I took you off ignore as I like to give people second chances...

I took you off ignore as I like to give people second chances and to be honest, I like a diversity of opinion and find that downrampers can often be useful devils advocates if they bring up good points that missed my radar. However this certainly doesnt inform me and is just designed to emote.
Ill address your points, then place you back on ignore. The points really aren't worth responding to, but in summary:

Director selling - who cares, they had personal liquidity issues and that's the end of that - it is not an ongoing thing, the timing was bad. Many directors have a lot of wealth tied up in the companies they are on the boards of, and if they face a liquidity crunch they have difficult decisions to make. But please, go on, bring it up again and again as if its somewhat significant. You cling on to a few negative points and recycle them, ignoring the other side of the picture, much akin to a propaganda machine.
We raised 271K at a time where share price was below the SPP price and during a banking crisis in the US. This is a positive outcome for me when actually looked at in context. There were 24 applications (average of 11K allocation per application) willing to take part despite the chart looking very unfriendly for almost all of the SPP.

We raised 4.5m just prior to this, so looking at the 230K 'shortfall' as a percentage of near term cashflow
0.23m/(4.5m + 0.271m) = 4.8% as a percentage of funds raised recently
As a percentage of our market cap it is approximately 0.76%

Lets look at the market cap and the effect of Assuming a constant SOI and no dilution in short term, if our share price moves one pip (0.1c) then it results in a change in market cap of over 2.9%. So, considering intrinsic company value, you can see that a movement of 1 pip in share price if sustained is around 4 times more significant than this 'shortfall'. So I put as much weight on this shortfall as I do when price moves one quarter of a pip

Now in all fairness, cash and equity are not the same thing. I would stress that considering cashflow it is insignificant on that front too (4.8% of recent cash raised) considering our position looking forward this year, we already have enough to deliver to market. Idan has clearly stated that cash is not what is needed for this (no further dilution, or financing), it is ticking boxes on the roadmap - which is being done ahead of schedule based on what have seen. That is what people are focused on, so there is no need for spin as this is is insignificant and spending time discussing this is beneath us as shareholders and definitely beneath directors with a full workload. Instead we should just watch and evaluate what is produced, try our best to value it in the current market, and make the best decision with the information available. In my calculations, UNT comes out as very undervalued, in a market where high growth equities are in demand to hedge against inflation, in a market sector (conversational/generative AI) that is hot and expanding, with very little presence in the ASX.
This post may seem excessive with numbers, but I find that they are useful in counteracting downramping which has very little basis in fact.

Lastly, I am happy to see a close at 3.4c going along with that chart I posted earlier. We want to find support in the 3.3-3.5c range over the next week or two now that the SPP and raise is behind us and we look forward to what lies ahead.

Have a great weekend (downrampers too! - you guys have been working very hard). =P