Ax cOUSIN SHORTY and Tastes Like Chicken

[Gulley Jimson]

<img src=http://lastplace.com/MotherTeresa/mother8.jpg>And how is Soylent Green today?

[Gulley Jimson]

"Oh, that was not very good. Now, was it?"

[Corran Horn]

Oh Well...

You better try something else.

[Bera]

TEST

[JXM]

cool, the unlinkable thing is good too.

[Bera]

I used Width=100%, one can also use pixels as well. In addition by using the <a></a> I made the image unlinkable to the post.

[JXM]

Grub

Where'd you learn how to do that width thing?

[JXM]

I suspect that curry is going to get lots of page views in the next couple of days. LOL!!!

[Poet]

Oh! That is UFB. I am sending it to all my girlfriends, toot sweet.

Terracotta Blonde! "I am only emotionally attached to myself". LOL!

[JXM]

It is performance art.

[JXM]

You have to check out his website.

http://www.rubberburner.com/

He is better than that turkish guy who says "I Kiss You"

[Poet]

Holy cheesecake! That guy is stuck in the 80's. (though I do like the red leather pants).

Nice artistic contribution. Let's see if Master Horn approves.

[Corran Horn]

I already saw that.. It's a retread...

Hahaha...

[JXM]

<img src=http://www.rubberburner.com/curry_2.jpg>

I found a picture of you on the internet

[Poet]

Yeah, Baby. I say ban all grubbers! Even TLC. -g

[Corran Horn]

You Are Banned!!!!

[JXM]

When's earnings?

[Corran Horn]

Now you see it.


Now you don't..

[Bera]

Are you having fun playing with my post?<g>

[Bera]

<img src=http://www.doodie.com/pics/naturewalk2.gif.05032001>

Always leaving me to clean up after you!

  
   W  o(..)o   (     CAUTION:  This monkey is still in 
    \__(-)    __)    training!  All opinions expressed 
        /\   (       are for discussion purposes only. 
       /(_)___)   
      w / \          ~Bera 
       /  /      
      m   m 

[Poet]

Hi Shorty,

I like the club here, and the rules.

[Corran Horn]

Did I overstep my authority? <GGG>

[cOUSIN SHORTY]

jackhole

[marcos]

<img src=http://www.canada.org.mx/vmarnoldb/identidad2.jpg>

When you get to the city of México next, go to the palacio de las Bellas Artes ... third floor, south side [and there's so much more there] ... called 'man at crossroads, originally done in NY in '33 for a Rockefeller, who didn't like it, destroyed it ... but Rivera got paid in cash in front, lol

Guy above is Arnold Belkin, came from Calgary, became a major mexican painter of last century ... knew Rivera, Orozco, Sigueiros, etc

[cOUSIN SHORTY]

I admire Diego Rivera.

[cOUSIN SHORTY]

Sorry. Wait. You're deleted.

[marcos]

<img src=http://www.diegorivera.com/murals/images/crossrba.jpg>

[cOUSIN SHORTY]

Once you have posted the code, go back and "edit" the post. Don't change anything, just go through the motions and when you are done, the jpg will appear instead of the code.

[marcos]

<img src=http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~kimball/images/repin%20Zaporoj%20best.jpg>

experiment

[Corran Horn]

Are you ever going to quit and stay quitteded?

http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=88230

[nycnpbbkr]

F. Goelo + + +

The post I'm replying to could be considered a violation of terms of service. cOUSIN SHORTY didn't deleted it, would you have?

[nycnpbbkr]

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/subject.gsp?subjectid=25226

[nycnpbbkr]

Boy some thread, this cOUSIN SHORTY dude must be a real popular guy. I think I too, would blame it on Franco American spaghettio's and split.

[FrankNG]

Is there a message thread on SI where I can read about to see what happened? It sounds like a very interesting story.

[nycnpbbkr]

Boy are you another SI rocket scientist, SI Dick Tracy right? Late to the game? No kidding, he's been in jail for over 2 years now. I never said he was any different from your SI icons. I was only writing about what really happened because the story was written on SI in real time.

You see there has to be another side to the trade that the SI shorts set up and Tosto was a real PROFESSIONAL that just did it better for billions. SI bashers found a link between a questionable x stockbroker and 5 stocks so they shorted his stocks. If the stocks just went down like they wanted them to there would have been no problems. But the stocks went up, fast and hard, so the SI people called the cops. Reminds me of someone who trys to by drugs, gets ripped off and calls the cops to get their money back.


He was the best at what he did, he worked harder than anyone, called my home at midnight and my office at 5 am, he never posted on the internet, everyone hated him, he was short and dressed sharp, he screamed at everyone, but in many ways he was very honorable man.

If you read the story Tosto was working for the goverment

and cheating investors in a second scam he was running while he was testifying for the government against his accomplices in an earlier fraud

Both at the same time blindfolded, double top secret agent stuff, the book would be put under fiction. I thought I knew him but I didn't know he worked for the goverment. Before the Feds came for him I told him how I felt about that.

[FrankNG]

I just read this on SI that Peter Tosto got 7 years for the fraud.

`Securities Fraud Addict' Tosto Gets 7 Years for Stock Swindle


New York, March 15 (Bloomberg) -- A former broker and convicted stock swindler was sentenced to 87 months in prison for cheating investors in a second scam he was running while he was testifying for the government against his accomplices in an earlier fraud.

Peter Tosto, who is also known as Peter Lybrand, was the federal government's star witness in its 1998 fraud case against brokers Thomas Browne and Gerald McNeil. Tosto's perjured testimony prompted a federal judge to overturn Browne and McNeil's convictions in that case. During their trial, Tosto told jurors that he had abandoned his life of crime.

While he was testifying for the government, however, Tosto ran three publicly traded shell companies and used offshore companies he also controlled to secretly buy and sell stock in them, pocketing about $6.4 million. He pleaded guilty to fraud charges last October.

``I'm baffled by what happened here,'' U.S. District Judge Denny Chin said as he sentenced Tosto to the maximum prison term allowed under federal guidelines.

Tosto told the judge that there is ``no excuse for my actions.''

``I was simply greedy and thought I would get away with the lies I told,'' Tosto said.

`Securities Fraud Addict'

In a letter to Chin, Tosto was described by a Securities and Exchange Commission official as a ``securities fraud addict.'' In asking for mercy, Tosto's attorney said he had problems with drugs and alcohol and that he is someone ``prone to obsessive, disease- based behavior.''

But Assistant U.S. Attorney Joanna Hendon asked Chin to impose the maximum sentence, asserting that Tosto's actions have compromised the judicial system. Hendon said she will re-try Browne and McNeil in the spring.

``Mr. Tosto should be asking his God for mercy and compassion,'' Hendon said. ``The last place he should be seeking mercy is this courthouse. There are few crimes more sinister and more destructive than perjury of government witnesses.''

Tosto told jurors at the 1998 trial of Browne and McNeil that he was the ringleader of a $1.6 million scheme to bribe brokers to sell shares in San Diego Bancorp Inc., a penny stock. At that trial, Tosto said he was guilty of fraud but was through being a stock swindler.

At the time, however, the SEC was investigating Tosto for gaining control of Polus Inc., Citron Inc., and Electronic Transfer Associates Inc. He was charged with fraud in connection with the latest scheme in February 2000.

In reversing the convictions of Browne and McNeil last month, U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein said the two men ``most likely would not have been convicted'' except for Tosto's testimony.

``Tosto's testimony was far more than a fraction of the evidence: it was the case's keystone,'' Stein said.

Mar/15/2001 15:23 ET

For more stories from Bloomberg News, click here.

(C) Copyright 2001 Bloomberg L.P.

[nycnpbbkr]

Oh, yea, one more thing, that was a professional opinion or what a court of law would call, "expert testimony".

[nycnpbbkr]

Bob, as far as stocks go I have been a total enigma to all. I get called Shell's friend and shorters/bashers attack me over my clients, I guess that's what happens when you have the playbook, know the players and don't lie or post on your clients stocks. However, one thing is strikingly obvious to me is that with my NYC experience and twice the years in the business as A&P (and still having my licenses to show) I would have been the very best person to ever question the massive preponderance of SI professional Dick Tracy, x-con, stock basher types, yet I was doomed from the beginning on SI. What does that say about SI?

If you noticed on the CTRN thread I made the argument that Peter Tosto's 5 stocks increased within a month to an allegedly 1.2 billion because (and only because) a bunch of amateurs were dumb enough to have shorted the tightly held stocks of a x stockbroker while creating stock threads to tell everyone else to also. These "so called SI professionals" played a game with a client, friend of mine, and lost. I was about to have a payday which would have retired me however I didn't sell 9 figures worth of stock because SI shorters cried foul and had everyone call the SEC after their shorts went upside down. Funny part is that Tosto's stocks were totally worthless until SI shorter/bashers decided to short them. Tosto never posted about his stocks on the internet, in fact no one did but the shorters and then they cried to the law in the name of righteousness when his stocks went up.

