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.
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.
I refuse to leave the jailhouse...
and submit to the censorship of Il Duce (otherwise known as the evil Snackman).
Besides, I'm busy casting Wavoid Nation and it's quiet in here except for the lawyer wannabes constantly braying.
Casting thus far:
WAVE Systems officers:
Stephen K. Sprague - Chris Farley
Gerard Feeney - Woody Allen
WAVOID Cult members:
Snackman - Rod Steiger (think Last Days of Mussolini)
Barge - Sam Kinison
24601 - Alan Alda
WAVOID Cult Facilitators:
Matt from IHUB - Sylvester Stallone (in Judge Dredd form)
Note: Obviously, dead people are eligible.
P.S. to Matt: You might want to inform Il Duce that the person he is accusing of being HhH, namely Howard Golden, is obviously not me. Perhaps you could perform some magic stunt to demonstrate the obvious to him in a scientific manner - like ISP addresses or something. I caution you to limit yourself to one sylable words, however, because otherwise he will accuse you of being a pointy-headed liberal.
Thank you, wannabe...
I do like ta josh a bit. No doubt you have identified the person I've chosen to play the part of Barge in my upcoming movie - Wavoid Nation.
Ya gotta be patient with this. Signature rant comes at the back end...
[Suppressed Sound Link]
P.S. Tough to get on a roll when Sheriff Matt sticks ya with 3-a-day.
Wavoid Nation: The movie. Snackman will be...
played by this gentleman...
[Suppressed Sound Link]
For the part of Barge, refer to the post to which this message responds. Three HhH points to the first to identify the voice.
eamonn, old boy...
time to face facts. Wavoids are not a community. They are a CULT. I been sayin it for goin on five years now, and maybe you don't like hearin it, but that don't make it any less true. You folks accepted Il Duce to run yer forum. Educated people like you should know better. (In fact, you do know better.)
I will rot here until the cult-facilitator Matt flips the switch on me before I will go back to the Cult-board and submit to Il Duce's censorship.
Yoo hoo! Matt?
Did you read my report yet? I fully expect an A+ and a parole date. And I'm not reading Atlas Shrugged. I'll poke my eyes out with this pencil first.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2276307
P.S. I was just joshin about Sylvester Stallone playing the part of Matt in my movie: Wavoid Nation. It would be a budget-buster for sure. Plus, he probably would object to losing sixty pounds of muscle and the Mervyn's-based wardrobe. I'm not even going to talk to him about going to Supercuts.
Ciao!
Wavoid Nation: Playing the part of Barge...
who else could it possibly be?
[Suppressed Sound Link]
Who knew he could sing?
P.S. Be patient for the words of wisdom in the second half
No, Stallone IS Matt...
After he loses about sixty pounds of muscle. Obviously, I'm going for the intellectual qualities and the voice.
[Suppressed Sound Link]
Oh, Matthew? The cult is in an uproar...
again. And you are sorta like the Reverend Jim Jones' landlord. Take the dough every month and look the other way while the Kool-Aid is mixed. These folks, the zealots, are nuts, Matt. I mean NUTS! If you say anything negative, you are immediately accused of nefarious motives. Today it's Zeev under attack (not a defense, because I know he can defend himself). But fer cryin out loud, stop protecting the delusional Snackman!
P.S. I'm still casting the movie: WAVOID NATION. I'm thinking Sylvester Stallone for Matt. Only he'll have to stop working out for about six or eight years.
24601: I consider THIS misleading PR...
and not misleading or erroneous press reports of PR.
Bolds are mine and indicate the sections I consider misleading.
*****
Wave Systems Makes Enterprise Applications
More Secure Than Ever
IBM's Independent Software Vendor (ISV) Program Helps Wave Systems Create More Secure Applications for the Enterprise User
Lee, MA - Aug. 4, 2003 – Wave Systems Corp. (NASDAQ: WAVX – www.wave.com) today announced that the new Document Manager Vault and SmartSignature security software applications in Wave's EMBASSY® Trust Suite client software family work with the IBM (NYSE:IBM) Embedded Security Subsystem, a hardware and software-based security solution available on select ThinkPad notebooks and ThinkCentre desktops, to create more secure applications for the business user.
The compatibility of Wave's security software applications with IBM's hardware and software security solution is a result of Wave's successful participation in IBM's Independent Software Vendor program. This partnership is another example of IBM's commitment to help independent software vendors use IBM's hardware and software-based security system to make computing as secure as possible for the end-user.
"The early stages of any emerging market are critical. IBM has clearly established their leadership in trusted computing with their family of Embedded Security System personal computers," said Lark Allen, executive vice president, Wave Systems. "Wave's partnership with IBM will significantly help us in our objective to deliver open and interoperable solutions to business customers as trusted computing continues to evolve." Leveraging the IBM security chip for personal computers, the Wave EMBASSY Trust Suite Client Business Edition includes the first of many new applications aimed at business users: Wave's Document Manager Vault and SmartSignature. Wave's EMBASSY Trust Suite represents one of the first portfolios of user software applications, administrative tools, and trust-based systems developed specifically around the new Trusted Computing Group (TCG) specification.
etc., etc., etc...
