Apologies to the forum; you must be pretty sick of this argument...

Apologies to the forum; you must be pretty sick of this argument by now.
I'll try to be brief refuting this blizzard of spam, abuse and misrepresentation.
Chem has attempted an absolutely classic switch of position. now regaling me for supposedly supporting his original (mis)understanding while appropriating ours as his own.
He starts out 75359936 lambasting Aus's comment "CCP would seem to want the mkt balance improved" and seems to assume balance means between Chinese and ROW production 75444306.
I quoted AL 75431478 from the Q&A and followed up with our idea of market balance 75434251, Aus explained it to 75456360 as I did 75465078 and 75479156.
Chem claimed 75473691 the Chinese were doing the opposite of balancing by expanding production quotas and I pointed out 75476706 it was a contraction compared to actual demand growth.
By 75479219 Chem was appropriating out POV but denying it was 'market balance'. He borrows our view 'when REE prices stabilize and confidence returns, LYC will be a prime beneficiary' in 75497020.
There's then a hysterical series of abusive rants, 75519684 etc and 75525035 etc including complaints that Aus & I post too much!!
It all culminates in the lie in 75533049 deliberately misquoting 'ausheds claim that the CCP suddenly wants to balance the global economy'.
Note the dishonest shift (bolded) trying to shore up his misrepresentations.
I'll finish by briefly restating my view (in line with Al Pol and Aus IMO).
- China wants to better balance the RE market (in China) so the players can make some profit, including external suppliers (mostly US and Myanmar). Currently most are loss making.
- They have implemented modestly increased quotas, well below the market growth rate, as a measure to improve market balance.
- This should increase spot prices and ultimately Lynas' sales prices.
I apologise in advance for the blizzard of abuse and misrepresentation I might set off. But I won't be shouted down by a bully.