Member Info for news

Contd [got cut off ]

Naysayer per Cambridge Dictionary: "Someone who says something is >>not possible>>, is not good or will fail." [Official meaning of Naysayer.]

Relevance: Zumore last night said akin to that I could ==Get Banned==from this site for using "Naysayer" or "Nay Nay" which the latter means No , No ---both everyday usage words.?? LSE Chat Rules on the right does not say members get banned for using "naysayer" or "nay nay" ie No No. I have been a member of this site for 13 years without blemish. Sun, 4.8.24. Hope that explains.

Link: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/naysayer

"Some who says something >>is not possible

Link: https://www.oncontracts.com/use-for-emphasis-instead-of-for-the-avoidance-of-doubt

">>British Lawyers>>>use For the Avoidance of Doubt" or "For Clarity". I've sometimes started using "For Emphasis" instead." By Dell D.C. Toedt III, American Attorney & P/t Law Professor of Practive, USA.

Note: I have posted a British contract law source and it says the >>same>> thing as Toedt III above, an American Attorney & P/t Professor of Practice. The American Attorney above uses "For Emphasis" and not the British lawyers style of "For the avoidance of doubt" or "For clarity." So, on >>checking 2 sources>> there is no suggestion that any of the terms are used for "lying" [incorrect per the 2 legal sources, both UK & USA]. Relevance: Clarifying the posts from last night.

Specinvestor99

Admin of London South East said to "Filter" and I think its best that to not carry on I reply , you reply, I will be filtering tomorrow. Right, I have gone to the loo and back to zzz. 4.8.2024.

---------"For the avoidance of doubt" ----------

Ref: "For the Avoidance of Doubt Or the Sake of C l a r i t y." -We Agree Legal Contract.

"Phenomenon or Rule Prevailing - Principles of Contract Drafting Require That You are Simple & C l e a r & that you avoid Ambiguity." Link to check: https://www.weagree.com/dm/contracts/contract-wording-for-the-avoidance-of-doubt/

Reply to Specinvestor99: Per your 2:52 post , you deem anyone using the term: "For the avoidance of doubt" is "lying" ["lies] which is NOT the case at all , be it general definition or contract term from which it has been derived. Everyone has different styles and I used that term and often I cite "For the Avoidance of Doubt/Clarity" and no where states that using this term is telling "LIES" as you state.

Secondly, I have CONFIRMED that I have NO affliction/S because using a style [individual style] of "For the Avoidance of Doubt " is NOT an affliction. If it were, then ALL LEGAL personnel are "afflicted" - surely not , isnt it? It just is practical to save re-edit BEFORE pressing reply.

I have to REPLY to so many questions and it should be put to others . Just like Solgold used the term "imminent" in 1 early RNS but that was not within their control as the govt in that country takes time to issue an Environmental Licence of which sometimes, timing in business is not foreseen earlier. In the case of RRR, if they used "imminent", there have been a lot of delays and explained by RRR RNS /Interview and political voting in the new govt etc as RRR explained isnt it?

You also said in your 2:53 & 3.20 post, you feel it is tis and that but that is NOT the case per the legal contract legal people and it is a terms that is used for "Clarity".

Relating to "afflictions", I have NONE and CONFIRM I have NO affiction/s. Why? Tired eyes that need resting from researching article on other stocks is not an affliction by any means and everyone needs to rest their eyes. The article above with link, they use RED WORDS for "For the avoidance of doubt, YOU ARE SIMPLE & CLEAR [words are in red just as I use caps given no colour icon here.

As NikeAir180, everyone has their OWN STYLE, you have yours, I have mine and others have their own style isnt it? I had to go to the loo and took a look at news so just looked in. Thank you NIKEAIR180 for explaining what is known as I have said.

Specinvestor99

I am having a cup of tea before I go off to zzz.

In a reply to anyone, I state my view on the point of law and precedent law - the other party can disagree. That is the right of reply. This is not a legal forum where legal views are expounded as there is no judicial review here on this forum. That is my view. The other person , say for example can state their view , isnt it?

For CLARITY: I repeat and CONFIRM that I have no such disability as you terms it. Everyone 's eyes get tired when they have used the computer for too long. It is NOT a disability as I said and I DONT have one. Sorry.

4.8.24 I have finished my tea now and off to zzz.

Typo 1:40am not pm.

Specinvestor99

I have already replied to Zumore.

Sorry, I cannot continue as it is now close to 1:50am in the morning. Sun, 4.8.24.

It is now very late in Britain ie past 1pm + in the early hours and I need to end the conversation. I will just reply with this: your post refers at 1:40am in the morning , UK time, Sun, 4 Aug 2024.

What you raised about LONDON AIM STOCK MARKET is not a matter that is up to me about introducing QUARTERLY reports like in Canada etc. I am not in charge of the London Stock Exchange/Regulations/ UK Govt Commercial Dept etc.

