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 : Pharmos(PARS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ariella who wrote (1066)	7/21/1998 10:21:00 PM
From: LemonHead	Respond to of 1491

Ariella, your DD maybe more than the Doctor ordered. Have you thought about the consequences of posting to much information for the wrong eyes. Feal like you are trying to carry the Flag all by your self, please don't burn out. Remember David Israel Rosen. Many longs sustain. A partner. Keith

To: Ariella who wrote (1066)	7/22/1998 4:58:00 AM
From: Gabe Fernandez	Respond to of 1491

Ariella in re to your post statistical tunning could it be--- initially dose of 50 mgm double the same in second study 100 mgm double dose next study should be 200 not 300--tooosimplistic to be true but makes as much sense as their answer of statistical tunning. All i got to say that they better study the FDA policies because they are strict.

To: Ariella who wrote (1066)	7/22/1998 7:43:00 AM
From: wolfdog2	Respond to of 1491

Ariella, I would like to second Don's sentiments. What you paid for your stock or how much stock you own is your private business. Your contribution to this board has been outstanding. I hope that you will ignore the unwarranted attack recently made on your probity will not cause you to withdraw from participation on this board. Thanks again for your contribution. Ken

To: Ariella who wrote (1066)	7/22/1998 9:01:00 AM
From: natufian	Respond to of 1491

Ariella- Let me also join the chorus and ask that you not respond to the borderline personal attack by another poster to this thread. He clearly has strong feelings about the CC deal, but that provides no excuse for either the tone or innuendo of his last posting. His assumption of the role as a self-designated "agent provacateur" stands in sharp contrast to the service which you have provided for other longs on this board. You have often provided valuable information, but more importantly, wise and patient counsel and perspective to those who read this board. Please don't respond intemperately to the actions of this man as David Is-Ros did. All the best, Natufian