Mr Ect Rep.I asked you legitimate questions about the operations...

Mr Ect Rep.I asked you legitimate questions about the operations of this company and transparency relating to your announcement you just put out.
I'm getting help writing this time for you to understand me and try treat my questions like every body else please.
You have answered Mithrams comment and told him that
"Hi Mithrams,
All very good questions and comments.
The quick shift in strategy proliferated by the loss of our NMDC/NLCIL partnership, meant "

That person made comments and gave his opinion and asked questions in between. He did not just ask a question but you answered him anyhows didn't you? Other people offered comments within questions too.
I did that too and you call me a troll. Might be because i have a different writing style and because of your own narrative if you reckon I asked
" too numerous and are leading questions that often cannot be answered because they are founded on incorrect assumptions and or are designed to not be answered so as to provide evidence of ECT not answering them". That's your own narrative Mr Rep. That is you trying to convince other people about your opinoin on my behaviour. Your narrative. Put that aside please and read the questions I asked you about facts. I think your narrative is too personal and not related to the fact based questions I asked. Almost 20 people gave me excellent feedback for my questions but you didn't appreciate them? Please answer my questions for the 20 other people then.

" too numerous and are leading questions that often cannot be answered because they are founded on incorrect assumptions and or are designed to not be answered so as to provide evidence of ECT not answering them"

Too numerous? I asked the same question a few times about whether or not certain questions would fall under "commercial in confidence". I did not ask that about just one question so I had to repeat it so you knew it was connected to the new leaf you appeared to have turned over by mentinoing the new potential comapnies you are informally potentially pursuing in your own words.
You answered mithrams both questions and comments. Is it because you like him or think he is good for your look and you ignored me because I asked you something that you did not want to answer? I know you Can answer them because you personally invited me to call you on the phone! But you won't tell us all publicly what you were going to tell me on the phone. That is something I can't understand.
Who are you to tell me that I "designed" a question so it couldn't not be answered when my questions offer knowledge into your operations?

I asked you if you will be transparent about past figures nd the current relationships that you have with customers or if some of the old relationships like the Tasmania deal, are still ongoing. This is relevant to know for investors but you don't tell us these things!
How are we supposed to asses your success at maintaining relations if you don't answer us? Why do you not update the market when a relationship ceases Glen?
I did the exact thing that Mithrams did and maybe I didnt use paragraphs but my words were pretty clear and the sentances with question marks you could have answered with facts, not an opinion. Why didn't you even try to answer them?
You cherry picked today and that is a fact, based on your "rules". Buddy you don't make the rules. We ask questions as you request and you avoid answering them based on your comfort zone, not rules. I think we have all learned a lot today from you.

I gave you a context for why I was asking my questions and gave you quotes from your past announcement. What that quote contained was about your transparency and I thought that was good. That had me asking if you will now apply the same transparency to other projects and sales agreements and what the status would be if you became transparent on the health of them. Some of them were mentioned a couple of years ago and still nobody knows if you are making money from them eg TasmaniaColdry sales being shipped.
You won't answer them so this is now a conclusive response as far as I am concerned.


who do you think you are by treating me like a second class citizen? Right there is you trolling me. That's what you did today and I am not a troll. A troll doesn;t use factual information to ask a question that is about a true need for relavant information.
You astound me with your cherry picking. I can only assume (which you don;t want me to do under your personal rules) that it appears you are hiding behind that wall of "commercial in confidence" again when I thought thigns had changed. You treat me like I am someone else, like others did when I first joined I got called about 10 different people. Time to drop the old personal hate battle that is going on behind the scenes don't you think? I think you have enough things on your plate than taking so much time out to read a bunch of questions and then not answer them and then make posts about how much you didn't like them. That's efficieny for you isn't it. Get back to business and keep people informed. That will keep you from being sacked mate. Those are the actual rules of life. I'm a tough old feller so I'll just get on with serious business people, not those who waste my time inviting questions and then making personal accusations. This boomer has called you out. Get on with it.