0PEN LETTER TO DAVID BAINES of the Vancouver Sun
For the second time since you began your relentless polemic against Naxos you have mentioned the internet discussions of the desert dirts. Even though your most recent offering erroneously names the forum "Silicon Valley" (keeping up what is apparently a hallowed tradition in your columns), I take it you or your collaborators are no stranger to the Naxos thread here. That being the case, I have a few things I want to get off my chest.
For those of us who know anything about the desert dirt work, it is clear that you are manipulating the available information in important ways. You frequently resort to "hot button" expressions such as "tried to float unorthodox assay methods", "cult-like fervour" and "alchemy"in an effort to disparage without having to do the honest and hard jounalistic work of actually finding facts.
You have spent an absolutely huge amount of time and copy on the Naxos story without ever doing the sort of first-hand investigation which would allow you to make an informed decision. You constantly parade the opinions of the dinosaurs of the Canadian mining and mineral investment community. What do you expect these people to say, that the whole foundation stone of their stature and credibility, the standard fire assay, is henceforth irrelevent? How can you be so unreservedly negative about this stock when the limit of your personal investigations was to once make a telephone call to Sierra Labs. Based on the attention you have given it, this is a big story for you, Davey. Why would you never consider a trip down to these areas or at least spend some time with someone who has?
It seems to me that a journalist of substance seeks to challenge the received wisdom and not sycophantically give obeisance to the established order. Apart from doing your readers a disservice, this is bloody boring. You do not have to buy into the challenging view, but at least you should give it a fair hearing.
With Naxos you have always gone out of your way to create the impression of sleaze. Your imputations about their management, Jimmy John especially, have been particularly egregious. When he was supporting the company with large infusions from his own funds, you were regaling us with tales of his (relatively minor) stock selling.
"Failure of legitimate assay labs to confirm these 'significant' assays are often attributed, by the charlatan, to their capability of detecting 'unassayable gold,' while the check assayer cannot.". Only a "yellow journalist" would use a quote like this in a piece about two companies, IPM and Naxos which have actually used legitimate assay labs to prove beyond question that they do in fact have precious metals in concentration in their lands.
Your motives in being so one-sided in reporting on this company are certainly open to question. I, for one, am delighted to find you back on your pet hobby horse at this particular juncture. This will refresh the memories of your readers with regard to your convictions about this company at a time when events are likely to prove how bone-headed these convictions are. Keep up the public drivel, Davey! The day is not far off when you won't find a place to hide.
A devoted reader. |
