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: Rich_1 who wrote (50338)	7/27/1998 5:44:00 PM
From: Joe Master	Respond to of 55532

Rich_1 one word - CHILL. Where did I go after any other RMIL shareholder. I admitted to exposing Riley's repeated lies. He called it harrassing and I agreed that if he thought that was harrassing that I would continue (harrassing) him where I thought it was appropriate. In fact I think the abridement of Ellen's ability to speak out on these matters is ridiculous on the part of SI. I the long run if they keep tis crap up they will lose subscribers by the thousands and they will wither and die. Yahoo message oards though unruly at least enable the writer to have a level of freedom of expression.

To: Rich_1 who wrote (50338)	7/28/1998 7:39:00 AM
From: Ellen	Respond to of 55532

Want to know what is even more lovely? I've received two more private messages from SI Bob. He states that his time is valuable. okey dokey... The request to ban trial members from posting on the RMIL thread is termed an "11th hour" request by SI Bob. Huh? I know of at least one person who made the same request days ago. His response to that fact is: "Someone making a request doesn't mean I'm going to think it's in SI's best interest." Hmm, so it is in SI's best interest on other threads but not this one...? SI Bob advised that he "honestly doesn't recall whether or not that request was specifically made" but states that he does know he has "seen at least one complaint about a trial poster in the RMIL thread" and that he "took what" he "deemed appropriate action." SI Bob goes on to say, "In fact, I just double-checked, and see that I did suspend someone who was posting in the RMIL thread as a trial-member." SI Bob says I didn't "even originally know who any abusive trial members were" and he considered my request to be a "blanket request", leading him, as he says, "to believe you are just being frivolous about it. If you can demonstrate a pattern of harrassment by a number of trial members, to such an extent that it would be easier for me to deal with it by placing a trial member block on the thread, I'll do so. But I'm not going to do it just because you told me to, and were only able to cite one name, after the fact. Now if you don't like my position on what does and doesn't warrant a trial-member block, there's really not anything I can do about that." I guess he assumed I didn't know Roger Thrash was the trial member being referred to simply because I wrote (posted on this thread) that someone pm'ed me to ask him to read Roger Thrash's posts. Hmm, passing along a message constitutes my not knowing who it was too...? I think not. What silly reasoning. And if SI Bob reads or did read Roger Thrash's posts, I believe he would see the "pattern of harrassment". But wait, there's more. Next post...

To: Rich_1 who wrote (50338)	7/28/1998 7:56:00 AM
From: Ellen	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 55532

The second private message is SI Bob bringing up old history - Interestingly, I DID NOT mention CADE but SI Bob, in an additional private message to me, says that he "explained" to me that "not only did I not show any messages of yours in the CADE thread having been deleted, provided a link to a message of yours that was still present in that thread (you didn't reply to let me know whether or not it was the post in question), but also explained to you that the system has a nightly batch event that deletes messages it deems too short. I don't know how many words it considers too few, but I do know that a one-word reply such as "Thanks" would get deleted by the system." I only know of ONE post that was deleted there and it simply said "Thank you". If there was a second one deleted, I was not aware of that. I was informed that that post was deleted because it was "too short", yet, now I'm being informed that none of my posts there were deleted. So which is it? And I didn't even bring that up! ----- "Just more games, I suppose. Regards, SI Admin (Bob)" ----- Yikes, he's bringing up old history that I didn't even mention, yet I'm "playing games"...? Wonder if my question - which is still unanswered - caused SI Bob to get so feisty? For the record, Jeff Dryer has not responded at all. So the question still stands: Does Michael Kugler have any connection with SI Administration?