Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
This thread makes no bones about it. Only people who dislike me are welcome. Only negative commentary will be allowed. Only "real" iHub members welcome (whatever the heck that means).
Well I'm curious. You've stated before that you try to be as fair as possible and apply the rules equally to everyone.
If you're going to allow a board that is specifically aimed at bashing/critizing you, are you going to allow other boards that bash/criticize other people on IHUB?
Last time I'm indulging you on this thread. Period.
You keep making posts to me about "I owe you a post",
You apparently *still* haven't read or understood the iBox for the "badbob" thread. It says pretty clearly that in any 6-hour period in which you make one or more posts in that thread, you need to make a stock-related post somewhere in that same 6-hour period.
There was a 6-hour period in which you did post to that thread, but didn't make a stock-related post anywhere during the same period or between that time and my last PM to you on the matter. However, if memory serves, I also did tell you that your recently-created thread for SEC regs or something like that is something I consider having filled that thread's requirement, even if belatedly.
You IMO are on a vendetta, and are looking for any excuse to justify what is your real motive, and that is to find a way to either terminate or suspend me.
Oh, so we're back to ignoring the fact that you shouldn't even be here at all, but I gave you a second chance and let you back in, eh?
But understand this: If I wanted to boot you off the site, I wouldn't be "looking for any excuse". I would just do it. Do you doubt that?
I wouldn't need an "excuse", but if I did, you've given me plenty. Including your stubborn refusal to quit disrupting this Q&A thread with your constant '"issues" with me.
Joemoney started a new thread where only negative opinions about me will be allowed. Go there.
get off your lazy butt and look in my profile before you make accusations that are unfounded.
I did. I don't make unfounded accusations. And I'd appreciate it if you would leave out the inappropriate displays of disrespect ("get off your lazy butt").
If you change requirements about being a member of IHUB, make it public, and make it for everyone..
I do, but here's my reply to this anyway: The people whose names are on my paychecks don't tell me how to do my job, so I don't see why you should think it's your God-given right to do so and I find it more than a little offensive.
Now take it to Joe's thread. Feel free to copy this message to that thread and reply there. But I'm not tolerating any more of this nonsense here.
Ok this is what I have been looking for. This is on topic and should be carefully reviewed by the old guard. Bob got Kudos on these two posts. I think if given enough time he will show he is not trying to recreate SI here.
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=101681
http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=75548
These are both Kudos to me.
:=) Gary Swancey
I think it is a glitch because sometimes I can and sometimes I can;t ... right now everything is showing.
:=) Gary Swancey
Joe, I believe that this title is more in line with the topic of the thread. I do not even like Bob's name in it to be honest with you. We are not going to humble to anyone and we are here to protect the IHUB concept like a watch dog. So this is really the Old Guard (Pre-bob and this could be named "IHUB Old Guard Watch Dog) I am surprised he kept the IHUB ticker, I won't have. That should be saved for IHUB specifically. I was a bit surprised you got it.
Now to me I like IHUBWATCH myself as the ticker.
This is my opinion but IHUB should mean Informative Harmoniously Understood Boards.
Please understand though I will test Bob as he will me fairness is all we should be concerned and not an obsession of Bob. That undermines IHUB as well. If Bob is on the same team it will come out soon enough but we have to give him time.
Of course we can discuss he progress so that my article does not become a reality.
:=) Gary Swancey
JMX helped me fix the board problem.
thanks! We can see all posts now.
joe
the posts are cut off in the message list, but they are not deleted. If you use the "previous" button, you can see the first 12 posts.
marty, when you repost on this board one more time you will become our second director, that is, if you would like to.
thanks,
joe
ATTENTION, CAN EVERYONE SEE ALL THE POSTS ON THIS BOARD?
is the board cut off at post 13 or 12? do you guys get this error too? gary?
joe
OK, now I'm angry.