******
Characterizing the relationship with IBM as a partnership was misleading, John. Oh, yes, I've read all the weasel words essplaining it already. But I ain't buyin it. The boys in Lee were hyping to beat the band. They crossed the line. Then, a bunch of them dumped stock into it. Certainly smells like a classic management pump-and-dump. Was it? Heck, I don't know. But I expect the Milberg Weiss folks will do their best to find out.
P.S. to Unclever: I think the stock ownership per the 10K includes all options, not just those exercisable in 60 days, but I'm working from memory here, so ICBW.
P.P.S. to whoever: Looks like somebody made a really dumb mistake to thing the sale of SSPX shares was an insider sale of WAVX stock. Duh.
Matt: You might want to drop in...
on the cult today. They are presently in full foaming-at-the-mouth mode and are organizing a torches-and-pitchforks assembly at the gates of Milberg, Weiss. It's touchingly naive, Matt. You have to see it for yourself.
P.S. Only a CULT acts this way, Matt, old boy.
P.P.S. Don't say I didn't tell ya so!
P.P.P.S. I demand an A+ on my Fountainhead report!
Earth to Wavoid Nation...
Do you Wavoids have any experience with the outside world at all? You're going to countersue Milberg, Weiss? And the Wall Street Journal? And some journalist? Only a frikin CULT would entertain such idiotic notions. Unbelievable ignorance.
Thank you, Unclever...
it was gettin awfully lonely here in cellblock #9, what with the mass executions here on Super Sunday.
John didn't care for the piece, but I think his tie was on too tight. I have some appreciative e-mails, though, from folks who don't want to be to public in their praise. Which is fine. Some folks are in kind of a bind personal-relation-wise.
Ciao!
P.S. Appreciate your transcripts of the CCs.
Here's a shot of Feeney, the CFO...
He's a clarinetist in his spare time.
Burpzilla: You should hear him speak...
here's a clip of him responding to a question regarding the consequences of a delay in deployment:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1669510
Matt: Well, did I pass or fail?
Be sure and read the actual report, not the erroneous one in which I copied some, er, notes by accident. Given the A+ that I assume I will receive, don't you think I deserve a parole date?
P.S. Ignore 24601's criticisms. He's a bit touchy about the cult thing being an owner of both WAVX and EDIG. I think. I know he pontificates on that thread, too, so I'm assuming that to be the case. Not that I have anything against pontificating, you understand.
Burpzilla: As you research WAVE Systems...
it may be useful to realize that the CEO has an uncanny resemblance to the late Chris Farley. Gerard Feeney, the CFO, looks like a 40-year old Woody Allen. Just so you can picture these folks sitting across the table from actual grown-up businessmen. Heck, they even sound like the actors. Enjoy your research, but next time be sure to plug into the Kool-Aid Katheter before logging on to Snackman's thread.
24601: Sorry you didn't like it...
counselor. Perhaps you can regale the jailbirds and jailbird-hecklers with some of your hilarious Fibonacci-number schtick.
P.S. I shoulda known not to even try off-topic humor in the aftermath of the Janet Jackson show.
P.P.S. to Unclevername: I agree entirely.
P.P.P.S. to 24601: Did you even read the whole thing?
P.P.P.P.S. to eamonshute: Your numbers are beyond insane.
24601: I don't see it myself...
oh, maybe some stylistic similarities. My piece was far more insightful, all modesty aside.
I imagine you celebrated the Patriots' win until the wee hours. It was fairly quiet here in the rec room--aside from that damn donkey in the corner. The place is filled with perverts, primarily the guards who pop in to harass us all day. At least I have a chance to get some reading done, however.
Here's my REAL report...
the other thing was just a silly mistake. Wrong file. That's all. Anyway...
The Fountainhead serves as an pretty good introduction to both Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism and her writing. Every one of the major intellectual themes that are contained in Rand’s fiction and her philosophy are presented somewhere or another in this novel.
Rand grew up in the totalitarian dictatorship of the Soviet Union and, consequently, held impassioned beliefs in individual rights and political freedom and Smirnoff's. She wrote The Fountainhead as a paean to the creative freethinker. Its hero, Howard Roark, is an innovative architect, a man whose brilliant and radically new designs are rejected by the majority of society, obviously too dull to fully comprehend their brilliance. Roark, like many creative thinkers, must struggle mightily to win acceptance for his ideas against the foolish masses, who want nothing more than a hand-out and intellectual pablum all the time. Also, they are fearful of change and most of them are Communist-sympathizers. The theme, as Miss Rand puts it, is individualism versus collectivism, not only in the political sense, but more importantly in the souls of men. The book is about the conflict between those who think for themselves and those who allow others to dominate their lives, who are invariably Democrats.
