Actually it is not odd at all. I harshly  decried Paau and admonished him for not supporting us who feel opting-in was helpful to have a voice. We need as many shareholders in this to show the Judge of the overwhelming unfairness of getting only 11% back when money-wise we put up $500M to get ready to mine. I want at least the $500M back. I think we got plenty support  in spite of him. What irks some (maybe only me)  who opted-in is that a person, like him,  would take advantage of us at our expense and him getting the same award with no cost to him. Plus him spending a whole bunch of time telling everyone here opting-in is a waste of your money. I still want to "kick Paau's butt" as you put it, for not putting up. To me put up or shut up. Had we put up nothing, then nothing would likely be the outcome. This became our voice.

BUT. Paau is a lawyer and has access to transcripts of court procedings which we don't have and I'm asking if there is an actual printed timeline.   Surely at the end of a proceding the Judge would state what the next court date would be. To have access to certain professional websites you must be a licensed practioner of that profession. I'm sure he is a member of the LAw Society of Upper Canada.

 I also asked him a specific question about the "Break Fee" but got no response so far.

Again, "What is the date of the next court appearance" which confirms the last order that says if you want to appeal you must put up $750M bond at the same time. Vz response was, no need for a bond "Look we honored our commitment to GRZ as an example. So trust us."  The court must reply to this response I think. The ball is presently in the Court's court.