Azure Share Discussion Threads

[werdermouth] 24/10/2005 23:39

jacko/kevinrtaylor/whatever - still spouting your drivel, eh?

"I am content that I can stand tall...."

That's an oxymoron; you aint tall enough to stand tall.


Registered any more false details on web addresses recently?

[uknighted] 24/10/2005 23:21

JakNife - 24 Oct'05 - 21:58 - 5213 of 5215


Personally, bigjohn75, I think that you need some focus. There are much more important wrongs in the world to make a fuss about, for example the various illegal actions perpetrated by the action group and its members. After all, computer hacking (and inciting others to hack), electronic harassment, blackmail and stalking are all criminal offences and that's before I mention the libellous comments that have been made together with the (now proved) false accusations.

I guess though that you must be happy living with your ambiguous moral standards.

regards

JakNife


Jacko that's a great perspective "There are much more important wrongs in the world to make a fuss about, for example the various illegal actions perpetrated by the action group and its members."
What a small world you exist in.
"Warm regards"
Uknighted

[jakass] 24/10/2005 22:17

jaknife, I guess you must be happy living with your boring repetition. Give us a break, go and put something under your worktop grill and clean your one spoon, so you can eat it in safety on the side of your bed.

[uknighted] 19/10/2005 14:33

Jacko. In post 3986 on this bb I posted some information regarding the administration of your website (which was the address and telephone number of a London bank office)- information that was freely available on another website. Within a short time of this post appearing I had been severely reprimanded by ADVFN for posting it and (surprise, surprise) the administration details on this latter website were suddenly changed.
Surely you cant have forgotten already?
However, I have repeatedly asked you to explain these events, which I am assuming were all initiated by yourself, and apologise to me for the embarrassment of being reprimanded - the result, I assume, of a complaint to ADVFN by yourself.

[greenchair] 19/10/2005 02:40

Incidentally, where is this old favourite?

"rocket fuel - 21 Oct'04 - 08:38 - 4690 of 5205

lol greenchair you'd know all about gambling pumping your money into the likes of rsv. anyway i've sold and trousered my profit in qxl. Luvverly."

I think QXL were about about £7 when he sold ?????

[greenchair] 19/10/2005 02:22

LOL Jack

Its a long time since I've read you.

I sleep soundly too.

But its still unfortunate that you will still be a part of the...well what ever....!

Good Luck.

[uknighted] 18/10/2005 23:51

Jacko Re: no contact. I still havent had that apology from you, yet.
Are you a man of honour or not?

[Abuse team] 09/10/2005 13:35

Post removed by ADVFN

[anomalous] 05/10/2005 18:48

In fact I hope he does sue, because then I can expose what his company did. I can expose the fact that the LSE and FSA failed to prosecute when they should have. In fact it might even encourage the FSA and LSE to prosecute Shore Capital for breaking the rules.

[slashertheslash] 05/10/2005 13:04

sore loser

[anomalous] 05/10/2005 12:49

What an utter hypocrite. His company breaks 44 separate Stock Exchange rules and they he then has the nerve to state that the European Banks have to come up to the market's high standards.

Maybe it should have read, that the European Banks have to sully themselves in the mud by dropping their standards to the level of the miscreants that broke the LSE's and FSA's rules in the Room Service Shorting Scandal.

Oh and if Shore is thinking of suing on this, you should be aware that the Judge did agree that you broke the LSE settlement rules. So there's no way that you can deny it.

[Abuse team] 05/10/2005 12:46

Post removed by ADVFN

[jonck] 13/9/2005 10:26

Apologies jak - thought you had added your own comments. We know what papers are like for getting things wrong or not giving the whole picture..

[jonck] 13/9/2005 10:13

jaknife.

"The judge did not decide about the extent of contractual relationship between Mr Tumber and Shore Capital, the market-maker, partly on the grounds that she had not heard the full argument but also because she found that, in any event, the level of damages would be nil."

Is this your opinion or are you quoting what the judge said. I understood it to be different and she did actually find there was a breach of contract.