According to Ayn Rand, her objective is the presentation of an man in the ideal state. Howard Roark is the first such figure in her novels. His independence, his commitment to his own rational thinking, his integrity, and his massive biceps mark him as a distinctive Ayn Rand hero. The author has described herself as a “man-worshiper,” one who revered man at his highest and best and most potent and most masculine and, well, using her own terminology: hunkiest. She held man’s creative mind as totally sacred, and consequently admired some other original thinkers of mankind—the artists, scientists, and inventors, such as Mapplethorpe, Schwarzenneger, and, most of all, Woody Allen. Her fiction illustrates the heroic battles such great individuals have to wage to develop their new ideas and methods and to struggle against a the morons that comprise society, most of whom are Democrats. She presents her heroes as ends in themselves, inviting her readers to simply witness and savor the sight of such glorious manhood, especially the Schwarzennegerian biceps, which as everyone knows are merely a metaphor. “My purpose, first cause and prime mover is the portrayal of Howard Roark's end itself, not somebody else's end. Howard Roark's end simply defines hunky. Which, incidentally, is the greatest value I could ever offer a reader.” Portraying such a character is of great value, obviously, because the sight of a dauntless hero with such great buns, who can also perform notable deeds while balancing his checkbood, is an uplifting experience, one that requires no further explanation or validation. She points out that, secondarily, a reader witnessing the life of Howard Roark may be inspired to become a super-hero in his own right and may even sign up at Jenny Craig.
Roark, that freethinking individual extraordinaire, is opposed by sundry collectivists—all Democrats--who believe that a person should conform to others or maybe rebel and that are, at heart either Communists or Fascists or some other stupid thing. These collectivist-Democrat types want a society in which the individual is utterly subordinate to the will of the people. Regarding this aspect of the book, Rand sets her hero against various stupid collectivist ideas that existed at that particular point in time both outside and inside the United States.
The obvious example of collectivistic-dumbass-Democrats in The Fountainhead is the political one. Ellsworth Twohey, the novel’s villain, is a Marxist intellectual who probably votes Democrat, who goes around preaching socialism to the stupid fool masses. Twohey holds that an individual has no value in himself but exists solely to serve his lazy good-for-nothing brothers. As Ayn Rand wrote the novel, in the 1930s, such crazy concepts were rapidly engulfing the world, no doubt fomented by lazy good-for-nothings like FDR. The Communists first, taking over her native Russia, then Il Duce and the Fascists in Italy, then Hitler and the Nazis in Germany. On September 1, 1939, the Nazis and the Communists invaded Poland and from there things started to get ugly. In the early 1940s, these horrid people appeared to be on the threshold of military conquest of the world. Meanwhile, in the United States, lots of pointy-headed intellectuals, their toady politicians, corrupt labor leaders, and damn-fool businessmen thought of the Communist and Nazi systems as “noble experiments,” going so far as to actually believe they were attempts to emphasize an individual’s moral responsibilities to his "fellow man." Before the war, there was tremendous ideological support in the United States for both the Communists and the Nazis, and Congress was nearly overrun by these individuals pretending to be Democrats, except for some of the Fascists who might have been Republicans. Anyway, even after the war, support among the intellectuals continued for Communism for a long time until they were single-handedly defeated by the ultimate Rand-style hero, the one and only Ronald Reagan. Rand wrote The Fountainhead, at one level, as a fervent warning to her fellow man of the horrors of collectivism, whether of the Nazi, Fascist, Communist, or Democrat variety.
The Fountainhead, obviously, is not fundamentally about politics, however. The book warns against more subtle manifestations of collectivism, one that underlies the political danger and makes that danger possible. Although all human beings have minds, most people, mainly Democrats, choose not to use theirs, looking instead to others for guidance. These individuals prefer to be led in their personal lives by an authority figure—be it parents, teachers, clergymen, or Bill Clinton. Those who prefer to be led by authority figures are conformists and stupid fools, refusing the responsibility of thought and self-directed motivation, taking the path of least resistance in life, looking for handouts all the time and going on welfare and using food stamps, etc., etc., etc. In the character of Peter Keating, a conventional architect who pays attention to the damn-fool masses, Miss Rand provides an incisive glimpse into the soul of such a craven loser (and likely Democrat). The picture is, indeed, a frightening one. Keating, in many ways an average American status seeker, mainly desires public acclaim. In exchange for social approval, he is willing to sacrifice any and all of his personal convictions. In pursuit of this acclaim, he becomes a blind follower of the power broker, Ellsworth Twohey, and in so doing reveals the mentality of the millions of “true believers” who blindly follow a Jim Jones, a Sun Myung Moon, or Adolf Hitler. Ayn Rand shows that conformity is really naughty.
