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 : James Cramer Skeptic Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain who wrote (977)	11/28/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: J. P.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1254

< I would welcome someone to edit my incoming message flow before I saw it, who would discard articles from the rock creatures of the world. > Don't look now, but there are referees in Silicon Investor. Now to see what human behavior really sinks to unchecked, unedited, and unrefereed, check out the Yahoo! stock chat boards especially during a weekday.

To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain who wrote (977)	11/29/1998 11:15:00 AM
From: Thomas G. Busillo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1254

Michael, a VERY interesting post. I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but I have to tell you it's with reluctance. Must the libertarian and egalitarian nature of the medium lead to such a low "signal-to-noise ratio" that without intermediation--an imposition of value judgements on content for practical considerations, which undermines the egalitarianism of the medium-- unmoderated forums succumb to the death spiral? I want to say no. I want to say that human beings have enough respect for one another that they will impose some degree of self-restraint... ...but then you look at some of the Yahoo boards and you can only conclude that mankind is trading at a fairly low multiple. So I agree that mediation in certain forums is warranted, but why that is so, in a way that shifts the general question from "what will happen to the internet as a forum of communication?" to "what does this say about mankind?" Okay, perhaps I'm guilty of an overgeneralization <g> And FWIW, the allegation re: potential illegality is totally without merit. IMHO, Cramer did not post here because someone pointed out an opinion that ended up being wrong. It's having to read an allegation that is patently false. Whether it was made because the writer lacked a familiarity with the general nature of sell-side research, I don't know, but I do know it's wrong. Good trading, Tom