Well you know what 'they' say
10th time is the charm
Ah, whatever, did I mention I knew all the rules?
Might be easier to go for the Bar exam then memorizing a bunch of rules heavily geared towards fillers and short investors
But for some reason, admins don't remember them, eh?
Maybe because there seems to be hundreds?
What you will see below is...
It's OK to use call CEO's names
It's OK to post lies
I'm not making it up...
It's right in their rules
Go sue them if you want to
They are pretty, pretty, pretty used to that
Well oiled and armored machine I see
But they fooked up legally and don't even know it yet
Remember Michael wasn't suppose to go to jail
After that they got with it and put 'layers'
Got a new dance in their pants...
Did you know a number of posters create multiple IDs and then use them months or years later?
Would you believe not only do you have HerbertWest, Sixth Man, TheLordsWrath and TheLordsWrathV linked together
But you have another sleeper ID waiting in the wings TheLordsWrathX
It was created 5 days after TheLordsWrathV
Huh?
And iLie didn't do a thing about it...
Shows you are stupid they are
Oh, what time is supper again?
You can tell my the graphs I posted
HAHAHAHA or is it AHAHAHAHA?
Investors can flag every one of their post and say they are posting under multiple IDs
If the board doesn't do a dam thing about it, then they can be held legally responsible for selectively enforcing their 'rules'
As far as the mod squad
The Mod Squad is a group of approximately 8 Members who have the ability to restore or delete posts on all boards in the Free Zone. (They cannot make any changes to the iBox nor do they have any access to confidential Admin areas or information). There are many boards that have no Moderators or are not fully "staffed". Being a board Moderator is a volunteer position and there are commitments away from the site that leaves the board unattended for periods of time. Occasionally there are also rogue Mods who just aren't suited for the position. The members of the Mod Squad are very helpful in being an extra set of eyes for both Moderators and Admins, in ensuring compliance to the TOS. While these members are anonymous to others, Site Admins work very closely with these Members and are confident in their understanding of the TOS.
Guess who are members of the mod squat?
One guy can't post on the board without calling the company a "POS". I think this is vulgar and his posts should be deleted.
The PG13 rule is loosely used as a guideline to what is/isn't acceptable when determining whether a comment is vulgar. The theory is that if society has deemed it appropriate for a 13 year old to hear, it is unlikely that it will be offensive to the majority of Users. This acronym would be considered appropriate in a PG13 movie.
I don't understand why calling the CEO of our company a liar is not considered a personal attack.
The Terms of Use prohibitions of personal attacks covers content about Posters on our site. Members are welcome to post their opinion (positive, negative or neutral) about public figures associated with the company and this is not considered a TOS violation.
This Poster is making libelous claims against our company and its officers! Why can't I remove these posts?
Moderators and Site Admins do not determine that Member posted content is libelous. Users are often of the opinion that a post is libelous, but no Moderator should act based on that opinion. Libel is decided by a judge in a court of law after conducting proper evidentiary hearings. If such a judgment is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction accompanied by an order that such content is to be taken down, iHub will take the matter under advisement. (Note: Interactive computer services such as iHub are immunized from declaratory relief orders, including injunctions. See: See Medytox Solutions, Inc. v. Investorshub.com, Inc., 152 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014, Rev. Denied) Otherwise, it is not a matter that Site Admin or Mods can decide. Our only role here is to ensure adherence to the Terms of Use. Anecdotally, quite often the information that some Members allege to be libelous ends up being accurate, which is why neither Site Admins nor Moderators remove posts on the basis of being allegedly false or libelous.
A User is posting "insider information".
This is a matter for a regulatory agency (i.e. SEC, DOJ) to decide, not Site Admins or Moderators. Our only role here is to ensure adherence to the Terms of Use.
This guy is just posting lies; the stuff he says about the company is NOT true. Why can't I delete those posts?
As a Moderator, your role is to enforce the Terms of Use, not make decisions about the veracity of the information posted. "Truth" is a very subjective term and neither Site Admin nor Mods remove posts based on judgments of this type. Each reader has both the right and obligation to decide for themselves if they feel a post is accurate and its author credible. Additionally, it would be an impossible task for any of us to try to verify as "truthful" the 50,000 posts on the site each day. Again, our only focus, as Site Administrators or Moderators, is adherence to the Terms of Use.