In The Fountainhead, in an amazing plot twist, Rand also shows that nonconformity is equally naughty. Rather than being the opposite of blind obedience, it is merely a variation on the same theme. In a variety of minor characters (Lois Lane, Smart Ike, Jack Webb), all devotees of Twohey, Rand demonstrates the essence of nonconformity: an unthinking rebellion against the values and convictions of others. The nonconformist, too, places the beliefs of others first, before his own thinking; he merely reacts against them, instead of following them. It is no accident that Ayn Rand shows these rebels as followers of Twohey, because nonconformists, usually Democrats, tend to cluster in private enclaves that inevitably demand rigid obedience to their own set of rules. Nonconformists, value freethinking no more than does the herd of conformists, it seems! These nonconformist fools are fictional examples of historical movements of the early twentieth century. Mainly writers and artists and taxidermists who rebel against grammar, coherent sentences, representational art, and conventional ferret-mounting in the same way that the surrealists, expressionists, Dadaists, and Horshakists did in actual fact. This band of real-life rebels, not surprisingly, centered in Weimar, Germany, in the 1920s where they could party a great deal in the cabarets of the time. Outwardly, some opposed Hitler. But at a deeper level, in their innermost hearts, in the place that only Rand can clearly see, their blind rebelliousness against others and their slavish conformity to their own little subgroups fostered another style of herd mentality, but a herd mentality nonetheless. The nonconformists, despite their open opposition to Hitler, were part of the culture that spawned the Nazis. This is why, in The Fountainhead, when Twohey is chided for cultivating a circle of “rabid individualists,” he merely laughs and responds: “You are all fools and I loathe you.” He knows that a hunky guy like Roark is a true individualist and all around swell guy; posturing nonconformists like Lois Lane are mere rebels against the crowd.
The issue of conformity in the story relates to another real-life movement of the time--the onset of the Modernist School of Taxidermic Thought which, of course featured the previously unthinkable juxtapositon of weasel nostrils vis a vis ferret lips. Rand was a leading taxidermist practicing in Brooklyn at that time and had passionate beliefs about the artistic merit of such posturings. It is believed she attempted suicide on one occasion following a viewing of Dietrich's famous exhibition Rabbits On Ice. She failed, obviously, but fell into a severe depression that caused her to lose a considerable amount of weight and, some think, prompted her to adopt her signature hairstyle as a protest. Also contributing to her depression was the fact that she had gone eleven years without a date.
Fountainhead was a challenging book and if you want to find out how it ends, you will have to read it for yourself. One hopes to be able to do so in a place other than prison.
Oh, wait! There must be some mistake!
I guess I pasted the wrong file there. That's not my report at all. Now where was it...I'm sure I've got it here somewhere. Drat. That's three and out for me for today.
P.S. I guess I better erase the erroneous report before a team of Wavoids e-mail it to the Cliff Notes people and demand my immediate prosecution!
I stayed up all night reading it, Greg...
and, of course, laboring on the report. Only now can I with good conscience relax and watch the game. If someone will just direct me to the rec room.
GregS: I've been reading Fountainhead. My report...
follows:
The Fountainhead serves as an excellent introduction to both Ayn Rand’s writing and her philosophy of Objectivism. All of the major intellectual themes that inform Rand’s fiction and her subsequent philosophy are presented clearly in this novel.
Having grown up in the totalitarian dictatorship of the Soviet Union, holding an impassioned belief in political freedom and the rights of the individual, Ayn Rand wrote The Fountainhead as a tribute to the creative freethinker. Its hero, Howard Roark, is an innovative architect, a man whose brilliant and radically new designs are not understood and are rejected by the majority of society. Roark, like many inventors and creative thinkers of history, struggles to win acceptance for his ideas against the tradition-bound masses, who follow established norms and are fearful of change. The theme, as Ayn Rand states it, is individualism versus collectivism, not in politics but in men’s souls. The book is about the conflict between those who think for themselves and those who allow others to dominate their lives.
According to Ayn Rand, the goal of her writing is the presentation of an ideal man. Howard Roark is the first such figure in her novels. His independence, his commitment to his own rational thinking, and his integrity mark him as a distinctive Ayn Rand hero. Rand described herself as a “man-worshiper,” as one who revered man at his highest and best. She held man’s creative mind as sacred, and consequently admired the great original thinkers of mankind—the artists, scientists, and inventors, such as Michelangelo, Newton, and Edison. In Rand’s fiction, she illustrates the heroic battles such great individuals have to go through, both to develop their new ideas and methods and to struggle against a conservative society that rejects them. Ayn Rand presents her heroes as ends in themselves, inviting her readers to simply witness and savor the sight of human greatness. “My purpose, first cause and prime mover is the portrayal of Howard Roark . . . as an end in himself—not as a means to any further end. Which, incidentally, is the greatest value I could ever offer a reader.” Her portrayal of such a character is of great value, because the sight of a dauntless hero performing notable deeds is an uplifting experience, one that requires no further explanation or validation. She points out that, as a benign secondary consequence, a reader witnessing the life of Howard Roark may be inspired to seek his own heroic achievements.
Roark, as a freethinking individual, is opposed by sundry collectivists—some who believe that a person should conform to others, some who believe that a person should rebel against others, and some who believe that, politically, we should have a Fascist or Communist dictatorship in which the individual is utterly subordinate to the will of the people. Regarding this aspect of the book, Rand sets her hero against various collectivist ideas that existed—and to some degree continue to exist—in the United States.