The SEC flew me across the country to question me for 10 straight hours over the Tosto matter yet never charged me with a thing, what's that say about me? Still, till this day, I see SI shorter/bashers bragging that Tosto was their biggest claim to fame. That really makes me laugh, especially when I watched the whole thing evolve on SI and know the real truth, so does Pluvia for that matter.

I think SI is a terrible place and anyone that pays to post there is an ignorant fool that doesn't have the balls to pick up and leave a heavily biased stock posting site. The resumes of the fellers over at SI seem to be ones of E-traders that failed in their real jobs and are sitting home e-trading their life savings in IRA's. Having all the answers is easy for these SI Dick Tracys because their posts support their shorts in the same way that the hypster's posts support his longs. Then there are the other SI posters who play the game, lose, sing like canaries and then brag about getting caught and ratting out their associates on their SI profiles. This seems to be the fastest way to become a SI icon and to have all the SI sheep to trust you.

[SI Bob]

I don't believe SI Admin really appreciates the anger they create when they delete, censure,
suspend or terminate a poster.

There's definitely a lot of truth to that, and my realization of this will change my conduct where I go next.

Becoming numb to that was a long and slow process, aided in large part by the fact that warnings would result in major eruptions more than half the time. Eruptions that resulted in even worse violations. And dealing with spam more often than any other violation and personally not giving a tinker's damn what a bad spammer thought of how he was treated.

In a not-so-readily-apparent kind of way, that's another benefit of the chairman concept. In theory (and hopefully in practice), no one person (chairman or admin) gets so inundated as to become numb. And a more visible and quick "admin" presence (in the form of chairpersons acting as agents of the site) should, if handled correctly, keep violations comparatively low. On the other hand, if it's not handled correctly by the people empowered to use it, the admin's workload will be at least double what it would be without chairmen due to the resulting polarization and flamewars.

I think it's a concept that should work well if care is taken to ensure that it's applied properly. If, instead, it gets used to silence opinions, isn't taken seriously, used sparingly, or is applied subjectively, it'll destroy a site before it even gets rolling.

[nycnpbbkr]

Mixed feeling, Bob I don't believe SI Admin really appreciates the anger they create when they delete, censure, suspend or terminate a poster. I promised myself to speak out against SI for as long as I post or until SI's demise, whichever comes first.

When Viperchick attacked me she rounded up a who's who list of shorters/bashers to join her. Any sensible person could see that I created my first and only thread at SI in a flight away from Lisa, yet her shorter/basher cronies convinced rocket scientist Jill that I was the problem. It wasn't until later that all these shorters/bashers (Including TLC who is too embarrassed to admit that he was a member of this ignorant mob) and every other poster to SI realized that Lisa was the problem, yet my SI legacy is one of a tossed poster. I hold Jill forever responsible for that "hilarious" (in her words) move. I will never forget the pain she inflicted on me and now she must forever know that someone despises her because she killed his existence on a major Internet site for all the wrong reasons.

F. Goelo , you should have never deleted the post. When you did you adversely affect IHub, your stock and your thread. Besides that, you become what you despise the most.

[SI Bob]

However, I agree that quoting only one sentence of one of your e-mails may give a wrong impression, so
here is the rest of it

Ummm... That's the rest of my statements in that email. For all anyone knows, those comments (it's obvious I was getting rather irritated) could've been in response to simply "Hope your day's going well" or anything. Your emails leading up to that would be relevant, but see below....

I don't think it would be appropriate for you to quote from the e-mails I sent you in a professional capacity and in
confidence... If you object to my publishing excerpts of your e-mails to me, then I'll ask Matt to delete the posts...

No, it's fine. I've had to hold myself largely defenseless against lies in the past and know I will in the future. Believe it or not, it's really something one can get used to. If you don't want me to show what you've said to me in email, that's not a problem for me. Note that you were able to trust to me to ask first and not divulge without permission.

Like many other posters, I left SI because of you

No, you've never left SI.

I don't think you can dispute what I have written, except where it comes to my opinions and conclusions...

That's pretty good. hehe Kinda like "I always tell the truth, except on days ending with the letter 'Y'". <g>

If you'd rather have the last word now, have at it. I'm not going to continue further with a dialogue in which my hands are tied behind my back.

Regards,

Bob

[SI Bob]

It doesn't really reflect well on you when you cite only enough of any story to make yourself look good or someone else look bad.

You've quoted from one of my emails and inaccurately represented what you said that evoked that kind of response.

May I have your permission to quote from the 86 emails you sent to me (not counting PM's and emails that were processed by eGain or were forwarded to me by Jill or anyone else)?

