanely. And then got out." MY RESPONSE: But is DGIV a scam or MTEI, in your opinion? Didn't Byron (rocketeer1) stick with DGIV for weeks with great loyalty? I mean it wasn't like he did a 10 minute pump and dump like Tmex used or still does. I just don;t see him as a big bad guy compared to others that I haven;t heard you talk about. ********** YOU SAID: There are questions to be asked about any BB stock; a very large percentage eventually fail. When asking such questions sparks hostility to the point of death threats, you gotta wonder what's wrong. my repsonse:: I TOTALLY AGREE ******** YOU SAID: My own view is that the screaming hypesters should be countered as soon as they appear, in the hope that they won't succeed in running the price up out of all proportion to an appropriate valuation of the stock. This would save a lot of people a lot of money, and would in the end be better for the companies themselves as well. Some firms never recover from a pump and dump, or a succession of them. my response: I TOTALLY AGREE, but doesn;t the same hold true for bashers who insinuate with no proof? *** YOU SAID: As for potential scams: not much independent information is available for BB stocks, as you know. Often the best thing to do--once you've found out all you can--is to ask questions publicly and see what happens. SURE, if you ask nicely and give the guy a chance to back up his or her claims first ****** YOU SAID: I've answered the rest of the questions you asked Barb a thousand times. NOT TRUE, Janice.... you've never said what you objectives are or if you are paid to post on SI. No way, Janice! WILL YOU PLEASE ANSWER NOW? Maybe Barb will be brave enough to answer honestly and openly and very clearly once and for all.

To: Janice Shell who wrote (293)	7/12/1998 5:03:00 PM
From: Dave Gore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 390

DEFINITION OF BASHER AND HYPESTER.....let's stop the bickering and move on. IF we can just get Janice and Barb or their associates to admit why they are here on SI, or at least to fully understand where they are coming from (i.e are they paid by anyone to bash stocks, etc.), we can all start fighting the bad guys together. How about this.. The ULTIMATE BAD HYPESTER...one who promotes a stock for the sole purpose of getting others to invest in it to run up the stock price as high as possible before dumping it, often while still telling others to still keep buying. Statements are ofter made without proof and often skeletons are known, but the hypester ignores them and do not warn others of them. (i.e lawsuits, reverse split coming, convertible debentures, etc). *********** The ULTIMATE BAD BASHER... one who comes into a stock, often just having joined SI, and immediately starts raising fear and doubt about a stock that has often increased in value enough so that this person can make lots of money shorting it. This person is either blatant about accusations that are often wild or sometimes very clever and possibly believable, but never seems to supply undeniable proof (kind of like the hypester) that proves a stock is a scam. A basher who admits they are short are more "honorable" than those who claim to not be shorting the stock. The latter person's motives are always questioned, as it seems odd to bash a stock and spend as much time when you supply no motive for it. (i.e. after all, most people spend time on SI to make money and thus lurk on threads that they have a vested interest in either short or long).