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: Joe Master who wrote (50054)	7/23/1998 10:29:00 AM
From: Just My Opinion	Respond to of 55532

Joe: Your question kind of vindicates my issue. You said the pictures left you with a certain impression. The original pictures were, IMO, designed to show the building in a very bad light. I tried to take pictures of just the building, the area it was in, and portray the issue in a more realistic light. The nays will try and say that I tried to slant things, but I would be willing to stack my photos up in a court of law against theirs, as far as intent, any day. As far as professionalism, I am not a pro, so naturally, my photos would not be of that quality. I did the best I could, trying to present a fair picture. I showed a full frontal view, the scene from directly across the street, and a background view. This was designed to show the office, and the surrounding area, for what it was, not what they wanted it to be. The office is not small, that building is brand new, and I would imagine if they renovated that entire strip mall that it is part of, that would be left untouched. Joe, the issue was debated a long time ago, and the reality is, IMO the original pictures were a delibert attempt to try and give the viewer the impression that the office was in a shabby part of town, and the buildings were all delapidated. If you ever get to FT Lauderdale, visit Galt Ocean Mile, it is one block away. However, it is true, offices do not reflect the value of a company, but that was never my intention. My intention was to show what I considered their obvious "tank job".

To: Joe Master who wrote (50054)	7/23/1998 10:44:00 AM
From: Angel D	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Joe, Forgive me if I missed something here, but after skimming 90-100 posts, it's possible. Didn't this train of discussion begin with someone alluding to the "phoney web-site" put up by one of Mork's alleged cronies and someone else (maybe you) replying something like "what's wrong with that, as long as it's accurate..." ? Now there is a debate over the accuracy of the site rather than the fundemental ethics involved. What if I decided to put up a "Joe Master" web-site. Maybe I could include pictures of "the little woman" and the twins (these might be candids or from the family album, what's the difference as long as they are accurate, in fact, they might even be paid models as long as they presented a reasonably accurate presentation of the Master family), maybe a picture of Joe (possibly taken right after he had finished rodding out a drain) and, of course, a picture of the house, taken from whatever angle I feel is most suitable. Would there be anything wrong with that? In fact, what if I included only the most flattering pictures I could find of the family and the house? Would this then be OK with you? I tend to doubt it. I think you would be incensed that I had the nerve to do such a thing, and you would probably be talking about lawsuits against me. C'mon Joe, this isn't your style. You know the difference between right and wrong. Regards, AD