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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mark silvers who wrote (5509)	3/31/1998 1:19:00 PM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14226

Mark Please forgive me for beating up on this issue but I do not understand what you mean by tampering with an ore pile. When the pile was first created could not this also have involved tampering by the personnel selectively placing material? How then does one determine when an ore pile is pristine? In any event an entire ore pile could not be effected. Therefore, if Russell went around and took samples from here and samples from there and then after processing these samples averaged them would this not settle the issue. If he found one sample which was way way out of line he would discard it for averaging purposes. This is the way statistics works in general. One indication or one sample is never sufficient. There is always, in any, statistical sampling, the possibility of sampling error. This is neutralized by multiple samples. The more you take the more reliable the results.Then you calculate the reliability to one in one hundred, one in one thousand or even tighter. You never, in any statistical sampling procedure achieve exactly 100%. The only way to achieve 100% is not to sample but to process every ounce of the material. I think that the issue of COC reliability is in the order of 1:1000. So, since there is a 1:1000 chance I'll be dead in one week there is no use worrying about it. Let's let this issue be replaced by more interesting matters. Regards, Ed

To: mark silvers who wrote (5509)	3/31/1998 1:26:00 PM
From: Chuck Bleakney	Respond to of 14226

It is probably OK because of the sheer size of the ore pile... The fact it is disturbed is irrelevant... there's a lot of it to back up a COC. If anything it is probably somewhat homogenized as part of the simple preprocessing of it. It has significant value by itself. Bottom line is, does it meets the requirements to stay on Nasdaq... Chuck