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 : Business Wire Falls for April Fools Prank, Sues FBNers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ellen who wrote (736)	4/30/1999 4:45:00 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3795

Ellen, your rmil history - #reply-6751804 - is relevant and basic to anyone wishing to gain an understanding of your current act, because that act has never essentially changed. As evidence I submit the obvious fact that here you are, after all this time, still nibbling ankles of those who inject critical analysis into discussion of bulletin board promotions. Just like on rmil - #reply-2359648 ... quod erat demonstrandum ...... nib nib .... lololol

To: Ellen who wrote (736)	4/30/1999 6:10:00 PM
From: Level Head	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3795

And that's a pretty weak defense or rationalization of your idea of "education." You think that to harass and insult is to educate?? On what planet? Earth, in fact. It is your own style, as nearly as I can tell, to harass and insult these folks to attempt to educate them about their style of communication. To be fair, it is their style as well to harass and insult those that attack in the face of obvious facts that should be causing concern. No one seems to be able to lay a claim to saintly behavior, or to be able to consistently turn the other cheek. Mr./Ms. LevelHead, are you still of the opinion now that this group has ethics which are "strict and admirable" as you termed them? Yes. And a sometimes caustic wit. I have observed a pattern in the exchanges: Someone will express concern about an aspect of a stock on a thread devoted to that stock. If the response is reasonable, and the concern followed up and resolved, life goes on. But, if the response is to turn a blind eye, or worse, a winking eye, to the problem, and attack the messenger, word of this gets to an FBN associate through their large network of friends. If the pattern is one of apparent deception, FBN (as a convenient name for a large group of similar minded people) will get involved. I have noticed that a run up in price is not a required component of this involvement, and in fact, FBN gets involved usually before such a run up occurs. ABFG participants have claimed that the run-up drew FBN's fire, but an examination of the price/posting history does not support this. No surprise. I have never seen FBN members pick a fight. They consistently offer information. Only when the information is disregarded, in an apparent attempt to deceive, with insults from the deceivers, is the "favor" returned. Even after many rounds of such invective, they will post a list of concerns, and suggest that they need to be addressed. At any point along this process, if the concerns were addressable and resolved, the team is satisfied. I have seen this happen, but it is rare, as the circumstances that attract their attention usually do not emanate from a defensible situation. From what I have seen, the following conclusion is evident: Defend your company, your position, or your opinion in a reasonable way, and you will not be attacked by the FBN group. But insult them for drawing your attention to a problem, and you will be fair game. If you drop the use of perjorative terms from your own posts, I expect that you will see reasonableness in your replies. The dialog can be more pleasant, and it is a better way to gain, or provide, an education. It just is not as effective, unless both sides cooperate. Level Head