Deep,

There is much about your posts that rub me the wrong way.

I have spent considerable time mulling this over and trying to understand what and why.

It is not just that you disagree with me - that always rubs people the wrong way - it is the manner in which you disagree.

I have also been reviewing my own actions in this debate and as Hub Leader.

I have given you much latitude, nonetheless.

I feel that I have a hypothesis about my dislike for your posts.

You may take the hypothesis any way you like, but it is a result of much thought over the subject.

Hypothesis:

I think you display an "ivory tower - not connected to reality" paradigm in your posts.

You treat me like you are the professor telling a student to "go and do your own research".

You stick to pedantic definitions and ignore real-world results.

<End Hypothesis>

You also appear to have somebody on your side that is trying to "rig the system"

I notice that all 4 of your recent posts - have 4 recommendations each. We do not have that many active posters on this forum at this time.

I strongly suspect a multiple-alias person - who is maintaining silence - is recommending your posts in an effort to discredit me in as many eyes as they can.

You seem to cling to every academic argument you can in order to disagree with me while ignoring the reality of what is actually happening.

You try to imply that Silver Standard has no "real, economically mineable, silver ore" simply because they do not meet a "proven economic reserves standard" which you ask me to look up rather than give it to me and all the other readers of this discussion.

I, on the other hand, will gladly give you a link to a NI43-101 conforming feasibility study (look for it in the link library here).

This report was prepared by Hatch Ltd. who are a respected name in the mining industry.

You appear to be implying that because I have not pointed to "proved, economic, reserves" that this mine is unlikely to be profitable.

This is the basis for my hypothesis - you ignore a well researched, standards compliant, report that was used as the basis for the decision to mine, in preference for some standard that you aver is a specific standard in common use in the industry, and then decline to point me to this standard and instead tell me to find it myself - based on your rather vague pointers.

In my opinion, a reasonable, real-life based, person who cared to advance his argument, and believed in his argument, rather than just being argumentative, would provide a direct pointer to his supporting evidence.

Your main purpose here, so far, appears to be as disruptive and as negative an influence possbile within the bounds of what is considered acceptable posting.

I believe you are trying to test the "boundaries" of what I will allow and not allow on this board.

Please understand that Agoracom is the ultimate arbiter of what is allowed and not allowed. I have only been given the "first-line" screening authority.

I am seriously considering terminating your privilege to be a member of this forum based on my perception that you have nothing positive to contribute and are, in fact, attempting to be as negative as possible without triggering ejection.

That kind of perception should not be based on a single post or single incident, and indeed it is not. You have had multiple opportunites to prove otherwise and have done nothing in my opinion to change that perception.

In fact, I think your presence here is discouraging legitimate participation by others and am therefore putting you on notice of this.

You may refer to my "control freak" attitude, if you wish, but seeing as I have been given the responsibility (and the authority) to assist in maintaining some specific standards in this forum, I feel it is my duty, rather than my pleasure, to attempt to handle difficult cases like yours.