From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1710 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Friday, October 5 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1710 In this issue: RE: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 23:08:04 -0500 From: "Hill, Ernie" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C14E1C.7F984160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Tom, Very foolish move by dgo! Perhaps they should read the archives, and they would see that you have provided very good advertising for them. If anything they should be paying you, or providing you with a free subscription. Instead they have likely alienated the majority of the people on this list. I don't know what kind of degree if any Ms. McKnight may have, but if her degree is in marketing she should ask for a refund of her tuition. E - -----Original Message----- From: Tom Worley [mailto:stkguru@netside.net] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 7:57 PM To: DGOnline Customer Service; CANSLIM Subject: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data To: Ms. Susan McKnight, President, Daily Graphs Online CANSLIM Discussion Group Members I was served with legal notice this morning that I was in violation of my agreement with DGO by posting the data on those stocks I had listed in my DGO List last Saturday. I was warned that not only could my service be discontinued, but I could be legally prosecuted for unauthorized use. I will, of course, cease and desist from my well intended practice. I felt then, and still feel now, that what I did was posting intellectual property I had developed. I did not post the entire DGO List, rather only those stocks that I had reviewed and found worthy of mention. Obviously, Ms. McKnight and her corporate counsel feel differently. I would also note that despite my frequent and strong support of DGO in this discussion group, I have never once received a thank you from DGO. I cooperated with a reporter from IBD, who had sought interviews from members of this group. I don't know if she ever posted the article as I never heard back from her once she got her information. I also note that there have been numerous instances in which an article appeared in IBD shortly after similar discussions in this group. Not once was this group credited or acknowledged as providing the topic or idea for the article. To me that is theft of intellectual property, and used for commercial purposes to boot. Maybe Jeff Salisbury needs to put a copyright on this group's discussions, and demand payment when they steal our ideas. This legal notice I received again confirms to me that this group is being monitored covertly by DGO, and likely by IBD as well. I guess that is some kind of back handed compliment, in a way, but I don't like the sneaky approach. The most upsetting part of this for me is getting this notice in a morning delivery by Fedex when a simple email would have sufficed. It's not like they don't have my email address, after all. Granted, it might not have the same legal standing, but I also don't need to be hit in the head with a baseball bat. And here I was thinking they had finally recognized my ability to make good money even in a solid bear market (BTW, my VR fund is up over 15% in the past six trading days, and continues to beat every major index, but I'm not giving the list of stocks to DGO or IBD). Unless Ms. McKnight further objects, I intend to continue reviewing the entire DGO List, and posting my thoughts and observations. Hopefully I can at least continue that service to this group. But with this "one way" policy so directly demonstrated, along with the continued failure of DGO to provide even minimal screening tools in the latest beta version, and the continuing limitation of reports to just those stocks in the DG books rather than all stocks, I will not make further recommendations to members to buy this service and will look for alternative means to achieve the same results. Sincerely, Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ****************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. ****************************************************************** - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C14E1C.7F984160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi T= om,

 

Very foolish move by dgo!

 

Perh= aps they should read the archives, and they would see that you have provided ve= ry good advertising for them. If anything they should be paying you, or provid= ing you with a free subscription. Instead they have likely alienated the majori= ty of the people on this list. I don’t know what kind of degree if any M= s. McKnight may have, but if her degree is in marketing she should ask for a refund of = her tuition.

 

E

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Worley [mailto:stkguru@netside.net]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 20= 01 7:57 PM
To: DGOnline Customer Servic= e; CANSLIM
Subject: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data

 <= /o:p>

To: <= strong>Ms. Susan McKnight, President, Daily Graphs Online

 = ;   CANSLIM Discussion Group Members

 = ;

I was= served with legal notice this morning that I was in violation of my agreement with= DGO by posting the data on those stocks I had listed in my DGO List last Saturd= ay. I was warned that not only could my service be discontinued, but I could be legally prosecuted for unauthorized use. I will, of course, cease and desist from my well intended practice.

 = ;

I fel= t then, and still feel now, that what I did was posting intellectual property I had developed. I did not post the entire DGO List, rather only those stocks tha= t I had reviewed and found worthy of mention.  Obviously, Ms. McKnight and= her corporate counsel feel differently.

 = ;

I wou= ld also note that despite my frequent and strong support of DGO in this discussion group, I have never once received a thank you from DGO. I cooperated with a reporter from IBD, who had sought interviews from members of this group. I don't know if she ever posted the article as I never heard back from her once she got her information. I also note that there have been numerous instances in which an article appeared in IBD shortly after similar discussions in this group. Not once was this group credited or acknowledged= as providing the topic or idea for the article. To me that is theft of intelle= ctual property, and used for commercial purposes to boot. Maybe Jeff Salisbury ne= eds to put a copyright on this group's discussions, and demand payment when they steal our ideas.

 = ;

This = legal notice I received again confirms to me that this group is being monitored covertly by DGO, and likely by IBD as well. I guess that is some kind of ba= ck handed compliment, in a way, but I don't like the sneaky approach.

 = ;

The m= ost upsetting part of this for me is getting this notice in a morning delivery = by Fedex when a simple email would have sufficed. It's not like they don't hav= e my email address, after all. Granted, it might not have the same legal standin= g, but I also don't need to be hit in the head with a baseball bat. And here I= was thinking they had finally recognized my ability to make good money even in a solid bear market (BTW, my VR fund is up over 15% in the past six trading d= ays, and continues to beat every major index, but I'm not giving the list of sto= cks to DGO or IBD).

 = ;

Unles= s Ms. McKnight further objects, I intend to continue reviewing the entire DGO Lis= t, and posting my thoughts and observations. Hopefully I can at least continue that service to this group. But with this "one way" policy so directly demonstrated, along with the continued failure of DGO to provide e= ven minimal screening tools in the latest beta version, and the continuing limitation of reports to just those stocks in the DG books rather than all stocks, I will not make further recommendations to members to buy this serv= ice and will look for alternative means to achieve the same results.

 = ;

Since= rely,

 = ;

Tom W= orley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM: TexWorley



******************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso
Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the
sender.
******************************************************************
 - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C14E1C.7F984160-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 21:27:12 -0700 From: "Jay Oken" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0157_01C14DE4.7EF5BA40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Some of you who have been longer term members of this board know that I = stopped posting some months ago due to differences of opinions with = others on the board. However, my wife (Tracie) has continued to = subscribe to the board and I frequently read the posts. After reading = Tom's post, regarding DGO, I feel compelled to relate my experience. A few months ago there was a discussion on this board regarding DGO vs. = the High Growth Stock Investor software. Tracie and I were not happy = with the screening tools of DGO and decided to cancel our subscription = to DGO and subscribe to the High Growth Stock Investor. Upon canceling DGO we received an e-mail stating that we would receive a = refund of $367.15. Since we paid for a full year in advance I calculated = that our refund should be $420 which created a difference of $52.85. = After a few e-mails back and forth I discovered that they were using the = single month rate of $66.58 to calculate how much of our subscription = had been used up (however, based on the annual subscription at the time = of $720 the monthly rate we paid was actually $60) and they were = claiming that we only paid $700.05, rather than the $720 annual fee, = since they were deducting the trial subscription of $19.95 we signed up = for. On July 14, 2001 I sent them an e-mail stating "I have re-read the User = Agreement and nowhere do I find that it states that prorations will be = at the higher monthly rate." In addition, I pointed out that "On the = DailyGraphs.com web site, on the page titled Subscription Information, = it states the that $19.95 trial cost is "applied" toward your first = subscription payment. My subscription payment therefore was $720 which = was for an annual subscription". Not the $700.05 that they claimed = Finally, I also requested that "Daily Graphs Online cease their = inappropriate/deceptive/(illegal?) practices with respect to = cancellation prorations in light of what is advertised on the web site = and what is stated in the User Agreement." The bottom line of all this = is that the way they were calculating our refund was $52.85 less than it = should have been based on what the user agreement stated and what they = advertised on their web site. On July 18, 2001 I received an e-mail stating that my refund would be = adjusted to include the $52.85. I can only wonder how many other people = did not have appropriate refunds credited to them and what the total = benefit has been to DGO based on the number of cancelled subscriptions. P.S. I have copies of all the e-mails that I sent and received, as well = as my Visa Statement, to document this incident (and am willing to = provide them to Ms. McKnight if she asks for them). I have only stated = what I know to be facts but I would say Caveat Emptor to anyone looking = to subscribe to DGO or who is a subscriber to DGO. Sincerely, Jay Oken ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: DGOnline Customer Service ; CANSLIM=20 Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 5:57 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data To: Ms. Susan McKnight, President, Daily Graphs Online CANSLIM Discussion Group Members I was served with legal notice this morning that I was in violation of = my agreement with DGO by posting the data on those stocks I had listed = in my DGO List last Saturday. I was warned that not only could my = service be discontinued, but I could be legally prosecuted for = unauthorized use. I will, of course, cease and desist from my well = intended practice. I felt then, and still feel now, that what I did was posting = intellectual property I had developed. I did not post the entire DGO = List, rather only those stocks that I had reviewed and found worthy of = mention. Obviously, Ms. McKnight and her corporate counsel feel = differently. I would also note that despite my frequent and strong support of DGO = in this discussion group, I have never once received a thank you from = DGO. I cooperated with a reporter from IBD, who had sought interviews = from members of this group. I don't know if she ever posted the article = as I never heard back from her once she got her information. I also note = that there have been numerous instances in which an article appeared in = IBD shortly after similar discussions in this group. Not once was this = group credited or acknowledged as providing the topic or idea for the = article. To me that is theft of intellectual property, and used for = commercial purposes to boot. Maybe Jeff Salisbury needs to put a = copyright on this group's discussions, and demand payment when they = steal our ideas. This legal notice I received again confirms to me that this group is = being monitored covertly by DGO, and likely by IBD as well. I guess that = is some kind of back handed compliment, in a way, but I don't like the = sneaky approach. The most upsetting part of this for me is getting this notice in a = morning delivery by Fedex when a simple email would have sufficed. It's = not like they don't have my email address, after all. Granted, it might = not have the same legal standing, but I also don't need to be hit in the = head with a baseball bat. And here I was thinking they had finally = recognized my ability to make good money even in a solid bear market = (BTW, my VR fund is up over 15% in the past six trading days, and = continues to beat every major index, but I'm not giving the list of = stocks to DGO or IBD). Unless Ms. McKnight further objects, I intend to continue reviewing = the entire DGO List, and posting my thoughts and observations. Hopefully = I can at least continue that service to this group. But with this "one = way" policy so directly demonstrated, along with the continued failure = of DGO to provide even minimal screening tools in the latest beta = version, and the continuing limitation of reports to just those stocks = in the DG books rather than all stocks, I will not make further = recommendations to members to buy this service and will look for = alternative means to achieve the same results. Sincerely, Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0157_01C14DE4.7EF5BA40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Some of you who have been longer term = members of=20 this board know that I stopped posting some months ago due to = differences of=20 opinions with others on the board. However, my wife (Tracie) has = continued to=20 subscribe to the board and I frequently read the posts. After reading = Tom's=20 post, regarding DGO, I feel compelled to relate my = experience.
 
A few months ago there was a discussion = on this=20 board regarding DGO vs. the High Growth Stock Investor software. Tracie = and I=20 were not happy with the screening tools of DGO and decided to cancel our = subscription to DGO and subscribe to the High Growth Stock=20 Investor.
 
Upon canceling DGO we received an = e-mail=20 stating that we would receive a refund of $367.15. Since we paid = for a full=20 year in advance I calculated that our refund should = be $420=20 which created a difference of $52.85. After a few e-mails back and = forth I=20 discovered that they were using the single month rate of $66.58 to=20 calculate how much of our subscription had been used up (however, = based on=20 the annual subscription at the time of $720 the monthly rate we = paid was=20 actually $60) and they were claiming that we only paid $700.05, rather = than the=20 $720 annual fee, since they were deducting the trial subscription = of $19.95=20 we signed up for.
 
On July 14, 2001 I sent them an e-mail = stating=20 "I have re-read the User Agreement and nowhere do I find = that it=20 states that prorations will be at the higher monthly rate." In addition, = I=20 pointed out that "On the DailyGraphs.com web site, on the page titled=20 Subscription Information, it states the that $19.95 trial cost is = "applied"=20 toward your first subscription payment. My subscription payment = therefore was=20 $720 which was for an annual subscription". Not the $700.05 that they = claimed=20 Finally, I also requested that "Daily Graphs Online cease their=20 inappropriate/deceptive/(illegal?) practices with respect to cancellation prorations = in light=20 of what is advertised on the web site and what is stated in the = User=20 Agreement." The bottom line of all this is that the way they = were=20 calculating our refund was $52.85 less than it should have been = based on=20 what the user agreement stated and what they advertised on their web=20 site.
 
On=20 July 18, 2001 I received an e-mail stating that my refund would be = adjusted to=20 include the $52.85. I can only wonder how many other people did not = have=20 appropriate refunds credited to them and what the total benefit has = been to DGO based on the number of cancelled=20 subscriptions.
 
P.S. I have copies of all the e-mails that I sent and received, = as well=20 as my Visa Statement, to document this incident (and am willing to = provide them=20 to Ms. McKnight if she asks for them). I have only stated what I = know to be=20 facts but I would say Caveat Emptor to anyone looking to subscribe to = DGO or who=20 is a subscriber to DGO.
 
Sincerely,
Jay Oken
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
To: DGOnline Customer Service = ; CANSLIM
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 = 5:57=20 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] OT: = Discontinuance of=20 my posting DGO Data

To: Ms. Susan McKnight, = President, Daily=20 Graphs Online
    CANSLIM Discussion Group=20 Members
 
I was served with legal notice this morning that I = was in=20 violation of my agreement with DGO by posting the data on those stocks = I had=20 listed in my DGO List last Saturday. I was warned that not only could = my=20 service be discontinued, but I could be legally prosecuted for = unauthorized=20 use. I will, of course, cease and desist from my well intended=20 practice.
 
I felt then, and still feel now, that what I did = was posting=20 intellectual property I had developed. I did not post the entire DGO = List,=20 rather only those stocks that I had reviewed and found worthy of=20 mention.  Obviously, Ms. McKnight and her corporate counsel feel=20 differently.
 
I would also note that despite my frequent and = strong=20 support of DGO in this discussion group, I have never once received a = thank=20 you from DGO. I cooperated with a reporter from IBD, who had sought = interviews=20 from members of this group. I don't know if she ever posted the = article as I=20 never heard back from her once she got her information. I also = note that=20 there have been numerous instances in which an article appeared in IBD = shortly=20 after similar discussions in this group. Not once was this group = credited or=20 acknowledged as providing the topic or idea for the article. To me = that is=20 theft of intellectual property, and used for commercial purposes to = boot.=20 Maybe Jeff Salisbury needs to put a copyright on this group's = discussions, and=20 demand payment when they steal our ideas.
 
This legal notice I received again confirms to me = that this=20 group is being monitored covertly by DGO, and likely by IBD as well. I = guess=20 that is some kind of back handed compliment, in a way, but I don't = like the=20 sneaky approach.
 
The most upsetting part of this for me is getting = this=20 notice in a morning delivery by Fedex when a simple email would have = sufficed.=20 It's not like they don't have my email address, after all. Granted, it = might=20 not have the same legal standing, but I also don't need to be hit in = the head=20 with a baseball bat. And here I was thinking they had finally = recognized my=20 ability to make good money even in a solid bear market (BTW, my VR = fund is up=20 over 15% in the past six trading days, and continues to beat every = major=20 index, but I'm not giving the list of stocks to DGO or = IBD).
 
Unless Ms. McKnight further objects, I intend to = continue=20 reviewing the entire DGO List, and posting my thoughts and = observations.=20 Hopefully I can at least continue that service to this group. But with = this=20 "one way" policy so directly demonstrated, along with the continued = failure of=20 DGO to provide even minimal screening tools in the latest beta = version, and=20 the continuing limitation of reports to just those stocks in the DG = books=20 rather than all stocks, I will not make further recommendations to = members to=20 buy this service and will look for alternative means to achieve the = same=20 results.
 
Sincerely,
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
- ------=_NextPart_000_0157_01C14DE4.7EF5BA40-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 22:32:08 -0700 From: "Bill Triffet" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Worley" To: "DGOnline Customer Service" ; "CANSLIM" Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 5:57 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data < Big snip> >> I also note that there have been numerous instances in which an article appeared in IBD shortly after similar >>discussions in this group. Not once was this group credited or acknowledged as providing the topic or idea for the >>article. To me that is theft of intellectual property, and used for commercial purposes to boot. Maybe Jeff Salisbury >>needs to put a copyright on this group's discussions, and demand payment when they steal our ideas. >>This legal notice I received again confirms to me that this group is being monitored covertly by DGO, and likely by >>IBD as well. I guess that is some kind of back handed compliment, in a way, but I don't like the sneaky approach. >> Tom, Bingo! Way too many times we have made very specific observations about the market only to have it published as a "how-to" in the Investors Corner. I have seen it with our examples of proven historical breakouts and on the discussions last year of follow-thru days. I'm tempted to go to the archives and pull out a few. I would suggest in the future, you do the same as them: take in the information from "ALL your sources" and then post it as your own observations of candidates - period. Several here have posted many good selections using HGS and Quotes Plus and TC2000. If some happen to show up in the Daily Graphs - so be it. One other thought: Given the length of the bear market we've had, I would guess the DGO has taken a beating in terms of subscription growth. Remember - canslim is really best as a bull market "system". It's easy to charge big money in a bull market for your data. I for one have refused to buy DGO up till now do to their lack of stock screening tools. I here this is changing. On a separate note to the lurking IBD editor here: how about IBD's take on the airline industry bailout? Won't touch that one with a ten foot pole eh? Oh that's right, "this time it's different". I'm waiting for the bailout of the manufacturing sector! (g) Thanks for your posts here Tom! - -Bill Triffet - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 22:38:55 -0700 (PDT) From: John Kruger Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] OT: Discontinuance of my posting DGO Data First, let me say that I am not a lawyer, but I have been in more than one legal battle over copyright. I assume that DGO’s claim would be based upon whatever agreement was “signed” when you subscribed to their service – that works. However, I do not know what their agreement says. As far as copyright goes, one can not copyright “facts”. One can claim that a sub-setting or gathering of “facts” is a unique representation and thus is copyrightable. To learn more than you want to know about such things, try: http://www.eff.org/CAF/law/multimedia-handbook John __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1710 ****************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.