As a participant on the board, the Moderators' recourse is the same as any other Member; to debate the information contained in the post without attacking the User, or to ignore it. Debate the message, don't attack the messenger.
But wait, there is more...
Saved the best for last
Pretty bold I'd say...
What is iHub's past experience when served with subpoenas for user information?
Our past experience is that while we frequently receive subpoenas for user information in civil matters, we ultimately produce on very few of them. More often than not these subpoenas are simply being used as a tool to intimidate persons who are exercising their right to express their views and opinions. Some plaintiffs take it beyond intimidation and also broadcast their legal shenanigans by way of press releases as a means to try and mitigate or obscure the information they don't want known by current or potential investors or other interested parties. In any event, we are not intimidated by subpoenas and hold them to the highest level of scrutiny and legal sufficiency before even considering responding.
Legal sufficiency is the primary meter we use when determining whether or not we will respond. The merits of each specific case are determined by a court of law having jurisdiction over the matter.
An article titled Legal Protections for Anonymous Speech published (last updated on 5/30/2008) at the Citizen Media Law Project website discusses what test or standard has been applied by courts in various states to decide whether or not to allow a speaker's identity to be revealed.
But what if there was no need for a company to subpoenas anyone, eh?
Leave it to me as I find a way to be
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting
I knew all the rules but the rules do not know me
Guaranteed
Legally and Responsibly...
The board should change it's name to iLie because the rules have been written to let lies run wild
You won't win posting there
What you will do is waste years of your precious life
Doesn't mean justice won't be served
You are not going to serve justice with a reply
You take them to court
But not in the fashion that they setup layers for
All of you that post there are counter productive to that happening
You won't be able to do it by posting on that board
The board that 'protects' liars
In fact, when you do it just gives them more strength
The board only exist now because of a handful of longs
Did you ever see an iLie board when longs disappear?
I did and they all move on
You see, iLie predates social media and dinosaurs
That's way when you reach the grand pobuh stage you get a gray beard
How's that beard looking Janice
Maybe some wax treatments?
40 posts a day...
I'd say that is a full-time job
I forgot to mention
Subpoenas are for pusses
10th time is the charm
Ah, whatever, did I mention I knew all the rules?
Might be easier to go for the Bar exam then memorizing a bunch of rules heavily geared towards fillers and short investors
But for some reason, admins don't remember them, eh?
Maybe because there seems to be hundreds?
What you will see below is...
It's OK to use call CEO's names
It's OK to post lies
I'm not making it up...
It's right in their rules
Go sue them if you want to
They are pretty, pretty, pretty used to that
Well oiled and armored machine I see
But they fooked up legally and don't even know it yet
Remember Michael wasn't suppose to go to jail
After that they got with it and put 'layers'
Got a new dance in their pants...
Did you know a number of posters create multiple IDs and then use them months or years later?
Would you believe not only do you have HerbertWest, Sixth Man, TheLordsWrath and TheLordsWrathV linked together
But you have another sleeper ID waiting in the wings TheLordsWrathX
It was created 5 days after TheLordsWrathV
Huh?
And iLie didn't do a thing about it...
Shows you are stupid they are
Oh, what time is supper again?
You can tell my the graphs I posted
HAHAHAHA or is it AHAHAHAHA?
Investors can flag every one of their post and say they are posting under multiple IDs
If the board doesn't do a dam thing about it, then they can be held legally responsible for selectively enforcing their 'rules'
As far as the mod squad
The Mod Squad is a group of approximately 8 Members who have the ability to restore or delete posts on all boards in the Free Zone. (They cannot make any changes to the iBox nor do they have any access to confidential Admin areas or information). There are many boards that have no Moderators or are not fully "staffed". Being a board Moderator is a volunteer position and there are commitments away from the site that leaves the board unattended for periods of time. Occasionally there are also rogue Mods who just aren't suited for the position. The members of the Mod Squad are very helpful in being an extra set of eyes for both Moderators and Admins, in ensuring compliance to the TOS. While these members are anonymous to others, Site Admins work very closely with these Members and are confident in their understanding of the TOS.
Guess who are members of the mod squat?
One guy can't post on the board without calling the company a "POS". I think this is vulgar and his posts should be deleted.
