CGB - 1.9c to 7.2c - What will happen in the next 6 months., page-1345

@CGBrep

I must say that your response to my post has me somewhat flummoxed and others as well it would appear. And that's ok - I really do enjoy stuff that is out of the ordinary. Takes that boring predictability and mundaneness out of things - wouldn't you agree?

At the outset, I do note that you have failed or, chosen not to respond to my earlier questions. Others posters have asked similar and other questions e.g. did any members of the BOD participate in the cap rise? Is there a reason as to why you did not address the questions that were put to you? Hopefully, I achieved my aim of putting them to you in a polite and respectful way?

I also appreciate that you have a rather difficult task - I genuinely appreciate that fact. The questions that I have posed to you and others are very pointed and based on the state of things as I find them to be after reading documents that are available in the public domain. Whether my assumptions / conclusions are correct or not, is another matter. Nonetheless, it is why I ask questions. And you are not compelled to answer my questions - no one is. HC is a public forum for open discussion - no one owes anyone anything (well except for good manners I would suggest).

Ok ... I will address the vexing issue of the emoji use. I certainly do not want it to be an unnecessary distraction or, to preoccupy you (or whomsoever) at CGB. You guys must be very busy. It's not overly complicated - I use it as a simple device to express comity towards those who I am responding to and any other readers of my posts. I use the emoji in most of my posts to all respondents. The only time that I do not use the emoji is due, in no small part, to simple absent mindedness.

"To date, as you are aware, we have not responded to you, as we do not know if you are serious, or perhaps baiting."

Are you suggesting that you (and whomsoever) are assessing the merit of my questions based on the colour and use of emoji rather than simply assessing the relevance and or, merit of a particular question? Do you not think that is somewhat odd?

"I am sure that any company being asked, what appear to be, well-researched questions by a poster would question the particular meaning of this emoji, especially used at the end of the text."

Firstly, thank you for acknowledging that my questions are well researched. And no, the association between the importance of an emoji in posts and answering questions has not been my experience. I would respectfully suggest to you (and whomsoever) that your position might be improved if you addressed the questions (irrespective of the presence of whatever emoji) in a professional, transparent and concise manner. You (and whomsoever) are viewing things through the wrong lens - I think. If it were me, I would not respond in the way that you currently do.

Here's how I would approach things if I had your role.

1. If, the answer(s) provided by you to any question posed by any poster are defendable, then that's a win for you and it has served a good purpose.
2. If the answer(s) provided by you to any question posed by any poster are not defendable then that seems to establish the fact that the questions had a rightful place within the discussion.

And no I am not baiting - that is frowned upon on HC - don't ya know? So please regard all of my questions as questions that are asked to develop my understanding of CGB operations.

Now ... can we return to the questions at hand please?

Are you able to respond to my earlier questions regarding the Volcan debt and the questions around the loan to AGMPL (otherwise know to you as AGM) please? If not, that's ok. It doesn't bother me either way. However, as the CGB rep I thought you might be representing and or, advocating the position of the company when responding to pertinent questions regarding the commercial activities of the company.

Thanks (do you think two green emojis is over the top?)

It's all good fun if it's done respectfully Neil.