Bob has changed the name of our thread. I will not take this from him.
joe
bob at this point in time I feel that our PM's need to be taken public. This thread I feel is an appropiate thread for our discussion. You keep making posts to me about "I owe you a post", and I keep telling you I don't. I can see where this is leading, this is the same kind of 'stuff" you pulled at si, and for which people were reinstated when they spoke with ethan caldwell (legal councel) about the situation concerning your terminations of them.
Here is the response I was going to make privately, but at this point in time feel necessary to make public. You IMO are on a vendetta, and are looking for any excuse to justify what is your real motive, and that is to find a way to either terminate or suspend me. If I keep this private, I am of the opinion that you will eventually get around to doing what you want to do, and you're going to then be in the position of being able to give the same one sided reasons that you always do, without the other person being able to make a sound, because they be gone. The old si bob just can't get rid of his spots. can you? :
bob,Your stock posting requirements are specific to that thread, (badbob) I do not see that requirement anywhere else on this site. I already posted to you that I have no more interest in posting on your badbob thread, which at this point is nothing more than a bob rah rah/off topic/nonsensical thread. I HAVE made posts on stock threads, get off your lazy butt and look in my profile before you make accusations that are unfounded.I am not going to report to you like a 10 year old, everytime I make a stock post
If you change requirements about being a member of IHUB, make it public, and make it for everyone..
And if you are adamant about this being a stock only site get rid of the extraneous threads, or make the posting requirements for each of those threads, also. I have a feeling that you're going to create some ill will about all of this though, because I have a feeling people don't really want to be answerable to you as to the quantity of (stock) posts they make, and have the burden of running back to you like a little puppy dog, begging for your approval.
I will be gone for a while, so if you respond, don't expect any reply until I have the time.
If you read the suggested Ibox it complies that if you are going to delete posts you need to let everyone know. Full disclosure since this is a personal thread and not stock related.
:=) Gary Swancey
gary,
i do not understand what Bob wants me to change on the iBox. I see no problem with it.
joe
Refuting the hit generating ploy.
Was refuting one of the vessels that destroyed SI and will it be the catalyst to undermine the concept of IHUB?
Yes I believe so since I am a victim of this concept. bias admin practices can be done effectively using the refuting card as a way or rather ploy to undermine TOS. This has been so well developed that anarchy prospered on SI till everyone left and the only voices on SI are those that no longer can get into verbal warfare on reckless accusations. Just because someone says something (the SI factor) the excuse or concept was/is to refute it. Understand it makes no difference whether if there is true only that refuting will create traffic and activity. Under this refuting concept does not require duty or responsibilty to even remotely have an underlying basis to anything you say. All you have to do is reword the rules of engagement and you have it.
By changing the refuting card basic wording it becames a useful play or ploy as SI is proof it can be played very effectively. Where the refuting concept is the normal manner for say religion concepts, political concepts, heck every concept in our society. What SI did was bring it to a new level.
The destruction of SI may have been the refuting of personal attacks to increase its hit ratio. Under the SI regime people just let anything that was said stand and should excuse the bias admin practice and selective application to TOS by asking other to just refute the claim. Hey it worked just like it was suppose to because the basis was to get hits. Also the TOS was totally undermined as was thread diruption as was civil posting. In other words it became a war zone.
So now SI was nothing more than memebers screaming HELP, SI regime saying what is the problem just refute it and in the end SI was nothing more than disrupted threads and personal attacks reign supreme. It did not matter to the apparently because SI had hits and false figures for traffic. But SI was on target with its hits. Reckless regard for the truth reign terror on SI and its members and still does. This hit getting tactic was designed even further so that the burden of proof was not on the one making the claim! That's right SI went as far as to change the basis for refuting. Now this “Bad mouth all you want” and "refuting" concept is attempting to invade IHUB and undermine its very principal.
