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 : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Matt C. Austin who wrote (13624)	6/16/1998 10:44:00 PM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

CL I guess you are calling Paul Blumberg and CPM liars? Why dont we use some of the logic and tactics that you used to use when you were bullying people on the IPm thread under the fictitious name of CL Miltimore. Have you talked to anyone at the company? You are guessing about leaches? Obviously you dont know what they are doing over there, have you even bothered to find out, before you cast dispersions? Are you that aware of what is going on behind the scenes at Naxos that you know what is overnight and what has been worked on? Are you more qualified than John Norton and Jeremy Ison that you can flatly contradict what they say? Are you more qualified than Paul Blumberg and Mr. Christian? You have continually lied about your name, first saying that you are CL Miltimore and then using this bogus Matt Austin name. You have even gone so far as to have fake conversations on the threads between these two fictitious people. Your real name is Frank Stauffer.Given this, why should anyone grant you more credibility than a John Norton, Jeremy Ison, Paul Blumberg or CPM? Futhermore, you are just plain wrong. Naxos has been able to fire asay FL for years. Fire Assayng the ore isnt what is new. Repeatability of results from fire asaying is what is new. You can go back several years to find fire assay results. The real reason you are so upset is that you backed IPM so strongly and vociferously, badgering and bullying anyone that didnt believe. Now IPM has its back up against the wall and cant fire assay squat. They claim to only be able to use modified chemical assaying techniques. You were wrong about IPM, and cant stand the fact that naxos is doing things in a conventional manner. Face reality, Frank/matt/ CL. mark

To: Matt C. Austin who wrote (13624)	6/17/1998 11:10:00 AM
From: Jerry in Omaha	Respond to of 20681

Sir(s); <<If you look at press releases over last several months assays are referred to very differently each time.>> Crafty is as crafty sees, oh master of disguises. Your implication is that some sly skilled smith of words has intended to be cleverly deceptive in his shell game of SFA terms in each and every news release. Banal fact: There were several authors of those releases and, in reality, they never gave consistency of terminology to such paranoid detail a second thought. << Naxos has gone from complex orebody to conventional overnight. No one wants to discuss here. Look at responses to you and watch response to me. Don't bring it up!!!>> My intention is not to make you look bad, you seem to be fairly competent administrating that yourself, so I will agree with you on this one. I have pestered everybody from Jimmy to the desert rats about how we can now SFA and couldn't before. I have not been able to assemble even a satisfactory conjecture. I do note, however as Mr. Silvers has pointed out, that there are professionals not lurking about using pseudonyms far more able in the conjecturing department than I am who appear satisfied to the point of risking renowned reputations. 'Nuff for me. Jerard P