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

InterDigital Communications (IDCC)

Add IDCC Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: No Moderator JimLur, Data_Rox, magillagorilla, dndodd, olddog967, Hydro_gen
Search This Board:
Last Post: 8/30/2015 8:13:43 PM - Followers: 838 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 20

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.


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.

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.

  • 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.

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
Current Price
Bid Ask Day's Range
IDCC News: Quarterly Report (10-q) 07/30/2015 08:44:42 AM
IDCC News: Current Report Filing (8-k) 07/30/2015 08:40:16 AM
IDCC News: Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership (4) 07/23/2015 05:01:47 PM
IDCC News: Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership (4) 07/23/2015 04:57:37 PM
IDCC News: Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership (4) 07/23/2015 04:53:40 PM
#402151  Sticky Note INTERDIGITAL LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 7-30-2015 FISH21049 08/06/15 10:14:08 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
#403332   You are completely correct on the 'open up' clamcakes 08/30/15 08:13:43 PM
#403331   A very realistic assessment. I'm grumpy on clamcakes 08/30/15 07:59:49 PM
#403330   Can someone from the legal community explain what TooManyPets 08/30/15 07:01:43 PM
#403329   MISTER, power11 08/30/15 04:59:25 PM
#403328   In regard to vacating a case decision because olddog967 08/30/15 04:37:49 PM
#403327   my3sons: Based on an old Supreme Court olddog967 08/30/15 03:20:26 PM
#403326   I think its time for our ceo to mister 08/30/15 01:58:25 PM
#403325   Gej, I agree to a large extent. jist1 08/30/15 01:54:34 PM
#403324   To anyone biggeneg7 08/30/15 12:59:17 PM
#403323   Lime finish this ic debacle and then never my3sons87 08/30/15 12:48:46 PM
#403322   I partly agree, that's the best way to Limejuice22 08/30/15 12:46:39 PM
#403321   Sonic maybe if they get a win they my3sons87 08/30/15 12:46:29 PM
#403320   My3sons, The patents in the 613 case expire in sonic22 08/30/15 12:06:25 PM
#403319   My initial thought was that IDCC should not my3sons87 08/30/15 11:56:42 AM
#403318   TooManyPets, IDCC will be just wasting money to appeal. sonic22 08/30/15 11:06:46 AM
#403317   as disappointing (yet unsurprising) as the latest ITC gejebr3 08/30/15 11:01:11 AM
#403316   To Many Pets mickeybritt 08/30/15 10:51:20 AM
#403315   IDCC had best appeal the decision, whether this TooManyPets 08/30/15 10:47:16 AM
#403314   LTE thanks for all your rational and factual dndodd 08/30/15 10:11:26 AM
#403313   The Bullies pushed IDCC away from IPR Royalties[Nokia Goodbuddy4863 08/30/15 12:31:39 AM
#403312   Can we expect Interdigital to go back to scooby5 08/29/15 11:59:53 PM
#403311   <<Lets see there's 3-4 arbitrations in process now, LTE 08/29/15 11:30:26 PM
#403310   Too bad we don't know why this is LTE 08/29/15 11:26:17 PM
#403309   Lets see there's 3-4 arbitrations in process now, Limejuice22 08/29/15 11:23:40 PM
#403308   lime if idcc has great engineers patents nokiashill 08/29/15 11:19:38 PM
#403307   from listening to the last ASM, the board Limejuice22 08/29/15 11:07:28 PM
#403305   I've been calling for Bill Merritt's head for nokiashill 08/29/15 10:55:18 PM
#403303   sonic, this is perhaps the worst ROI I JohnSamuel 08/29/15 10:25:50 PM
#403302   <<In an updated analysis report last year, in LTE 08/29/15 10:20:35 PM
#403301   <<IDCC easily spent over 200M(It was a 7 LTE 08/29/15 09:59:34 PM
#403300   <<"The Court held that even though it does LTE 08/29/15 09:53:59 PM
#403299   Gungrey: I am sure that IDCC has olddog967 08/29/15 09:44:17 PM
#403298   Law360 on the original '244 trial's delay. LTE 08/29/15 08:59:37 PM
#403297   Turney, I completely understand the issue with settling. However sonic22 08/29/15 08:56:18 PM
#403296   olddog967, thanks. LTE 08/29/15 08:44:44 PM
#403295   mickey; No matter what you think or post olddog967 08/29/15 07:59:38 PM
#403294   MIckey, IMO IDCC could do worse than hire squingeqbob 08/29/15 07:52:45 PM
#403293   olddog Why do companies submit patents to the committee? mickeybritt 08/29/15 07:22:54 PM
#403292   Mickey: Sounds like you are being a little olddog967 08/29/15 07:11:53 PM
#403291   There is a big problem about settling for Turney 08/29/15 07:01:03 PM
#403290   OldDog, IMO you're one of the "stand out" Gungrey 08/29/15 06:51:03 PM
#403289   Olddog You win I can't read and they didn't mickeybritt 08/29/15 06:42:58 PM
#403288   LTE: You can access the April 23 olddog967 08/29/15 06:29:41 PM
#403287   That has always been a back door way jjff 08/29/15 06:11:31 PM
#403286   mickey. It is very simple what the olddog967 08/29/15 05:59:45 PM
#403285   Mickey, give it up.....we'll live to see another day. Gungrey 08/29/15 05:46:48 PM
#403284   Olddog How about you explain what the standards committee mickeybritt 08/29/15 05:27:19 PM
#403283   Data: Give up on trying to explain olddog967 08/29/15 05:12:46 PM
#403282   Data_Rox I guess I failed reading what does these mickeybritt 08/29/15 05:04:37 PM
#403281 The purpose o Data_Rox 08/29/15 04:22:05 PM