To even further fester anarchy, refuting was designed and refined to violate its members. All Si did was found it acceptable for the attackers to demand that the target provide proof to refute the claim made against them. That's right all you have to do is change who should provide burden of proof. In our society the burden of proof is on the person making the claim but not on SI. That is not part of any and that would cause full application of the TOS. Never do they attackers provide proof or substance that would hold up in court to support the reckless claim(s). Just plain and simple spinning of information and word play. Even further to fester this was the concept well what might me out of line in one place is not in another.
I have always screamed foul on this refuting ideology for a long as I am a victim to this concept. This is the basis for SI’s anarchy and innocent people and companies have had to suffer through numerous attacks of reckless claims and never once any proof to the claim was provided and the refuting turned to fights that caused hits. SI was suppose to be about stocks and slowly the focus was turned to claims being made and no underlying basis for them either. Of course with a demand for clarification (refute please) the TOS was totally undermined.
Here prior to Bob if you were going to make a claim then state the underlying basis or it got deleted thus squelch the anarchy activists. Even now look at what is happening to IHUB. The activists are screaming foul. They want to be able to say what they what when they want without any basis or duty or anything. They want refuting. But be careful on the refuting because if you dare word it wrong it is a personal attack to yur attacker and thus suspension.
Next the harassing card. The hardest thing to prove and requires a lot of historical proof. Another hit generating tactic to undermine peace, justice and proper admin practices..
:=) Gary Swancey
Joe, 1st order of business is to comply with Bob's request so the Ibox needs to be revised. I would like to suggest a some items:
This board was created because admin Bob has possibly created his own little world and the opinions of the real iHub members must be expressed on SPECIFIC ISSUED that possibly could undermine the origianl concept of IHUB, which is why we came here to escape the anarchy of SI. We have rights to our own opinions, and this board is meant in no way to harass, degrade, or reject admin Bob.
Nor is the board a bashing site or personal attack thread. If you wish to join in that is fine but have a solid on topic opinion with a solid underlying basis. No sly pokes or clever word games to disrupt.
Since this is basically a personal board dedicated to montioring the concept changes of IHUB to ensure that that IHUB remains totally within its original concept, we reserve the right to delete any post we feel deserves to be deleted. Also we reserve the right to changes or modify any rules as to the posting here as neccessary so this thread can remain on topic and stimulation IHUB to meaning Informative Harmoniously Understood Board.
Please read the post that started invoked this thread: http://www.investorshub.com/beta/read_msg.asp?message_id=101205
We also need directors to support the cause. Please PM me if your interested.
All we want on our threads is peace, justice, and unbiased governing.
Thanks,
Joe
You can modify it anyway you wish and I will support what ever version you wish to post as the guideline.
:=) Gary Swancey
Evening Bob, I agree with you but I do have some issues with the stock threads. I realize both sides of the story need to be out there but this is not SI and this thread will probably heat up. But anarchy will not come to this thread.
This thread is where you can see feedback on where the old guard that came here feels about what has happened and changed.
I am not going to allow anyone to attack anyone. Issues will be very specific. If you make certain rules then I will most likely have to resign as chair of stock threads because the rules changed. Where as before you came I could as IR do exactly what I was doing here and I am getting legal opinion on this newest revision that is forth coming. But as an IR it is my job to keep the facts straight and NOT allow hype or bash of ridiculous false information. This I am going to cover also as a specific post here.
This is not a bash Bob site and I will not be a part of that but this is to discuss admin practices.
This started being a site that was moderated and basically not just some free wheeling public forum fraught with anarchy. So the old guard (People post bob coined by BOP) are very worried and justifiably so.
:=) Gary Swancey
Ok lets take the possible ways to undermine IHUB one at a time. Like refuting the basis that destroyed SI. BOP refers to those of us that escape the true evil and anarchy of SI came here for a safe haven.
However take Jenna. I am watching as she refutes and gets deleted. I notice and pay very close attention of how it comes about. Seems her long time stalkers are getting away with murder on some threads. But I am not the chair and respect each Chairs right to delete as they wish.
