SureTrader SureTrader
Home > Boards > US Listed > Telecommunications Hardware >

InterDigital Communications (IDCC)

IDCC RSS Feed
Add IDCC Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: No Moderator JimLur, Data_Rox, dmiller, magillagorilla, dndodd, olddog967
Search This Board:
Last Post: 5/30/2015 10:28:23 AM - Followers: 828 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 7



http://www.interdigital.com

About Message Boards and the Moderators' Role

The principle objective of the iHub message boards is to maintain a high signal-to-noise ratio while encouraging the exchange of all points of view. Moderators are an important part of making our message boards beneficial to all participants and readers. Moderating a stock-specific board, particularly those which are controversial due to many divergent perspectives or newsworthy events, can be a challenging and time consuming role. The time and effort expended by our Members who volunteer their time to fulfill this valuable role is greatly appreciated and our Moderators should be treated with the respect they deserve for donating their time and efforts to the collective benefit of our community. Company-specific boards are the lifeblood of iHub. The Moderators' role is simple to define for company-specific boards: 
 

To promote the civil exchange of on-topic dialog that complies with the Investors Hub Terms of Service.
 

It is no accident that neither the above definition nor the  Terms of Service makes mention of investment sentiment, shareholder interests, or considerations such as "the good of the company." That is because the TOS are blind to investment sentiment. In order to be a successful Moderator and conduct a board within the scope of iHub's TOS, it is critical that Moderators distinguish their role and privileges as Moderator from their role and privileges as a posting Member. That is often easier said than done, particularly on active boards with both the typical and atypical controversy.

At the same time, Board Moderators are entitled and encouraged to express their investment sentiment in the same manner as any other Member; by participating in the dialog. However; insofar as their Moderator privileges are concerned, it is not the Moderators’ role to dictate bullish or bearish sentiment, to command the "tone" of the content be along any particular investment sentiment, or to favor one investment sentiment over another when removing or restoring messages.

It is also not the Moderators’ role to remove posts on the basis of "truth" or "accuracy". Readers determine the veracity of the posts they read and the credibility of other Posters. If a Moderator disagrees with another Member’s post they have the same recourse as any other User; to ignore the post, or to challenge it with a post of their own focusing on the information, not the other Poster.

In short, the role of the Moderator is to help foster an environment that promotes and encourages posting of ALL opinions and information about companies, regardless of the bullish or bearish sentiment of the posts, and to be the site’s first line of defense in ensuring we remain free of spam, vulgarity, and personal attacks.

 

Deletion of Posts

While in manage mode, Moderators will see a message that says "Click any message below to view, then remove or restore it." Clicking on a specific post will then show the option to "remove" in a box on the left. Clicking this will then provide the following options as a reason for removal: Personal Attack, Duplicate Post, Spam, Off Topic, Vulgarity, Author Asked to Remove, Violation of Privacy, Threat.

Duplicate

This is an accidental duplicate post by a single Member. This does not mean a similar message posted previously or the same content posted by a different Member.

Personal Attack

This is when someone attacks one or more members personally rather than the content of that Member's message. The post does not have to be addressed to the "target" of the attack to be considered a Personal Attack. If it attacks a messenger rather than the message, it qualifies for deletion and it is expected that Moderators will remove it.

Spam
Posting the same or similar content to more than two (2) boards within a calendar day;
Posting the same or almost identical post more than twice within a calendar day i.e. "where's the PR?", "anyone seen the PR?", "thought there was going to be a pr today?", "geez, is the pr coming out today or not?";
Sending the same or similar unsolicited PM to multiple recipients   

Off Topic
  • Posts about or focusing on other Members or groups of people and their reasons for posting on the board (i.e. "XYZDownDaDrain" is just a basher, ignore him", "XYZToDaMoon" is a pumper", "the naysayers are very loud today", "c'mon, where did all the cheerleaders go?"). The post does not have to be addressed to a specific person. If the post is about other Users then it should be removed.
    Posts with religious or political statements should be removed as "off topic". These inevitably create an avalanche of replies that are off topic as well.
    Posts about Moderators and/or deletions are also "off topic". Issues of this nature need to be discussed with a Site Admin.
    Putting "ot" at the beginning of a post does not make it acceptable. It is still off topic and eligible for removal.

Vulgarity
  • The PG13 rule is loosely used as a guideline to what is/isn't acceptable when determining whether a comment is vulgar. The theory is that if society has deemed it appropriate for a 13 year old to hear, it is unlikely that it will be offensive to the majority of Users.
    Otherwise, profanity (as explained above) is unacceptable on the stock boards, even when punctuation characters are used to "fill in the blanks" or letters are changed (f**k, azzh*le, etc.). Note that there are also "polite versions" for many acronyms and these are assumed to be the case when in doubt (i.e. "wtf?" = "what the freak?" in the polite version).
    Any form of vulgarity directed at another User is unacceptable and should be removed (i.e. "you're a sh*thead", "being an a** doesn't help your case").

Author Asked to Remove

Violation of Privacy
Posting of what the Member believes to be any personally identifiable information (email, real name, phone, address, etc.) about another User or posting the contents of a private message is a privacy violation. For example, if a Member posts that "XYZDownDaDrain is actually Bob Smith", whether the information is accurate is irrelevant. The Member was trying to disclose personal information. This is a serious violation and can get you suspended or terminated from the site.
Posting or referring to the contents of private messages without the author's prior consent is considered a violation of privacy and can get the User suspended or terminated from the site.

Threat
A Member threatening any other Member in any fashion is to be removed.
Threats or insinuations of violence or physical harm against anyone is a serious infraction and can get you suspended or terminated from the site.

If a post does not fit into any of these categories the post must not be removed.

Some posts fall into a "gray" area and are borderline depending upon the way they are read. As inclusion is favored over exclusion, please err or the side of not removing posts if they are not clear violations. Please use the "Report TOS Violation" button at the bottom of the post with your comments if the post is not egregious in nature and Site Admins will review the message.

Bottom line: Please use your best judgment in removing posts based on the above guidelines and let us know if you have any questions or need any help. And keep in mind that post removal and non-removal have to be given the same emphasis. It is not permissible, for example, to remove a post that calls someone a "pumper" while not also removing a post that calls someone a "basher". Investor sentiment, including your own, can NOT be part of the removal/non-removal decision.

Image:Ra1.gif More guidance about acceptable removal of posts can be found at FAQ:Deletions and Restores.

