NOP I disagree with some of your opinion as I will state specifically what I disagree with ...
The other primary argument I see taking place is "when is a personal board not a personal board". And quite frankly I think the difference between Gary and Bob on this is a matter of Volume.
Volume so do you think that as long as a thread is not very active that fine but if it suddenly gets active NOW it is in danger of losing its Personal status???
Gary (I believe) is referring to a single or occasional instance of a particular security or securities being mentioned on a board while Bob is referring to a pattern of recurring references.
No, I am saying that on my Personal threads I can talk about whatever I want whether I own security or not and I do nt have to talk to people I do not like. PERIOD regardless of the conversations.
If that is correct, both are Right! If a stock gets mentioned, in either a positive or negative light during the course of regular on topic discussion on the "personal board" it should remain as should any responses to it (provided no other rules are violated).
I disagree becuase not you are actually in that concept destroy the personal board concept. However, the world will not be able to know what si being said only through select people who follow the board so how can it be a stock thread. It does not allow for people who just stalk you and what not just mess with you.
However if there is a pattern of ongoing use of a personal board as a 'bully pulpit' concerning a particular stock or group of stocks. Then the CoB is not operating a personal board in the spirit in which it was intended and should be removed from "personal" status. There are always exceptions to this rule but quite frankly even a board titled "Why OTCBB stocks (suck/are the greatest investing vehicle)" probably shouldn't get "personal" status.
WRONG! I open a bar (since you used the bar reference before) I standing behind the bar and talking to people who visit my bar. They like me I like them and we are having just typical chat seesions. Now someone with MY bar decides they do not like the conversation and got next door to say "Bad Mouth all you want" bar and gets someone or a crowd to suddenly invade MY bar to disrupt the atmosphere. I as the Bar will immediately toss them into the street and close the door behind them and resume conversation with people I like.
And there is nothing wrong with that.
Perhaps as a means of restricting "Personal Boards" guidelines could be established showing what criteria must be met before a member can become a CoB. Add further criteria before starting a personal board. Additionally, a probationary period would be in place for all CoB's during which they would have a lower level of powers and/or be subject to more stringent reviews. This should only apply to new CoB's though it might be a consideration for CoB's returning from a serious suspension.
HUH? now COB are put in place by IHUB basically and thus I beleive pierces the library law that protects IHUB. But you are entitle to this logic but IHUB would basically be respnosible for that COB's action. I do not think that is the concept here. If that was then Bob is the only chairman and he can put his cabinet ib pklace to control IHUB.
Now BOP as long as I have knownb you this is out of character. Maybe there is something I am missing but this is the concept of SI amd why SI was too late with recognizing that they needed the moderate board format. They would not mess with a moderated board unless if you type in a ticker for a public company that board can not not be personal. PERIOD!
Corners and what not are basically personal that the COB has for his friends and people he has a repore with right and can throw off anyone he does bnot like. Heck he can go to parking lot to get into with people he does like or has no use for.
Consistency ...
Now I agree that tickers that people can enter in order to go to the stock chat site is not a personal board.
:=) Gary Swancey
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