This is a private forum that is publicly viewed. These are small communities and each has it own Chair that control. I still have not understood why a single deus was brought on board to oversea private threads. Every private thread is public and open to the public and you do not have to do like RB and apply to the Chair just to post.
If you want we can take this one point at a time. But this is a public forum of moderated threads. I will fight any war to undermine the chair. I will fight any removal of a chair.
:=) Gary Swancey
gary, please feel free to admin as you see fit as director on this thread.
thanks,
joe
NEW DIRECTOR
I would like to welcome our new director, Georgia Bard AKA Gary Swancey, the one who gave me the idea for this thread.
Thanks,
Joe
Joe if you feel that you and I will have a synergistic relationship and we are both on the same page then I would be honored.
I warn you though I am an advocate for the concept of IHUB. I do not want it undermined in any capacity what so ever.
I have a lot to say and I am watching the SI anarchy specialists and the absurd way they are out to get their way here as they have had on SI for so long. If you would like we can take it point by point on how they plan to accomplish over time.
They will need Bob's help to do this and it will take a few victories. I know somewhat how they plan to do it. I am pretty sure you do too.
:=) Gary Swancey
gary,
would you like to become a director?
joe
Attention
We have reason to believe that Bob has deleted our board from the "New Threads" list on the front page. If this is not a
technical error, he may be trying to silence us. We must let him know what we think.
Thanks
joe
Joe,
Two things:
1. Right-click the link above that says "Home", then select "Open in New Window". Got it open? Now, look in the "New Threads list" on the homepage. Read what it says. On my system it says "New Stock Boards". That was recently changed to include only STOCK boards. As in boards that are relevant on a STOCK discussion site. Might want to tell the other person(s) in your "We" to do the same. Your pennance is to all of you to get on the phone in a conference call and chant "There is no conspiracy" 20 times. <g>
2. As you may or may not know, I posted earlier today that I was going to change the rules so that if someone wants to run a board that isn't about the market at all (a "personal" board), they can impose any kind of rules they want. Actually, I thought I was planning to change the sites rules to that, but found out that it'd already been much that way.
Although I have to admit I get varying versions of it. For example, I've had people tell me that the rules were always that they could delete anything they want on any thread, stock or otherwise, to which I've already replied "On stock boards? Not on my watch!" It was Matt (I prefer to get my facts from the horse's mouth when possible) who confirmed for me that it's been this way for "personal" boards, which cannot stock boards.
Well, someone whose opinion I always respect and sometimes agree with wrote to me tonight to basically tell me that I'm nuts and shouldn't have a hands-off policy in ANY category as there would eventually be people who would take advantage of that in a very bad way. He told me that someone will figure out that they can start a personal thread, talk about stocks in it, and delete any posts that disagreed with them.
I told him he was nuts. Nobody's going to do that. And I also told him that I'm willing to give it a try and see if it gets abused or if someone eventually proves to me that the idea itself is not workable.
Congrats, Joe! I figured I'd be waiting months.
Now, in case anyone's seeing this post because I'm on their peoplemarks, can someone defend the "Do whatever you want." idea being applied to any category of threads in light of this thread?
This thread makes no bones about it. Only people who dislike me are welcome. Only negative commentary will be allowed. Only "real" iHub members welcome (whatever the heck that means).
Input anyone?
And, Joe? Don't even think about deleting this post or any replies to it. I may have a lot of smileys and grins and laughs in my posts, but this has never been a "game" to me, and you just caught my attention in a major way.
Interesting ... this thread was brought to my attention and boom the posts disappear as I was reading them. SO I decided to post this message to see if it is my computer and has all the posts disappeared.
:=) Gary Swancey
Many of the new threads of being deleted, sorry, must be a technical error.
joe
Attention
We have reason to believe that Bob has deleted our board from the "New Threads" list on the front page. If this is not a technical error, he may be trying to silence us. We must let him know what we think.
