Emailed. I expressed a concern so as to give context. Leonard...

Emailed.

I expressed a concern so as to give context. Leonard commented under the concern.

Leonard like pretty much every company official or director I've been in touch with an the last year or so (and there are several - tha'ts how I operate) would prefer to talk on the phone than respond via email but when I essentially promised not to pass his email on baring illegalities he responded to my email and made clear his reply wasn't for reproduction on social media sites.

This general aversion to being misrepresented or reproduced on social media sites seems to be a general one to ASX company officials and directors. I don't have any trouble understanding it - social media can be feral. I've seen plenty of that myself.

Are you now willing to answer the question I asked you? Are you willing to accept that it is a fact that the exclusion and restriction provisions of 1.2 (c) are currently in effect?

I've never really understood your aversion to answering such a simple question. It would have saved so much time.

I can't post you (or this forum) what Leonard wrote (providing a paper trail) because I intend to honor my word to Leonard. But anyone that doubts what I'm saying can ask for themselves. Your corroboration would have been sufficient to have settled that matter in my opinion (making it essentially a matter of fact and allowing discussion to move on) in the eyes of most of the HotCopper AVZ frequent commenters.