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.

Pastimes : and there was no one left to speak for me -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: INFO_DART who wrote (218)	9/28/1998 6:38:00 PM
From: Yorikke	Respond to of 276

There is nobody dying on SI. In fact there are really relatively few really overtly nasty characters wandering around. There are, however, a lot of stupid or ignorant individuals out to lose their fortunes. I see no real reason to launch a crusade against the Infidel. And given the state of SI, the best that could be organized would be a children's crusade, or one like the one led by that mad monk..was that the peasants promenade? The point being that I just don't think that even if the Infidel did exist, which I doubt, things would become any more organized than to the point of creating a fiasco. If, in my travels in this idea maze, I happen to see injustice I will do my best to contribute to its limitation. I do not believe in calling the 'cops'--friends are the only ones I know of who have been 'jailed'. And I don't believe in jumping into muck holes that people have created of their own free will, just because somebody has decided to drown in his own stupidity. Free speech has never been a pleasant right. Gentlemen have always been offended by the base humor of the masses. Insults, even though subject to limitation by law, are not new to our forums. Anarchy is a dirty philosophical road. But it is a road that one can at least travel without the fear of tolls or inspection. Thugs are not the Sheriff's tax collectors. Though neither are appreciated. The rules of this forum are relatively clear. If you become really offensive or threatening, the King's Guard will escort you from the enchanted forest. So be it. My interest in this debate has been to consider how a person can respond to attempts to limit others or attempts to limit oneself. The basic rules are clear. Treat others as you would have them treat you. Be Polite and respectful and where ever possible try to seek reconciliation. Apologize for any wrong committed whether real or not. Always attempt to provoke a smile. Use humor to quell dissention. Lurk for a long time before commenting...you will generally lose interest and escape making a fool of yourself. Try not to be offended, even by the most asinine of comments; and if you are send the poster a private message rather than post back on the thread. Remember that if you go rolling in dog doo you are going to go home smelling rather bad. Finally that no matter how hard one tries one will always be amazed at how much of an asshole one can make of oneself. Never treat any of this as anything more than what it is.......enable by whacking the Big X in the upper right corner of the screen. and those are my truths. regards, mnmuench

To: INFO_DART who wrote (218)	9/29/1998 9:21:00 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 276

RE Nazis and protection of their freedoms I've thought about this post, and have slept on my answer. While defending the freedom of speech of all, we must exercise care so as to assure we do not attach any credence to the ideas they serve. Rather, we thoughtful of the world, must, through our words and deeds, clearly express that we do champion the freedom of exchange of ideas not (necessarily) the ideas themselves. One must consider those fundamental Christians who rail with a holy zeal concerning the freedom of religion while denying the most basic sacraments of the native American religion to its followers, or the Jew who could not shop for the necessities of life on Sunday in the south and west due to Sunday blue laws. In the same breath, one should note the denial of sacramental wine to Christians in Islamic fundamental countries and the treatment of the followers of Islam in Israel. Most of the founding fathers of this land understood the need for freedom. Why do we find it so hard? rh