Lastly, I CONFIRM that I do NOT SUFFER FROM A "DISABILITY". I CONFIRM that I NEVER SAID I HAD A "DISABILITY" because if one looks at the computer screen for long, one needs to rest one's eyes and that is normal for everyone, not only me. However, in using CAPS, I can pick out the words more easily , that's all, not because of any disa bility. Sorry, NOT correct.

I am off now as it is late and no one is here any more. I was here to look at other stock forums to catch up. News, 4.8.24 By the way, I have never gone to Canada so I cannot have experiential knowledge so I do not have CROSS BORDER knowledge to bridge two jurisdictions and many here who have not lived in Canada or dual citizens will only know about British law/British Stock Exchange rules, isnt it?----4.8.24.

Specinvestor99:

[1] NO ONE is stopping you from posting and you are posting isnt it? However, where it DOES not concern you, then I can say that the topic of conversation is ended isnt it between the parties directly involved surely? All the PARTIES [principals] have now gone SILENT so there is now a conclusion to the conversation on this forum involving the parties.

[2] FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT - the OFFICIAL meaning is "CLARITY". ===UNDER UK LAW ===OR PRECEDENT CASE LAW, USING FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT IS ===NOT USED AND MEANS IT IS TELLING LIES is it? When one posts a long stream of replies, than using the word: For the avoidance of doubt in Britain means that it is the SUMMARY for "CLARITY." You may disagree but that is the current position of UK law.

I have nothing to add and I will not be on this forum so cannot answer as I have other stocks to research as well.

News, 4 Aug 2024

I will keep it short as it is late in Britain. News, Sat 3 Aug 2024.[1:28]

My reply below refers. Sat, 3.8.24. For your attention in case you like short replies so in summary me stating that UK Stock Exchange Rules and Canadian Stock Exchange Rules are different to a Canadian poster on this forum DOES NOT justifies BANNING either. Even the London Stock Exchange will back me up as Canadian Stock Exchange rules are different and SO IS UK LAW & CANADIAN LAW.

News. Sat, 3 Aug 2024. So, why should that merit banning for? London South East Chat rules does say so that ordinary words like No No [ Nay Nay] & Criticism [Naysayer] are banned words under UK Law or London South East Chat Rules for using ordinary words, surely?

Typo: Should read 13 years of unblemished record on London South East for me, not 12.

-------------My Official Record on London South East Stock Forum------

News [me] - signed up to London South East on 1 9 July 2 0 11. So , a 12 YEAR RECORD THAT IS UNBLEMISHED

on this site.

Just to let you know Zumore in case you are not aware. I was ALSO LONDON SOUTH EAST'S TOP POSTER when I was voted by folks on Solgold , London South East SOLG forum ---hence, RICHYRICH1 on this forum said he remembered me.

So, I will robustly defend your assertions of which I have shown appears to have NO MERIT on UK Law grounds or otherwise for words used in ordinary life ie "criticism" [naysayer] or "Nay Nay" which is defined as "No No."

What get banned a/c to you, Zumore for using ordinary words that even in UK CINEMA have official CRITIQUE articles about plays etc? Since when is Naysayers being ruled IN THE UK HIGH COURT as being "abusive" a/c to you. Where, Sir and on what basis - if that is so, THEN NAY NAY WHICH IS DEFINED AS NO NO is also considered "abusive" by you which is an ordinary word? IT DOES NOT SAY SO ON THIS SITE'S CHAT RULES EITHER. My robust reply and for the attention of HEAD OF ADMIN, LONDON SOUTH EAST. Sat, 3 Aug 2024. 11:41pm. Thank you. Yours respectfully, NEWS.

--------------------Zumore -------- 22:48pm., Sat, 3.8.24.

HEAD OF ADMIN, LONDON SOUTH EAST

I have listed my official reply to Zumore who is NOT the principal but is complaining about what I said to Specinvestor or use the word "naysayer" [nay nay]. Nay Nay is officially defined as NO, NO. Zumore - if Specinvestor99 wants to complain to London South East, let him take it up and it is still the same reply.

UNLESS IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE UK HIGH COURT THAT THERE IS PRECEDENT LAW IN THE UK THAT EXPLAINING UK LAW IE LONDON STOCK EXCHANGE REGULATIONS ARE DIFFERENT TO CANADA IS A VALID PREMISE TO GET BANNED, then it is your view but NOT UNDER UK LAW . Your view is therefore NOT CORRECT.

[2] Get BANNED from the London South East for using "NAYSAYER" WHICH IS OFFICIALLY DEFINED AS "CRITICISM"? AND FOR "NAY NAY" IS NO , NO? So, saying No, No is being abusive. If one goes to the theatre in the UK, one can read the CRITIQUE on the play etc. So, do CRITIQUE are considered "abusive" per your view? SO, UNLESS , THE UK HIGH COURT OR COURTS HAVE PRECENDENT LAW THAT USING THE WORD NAYSAYER WHICH IS ==CRITICISM== is grounds for BANNING, then it is ALSO NOT CORRECT.

LONDON SOUTH EAST CHAT RULES: THERE IS NO CHAT RULES THAT SAY, NAYSAYERS WHICH IS CRITICISM IS CONSIDERED AS ABUSE by this site or that NAY, NAY IS NO, NO abuse either.