Thanks
joe
The requirement is to share similar opinions with other members who are not in favor of Bob's presence.
sorry,
joe
That is correct. I have nothing against Bob. If that is an absolute requirement, than I am not the right guy for the job.
so you have nothing against bob? eom
I do not have anything against Bob. I like him professionally and personally.
But I am a fair person and I don't believe in silencing people.
I disagree with GA Bard's assessment of Bob, but I agree with his right to say it. I also believe in the right of people to disagree with GA Bard.
that's my pitch
you posted this JMX,
You linked one of my posts as one that was critical of Bob. Just to be clear, I think that if iHub management wants the site to be a successful money making venture with quality participants, that Bob's presence is the best way to ensure this.
Do you fit the opinion required to become a founder?
Joe
Please tell me why you want to become a director. I want the best people to become directors. Do you have something against bob?
I'm taking your application seriously.
Joe
The Post That Started This Thread.
The following was written by Gary Swancey. Thanks Gary!
"IHUB = Immediately Humble Unto Bob
I know I have been silent for some time but there is a reason. When I first heard SI Bob was coming to IHUB I became concerned especially for the peace and tranquillity and knowing the only thing left on SI were the stalking off-topic bullies that are dismay and confusion and merely hit generators. My opinion as a small voice in cyberspace is to question that which I believe is harmful to the people. Thus this composition is based on the scar from the character assassination carried out with extreme prejudice on SI since 1998 under the bias administration that allowed such nonsense to carry on. IHUB was originally a vision for people to escape the turmoil and havoc of SI and Raging Bull thus I rip down my sleeve and show the branding of the cyber-numeral 8 on my right shoulder and invoke Law 7. IHUB should be returned to the people.
As through our history destructive forces have arisen to pursue total world domination. It is the quest of every evil egomaniac from Hitler and his holocaust to the sick cartoon character Stewie Griffin. Where Stewie is a one-year-old little boy of truest evil, Hilter and others grew their armies. The bottom line and primary goal today is to control and completely dominate over all Cyber-Mankind. Until this objective comes to fruition, anyone or anything that interferes with the grand plan shall be destroyed.
In 1997 an atomic bomb dropped on the stock market and thus a new era of information exploded. As in the movie “The Postman” a New World order would arise out of this lawless Chaos like the Xerox Salesman who gains total control and becomes the law of the land. Intelligent people have asked and wondered who would arise out of the mysterious darkness of Cyberspace to be the self-appointment supreme Emperor of the Cyber-Cosmos that would have the army (cronies) to subjugate all who dare to oppose this newest deus with egotistical real-life illusions of Granduer?
The war for total domination of Cyber-World has been raging for since 1997 as documented in John Emshwiller’s book, “Scam Dogs and Momo Mamas.” Within this simply written publication John Emshwiller articulately conveys and documents the controversial battles for power, influence and control of Cyber-Turf. Is this a classic and prelude basically of events to come as the book shows the self-appointed emperors along with their rises and falls.
Lets face it, the bottom line to a chat site is advertising dollars. The more hits you have the more the site can make claim to fame. It does not matter about the topic or the quality of content, it only matters about hits. Thus comes the controversy factor, which basically is designed for the more the merrier. Truth, facts and fair play does not matter. The verbal warfare is what is needed so the hits can escalate. Thus a site only needs an army of renegade posters to secure their market share such as: harassing stalkers, relentless bashers, urban legend generators, whiners, libelous innuendo experts, unlawful insinuations, abusive rhetorical manipulators, invasive privacy revealers, tortuous spin doctors, and there are more. Having an army of these types taking advantage of total unchecked disruption can easily increase the hit count to a site. What is lost is the quality.
