RE: MIAsurething1111,
I am becoming more and more of a fan of your cynical approach in assessing our mutual "friend". I think one of the most insightful comments on the subject is your comment to the effect that the value of forum discussions concerning whaler is in talking about him, not talking with him. He's a master of obfuscation. If he chooses to respond to a challenge of his opinion, information or facts, its a masterpiece of deflection. He's turned my comment on his omission of the "safe harbour" disclaimer on a press release into an endless babble about hideous omissions, new geologists, etc. By the time he's finished babbling he's referring to Table 17, and setting up hope that something he reads in some block models means Micon intends the information he selects to over ride what they say in their summation.
whaler is able to stick handle around the real message of the Micon Report - the part where Micon says, in effect, all we can stake our professional reputation on is that ISM has 1.7 million tonnes of mineral resources - mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. In spite of the fact that most shareholders, potential shareholders and anyone else following the company was looking for a report that put a dollar value on economic reserves, whaler overlooks this fact, and reads something positive into some data table. However, he is able to see no problem in the item that Nickel77 has pointed out - data that someone decided (obviously not Micon) Micon should not include in their analysis. whaler would have us believe that thousands of people that turned thumbs down on ISM after the Micon Report were fools - he, alone (well, the CEO said he was pleased, but I think his tongue was bleeding after he said it) sees good things in what Micon had to report.
By the way, Surething, is there any truth to the rumour that you are being considered for the position of Hub Leader at the Big IF, if the present Hub Leaders abdicate? By the looks of it now, it might not be the full time job it was in the past - you're the only one posting this month. I still find it humourous that about the time that the operators of that site are appearing before the OSC, they decide it is of value to initiate an IP check tool. When their new hearing date comes up (sometime in July?), they can explain the steps they have taken to preserve the integrity of the content on their forums. The need for this control is obvious, as indicated by the reason they are appearing before the OSC! Too funny!