SP, page-412

@ans25
Lets clear up one point, I don't think you are a said "cheer leader" because of your positive disposition to GPP and its projects, in fact I applaud your commitment but more so because of your ability to actually debate points and not just blatantly ramp.
I wasn't going to bother replying but as it appears to be a direct reference to myself then I will.
I will make it blunt, I am not a hypocrite and if cared to wander back in the forum of my "different holding" you will quite obviously see that the "Board of Directors" and "Management" were often the topic of my displeasure to the point that I was a participating Requisitioning Member that helped dispose of that said board. Has the "new board" satisfied my decision and the confidence that it will progress, not yet BUT the difference is they will freely and eagerly engage with ALL share holders either by phone or email where as the same cannot be said for GPP's management.
So it was warranted then that my "over pedantic" analysis had merit and just cause, and I am not suggesting anything of the nature here but historically there were 2 attempts to dispose of some GPP board members by disgruntled share holders for similar reasons of not being able to progress projects which has made for some interesting reading.

I brought into GPP solely for the OHD as I personally see it as being the long awaited "company maker" and believe that if we find Lithium that has been suggested by GPP's announcements, then I think they will flip it to fund the OHD, as for the REE if they again find what they are suggesting, then IMO they will take this to mine as its process is far cheaper than getting the Lithium and REE will be very much in demand. The SOP project I believe will play an important role in tandem with the OHD project.

The point of this part of the post is to recognise that commentators @apkjm @Scarpa @jantimot @natandsal @Davy Boy (at one stage) and yourself that can offer up valuable information and constructive debate will have a "negative" poster like myself go and do some looking and research.
As well as my "deemed" negative posts will
1) Make you do similar to disprove and
2) Acknowledge that posters that were continually attacked for their perceived negative opinion also had validity in some of their reasoning when I stopped being so "pro" GPP and started to be prepared to listen to the other side and started to do more investigating into GPP. When it became a can of worms and despite the perception that I am only digging for dirt and looking for negatives I was more curious as to the more I found the more it has lead me to more things that have made me raise my eyebrows.
As for the ganging up attacks, the following is part of an admin post @Madmin that seen a need to post on the GPP thread back in March, whether it is as prevalent now as it was back then maybe questionable, it maybe irrelevant to the current debatable topics but the underlying point of what I am trying to make apparent is the same, that a poster should be free to say what they feel is important to a discussion.

......but don't gang up on someone because they're questioning something. Look at a range of stocks, and ask yourselves as investors whether you want a cosy ramp fest, or some serious discussions.
As well as wether you or anyone else deems my posts as serious and worth debating is up to you but I will continue to post as @The Stig has posted 27843165 there is some that are getting a benefit from my research and digging.

For the full Madmin post:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/an...291902/page-106?post_id=23414316#.Wd66gxNL9m9
AS well as some words of wisdom from a poster on another thread @Martin Gifford
Shareholders should take some responsibility for treating management with too much deference. That is too common in many stock threads. Management get elevated to the status of Gods. Instead, shareholders of any stock should maintain a devil’s advocate attitude

I have previously openly admitted that I failed to do enough research of the OHD project (I only went back 2 years in announcements) but when GPP failed to produce the PFS and missed timelines, then little flags were popping up. Hence I am interested or more so now concerned as to why GPP since its listing has tried repeatedly to get some sort of project up and running but to no avail. You may not like the negative posts, and you may not deem that what happened back then is important as we have 3 "bazookas" in the pipe works BUT there is a definite history of rinse and repeat of looking for the next "good" or "hot" commodity to chase.

What I find amusing is that you and others like to mention my other holdings and when you resort to doing that then it is clear that you have no other recourse to try and defend your side of a debate, try not to resort to that as you are a much better poster than the others that do it.

cheers