This is compounded and can get totally out of control by a peacemaker with the opinion and power to enforce it like bad mouthing a stock all you want. Negative opinions are just as appropriate as positive ones and truth is not the issue. The excuse is simply refute the and refute it over and over and over again until it becomes urban legend and the truth will be off topic. This creates activity, traffic and most of all hits. However, one shroud is to limit the defense so the attack can get out of control. The defender can only post a limited amount but the gang of disrupters can overwhelm the thread or visa versa so the hit count escalates but does not allow equal time for the defense or offense.
But this type of distressing attacks and disruption weights on people. After a while decent people eventually take enough of it and leave after exhaustingly seeking relief of some nature from the peace-keepers. Thus losing the main posters and their following the site will die as in the fate of Silicon Investor (SI). Realizing that people had had enough and searching for a safe haven, IHUB recruited key people to test the beta site. Investors HUB (IHUB) became such a sanctuary for those that were tired of the nonsense. People wanted to return to the principals of IRC and the features of SI. To answer this outcry of the people, the concept was a Chairman of the thread that would have the power to keep order. As the site grew, a solid reputation began to grow as each community had its own leadership thus peace and tranquillity became the underlying basis for sharing information. Soon little communities sprout up as they try to keep the focus on information. The people had their sanctuary.
Invaders of nonsense were dealt with swiftly by the Chairmen. Bashers, spin-doctors, FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) fabricators plus other attackers were not allowed to spew nonsense without an underlying basis. Multiple aliases were swiftly exposed and IHUB began to demonstrate that it was not the hits but the quality of information that was first and foremost. IHUB was becoming the people’s choice. The downfall of SI is a prime example of not addressing these situations. Even though the character assassinations and personal attacks was mainly responsible for getting SI’s hit ratio up, it was the lack of implementing TOS and then doing it only selectively that became the waterloo for SI. In the end, SI was doomed because these relentlessly stalking cronies that do not share stock information nor provide due diligence nor any other type investment rhetoric or research, other than blaming the Internet posters for failures of companies were in full control. They are/were there to generate trouble and thus destroyed SI.
In March 2001, the controversies on SI were no longer a problem and the hit ratio was destroyed. Basically, people were fed up and had moved away from the heckling and ridiculous lack of or rather bias administration TOS procedures. Of course a lot of white washing was spun to account for the exodus from SI. However, the army of hit creators only had themselves to post to in the end and thus SI cut back on the peace-keepers. Instead of keeping peace and dealing with these hit creators SI found itself alone for the crowd simply went elsewhere. No more need for a peacekeeper.
Again, IHUB was an alternative from the bashers, stalkers, bullies, urban legend generators, character assassinations and total pandemonium architects. As the Internet posters searched for a site where some control to these evil hit creators could be found, such a place most felt would be IHUB. But alas a sad day for the people came when the main controlling force and adminstrative icon of SI came to IHUB and the SI hit creator cronies followed to now conquered IHUB. With SI laying raped and stripped clean on a bloody battlefield in the after math of hit creators thus a new campaign motto echoes through the endless void of cyberspace. Immediately Humble Unto Bob! (IHUB)
As I watch this newest regime invade and establish its new laws and power over the site, I am reminded again of the Postman. As Bob the computer salesman flexes his muscles and totally appears to be undermining the original concept and promises that were used to get pioneers to the site to establish small communities, I envision the invasion of the small communities by Bethlehem the Xerox salesman. The pushing and bullying of people now suddenly disrupts the once peaceful community. The good guys attempting to defend the onslaught of the new invading cronies of hit creators are eventually dealt with by a swift sword and punishment for daring to defend one’s self and maintain the integrity of the site. Thus the new regime flexes its muscles.
