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 : Grinders and Gripers Coffee Shop -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Osprey who wrote (2367)	10/2/1998 3:17:00 PM
From: Savant	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4201

Your first two links don't link.

To: The Osprey who wrote (2367)	10/2/1998 4:52:00 PM
From: Sawdusty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4201

Thanks for the links Osprey. Interesting reading. I never had a chance to respond to your post # 2355: "How do you feel about people or groups that post regularly,hype or spam stocks who are being paid a fee whether it be cash or shares of the company in lieu of the service and do not disclose their affiliation as a promoter of the stock in question?" I feel that it is a necessary and worthwhile profession when it is practiced legally and morally. There are some however, that take advantage of chat lines to further their own ends and screw the person that gets in their way. I feel that it gets even more disgusting, that when they are questioned about motives, they resort to personal and vicious attacks. By the following statement it is clear that MM has been operating outside of the law: <<John Stark, special counsel for Internet projects for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, declines to comment specifically on Wall Street West. But he says the law is clear: Companies that promote stocks have to disclose whether or not they were compensated, and the specific amount. "It's not enough to give a vague blanket disclaimer. You have to say exactly what you received," he says.>> Facts are that he had never issued a disclaimer until this past weekend, yet he has been practicing his craft on SI for some time. Even after he admitted being the owner of Gold Ridge he continued to spam several threads. Yes he was then including the disclaimer, but he was not disclosing his connection. If he decides to give full disclosure in the future I will have nothing further to say to him. If not, I will take the time to point out the connection. I have been attacked for doing this and I expect to get attacked again. I can live with it. I also have a small library to back up my comments if they are in doubt. Cheers, Dan