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: J Shill who wrote (1583)	5/4/1999 3:59:00 AM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3795

J Shill, Why would you say "tell it to the judge and jury"? Do you really expect this to ever get to trial? Wasn't it you guys that said the plaintiffs in this case have excellent legal representation? Don't you think that at some point the plaintiff's legal team will attempt to "gracefully" back out of this predicament they now find themselves in? Don't you think the plaintiff's legal team will advise the plaintiff of any risks of continuing into court with this action? Don't you think... KJC

To: J Shill who wrote (1583)	5/4/1999 9:30:00 AM
From: John Sladek	Respond to of 3795

J Shill, Here you have 3 people with very close ties to Silicon Investor Could you please explain what the close ties between each of the people and Silicon Investor are? Please be specific. Their over inflated EGO's make them think that they are on the right side of the law. Why attribute this belief to their egos. They do have legal representation you know. Do you think that possibly their lawyers have told them that they have a good case, or that BW has no case? Do you think that if their lawyers advised them to keep their mouths shut they would be posting on this thread here on SI? After the BW civil suit was filed NOW we have the 3 admitted posters of the release stating it was just a prank. Past history has shown that these people engage in pranks on April 1. It wouldn't make any sense to say it was a prank from the start - the entertainment ("I am a broker") and educational value (i.e., don't believe everything that you read in a press release) would be much lower. That being said, they admitted that it was a prank here on SI at least as early as April 2 (see #reply-8675507 for instance), and changed their web page to indicate that it was an April 1 joke. The suit came almost two weeks after they admitted it was a prank. I think that you should familiarise yourself with the facts of this matter. Your lack of knowlegde of the basic chronology of events greatly undermines your simplistic analysis. You should also learn the difference between stating as an opinion and representing something as a fact, particularly as it pertains to libel before making statement's such as this: Well they had better get a grip on reality and see the facts* of the matter. 1. They started a web domain with the intent to defraud the public with the press release.* Regards, John Sladek