Share price, page-85

I think this was clearly understood, certainly by me.

However if I take issue with one of your points, I don't think I have the responsibility to explain why I don't take issue with all of them, or why you are so right.

I may agree with some points and appreciate the effort involved in making them, but not necessarily the conclusions (in this case, that it's going to end in a takeover..this was the thin argument that I took issue with. Not of them, just that one).

I hope you can see this is a valid approach. Your rewards are TUs where someone appreciates with the effort or contribution gone into it, but not necessarily all of it, nor the conclusions.

That is what TUs are for, it's not only use if you totally agree with everything. Nor is everyone in a position to offer a counter view to every point raised.

(We all get frustrated at times. In another thread I was excluded from a pre AGM meeting which I could have very productively contributed to, but they prejudged me as too bolshie. I took issue with the person who cryptically disinvited me.

Where was my invitation to make contributions? Nowhere. He can hide behind being cryptic if he likes, but it's a coward's game.

They had next to no understanding about the recourse you can take through ASIC and why AGMs are a very good device to be active about raising issues, sometimes with media support.

I spelled out why their approach was less than optimal. A prominent poster quietly TU'd that post but then disavowed saying that it was ALL a misunderstanding. Mine. Instead of conceding on the points I raised, they decided to stonewall me.

I conceded on one misunderstanding. Big mistake. You give ground and they eat you alive. Sometimes you can't win when egos are involved.

I have decided to laugh at them. Sometimes it's all you have left.)