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 : NBMX - National Boston Medical (was FGRX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (1045)	1/11/1999 10:42:00 AM
From: jjbucci	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1286

Jeffrey, My question is who decides the motives of the person/group who is protesting? Who decides whether a company targeted as a scam is in fact a scam ? If professionals touting stocks must register as investment advisors and reveal whether they are compensated and how much they receive to tout a stock then people who stage these kinds of protests on multiple message boards and against multiple companies should also be required to do the same. This would end the constant bickering over their intentions and would end this type of discussion on most of the boards. Too often the posts on the boards turn into personal attacks going both ways, this helps to turn many people off from posting which basically ends the discussion of the stock. It is happening over and over on many threads. I do though agree in theory that protests are necessary, many companies need to communicate better with their shareholders in order to better explain their actions. The problem is that there is too much of a chance for abuse when people can act anonymously. This is a problem both on the postive and negative sides of the argument. SI should require verifiably identities for all posters. This would help to end the problem. jjbucci