SI
SI
discoversearch

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
Brokerage-Chat Site Securities Fraud: A Lawsuit
An SI Board Since June 2001
Posts SubjectMarks Bans
3143 54 0
Emcee:  CountofMoneyCristo Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
3068Again, that not what I said. What I did say was that the chances of someone modiSI Dave-4/9/2005
3067I said it wasn't done <b>recently</b>. I checked the logs back tSI Dave-4/8/2005
3066You telling us that SI's servers are more sophisticated than Microsoft'solivier asser-4/8/2005
3065>>> Like I told Olivier, the post to which you responded has not been mYogizuna-4/8/2005
3064It certainly was erased. Longtime readers of this thread remember exactly what olivier asser-4/8/2005
3063Why not. How many times have you seen users reply to someone else's blank poSI Dave-4/8/2005
3062You are suggesting I would refer to a blank post in this manner? Message 1942944Yogizuna-4/8/2005
3061<b>Jurisdiction</b> I've posted this here before, but it seems olivier asser-4/8/2005
3060avawava one of those multiple personalities created just for me? Seems that wayolivier asser-4/8/2005
3059Personally I would be pretty "sue happy" if I had been able to squeezeavawava-4/8/2005
3058I really hope Berber and Moor try to call me sue-happy in front of a jury, becauolivier asser-4/7/2005
3057< I'm sure there are plenty here who would agree it's not likely anyoDave O.-4/7/2005
3056Hey Dave, thought I'd raise a point. The Civil Rights Act was enacted becauolivier asser-4/6/2005
3055Any lawyers listening, I'm going to assume that you in your careers have seeolivier asser-4/6/2005
3054The Judge ruled from the bench in no uncertain terms that there was no immunity olivier asser-4/6/2005
3053Long response, but, in short, answer is: 1. Gross negligence is determined at tolivier asser-4/6/2005
3052I understand your position from past readings. My question/point was that, from SI Dave-4/6/2005
3051Good question. Two problems: First, I pleaded gross negligence at length. Theolivier asser-4/6/2005
3050Olivier, Wouldn't you assume they filed the plea of sovereign immunity whilSI Dave-4/6/2005
3049Here's an example of the incredible arrogance of the Office of the Attorney olivier asser-4/6/2005
3048<b>VIRGINIA CIRCUIT COURT UPDATE</b> Earlier, I said I would neitheolivier asser-4/6/2005
3047I don't think so, Dave, but like I said we're not getting anywhere. &lolivier asser-4/5/2005
3046<i>>>It was there just a few days ago, now poof, erased.</i> SI Dave-4/5/2005
3045Sounds like the originator of the post deleted the message during the 15 minute Geoff Altman-4/5/2005
3044I'm not alone, Dave. The post has been altered, its content erased. Some oolivier asser-4/4/2005
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News