The obvious example of collectivism in The Fountainhead is the political one. Ellsworth Toohey, the novel’s villain, is a Marxist intellectual, preaching socialism to the masses. He holds that an individual has no value in himself but exists solely to serve his brothers. As Ayn Rand wrote the novel, in the 1930s, collectivism was rapidly engulfing the world. First the Communists took over her native Russia, then the Fascists came to power in Italy, then Hitler and the National Socialists took political control of Germany. On September 1, 1939, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, as allies, invaded Poland, plunging mankind into the most destructive war of its history. In the early 1940s, collectivism appeared to be on the threshold of military conquest of large portions of the globe. In the United States, many intellectuals, politicians, labor leaders, and businessmen thought of the Communist and Nazi systems as “noble experiments,” as new attempts to emphasize an individual’s moral responsibilities to his fellow man. Before the war, there was ideological support in the United States for both the Communists and the Nazis; even after the war, support among the intellectuals continued for Communism and does to this day. Ayn Rand wrote The Fountainhead, at one level, as a fervent warning to her fellow man of the unmitigated horrors of collectivism, whether of the Nazi, Fascist, or Communist variety; the evils that result in concentration camps; the extermination of millions of innocent victims; and the precipitation of world war. Ayn Rand witnessed these horrors firsthand in Europe; she wrote The Fountainhead, in part, to prevent their recurrence in America.
But The Fountainhead is not fundamentally about politics. The book warns against a more subtle manifestation of collectivism, one that underlies the political danger and makes that danger possible. Although all human beings have minds, many people choose not to use theirs, looking instead to others for guidance. Many people prefer to be led in their personal lives by an authority figure—be it parents, teachers, clergymen, or others. Those who prefer to be led by authority figures are conformists, refusing the responsibility of thought and self-directed motivation, taking the path of least resistance in life. In the character of Peter Keating, a conventional architect who goes by public taste, Ayn Rand provides an incisive glimpse into the soul of such an abject follower. The picture is frightening. Keating, in many ways an average American status seeker, desires acclaim from others. In exchange for social approval, he is willing to sacrifice any and all of his personal convictions. He becomes a blind follower of the power broker, Ellsworth Toohey, and in so doing reveals the mentality of the millions of “true believers” who blindly follow a Jim Jones, a Sun Myung Moon, or an Adolf Hitler. Ayn Rand shows that conformity, a widespread phenomenon in contemporary American society, is one of the underlying causes of collectivist dictatorship.
In The Fountainhead, Rand also shows that nonconformity, often thought to be the opposite of blind obedience, is merely a variation on the same theme. In a variety of minor characters (Lois Cook, Ike the Genius, Gus Webb), all devotees of Toohey, Rand demonstrates the essence of nonconformity: an unthinking rebellion against the values and convictions of others. The nonconformist, too, places the beliefs of others first, before his own thinking; he merely reacts against them, instead of following them. It is no accident that Ayn Rand shows these rebels as followers of Toohey, because nonconformists, placing others first, always cluster into private enclaves that inevitably demand rigid obedience to their own set of rules. Nonconformists value freethinking no more than does the herd of conformists. The nonconformist characters of the novel are fictional examples of historical movements of the early twentieth century. They are predominantly writers and artists who rebel against grammar, coherent sentences, and representational art in the same way that the surrealists, expressionists, and Dadaists did in actual fact. This band of real-life rebels, not surprisingly, centered in Weimar, Germany, in the 1920s. Outwardly, some opposed Hitler. But at a deeper level, their blind rebelliousness against others and their slavish conformity to their own little subgroup fostered a herd mentality similar to that of the conformists. The nonconformists, too, were part of the culture that spawned the Nazis. This is why, in The Fountainhead, when Toohey is chided for cultivating a circle of “rabid individualists,” he merely laughs and responds: “Do you really think so?” He knows that a thinker like Roark is an individualist; posturing nonconformists like Lois Cook are mere rebels against the crowd.
The issue of conformity in the story relates to another real-life movement of the time. The Fountainhead takes place in America in the 1920s and 1930s. Roark and his mentor, Henry Cameron, are early designers of the modern style. Although the book is not historical fiction, and the lives of Cameron and Roark are not based on the lives of real-life individuals, their struggles parallel the battles waged by Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright. In the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries, the architectural style that still dominated American building was Classical. American architects largely copied Greek and Roman designs (or those of other historical periods such as the Renaissance). Louis Sullivan (1856 - 1924) was one of the first to build in what became known as the modern style. Generally held to be the father of modern architecture and, in particular, of the skyscraper, Sullivan waged a long battle for his ideas against conventional standards. Ayn Rand scholar David Harriman, editor of The Journals of Ayn Rand, points out that Sullivan’s life serves as a “concrete inspiration” for the character of Henry Cameron. Harriman also notes that Frank Lloyd Wright (1869 - 1959), the greatest of the modern designers, is famous for his “strikingly original designs.” Wright was a fiercely independent individual, who refused to collaborate on his work and who learned early in his career not to compromise. Although the events of Roark’s life are not identical to the events of Wright’s, in the broad sense Wright does serve as the model for Howard Roark. Cameron and Roark, in the novel, struggle against characters like the Dean of Stanton Institute, who believes that all the great ideas in architecture have been discovered already by the designers of the past, and that contemporary architects are simply to copy those ideas. Sullivan and Wright, in real life, battled against similar instances of conformity. Though important similarities between Rand’s fictional characters and Sullivan and Wright do exist, it is important to remember that Roark and Cameron are exemplars of innovativeness and independent thought; they are not fictionalized versions of Frank Lloyd Wright and Louis Sullivan.
