Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread.

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.

Strategies & Market Trends
Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread.

An SI Board Since May 2000

Posts	SubjectMarks	Bans
5425	101	0

Emcee: Shoot1st	Type: Moderated

Introduction Compact

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):

Reply	Message Preview	From	Recs	Posted
3925	Elgindy Co-Defendant Peters Looks To Plea In NY, CA Cases By Carol S. Remond	StockDung	-	5/10/2005
3924	It is pretty hypocritical how Jeff attacks personally while claiming that his me	rrufff	-	5/9/2005
3923	lma(zz)o <i>nothing wrong with transparency</i> fulldisclosure.biz	ravenseye	-	5/9/2005
3922	<i>nothing wrong with transparency</i> That's the entire argume	Jeffrey S. Mitchell	-	5/8/2005
3921	I agree - From my perspective, it would be the start of a more fair marketplace.	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3920	DTCC has always been very secretive. I doubt there's actually any reason fo	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3919	I thought I did address your points. I don't like it when anyone attacks an	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3918	You're still not addressing my actual points, but never mind. I think you&#	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3917	Janice, it really isn't important who he is, who you are, who I am, who Jeff	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3916	As noted: if he actually were important in any real sense of the word, many peo	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3915	LOLOLOLOLOLISSIMO!! <i>In essence, this proved the existence of naked sho	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3914	Rather than attacking and trying to hunt out anonymous posters, it seems to me t	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3913	Gotta love this guy. I post a simple post and it spawns about a dozen responses	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3912	I wonder why.	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3911	I didn't see any threats in his posts. Besides, Bob is a victim here. It wa	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3910	Probably at least some of them want to sue him for defamation, and it's diff	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3909	The more action the better. I hope this issue stays before the public and we ge	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3908	Pugs's threats were quite different. The actual threats had nothing to do w	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3907	As to "Bill" Burrell, he was only anonymous as a poster here. He'	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3906	A claim that Bob is not so "important" seems to fly in the face of all	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3905	But you were upset that Pugs tried to threaten you if I read your posts correctl	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3904	<i>You didn't like the results of what happened when people were going	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3903	That's what is so ironic. I think Bob O'Brien was brilliant in leading t	rrufff	-	5/8/2005
3902	Sure it's public information. But I don't think it's right to post	Janice Shell	-	5/8/2005
3901	I really can't understand why "crusaders" want to find another int	rrufff	-	5/8/2005

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):