Bob

[Poet]

[Poet]

Well I certainly hope you feel better after that ridiculous rant. Why you couldn't have done that privately or on one of your own penny stock hyping threads is a mystery.

I'll bet if it had been posted by one poster to another on your thread, you'd have deleted it. But I'm going to let it stand as a testament to your small-mindedness and twisted logic.

[SI Bob]

but will always remain a Subjective occupation tainted by the beliefs and prejudices of the Chairperson...

If that were true, it would spell the doom of either the chairperson concept or the site implementing it. I don't think it can remain true for that very reason. The power to delete relevant information (not the chairperson's definition of "relevant", but the classic "reasonable man's" definition used in courts) must be applied as objectively as possible because it takes only one abuse of it to strip a site of its CDA protection. There's no room for subjectivity. And "erring", while possibly a minor matter for someone who is only a member of a site, is a very major matter for the site for whom that member is acting as an agent.

You seem to claim you had none of these and were Impartial at all time on SI and I say: BS...

Being human, I'm sure it's impossible for me to be 100% objective, though I try to be.

An important difference is having no vested interest in what is and isn't said about a stock. Not that I'd be one to squelch someone who disagreed with me if I did have a position in the stock. It's a matter of ethics.

What I'm seeing, based on your own comments on the subject, is that it might not be a good idea for a person who has a vested interest in a stock to be able to ultimately decide what does and doesn't get said about it. Things like taking "erring" lightly, and being subjective.

So, whatever I do poorly, according to your perception, doesn't seem to affect the number of posts, which ultimately is the name of the game for iHUB management...

If I really believed that the number of posts is ultimately the name of the game here (quantity over quality -- the Raging Bull and Yahoo model) this would be my last post on this site. I don't believe it, though. Based on my conversations with the people responsible for this site, I believe the site is much more similar to SI than to RB or Yahoo.

Correction: The old SI. The same fair and conscientious enforcement of the rules (for the sake of the community) as SI has always had but with the only hands on the reins being those of competent folks who care about the community, like in the pre-GNET days of SI.

Bob, I haven't the time to be used as... a sounding board for the Chairperson concept, to see if it's worth incorporating in your next venture,

You're making an incorrect assumption. Personally, I'm reluctant to ever make assumptions and it still floors me when "stock people" do so as it's generally not a trait that's compatible with market success. Unless one can talk a lot of others into making the same assumptions, of course. <g>

so this will be my last post on the subject...

Based on your assumption, that's reasonable, so I thank you in advance for letting me have the last word on the subject. You've been quite helpful and I feel I have most of the information I needed, and what is lacking can be gained by continued observation.

Regards,

Bob

[SI Bob]

but was clearly included to advertise/spam his Website

Therein lies the difference in opinion. It's not "clear" to me that the intent was to advertise/spam. The contrary seems clear to me.

I and many others continue to believe that your personal sympathies and trading philosophy go to the short side

You and the "many others" you claim agree with you couldn't be more wrong. I *very* rarely short anything. I lack the intestinal fortitude and it's contrary to my nature.

that you have displayed that bias amply while working for SI..

Yeah, I've heard that before. If I suspend a tout, I favor shorts. If I suspend a short, I'm letting people get screwed by touts. If I suspend a Republican, I'm a Democrat. If I suspend a Christian, I'm an Atheist. I actually had someone email me after a suspension once and call me a racist, as if I could tell their race or cared to by the way they typed. Geez.

That someone says a thing that doesn't make it true.

Most people could accept that their suspension was for good reason and was for something they did. Every once in a while, though, you get someone who thinks their stuff couldnt *possibly* stink and if they get suspended, it's because of some conspiracy. Heck, I had a small group of touts once (publicly) threatening to sue me (I told them "Bring it on!") because they claimed to have incontrovertible evidence that I was a key component in a shorting conspiracy with ties to organized crime and was actually paid per-suspension by the mob.

It was either about MTEI or ZSUN. Can't remember which. I'm pretty certain MTEI no longer trades. Anyone happen to know the status of ZSUN?

Of course, that speculation was purely fantasy, and a way to sucker other people into their scammy stock by making me look like the bad guy and them the noble good guys fighting for a truly wonderful company.

When someone labels a nay-sayer as a "basher" or comes up with some incredible conspiracy theory to explain why they were suspended for spamming, etc, it really speaks volumes for their research abilities and/or motivations regarding the stock they've fallen in love with.

You were paid for doing the Job, while here, no Chairperson is compensated, so if we err on one side or the other, so be it: we don't claim to be Pros...