Matt: No. Not yet...
I feel the need to do more penance. Ask me tomorrow.
24601: You are right...
about Last of the Mohicans being fine for the 11 to 13 age group. As for ages 17 through 19, I was more interested in the work of Luther "Wimpy" Lassiter.
Okay, so maybe I exaggerated a little...
Maybe Ayn Rand isn't the worst of all time, but I'm sticking with bottom 10, 20th Century novelists. I'm on page 119 of Fountainhead right now and my eyelids are propped open with these cheap prison toothpicks. This is probably the most brutal form of punishment imaginable. You may as well go ahead and fry me.
Dear Sheriff Matt:
I see you are not going to post the messages that Snackman arbitrarily deleted and that prompted my tirade. You know as well as I do that he was using every excuse in the book to delete my stuff. And you, feeling sorry for the poor Wavoids, took it upon yourself to protect them from my depredations. Go ahead, put up the last five or so messages--pre-dating my objections--and let the jailbird hecklers see. They were not violations of your precious TOU, Matt.
Look. I get three posts a day. Fine. The Wavoids have an ignore button. They don't wanna read my stuff, they don't have to. Why do they need a censor on top of that? There's nothing crude in my remarks. And anything ad hominem (24601's complaint) is directed at management, but, hey they're "public figures." A little criticism is small price to pay for the big bucks they haul in, ain't it?
Matt, I know Snackman and a few of the zealots will do virtually anything to get me to shut up. (Including their well documented "outing" attempts.) But by my count there are several Wavoids who favor allowing me to continue posting. (Opie, wavehello, zen, weby (possibly the most fervent Wavoid of the entire cult), even the counselor himself, 24601, express the wish that I not be silenced.) So why don't you listen to these folks? Appoint a different Wavoid--someone not so intolerant--to be moderator and the problem goes away.
Anyway, that's three and out for me. Sayonara.
GregS: Ayn Rand spawned a cult of her own...
and any fool can understand "objectivism" with about five minutes of sustained concentration. Of course, it is fundamentally fallacious and based on circular reasoning.
The core belief is that absolute knowledge can be obtained through reason, thus there can be absolute moral and immoral action. For the Rand cult, the discovery of the truth of some principle--whatever it might be--ends all discussion. If you disagree you are simply wrong. Period. Your flawed reasoning can be corrected, but if it isn't it's a case of heresy and you are dismissed.
So, I dunno Greg, but I view Ayn Rand as not only a second rate philosopher, one who deals in simple notions that appeal to the haves in society by telling them it is cool to screw everybody if it's in their own best interest, but I also think she's possibly the worst novelist of all time. But, hey, I could be wrong.
DIG SPACE: Maybe now Joe Trippi...
now that he's got some free time, can figure out if he actually still owns WAVX. I'm sorta thinkin maybe he dumped it but didn't have the heart to rain on the Wavoids' parade (such as it is). On the other hand, it's possible he thought it might damage his candidate's credibility if he was linked even indirectly to the cult.
You do have to give Joe credit for raising Howard Dean out of oblivion to national stature, though. No denying he did a heck of a job with the material at hand. Of course, he made some strategic blunders (like excluding Mrs. Dr. Dean from the road show on the idiotic premise that her private medical practice was more important than being at her husband's side).
And now they're saying the money-raising machine everybody touted is practically broke. Which makes me wonder if Trippi was tapping the WAVE brain trust for financial advice! Sounds an awful lot like that plant-all-the-flags-you-can-and-defend-every-one-of-them strategy that allowed WAVE to blow through 120 million in three years, doesn't it?
Newtothis: Work on yer groveling skills....
and maybe the Sheriff will be swayed. Whatever you do, don't mention his haircut.
GregS: Are you still holding a grudge...
because of those mean things I said about Ayn Rand? How about I read a tome or two of hers while I'm over here? I'll risk the narcolepsy. Besides, I'm sure it will get me in Sheriff Matt's good graces. He obviously is a big fan of hers. Why else would he have copied her hairstyle?
CHWDRHED: Because in the world of cult stocks...
EDIG and the others can't hold a candle to WAVX.
Do the EDIG folks go to shareholder meetings wearing their EDIG license plates suspended from chains around their necks?
I'm not making this up.
24601: Not at all, John...
