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.

Pastimes : HYPE AND HYPESTERS DENUNCIATION CENTRE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (465)	4/22/1999 8:03:00 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 612

LOL! Brad is cool. Way cool. That is actually a really good idea, it would be easy for the regulators to scout the site for potential violators. I don't know if you saw the Raging Bull dude on CNBC touting his site as the "best" and yapping about how the people that post there are all smart and you can find the truth there, and the news hits their site early, and all that. That cracked me up. SI kicks, and that's a fact. Tell you what: I will let the guys that I have already spotted alone, unless they get out of hand. There are a few of these paid hypesters that I consider to be real menaces, so we'll keep in touch on those. Speaking of which, the 'beermeister' Member 2389696 recently published a disclaimer on his web site that looked quite good to me. #reply-9003982 Anybody who cares to check his site can now see who they might be buying their stock from. If he has the smarts to put that same disclaimer on every post, so they all comply with the SEC law, I personally have no problem with it at all. Unfortunately, what I suspect will happen is he will go undercover. That's OK too, since he has to buy another membership. I really wish they would all just move to the 'free' stock chatrooms and let us get on with business...but as my ex-wife used to say, "It's nice to have a dream. Where's the check?" Here is that law, notice it is quite specific: Section 17(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77q(b)] makes it unlawful to publish any communication describing a security (whether or not the publication offers the security) where the publishing party receives payment from the issuer, an underwriter or dealer, without fully disclosing that such payment has been (or will be) received and the amount paid." ...finally, some amusement, this is a post just prior to beermeister's web page alterations: #reply-8721037

To: EL KABONG!!! who wrote (465)	4/22/1999 9:24:00 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 612

techstocks.com