Watching Francios, one of the original recruited Chairman stand up for what he believe to be forthright and did not humble unto Bob, was then strung up as General Bethlehem did one prisoner in one scene. There Bethlem read the "Laws of Eight" but the comparison is quite unique as Francois met with the terminating sword of Bob:
“The Postman” “Laws of Eight”
1. You will obey orders without question.
2. Punishment shall be swift.
3. Mercy is for the weak.
4. Terror will defeat reason.
5. Your allegiance is to the clan.
6. Justice can be dictated.
7. Any Clansman may challenge for leadership of the Clan.
8. There is only one penalty - DEATH
Could it be this same “Laws of Eight” have now come into existence on IHUB with the new regime of “Bob’s World?” Immediately Humbled Unto Bob or face the “Laws of Eight”
1. You will obey Bob’s orders without question.
2. Punishment shall be swift.
3. Mercy is for the weak.
4. Terror will defeat reason. (cronies will handle this)
5. Your allegiance is to BOB!
6. Justice can be dictated. (Bias Administration Practices)
7. NO ONE may challenge for leadership, influence or turf in Bob’s World
8. There is only one penalty – TERMINATION
When I confronted Bob, I made a statement to see if I could get a confirmation, “that let the evil do whatever they want and the good guys when they complain get nailed.
Welcome to Bob;s world.”
In his arrogant style Bob replies, “Actually, the last part of that is more accurate than you intended.” Thus the confirmation that IHUB is basically now “Bob’s World.” He continues with his reasoning for the first part as “The fact that someone says another is evil and wrong doesn't necessarily make it so, in my experience.” Thus the cronies reign on and create hits since evil cannot be defined and thus the battlefield for control is now established.
Also the reasoning that was read to Francois before Bob’s sword terminated Francios’ existence was only 6 of the “Laws of 8” or was it.
Effective immediately, your account on Investors Hub is terminated. The reasons for this action are:
1. Continued abuse of the CoB feature. This is a violation of Law 6 the Justice can be dictated. Fighting the cronies of disruption and there relentless attacks, spins, personal attacks and even posting his private accounts from SI and RB very slyly only caused the defense to become emotion enough to sign his own death warrant in accordance with Law 6. Of course the cronies are left to rain terror on the next target as Law 8 is executed by Bob on the target.
2. Continued personal attacks on me despite my very clear warnings against it. A clear and distinct violation of Law 5 to have total allegiance is to BOB! Also a violation to Law 7 because Francois dared to expose the bias tactics of Bob!
3. The almost exclusively destructive nature of your participation since reinstatement from your previous suspension. Direct Violation to Law 1 for not being totally obedient and Immediately Humbling Unto Bob! Which invoked Law 2 & 3 where punishment was swift and no mercy thus establishing the invoking of Law 6 because Law 4 was strategically used to get the advantage over Francois. But also Law 7 for daring to contest Bob’s reign of bias and unfair administrative practices Law 6 thus resulting in Law 8.
4. Overall conduct very unbefitting a Chairperson on the site, including personal attacks on me and others.
Again by allowing the situation to get him justly emotional this caused a direct violation of numerous Laws and now suddenly there is a befitting conduct Laws. I guess the Laws of engagement change also, of which neither have been published or made know to anyone. But by defending against the cronies and not allowing their hit creating disruption to fester, Francios’ conduct is now selectively being use as an excuse to exercise Law 8. Where maybe a suspension would calm him down. Regardless of fairness, this sudden conduct law establishes the underlying basis that there are no Chairmen anymore only the KING CHAIRMAN BOB! Thus Law 7 is violated and Law 8 executed.
5. Continuing the "Bash Bob" theme on the Q&A thread despite very clear warnings to everyone in general and you specifically. Violation of Law 1 & 5 though nothing was done to stop the same on Francois or the off topic attacks by the hit creating cronies.
6. Continued harassment of me personally. Again Law 1 and 5 caused the effective judgment and execution of of Law 8. But for anyone but Bob this has to be endured under normal chat sites, which is one main benefit that IHUB allowed.
