right hq, where are the resource upgrades, page-101

"Good grief Vintage, have you got nothing better to do? Picking one post out of a pretty big file is damn spooky"

Lol upmarket. You are just posturing...or have no idea how to use HC's 'advanced' search too! It took me less than 2 minutes to find, copy and paste that post. All you need is a reasonable recollection of the time frame in which certain debates took place (which I have) - so you click 'advanced', enter date range, poster name and share code, hit enter and voila..there it is. With you - not too many posts - it is very quick. Just have to check the few posts with the highest number of TU (ie the posts most attacking of my posts, lol, and there is what I am looking for).

A shame that resource upgrades are not that easy!

As far as the details of your post are concerned, it is just more of your arrogant superiority (describing those you don't agree with as seagulls, rabid, broken records, martyrs, crusaders etc etc).

I would remind you that all I did in my recent post - directed at Sharks (NOT you) was make a simple observation about changed perceptions - that while it is entirely acceptable now to forecast 2014 start-up, I got crucified for it just a year ago.

You then couldn't help using my response to Sharks as a prompt for a dig at me - and also make your absurd comment that the issue of mining commencement timelines was only 'minutiae'

So I then (with my 2 minute research) reminded you of the earlier discussion of start-up timelines - something of CENTRAL interest on the PEN threads for months - and one of your posts on the matter.

The major point of quoting the particular posts was to remind you of the general agreement on the threads - and specifically your agreement with it - of the late 2012-early 2013 start up. That did not appear to be 'minutiae' to you then! It was a core purpose of the post!

And btw, my focus in the post was on the timeline - not on whether you agreed with svengali on the 50c SP by early 2013. But having raised it, I agree that you did suggest svengali's 50c forecast was a 'tad' aggressive. 'Tad' of course means 'a small degree' or 'a little'. In other words, you said it was aggressive but only to a 'small degree'. (So, given the correct definition of 'tad', your comment that 'tad is often used as an understatement if you haven't noticed' is meaningless - in case you haven't noticed).

It seems to me that, with your posturings and little put-downs, you are often 'up' something else other than just the 'market'