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 : DGIV-A-HOLICS...FAMILY CHIT CHAT ONLY!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (18500)	7/16/1998 8:51:00 PM
From: coolhandluke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

listen , miss shell ..... which is empty........ cuz you insult our intelegence.. as if we dont know what we are doing... like you are the only person knows how to invest..... what you are telling us is nothing new... if we hype it , its not your problem cuz you are not an investor.so go away, bye adios....... i like to hype my dgiv.. rah rah rah sis boom bah... go dgiv go... arent you upset yet?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (18500)	7/16/1998 10:04:00 PM
From: Lazarus Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50264

Janice Shell... Suggestion number one is valid and something that is long overdue. It is a convenience and perhaps, a discipline enforcer. We already have the ability to ignore a poster by not reading their posts, but how much more convenient would it be to not even see that they posted at all? By not seeing that the "ignored alias" had posted, it enforces a discipline to not respond, which is the one of the purposes of ignoring the person in the first place. I view suggestion number two as nothing more than another convenience. It saves one from having to paste the same information to multiple PM's or from going outside SI to an email system. Though reluctantly, I must agree that point number three is something that I hope never comes about. The ability to speak freely, within certain limitations, is fundamental to any truly open discussion and is a value that most of us hold dear, I dare say. However, just as fundamental a right is the right to walk away from any discussion I so desire. Lazarus, thinking Janice calls it "Raving Bullies" because she knows she will be mostly ignored...

To: Janice Shell who wrote (18500)	7/17/1998 12:01:00 AM
From: Charliss	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 50264

Hi Janice, You were commenting on these three suggestions someone made, and you took issue with them. I would too. They are: <1) Create the opportunity to ignore certain posters, like Raging Bull has. 2) Create the ability to have a PM distribution list 3) Have ability to vote a certain poster off of a thread. Majority rules.> #1....I see this as a type of moral laziness, an unwillingness to take responsibility. This would take away from me the process for personal growth. Only through experience, through meeting the unpleasant or challenging head on can I learn not only tolerance for differences, but also develop the ability to critically examine and then, if I choose, to ignore what I have encountered. From Herbert Spencer: "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man or woman in everlasting ignorance- that principle is contempt prior to investigation" I would be afraid of the day when the practical means for such contempt can be officially supported and provided for in my daily life- here on SI or anyplace else. #2....Would this be like our cc ability in e-mail? If so, sounds good to me. #3...This one really scares me. From my own personal experience, I know there are many people who would vote me right out of existence, both figuratively and literally, if they could safely do so, simply because they do not like me because I am different than they are. Best, Charliss (DGIV investor, advocate in bunny slippers, who will always seek out and support those things for others which she values for herself)

To: Janice Shell who wrote (18500)	7/17/1998 9:40:00 AM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 50264

>>But why, then, is it that people keep coming back to SI? << Janice, I can only speak for myself. When I first joined SI I wanted to share with others information about the technology and the companies I was invested in, both positive and negative. What I found is that this only works for large listed companies, in which the price can not be easily manipulated. In small BB issues, I discovered that the positive information shared acted like a beacon to draw those who wanted to (needed to?) bring the stock down. This polarized the discussion, with the longs not wanting to discuss anything negative, since there were enough non-investors who took every opportunity to put a negative spin on anything said. This also caused some long holders to rally to their stock, which of course resulted in their being called hypsters. On a positive note, I did make some friends here on SI, and that is why I keep coming back. I come here to share niceties with friends, and to share some generic information about the sector and about our companies. But any detailed information or DD is done through other channels. SI is not the proper vehicle, and their mission statement will never be met because of these dynamics. JMHO.