I have always respected your right to form your own opinion. Nor do I wish to silence Snackman. I merely request a board moderator who will abide by the IHUB TOU and not delete messages willy-nilly.
One question: Are you in agreement that I should be banished from the WAVX board?
Heck, I've argued with you more than probably any Wavoid. Have I ever suggested you needed to shut up? Or go away? I'd welcome your substitution for Snackman as board moderator because I know you will play by the rules. And that, a change in moderator, will make this entire problem go away, in my opinion.
P.S. to eamonnshute: Do you agree with the zealots' position that I should be banished from the WAVX board?
NICE EVASION, JOHN. Very lawyerly. Do you think I should be banished from the WAVX board or not? Easy enough question.
Akvetch: I tried a private appeal...
after Snackman had arbitrarily deleted a number of my critical (of management) remarks. This is what I get:
Sent By: IH Admin [Matt] Date: 1/20/2004 12:41:00 AM
You are at 3 posts/day and about to be less. You are masterful at being a dickhead. Grow up or go back to RB.
*****
I challenge Matt to scroll back to the prior, say, five posts of mine (before I started bitching about the deletions) and put them up here for the jailbird hecklers to see. The guy, Snackman, just can't stand criticism of his precious friends in Lee, MA. He deletes my stuff almost automatically. Go ahead, Matt. Put them up and let the hecklers have at it.
Cytotekk: It ain't MY stock...
I sold it four years ago, at 14 bucks and change (or 85% ago). The name of it is WAVX and it is, in my humble opinion, the premier cult stock on NASDAQ. (Premier in terms of it cult-ness, that is.)
The cult members deny that it is one, of course. Don't they always? But what else do you call a community that:
A. Wants to lead the way in "security" on the internet, yet whose leader participates in the attempted publication of the identities of dissidents such as myself. Snackman did this, quite openly, on the WAVXDD board. Ask him. He won't even deny it. Don't mention the irony of it to him, because he will think you are a pointy-headed intellectual, call you a liar, try and have you banned from IHUB, and possibly organize a torches-and-pitchforks party in front of your house.
B. Thinks promotion by lineage is a good idea. The present CEO being the eldest son of the founding CEO. His entire resume prior to working for this company was working for a water company--also family owned.
C. Forgives such behavior as, for example, the CEO defending a $21 million revenue projection in the seventh month of a year in which the company fell more than $20 million short of it. A miss that obviously would have resulted in the dismissal of any other CEO on NASDAQ.
D. Looks the other way while management blows EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS on selling and g&a expenses (I'm not counting R&D here) during a 3 year period in which the company generated $1.4 million in revenue.
E. Looks the other way when management spends $7 million to acquire, of all things, an internet portal (Isophere.com) to obtain--according to their explanation--their precious human resources. This acquisition coming in the middle of a sector meltdown that would have enabled the same staff to be had for the price of a couple want ads.
F. Looks the other way when management spends a quarter million on a contract with one David Booth--a gentleman who is said to line his hat with tin foil (for the usual reasons).
G. Looks the other way when management pays itself more in cash compensation over that three year time period, 2000-2002, than the company books in revenues.
H. Looks the other way when the CFO makes two of the ugliest financing deals in the history of corporate finance--all the while drawing down 900K in compensation the same year.
I. Expresses the opinion--and I'm not kidding, this has come from several of the respected Wavoids--that they are actually happy the CEO was not honest with them, that if he had been, they'd have exited the stock and would not now be in the fantastic situation they are in (the cusp of unimaginable riches, that is).
J. Maintains a back-door e-mail list to share "inside" information (which as far as I know is not specific enough to run afoul of securities law). Mainly winks, nods, high-signs from folks in the know.
I could go on, but you get the picture. This is a cult stock. Period.
dig space: Matt is not compensated...
for his time here. At least that's what he told me. Apparently he enjoys the role of cult-facilitator. He obviously has no problem supporting a moderator who has actually participated in the attempted "outing" of posters who desire anonymity. The rationale? Happened someplace else, so I can look the other way. But the culprit admits the outing attempt? Hey, no problem. Long as you do the dirty work somewhere else, you got a home at IHUB.
P.S. The company within the Jailhouse is actually preferable to the WAVX thread. Some of their schtick is a bit used, but I think it's probably a more suitable place for some of us.
Snackman: I do have an agenda...
THE TRUTH.
No, Snackman, I'm NOT a liar...
I've never told a lie in this or any venue. You do desperately want a controlled venue, obviously, or you wouldn't have left the original RB WAVX board for your personally monitored one. The one where you could arbitrarily boot off whoever you disagreed with. You have run off any number of contrary voices from RB and from this forum and not because of their supposed vulgarity or repetitiveness or any other idiotically transparent reason. The reason is, simply, they disagree with your views.
Go ahead. Poll the Wavoids. See how many of them will call me a liar, Snackman. I'm thinking you and a handful of your henchmen is about it and you folks will say anything and call anyone a liar if it furthers your purpose. (Example: last week's Kite-surf calling GregS a liar, to which you interceded with some verbiage that indicated that you didn't even consider it an insult, that it may or may not be correct, that it was okay because it was somebody's opinion.