The PG13 rule is loosely used as a guideline to what is/isn't acceptable when determining whether a comment is vulgar. The theory is that if society has deemed it appropriate for a 13 year old to hear, it is unlikely that it will be offensive to the majority of Users. This acronym would be considered appropriate in a PG13 movie.
I don't understand why calling the CEO of our company a liar is not considered a personal attack.
The Terms of Use prohibitions of personal attacks covers content about Posters on our site. Members are welcome to post their opinion (positive, negative or neutral) about public figures associated with the company and this is not considered a TOS violation.
This Poster is making libelous claims against our company and its officers! Why can't I remove these posts?
Moderators and Site Admins do not determine that Member posted content is libelous. Users are often of the opinion that a post is libelous, but no Moderator should act based on that opinion. Libel is decided by a judge in a court of law after conducting proper evidentiary hearings. If such a judgment is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction accompanied by an order that such content is to be taken down, iHub will take the matter under advisement. (Note: Interactive computer services such as iHub are immunized from declaratory relief orders, including injunctions. See: See Medytox Solutions, Inc. v. Investorshub.com, Inc., 152 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014, Rev. Denied) Otherwise, it is not a matter that Site Admin or Mods can decide. Our only role here is to ensure adherence to the Terms of Use. Anecdotally, quite often the information that some Members allege to be libelous ends up being accurate, which is why neither Site Admins nor Moderators remove posts on the basis of being allegedly false or libelous.
A User is posting "insider information".
This is a matter for a regulatory agency (i.e. SEC, DOJ) to decide, not Site Admins or Moderators. Our only role here is to ensure adherence to the Terms of Use.
This guy is just posting lies; the stuff he says about the company is NOT true. Why can't I delete those posts?
As a Moderator, your role is to enforce the Terms of Use, not make decisions about the veracity of the information posted. "Truth" is a very subjective term and neither Site Admin nor Mods remove posts based on judgments of this type. Each reader has both the right and obligation to decide for themselves if they feel a post is accurate and its author credible. Additionally, it would be an impossible task for any of us to try to verify as "truthful" the 50,000 posts on the site each day. Again, our only focus, as Site Administrators or Moderators, is adherence to the Terms of Use.
As a participant on the board, the Moderators' recourse is the same as any other Member; to debate the information contained in the post without attacking the User, or to ignore it. Debate the message, don't attack the messenger.
But wait, there is more...
Saved the best for last
Pretty bold I'd say...
What is iHub's past experience when served with subpoenas for user information?
Our past experience is that while we frequently receive subpoenas for user information in civil matters, we ultimately produce on very few of them. More often than not these subpoenas are simply being used as a tool to intimidate persons who are exercising their right to express their views and opinions. Some plaintiffs take it beyond intimidation and also broadcast their legal shenanigans by way of press releases as a means to try and mitigate or obscure the information they don't want known by current or potential investors or other interested parties. In any event, we are not intimidated by subpoenas and hold them to the highest level of scrutiny and legal sufficiency before even considering responding.
Legal sufficiency is the primary meter we use when determining whether or not we will respond. The merits of each specific case are determined by a court of law having jurisdiction over the matter.
An article titled Legal Protections for Anonymous Speech published (last updated on 5/30/2008) at the Citizen Media Law Project website discusses what test or standard has been applied by courts in various states to decide whether or not to allow a speaker's identity to be revealed.
But what if there was no need for a company to subpoenas anyone, eh?
Leave it to me as I find a way to be
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting
I knew all the rules but the rules do not know me
Guaranteed
Legally and Responsibly...
The board should change it's name to iLie because the rules have been written to let lies run wild
You won't win posting there
What you will do is waste years of your precious life
Doesn't mean justice won't be served
You are not going to serve justice with a reply
You take them to court
But not in the fashion that they setup layers for
All of you that post there are counter productive to that happening
You won't be able to do it by posting on that board
The board that 'protects' liars
In fact, when you do it just gives them more strength
The board only exist now because of a handful of longs
Did you ever see an iLie board when longs disappear?
I did and they all move on
You see, iLie predates social media and dinosaurs
That's way when you reach the grand pobuh stage you get a gray beard
How's that beard looking Janice
Maybe some wax treatments?
40 posts a day...
I'd say that is a full-time job
I forgot to mention
Subpoenas are for pusses
15
