That interpretation outline by 2ic is incorrect in my view. They...

That interpretation outline by 2ic is incorrect in my view. They have mixed halo mineralisation intersections in the basalt with a weak (upper) main lode intersection within the porphyry. Therefore the geometry is shallower than it actually is. The second (lower) X is also incorrect in my view. I expect if/when that hole is extended it will hit main lode mineralisation sitting vertically under hole 260. I think that the main lode is within the porphyry, vertically along the contact, likely forming through desulphidation, using iron sourced from the magnetite rich basalt. If it helps, I’m a geo too.