As to my stock answer to why I bother: You got that wrong, too. I have never said I enjoy cults. The phrase is:Cults fascinate me. Fascination is not liking. In this case it is the furthest possible thing from liking.
Snackman, you are a dangerous man. You have for seven years now been beating the drum for this company. Everything they say, everything they do, it's all according to you hunky dory and in the stockholders' best interest. You don't object to their squandering EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS from 2000 through 2002 producing a grand total of one point four million in revenues. You don't object to management paying themselves more in cash compensation than the company rings up in revenues. You don't object to Steven defending a $21 million revenue projection in the seventh month of a year in which he came up more than $20 million short. Noooo, that's all okay with you. Management is wonderful. Management knows what it's doing. Just trust management and you will become rich. Ignore their egregious greed. Ignore their idiotic maneuvers. Pretend the expenditure of $7 million for an Internet portal to obtain precious human resources in the midst of a sector meltdown that made such talent obtainable for the price of a want ad somehow made sense. Ignore the CEO striking deals with folks seen stuffing their hats with tin foil. They're geniuses. Ya just gotta believe. Only a cult buys this faith-based approach to investing Snackman. Only a cult.
Snackman: Point to a SINGLE vulgar post...
of mine anywhere. (Not counting the one in which I'm quoting Matt calling me a dickhead, of course. And why is it you're not objecting to that if you're so concerned about vulgarity?)
As to who is a liar and who is not, you have accused me of being a liar on numerous occasions, but when I've called you on it, you haven't been able to come up with a SINGLE example of it. Not one. Actually, it's an accusation you like to make and you don't frankly care who you point it at. Case in point: Last week GregS made a contrarian point, eliciting the typical Wavoid reaction, primarily foaming-at-the-mouth and calling him a liar. Kite-surf (an expert at virtually everything who once spent most of a day talking about how WorldCom had gotten itself kicked off the DJIA) comes back to dispute Greg's contention with the "You are a liar" message. Greg takes exception to that, which is completely understandable since he was merely voicing his opinion and clearly labeled it as such. Your interjection into the exchange follows:
Posted by: Snackman
In reply to: greg s who wrote msg# 27039 Date:1/23/2004 11:51:38 AM
Post #of 27296
greg s, you may or may not be a liar. That is ones own opinion.
Go-kitesurf is attributing his beliefs to statements made by you. I don't think he is attacking you per se, only giving his opinion on what you have printed on these boards.
Just my opinion.
****
So, Snack, while I may be a pain in the ass, one thing I am NOT is a liar.
P.S. Of course you don't eliminate 100% of contrary views. That would be too obvious and even Matt would have to do something about it. You just eliminate, say, 75% of them under the "repetitive message" interpretation--as if 99% of the messages are not repetitive at this juncture.
P.P.S. I have opinions that you don't like. They are clearly labeled as opinions. They are clearly labeled as possibly incorrect. Here are a few of them:
1. WAVE management is grossly incompetent.
2. WAVE management is egregiously greedy.
3. WAVE management will--in almost all instances--put its own interests in front of the shareholders.
Then there are what I consider to be facts.
1. WAVE is a cult stock.
2. Snackman runs the cult.
3. Matt facilitates the operation of the cult (either knowingly or not).
And that concludes my messages for the day.
GregS/Zeev: I'm not asking...
for your intervention on my behalf. I'm merely using you as examples of respected posters, along with Larry Dudash, who have visited the WAVE board, done a fair amount of homework, and then posted critical remarks. The reaction to each of you was, well, standard Wavoid gang-attack. I realize none of you are emotionally invested in the argument enough to waste any more time on it. Heck, I agree that you're better off moving on to other matters.
Pardon me for bein a persistent pain in the ass, but I've been having this argument for going on five years now. The boys at the WAVE board want a controlled discussion. The leader, Snackman, is relentless in repressing opposing views. He deletes all sorts of stuff that, under the IHUB TOU, ought not to be deleted. He has run off CPA and Bluefang, both of which are respected long-time longs, for being critical of management. And Matt, for whatever reason, lets him get away with it. Hey, I can see I'm buttin my head against a brick wall here, but I'd as soon get booted out of this place than put up with the monumental hypocrisy that there is any balance whatsoever in the way the place is moderated.
Matt: Scroll back to the preceding post...
the one that I was griping about Snackman deleting and you upholding. I'd point to the specific message, but, well it ain't there anymore.
P.S. to Susie:
Former shareholder of Wave. Exited four years ago at $14. Have been objecting to the cult-ness of the shareholder group off and on since even before I got out. Hey, I'm just stubborn, I guess. I don't respond well to the Wavoids' standard response to criticism, which is: "Shut up" or "Sell if ya don't like it," etc., etc., etc. These are people who want to own the company in charge of internet security and yet they have no qualms about attempting to publicly "out" posters (myself for one). The board moderator himself participated in that exercise.