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.

Non-Tech : E4L, Inc. (NYSE: ETV) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DOC who wrote (493)	11/28/1998 8:25:00 PM
From: out_of_the_loop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1080

Sir: I will apologize to you for calling you a thief; that was probably uncalled for. I hereby apologize for that and any mention of stealing on your part. That, after consideration, wrong on my part. I have thought about this myself for several days and I , too, will ask the SI administration to remove that post, because I know what it is like to have been accused of something that I know is not true or provable. For example, Message 6580296 , made me think about this, because, for example, the AMA does not investigate doctors (state societies do, so I knew that even if there were somebody with the same name, that statement could not be true). As far as you are concerned, your private identity on SI is not a right - it is discoverable by law, this has been proven in court cases already; so you must do what you must do and we will see where it goes. Your identity will be revealed as soon as your complaint or subpoena or whatever comes in the mail (you cannot charge someone anonymously in this country) or is delivered. So, in summary, I apologize for calling you a thief; that was unfair. The rest, you must do what you must do. We will see who you really are then. Sincerely, Howard Epstein

To: DOC who wrote (493)	11/29/1998 3:44:00 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Respond to of 1080

DOC, Just out of curiousity, did your lawyer suggest that it can't be libel if the defamation was to an anonymous alias??? JXM

To: DOC who wrote (493)	11/29/1998 11:57:00 AM
From: Graystone	Respond to of 1080

I feel for you DO? or DOG is a (Slimy substance here)ball I can imagine your anger upon someone discovering that someone thinks you are that piece of (appropriate expletive here). I can imagine the anguish you feel at being associated with that (descriptive crass phrase here). Lying, cheating, using innocent people, stealing, abusing public networks, pushing worthless securities, convincing people to believe lies, promoting criminal activities....imagine ! At least we all agree on one thing, that character is a real (appropriate sentiment here). We all owe Howard a big debt of thanks for reinforcing what a low life that poster is. Thanks Howard.