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: Janice Shell who wrote (13665)	12/11/1998 11:11:00 AM
From: Ellen	Respond to of 26163

So far, so good: people shouldn't feel that they have the right to indulge in invention or outright lying (you listening, Spidey?) in order to support an investment (in this case, I gather, DCTC). Research should be accurate, and negative statements should always be qualified unless absolutely provable. And what is your opinion, Janice, of indulging in "invention or outright lying" to do the opposite? Isn't that equally wrong? You said: Negative statements should always be qualified unless absolutely provable. Whoa. So you actually think it's ok to post any ole negative thing if it's "qualified" but not necessarily proven? You can't be serious. Wait, I guess you ARE serious, as you're prone to do that frequently. On the other hand, I wouldn't like to see the threat of libel suits used to stifle legitimate debate, or to intimidate posters who raise uncomfortable questions. You said: posters who raise uncomfortable questions Meaning yourself. Sounds like you're worried...? But no, raising questions - no matter how "uncomfortable" - should NOT be stifled. Innuendo, however, is another & different matter entirely. Wouldn't you agree?