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 : DCH Technologies (DCH) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scoobah who wrote (750)	3/13/1999 2:09:00 PM
From: Scoobah	Respond to of 2513

Since this board has already been littered with the filth from Francois, we may as well determine if there is support for his position from those he claims advised him. PREVIEW - PRIVATE To: Stock Watcher From: H2Oshinsky Saturday, Mar 13 1999 2:06PM EST -Preview- You may want to know that one of your followers is throwing your name around as the reason he sold DCHT at a $4,500 and he is looking for blood to avenge his loss. He is also claiming to have emailed the SEC on this matter. Message 8301257 You may want to comment on this, and you may not; but I recall the reason you dropped DCHT was because of volume concerns and their non reporting status. Is anything else this poster is saying true? For the record, I live very confortably from my full time investing in stocks and am up 44% in the last 2 months, so please, don't feel sorry for me. Anyway, the following day, I called my broker and told him to sell at a loss because I do not want to be associated in any shape or form with such a Company. When appraised, "Stock Watcher" checked the facts and promptly dumped DCHT from its Index and warned investors to be careful.

To: Scoobah who wrote (750)	3/13/1999 3:09:00 PM
From: Rickmas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2513

Mr. Oshinsky, I understand your outrage over deliberately twisted and malicious postings concerning DCHT on this board. However, I believe that the other investors can see clearly what is going on. I was immediately attacked when I posted factual information that was in direct conflict to the skunk's misleading posts. Now that I have expressed positive feelings toward the company, I am attacked again. Yet I do not feel the slightest need to be defended by you or anyone else; nor do I feel the slightest obligation to respond to such a pathetic demonstration of due diligence, free speech awareness or simple courtesy. As I have stated before, anyone who posts quality information on this board opens themselves up to being dragged into a pissing contest with a skunk. This represents a gross disservice to the investors who come to this board for market intelligence. The people who participate in this board will determine its quality. If they are satisfied with the present level of discourse, I imagine it will remain at this relatively disfunctional level. If they wish for it to improve, well... I'm listening. Out here in the country, we play a game with skunks. You can't try to reason with it because it'll spray you. You don't want to shoot it when it's under your house because it'll stink it up, so we sic the dogs on it and they run it off to a neighbor's house down the road. After a while, the neighbor sics his dogs on the critter and they run it under someone else's house. Sometimes it even comes back under your house. We don't hate the skunk. It was born a skunk; it can't help what it is. We just don't want it under our house. -- Rickmas

To: Scoobah who wrote (750)	3/14/1999 6:51:00 AM
From: Sid Turtlman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2513

Steve: I wanted to straighten out a misimpression you may have given people in two of your posts: "I do corporate development work that is true, but I do it for RAM capital, so make sure in your email to the SEC you get it right. Additionally, let me know when you send it, so I can call them and get your real name, address and phone number in case my attorney decides you are interfering with my contractual relations, in which you will find yourself defending a tort action. Think I am bluffing?" Yes, of course you are bluffing. There isn't one chance in 100 billion that the SEC would tell you a thing about any complaint made about you. I have helped that organization expose and close down several frauds, and I can absolutely guarantee that no SEC employee will ever tell any outsider anything, especially a potential target such as yourself. "Subj: Harrassment on SI DCHT board Date: 3/13/99 1:46:05 PM Eastern Standard Time From: MrOshinsky To: si_admin@techstocks.com Please tell me what you intend to do about this poster before I call both mine and your attorney?" [quotes from two innocuous F.Goelo posts] Since that poster isn't threatening other posters with physical violence or using foul language, the offenses that got you bounced off SI, you can be sure that SI will do nothing about him. You can chat with your lawyer or SI's lawyer all you want, and the answer will be the same - unless you initiate a lawsuit against the poster, and convince some court to issue a subpoena for information from SI, SI will not reveal any information about any poster to you. So you can go the lawsuit route, but you will never win, and will never find an attorney to take it on spec, so it will cost you money for nothing. BTW, I am sorry that your latest version of your DCHT report didn't follow any of the suggestions I made in Message 7961651 Unless the report is willing to talk about the company's competitive position, finances, and other areas I mentioned, it is hard for any except the most naïve to take it seriously. Also, do you have any idea why DCHT still refuses to give out the address, phone number or name of any employee of Antaeus Corp., the company that DCHT claims is going to be buying $1 million per year of its products? What reason is there to believe that Antaeus exists at all, or existed BEFORE the company's press release? Thanks.