Now with Francois dead, the cronies can now regroup and seek out for another target to gain control of Cyber-World as the bias tactics continues using the historical tactics of SI. Thus absolute chaos has come to IHUB and makes you wonder if IHUB knew the turmoil and how the site would change under this newest regime and thus the creation of Bob’s World and the “Laws of 8.” The influx of the hit creating cronies that only cause total disarray, dismay and harassment that have gone unchallenged until the target is eventually executed under law 8, has floursihed SI and now follow to invade IHUB to reek havoc.
The once peaceful society and unique concept appear to have been totally undermined and IHUB over night has transformed into the perils of SI, which caused people to leave. SI is a desert in Cyber-World and the once fruitful and growing society of IHUB is being overrun with bullies gaining control. Harmony has been replaced with CHAOS. Facts and solid information is being reciprocated with attacks, innuendo, insinuation, fabrication and attacks.
As I became furious over the frame and demise that was so well planned against Francios, I like “The Postman” entered the battlefield challenging the unfair and bias tactics that lead to the malicious execution of Francios. Just like in “The Postman” I shouted who I was and I claimed Law 7 to challenge this newest world dominance takeover of justice being dictated and reason replace with terror. Just like General Bethlehem, Bob merely conveyed the classic, “HUH?” He forgets the scars I wear from the turmoil and character assassination that he allowed through bias administration practices on my attackers, not to mention others who suffered from the same bias practices. However, Jill was the only relief I recieved.
He forgets his blatant tactics of logic and bias ideas that cause people so much grief and eventual escaped seeking an alternative site thus leaving SI. He forgets the entire harm he festered and allowed so the cronies could gain full control without ramifications for stalking, personal attacks, posting off topic, innuendoes, etc. He forgets that SI grew in posts because of the dismay and personal attacks for control of Cyber-World under his regime that ran off everyone good and only the cronies were left to fight among themselves. He forgets that people when they have been wronged do not forget those that had the power to stop every violation of TOS never once even justified any corrective action.
But the victims and their cyber-scars do remember the suspensions for defending and the cyber-scars of the attacks and the hours of defending. Guilty until proven innocent reign supreme and even then once proven innocent, the cronies are allowed to continue the urban legend attacks unchecked. This unchecking caused the stock talk sites to become personal attack boards not about the stock anymore except for the initial attack on the company, which later spread to a character assassination of a long. Thus the threads of SI were about attacking individuals and the defense or refuting, which eventually created mayhem but the hit count was effectively stimulated.
I learnt a few things in declaring war on this new regime. There are no Chairmen only pawns to a DICTATOR, an ultimate unchecked power and by his standards whatever they are and can change as needed, he can use “Befitting Conduct” so the cronies can fester and gain absolute control. Also if anyone dares to challenge this new regime then your right to post will be limited and thus the bottom line is to eventually silence you and if you do not go silent thus execution of Law 8. This is “Bob’s World” and you will humble unto him or face Law 8.
It is a sad day when Matt with a truly heartfelt for posters looking to escape the misery that most faced on SI has now only undone the very concept and thus Immediately Humbling Unto Bob has undermined the entire concept and purpose of his vision. As the mayhem festers, Matt has to realize he has a major problem or maybe hits is all that is important and not the quality and tranquillity of the site with the chairman concept totally undermined.
What was once a free and objective site is now the haven for the lifeless hit generating cronies and unlike “The Postman” this newest regime is getting paid. Wonder how many hits and Law 8s will be executed, as with all total world domination scenarios, before “Bob’s World” returns back to the original concept and to the people. People came here originally to escape that which has now followed the logic, arrogance and bias practices of the new administration.
I call it as I see it and Francios should have gotten a suspension at worse case but not termination. I feel Bob has no right to undermine the original concept and this is not Bob’s world. IHUB for made as a successful alternative to other sites for the people. Let’s hope that it returns to the people soon and this is merely and over dramatization.
:=) Gary Swancey"
Followers
|
7
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
88
|
Created
|
05/11/01
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators Georgia Bard |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |