Wt Indus Met Ld Discussion Threads

[palawrence] 21/7/2002 16:46

Indalo

Don't argue with the hypocrite on that one. What he means, if one can ever deduce the fevered ramblings of his labrynthine mind, is that in the past he alledgedly made profits (his allegation not mine) and his current losses (or sufferings as he puts it, a first there to admit that) have not yet exceeded them. Hence as the profits were other people's money and until he has exhausted them he is not using his original capital, or in his thoughts, his own money.

The reference does not IMO have anything to do with conducting unauthorised investment business.

[palawrence] 21/7/2002 16:40

Ainsoph

As you appear to be unable or unwilling to answer this question:-

Have you, at any time, used more than one alias on ADVFN?

It must by now be considered by all to be yes and consequently you are, at best, a hypocrite on the grandest scale.

BTW It doesn't matter whether it is slander or libel, use the term that covers both defamation. Neither you nor Indalo will get very far, it is rather difficult to show hurt to an anonomous nickname.

LOL!

[indalo] 21/7/2002 16:38

Matt,

Section 19 of the "Financial Services and Markets Act-2000" is clear about this...

"The maximum penalties for conducting unauthorised regulated activities are as follows-

Two years in jail and an unlimited fine"

[matthewa] 21/7/2002 16:35

Ainsoph - When have yoyu ACTAULLY ever made money?

[matthewa] 21/7/2002 16:32

indalo - IF my memory serves me correctly its 4 years and/or an unlimited fine or was it £20k (limit)(County Courts).

[ainsoph] 21/7/2002 16:32

ainsoph :-))

[indalo] 21/7/2002 16:29

That's very interesting Matt....The SFA are very serious about authorisation. In fact, a large part of the authorisation exams are based on the penalties for conducting investment business without authorisation!

Section 19 of the "Financial Services and Markets Act-2000" is clear about this...

"The maximum penalties for conducting unauthorised regulated activities are as follows-

Two years in jail and an unlimited fine"

[matthewa] 21/7/2002 16:24

Ainsoph/KDC - If you contact the SFA can you remind them you conduct investment business for other people without a licence.

KDC - 28 Sep'01 - 10:10 - 24 of 129

It has not been the best year but still playing with someone else's money and believe times are a-changing


K

Ive saved the posting its on the EVG thread so dont bother editing it. Actually you were removed so you can edit it. Shame.

[indalo] 21/7/2002 16:23

Why on earth would I want to do that??

I am not trying to "frighten you"...I am merely telling you that any accusation of dishonesty against me will be taken seriously, and that I won't tolerate you slandering me on this or any other BB..

[indalo] 21/7/2002 16:11

Ainsoph, if you make libelous accusations toward me again I shall take legal advice...

I HAVE NEVER AND WILL NEVER USE MULTIPLE NAMES!

[day_dreamer] 21/7/2002 16:09

TS :

She will never answer that question !!
And she will try and twist anything to take the heat off herself.
I have to laugh at this new list of posters she mentioned and one
in particlular who I have a drink with every Tuesday for the past
3 years, maybe she would like to join us this Tuesday and I'll pay !!

Gravy

[torturedsoul] 21/7/2002 16:01

i've just been catching up on the thread.

ainsoph, you're looking more and more desperate after each post you've made.

there still doesn't seem to be an answer from you to palawerence's question.

maybe you (ainsoph), could answer it now?

"Have you, at any time, used more than one alias on ADVFN?"

it seems strange that your alleged aliases have been rather conspicuous by their absence on the advfn boards during the last few days while you've been otherwise engaged in this little spat, doesn't it?

coincidence? maybe, maybe not.

[bigfingle] 21/7/2002 16:01

I have several aliases, and why not ? Sometimes I'm a different person, so why not spell in a ffiderent way ? And forgive me folks, I thought this bb's ONLY purpose is to ramp/deramp shares ? So what's new, and why the fuss ?

[day_dreamer] 21/7/2002 15:51

I havent mislead nobody ainsoph and you know it.
I have never tried to hide my identity.
You know you'be been rumbled, I've been trying to do this
for years and at last the message is getting across advfn
about you dirty little tricks to ramp shares.
You definately are paranoid after looking at your last post.

Gravy

[2deano] 21/7/2002 13:56

Opus1,

It would actually be very easy to put controls in place and stop this ( even displaying ip addresses would reduce the problem notably ( although not 100% ) - something done on other free sites ). The question is: "Do ADVFN moderators want to address the problem or are they happy for it to continue on the free bulletin board".

Regards and have a good one.

[opus1] 21/7/2002 13:52

Agreed, but to be useful there would have to be a prospect for resolution. In this case the chances of that happening would have to be measured in light years.

[2deano] 21/7/2002 13:32

Opus1,

Thanks for your comments. Don't read the thread if you don't see the point. Indeed, there wouldn't be a point if advfn had the proper controls in place to prevent people from doing this.

So, while you may not see the point, a lot of people do. Not only do they see the point, they are actually concerned and think it should be stopped.

I agree, and for those reasons I have created this thread. I also stand by the intention of its creation.

People operating under multiple aliases to ramp stocks is a serious offence. Indeed it is prosecutable by law. If you are in doubt of this please see S118 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

I put it to you that a useless thread is one that has no purpose in its intent. ADVFN moderators really do need to do something about people consistently operating in this manner.

And as an aside, don't you want to know that the person you are communicating with on advfn is one and the same? I have even seen question and answer format communication on advfn between different users, when in fact one person was orchestrating the discussion in favour of his view ( i.e. to ramp ). In other words that person was using multiple usernames to realise a perceived two way discussion.

This is not right and should not be allowed. And I will not stand down from my soapbox on this one.

Regards.

[2deano] 21/7/2002 13:30

Ainsoph,

I once again *politely* request, for the second time, that you remove those e-mail addresses from your post: number 125.

Alex has also politely requested the removal of his address. There is also an earlier post which lists Alex's e-mail address. Kindly remove that also.

[opus1] 21/7/2002 13:29

Never have I seen so many words used to such useless effect. This has my vote for the most boring and useless thread ever on advfn. You should ALL be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves.