Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: go4it who wrote (29003)	12/5/1997 7:51:00 PM
From: Donald Watson, Jr.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Question, when Auric had given there Fire assay numbers (See June 24 release) they used 3 sample areas. Does anoyne recall the weight of the samples 10lbs. 20lbs. 400lbs? And in the latest Fire Assay numbers (Batemen Process) Was each Sample 20 lbs. It seems to me I read in J Taylors interview with Dr. Shaw that he found that much larger samples gave much more accurate results. Also another sidenote. I think it critical that IPM management answer the E-mail and Phone calls of Investors. I was telling some folks about IPM and when they tried to call the Co. they said no -one was available. Im pro IPM but sure would like to hear that more of us are in close contact with them. They may be busy but if a potential investor cant do proper DD. there not going to invest. Just my 2 cents on that. Your Friend, Don Watson

To: go4it who wrote (29003)	12/5/1997 7:53:00 PM
From: Anne Lamb	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35569

laughing..well..fun to read the posts for once.. as to BOBS..i resent your line that i would even consider writing you or anyone else hatemail..that was unfounded and uncalled for.. but typical of what i have been seeing around here lately.. as to Dennis..where did i say forgive and forget..i said no such thing.. i find it so heartwarming how youre trying to save the worlds unwitting investors especially in light of your view of what this forum is for as per what you emailed me last summer. and to Chuck and EVa and Roger..i love it. lol and one side note..i never said i didnt want questioning or negative posters..i do want them..constructive arguments and thoughts make for a good thread..and i also said that anyone that posted back to me would claim i said that..bingo.. so.. TO THE MOONPIE, ALICE!..then maybe further in the future!