  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 2M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 2Y
  • 3Y
  • 5Y
IDCC
Current Price
Volume:
Bid Ask Day's Range
Wiki
Option Chain for IDCC
IDCC News: Current Report Filing (8-k) 05/28/2015 08:21:02 AM
IDCC News: InterDigital Joins Wireless Broadband Alliance 05/18/2015 08:30:00 AM
IDCC News: InterDigital Featured in Senza Fili LTE Unlicensed and Wi-Fi Report 05/14/2015 09:00:00 AM
IDCC News: InterDigital Europe and Partners to Lead Groundbreaking European Commission 5G Research Project 05/14/2015 04:02:00 AM
IDCC News: Multiple Project Wins Highlight InterDigital 5G Leadership 05/14/2015 04:00:00 AM
PostSubject
#397709  Sticky Note Please post this to sticky notes... bulldzr 03/27/15 09:31:26 PM
#393361  Sticky Note Upcoming 'legal' events for Interdigital as I see FISH21049 12/08/14 10:26:16 AM
#392981  Sticky Note Let's make it simple: Fog1937 12/02/14 10:38:12 AM
#382423  Sticky Note Sticky info: Analyst Reports, Rmarchma Reference Information, etc. postyle 02/21/14 03:45:14 PM
#399853   makes alot of sense..I have always thought intel asr1 05/30/15 10:28:23 AM
#399852   while we wait on legal proceedings, we can gejebr3 05/30/15 10:08:47 AM
#399851   <<Thanks for the update...is the MMO trial that LTE 05/30/15 10:06:43 AM
#399850   <<Just want to clarify the jury trial dates LTE 05/30/15 10:03:41 AM
#399849   IMO, M&A or investment possibilities ( after IDCC's mike12kidc 05/30/15 09:03:18 AM
#399848   Intel May Acquire Altera Now -- Is Qualcomm Next? dndodd 05/30/15 07:54:55 AM
#399847   Just want to clarify the jury trial dates olddog967 05/30/15 06:06:13 AM
#399846   "Geeze Louize... how many more of us IDCC hrbart 05/29/15 11:26:09 PM
#399843   Gungrey:n1-1/2 years for Infringers to keep-on infringing! sjaym 05/29/15 10:18:54 PM
#399842   Olddog, Thanks for the update...is the MMO trial that sonic22 05/29/15 10:04:50 PM
#399841   O'dog it seems that the Delaware actions will my3sons87 05/29/15 08:46:15 PM
#399840   O'dog thanks my3sons87 05/29/15 07:31:59 PM
#399839   Dammit OldDog, that seems like a long time Gungrey 05/29/15 07:10:55 PM
#399838   Geeze Louize... how many more of us IDCC bulldzr 05/29/15 06:53:51 PM
#399837   Update on Delaware Cases olddog967 05/29/15 06:48:10 PM
#399836   my3sons: Based on a quick reading, IDCC’s olddog967 05/29/15 06:15:39 PM
#399835   Hey Jist, you jist might want to stay Gungrey 05/29/15 06:15:24 PM
#399834   I appreciate it, I am trying it--mine are Limejuice22 05/29/15 05:03:58 PM
#399833   Lime, I did the stone blasting machine in the zombywolf 05/29/15 04:56:29 PM
#399832   JL, You ask jist1 05/29/15 04:47:04 PM
#399831   Jim: Give credit to my computer's olddog967 05/29/15 04:45:02 PM
#399830   olddog, I don't think we will see any JimLur 05/29/15 04:38:03 PM
#399829   Gung, Interdigital has a strong balance sheet. jist1 05/29/15 04:29:36 PM
#399828   olddog, Your eyes are as good as your JimLur 05/29/15 04:23:59 PM
#399827   jist1 I didn't say wait another year for the mickeybritt 05/29/15 03:54:02 PM
#399826   Note that MSFT only has a 1% share Gamco 05/29/15 03:53:20 PM
#399825   my3sons: Apparently others also believe that. olddog967 05/29/15 03:49:37 PM
#399824   O'dog what do you think of IDCC's reply my3sons87 05/29/15 03:48:09 PM
#399823   Gamco: Interesting that no one company really olddog967 05/29/15 03:44:52 PM
#399822   Gun it provides the ITC Commission with all my3sons87 05/29/15 03:43:16 PM
#399821   Hey Sons, if I interpret that brief correctly Gungrey 05/29/15 03:40:10 PM
#399820   If you believe what you jist posted then Gungrey 05/29/15 03:34:13 PM
#399819   Postyle as always thanks for posting so that my3sons87 05/29/15 03:06:19 PM
#399818   Mick, I was hoping your $100 by jist1 05/29/15 02:41:00 PM
#399817   jist1 We are retail and small potato's to them. mickeybritt 05/29/15 02:07:59 PM
#399816   5/29/2015 Inv. No. 337-613: wirelessledger.com/summary-of-IDCC-response_5-2 postyle 05/29/15 02:02:07 PM
#399815   thanks Zomby---I might try that---Mine is close, oh Limejuice22 05/29/15 01:59:38 PM
#399814   Patent Analysis for the IoT Wireless Connectivity Standards Gamco 05/29/15 01:51:09 PM
#399813   Mick, A disclosure as to why they jist1 05/29/15 01:33:22 PM
#399812   As the song says TIME IS ON OUR SIDE!!!!! mickeybritt 05/29/15 01:25:52 PM
#399811   If I'm a Judge reading this brief, I jist1 05/29/15 12:50:02 PM
#399810   DN noted the Arima logo on page 10 jist1 05/29/15 12:34:15 PM
#399809   You gotta like how this reads. It does jist1 05/29/15 12:31:36 PM
#399808   Intel close to deal to buy Altera for magillagorilla 05/29/15 12:18:44 PM
#399807   IDCC opening statement in their brief. my3sons87 05/29/15 12:13:08 PM
#399806   ID on Infringement and Public Interest in Remand dndodd 05/29/15 12:13:05 PM
#399804   Postyle, Magilla and O'dog the IDCC remand appeal my3sons87 05/29/15 12:09:06 PM
#399803   How long will it take for Cowen or jist1 05/29/15 12:06:23 PM
#399802   Gunge, This might shock you...expectations of stock jist1 05/29/15 11:05:48 AM
#399801   The only reason they currently control/keep a lid Gungrey 05/29/15 10:52:10 AM
PostSubject