SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Technology StocksAMD:News, Press Releases and Information Only!


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: TimF who wrote (6832)6/13/2006 11:32:03 PM
From: hammerfall_prophet
   of 6843
 
> The post you replied to was made in 1999.
Yes, I realized that after about 1/2 hour; I'd heard that history is bound to repeat itself, but it seemed rather too repetitious. :-) I've still no idea how I ended up browsing 1999 posts; must have accidentally clicked on some wrong button... Thanks.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Petz who wrote (6830)12/8/2006 2:03:23 PM
From: mas_
   of 6843
 
This seems like a nice place to hang out free from badly implemented and over zealous moderation ;-).

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: mas_ who wrote (6834)12/8/2006 5:21:19 PM
From: Petz
   of 6843
 
Well, I will love the 30 posts a day limit, even 20 or 25, perhaps ignored around EPS. Actually it would be great if SI would have a feature to support a limit on moderated threads, with the moderator just adjusting the limit.

I assume you were kicked off for some "personal attack" or something. That kind of moderation is a bit overdone IMO.

This was a great thread when Paul Engel would fill the regular AMD thread with dozens of snide comments and every press releases having anything to do with Intel, every day of the week.

Have a great day, my new job is a bit too intense for me to follow the thread in the evening.

Petz

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Petz who wrote (6835)12/8/2006 8:08:06 PM
From: mas_
   of 6843
 
Limits suck. What a moderator needs on SI is what exists on Ihub, the ability to remove posts. Yes I was suspended for this very innocuous and truthful comment agreeing with another poster about Doug. Once the suspension is over I don't think I care to return there while that logically challenged individual is running the show as I really am done with his BS.

Message 23073389

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: mas_ who wrote (6836)12/11/2006 12:30:13 AM
From: Petz
   of 6843
 
1. Come on now, with a post limit, Doug will be off the thread more than he is on. If so, why not monitor the thread and if he is off, post. If not, refrain.
2. I think AMD will have monay postivie surprises over the next 6 months, the biggest indicator being the insider buying. Doug will just go away when his point of view becomes untenable, and he loses enough money.

EDIT - "monay" ppsitive surpises was a freudian slip, I suppose

Petz

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: Petz who wrote (6837)12/11/2006 9:09:03 PM
From: TimF
   of 6843
 
Shouldn't this conversation be on
Advanced Micro Devices - Off Topic
Subject 53036

Not on
AMD:News, Press Releases and Information Only!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: mas_12/18/2006 12:40:33 PM
   of 6843
 
upcoming Core 2 price cuts

hkepc.com

as low as $113 for a 1.8 GHz 2MB in Q207.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: mas_12/19/2006 4:27:13 PM
   of 6843
 
The road to 32 nm: good-bye to performance scaling, analog, and SoI?

edn.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Petz who wrote (6837)12/22/2006 3:49:29 PM
From: Elmer Phud
   of 6843
 
Petz

As I am unable to post a reply on the SI board I used this instead

Here's one example of your use of chipsets to explain Intel's apparently low yields. The discussion continued for several more iterations:

Message 17415851

You had to go back 4.5 years to find a post that said nothing of the kind. It simply says that the product mix is too complex to make any determination.

The point being that no matter how well intentioned, attempts to estimate fab output or yields are not going to be of much use.

This is your proof that we are "constantly claiming chipsets to explain low yields"? One 4.5 year old post? This is really lame Petz. You were caught in a lie and you compound it trying to wiggle out. An honest person would just acknowledge they misspoke and that would be the end of it.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: zdenekb_199912/29/2006 6:59:52 PM
   of 6843
 
(deleted)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10