Anyone who has the ability to delete posts is acting as an agent of the site on which they delete the posts. Whether they're paid or not, the site assumes the same responsibility for their actions. It's extremely important that an agent of a public forum not err one way or the other when it comes to discussions about stocks.

I'm checking out the "chairperson" concept because I'm not so sure it's working in reality as well as it would in theory. A "chairperson" having a "so be it" attitude about the possibility that they're "erring" and deleting relevant posts whose presence or absence could influence shareholders and potential shareholders, indicates that there's a pretty serious problem with the execution of the concept.

iHUB wanted to be different and not carry a repeat of the garbage threads found on SI or RB,

I had no idea SI was as overrun by garbage as Yahoo and RB. I thought iHub wanted to have the clean interface of the old SI while emulating the overall quality of contributions found on SI.

completely controlled by the Shorters, with the complicity of the Admin, who refuses to enforce its Terms of Use, such as the spamming of completely irrelevant posts or certain personal attacks...

That opinion is incorrect, despite it being presented as if it were fact.

But I would ask that if you really do have evidence of evil intent and misdeeds on my part, as you repeatedly claim, that you give the evidence to back up those statements so I can refute them or so others can decide for themselves rather than just take you at your word.

Come to think of it, I was told that you personally don't allow posts that present statements without also backing up those statements via internet links in the same post. Is this true? Shouldn't you hold yourself to the same standards, if it is?

BTW, my little Demo is bearing its fruits...

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=15459855

I don't understand. "Demo"? Didn't you see my answer? I said that since I'm no longer the admin there, it would be inappropriate for me to give my opinion on that matter. Does my not answering lead you to "assume" what my answer would be? Before you "assume", ask yourself if I've ever suspended Anthony for any reason at all.

If I've never suspended him, your allegations about me might have a little more credibility, although it still wouldn't prove them true. But if I've ever suspended him, your allegations can be dismissed out of hand because there's proof that they're wrong. So, have I?

and I'll soon be able to draw my conclusions before it's all over for the SI Model...

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=15479095

LOL! I suppose you think that's news to me.

http://www.sibob.com/siposts.htm
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=15310843

But, I sure don't think it's the SI model that's flawed and is causing its death. I hope not, because iHub is a nearly identical model.

In my opinion, the main problem with SI's model is managers that see it as nothing but a stepping-stone to bigger and better things within a dotbomb company, who care nothing about the community it depends on, and makes changes to it without ever giving any consideration to the people who use it.

The manager they'd hired only a month or two before laying off a bunch of people (new manager included) actually "got it" and would've done extremely well for the site.

I see Matt as being comparable to her, but with the added difference of having very competent programmers working with him who he doesn't force to do things the wrong way. Matt understands online communities pretty well and definitely cares about them.

Which is why I'm checking out this site. You might say I'm kinda kicking the tires.

Other than a ticking sound from under the hood (could be loose valves or a time-bomb -- trying to figure that out, which is the reason I'm posting to you), this is a car that's in pretty darned good condition.

Bob

[SI Bob]

1) Your first post was deleted because you were Spamming a Link to your Website in it and you were told why it was
deleted... Yet, you posted it again with the same Spam...

Apparently there are major differences in the way people define "spam". Personally, I've never considered a general link to one's site as part of a "signature" closing to a message to be spam if the body of the post was relevant to current discussions and not just veiled enticement to check out the website. As I've said before "intentions" mean a lot. cS has often used that link as a signature and it's been pretty obvious that his intention isn't to spam thread to generate hits for himself.

So, if he reposted his post, without the link to his site (which is a must-read IMO), you wouldn't delete it?

BTW, your commentary about SI Admin favoring bashers/shorters is extremely misguided. SI is neutral when judging people based on their opinion of a stock. If anything, you tend to be biased against shorts and "bashers" and since SI doesn't share your bias, they look to you like they're favoring them.

I still don't see how someone who is short a stock and expresses their (negative) opinions justifying their position is somehow more "evil" than someone who is long a stock expressing their (positive) opinions justifying their position.

[nycnpbbkr]

Don't ya just love how Jimmy Crack Corn limited BB symbol nobitqzE has 168,975 posts to it's thread and IBM has 37, think somethin going on there?

[Mattu]

Please check your e-mail.

MB

[cOUSIN SHORTY]

This is my last message on this site.

Why? I posted a question relating to material facts to a principal of a company that trades on the BB and the post was removed by the "Chairman" of that thread. I then posted it again and the second post was removed and the "Chairman" implied I was shorting the stock.

I have no intention of being a part of whatever is going on here.