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 : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: antibash who wrote (13650)	12/11/1998 2:46:00 AM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Respond to of 26163

antibash, I believe that the attorney took this route because he knows "Spider Valdez" and "Rico Staris" only as aliases on SI. He doesn't have their real names (yet). I'm pretty sure that Mr. Dumont (allegedly bgtit) has been served by more conventional means, because (using any internet telephone directory) you can look up a Mr. Dumont residing in the New Hampshire location indicated in the legal document. I'm fairly sure that once the attorney acquires the real names of Spider and Rico that they will be served in a more conventional manner as well. An interesting side note to all this is that since both Rico and Spider have acknowledged reading the lawyer's post, does that constitute being served (in a legal sense)? I've never heard of using the internet to serve someone before, so is this a legal precedence? Is it valid given that the alleged offenses occurred on the internet, and that Rico and Spider are known only by their SI aliases? I don't know the answers to my questions. I really don't. This will really be interesting for all observers. KJC

To: antibash who wrote (13650)	12/11/1998 3:11:00 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Respond to of 26163

Well Auntie, much in the same manner that you haven't correctly read the transcripts, the court order, the filings, the press releases, or any other document presented here, you have followed through with your usual consistency. "Thick", I believe is the degree of measure. The document presented by Solomont is not "serving papers". In fact, it plainly states so in REALLY BIG CAPITAL LETTERS in the second line. I'm not surprised you missed it. This is a request to waive the usual summons procedure in an effort to save time and expense—sort of like: "Hey, I'm gonna have your butt in court one way or the other, so let's do this the easy way. Cut to the chase, save us all a lot of time, and simply comply with the request. If not, I'll serve you via the officially proscribed method, then make you eat the cost of hunting you down, too." As such, the lesser formality is not surprising, and quite allowable. If it's not "serving papers", then it could hardly be "the wrong way to serve papers." Understand?