So, above is my reply. I have eye strain so using caps, and it is NOT for any other reason. I need to pick the key words for reference otherwise it is a mass of words. LET ME ALSO SAY, NO ONE ANSWERS THE QUESTIONS SPECINVESTOR99 FROM CANADA WANTS TO KNOW but I take the trouble to explain and since it is not appreciated, that CANADIAN LAW AND UK LAW ARE NOT SIMILAR, I cannot see how that is BEING CONDESCENDING.

------------------MY DEFENCE AND A ROBUST REPLY TO YOU & FOR THE ATTENTION OF HEAD OF ADMIN, LONDON SOUTH EAST, RRR. Dated Sat, 3 Aug 2024 Time: 11:35pm. NikeAir180- yes, it was a typo and you are right as I watch the Australian mkts and they are already Sun for their RNS.

Zumore:

I am looking at another stock on this site but let me reply:

[1] Kindly look at my exact post on LONDON SOUTH EAST at 20:25 at Red Rock Resources [RRR] at the last para in reply to Specinvestor99: " For note: You said you are from Canada? That has BEARING on conversation on THIS FORUM as it is talking about BRITISH STOCK with BRITISH RULES and NO one here knows about CANADA as us FOLKS HERE are NOT CANADIANS." [Context of Canadian : My reply to Specinvestor99 from Canada on UK LONDON SOUTH EAST RRR, LISTED ON LONDON AIM STOCK MARKET. Specinvestor99 talks about CANADIAN STOCK EXCHANGE RULES which is NOT THE SAME AS IN THE UK, so hence I say, we on this forum ARE NOT COVNERSANT on CANADIAN STOCK EXCHANGE REGULATIONS ETC as the context in the past explained.

------------------------FOR THE ATTENTION OF HEAD OF ADMIN, LONDON SOUTH EAST, RRR--------------------

Specinvestor99 has NOT complained but ZUMORE has now stated to me at 22:48 -" I cant be the only one that noticed that you are VERY ANTI-CANADIAN and very condescending towards our favourite Canadian poster. Its bit like you do not understand the BRITISH WAYS. =======FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT: Zumore, if you are on British soil , then kindly note that I do go to Canadian site but there they TOO will NOT EXPLAIN anything of the CANADIAN REGULATIONS there relating to their Canadian stocks. Why? It takes too much time to NAVIGATE and explain as THEY ARE EQUALLY NOT FAMILIAR WITH UK LONDON STOCK EXCHANGE RULES eg AIM Handbook etc.

ZUMORE TO ME: "YOU COULD EVENTUALLY GET BANNED FOR THAT." Well, my reply to LONDON SOUTH EAST HEAD OF ADMIN WILL BE , Zumore , SPECINVESTOR 99 HAS NOT COMPLAINED who is said by himself to be from Canada. Others do not explain to Specinvestor99 about British regulation of the Stock Exchange UK. So, as AN OUTSIDE 3RD PARTY, YOU state I could GET BANNED eventually for telling Specinvestor the above about BRITISH REGULATORY rules of the London Stock Exchange given Specinvestor99 thinks that BRITAIN should be THE SAME as CANADA FOR AIM STOCK MKT LONDON?

[2] Zumore: "YOU FURTHER STATE I use ==ABUSIVE LANGUAGE by calling posters "NAYSAYERS" and "NAY NAYS". So , it goes without saying you could GET BANNED FOR THAT AS WELL." 22:48, Sat, 3 Aug 2024.

My reply to London South East forum [HEAD OF ADMIN]: The ===OFFICIAL DEFINITIION OF NAYSAYER is ==A PERSON THAT CRITICIZE" and ISNT THIS CORRECT SO HOW IS THIS BEING ABUSIVE a/c to you. DONT they CRITIZE this co ie RRR? IS CRITICIZE CONSIDERED IN LAW , LEGAL CIRCLES AS A/C TO YOU : "BEING ABUSIVE". I cant see any High Court precedent law case that has PROVEN THAT IN A UK COURT OF LAW THAT USING NAYSAYER IS "LEGALLY RULED IN THE UK AS BEING ABUSIVE". FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT: ==YOUR ASSERTION /S ARE ===UNPROVEN== and NEVER ESTABLISHED in any UK HIGH COURT THAT NAYSAYER is taken to be being "abusive". So, let's say, I used the OTHER MEANING OF CRITICISE, so is that that GROUNDS fo

Ref: ADVFN RRR STOCK FORUM [Red Rock Resources]:

The principal, Kemche has now replied to an earlier post by stating verbatim in the opening sentence: " Algernon, I truly appreciate your offer of advocacy services on this occasion but I will politely have to D E M U R ." Ref: 20:45, Post 18499 of 18499. ADVFN RRR stock forum on Sun, 3 Aug 2024. [DEMUR = NO THANK YOU TO ADVOCACY BY ALGERNON2 re:topic of conversation using Perry Mason books?]

The post background is 17:26, Sun, 3 Aug 2024, Post 18498 of 18499. [ADVFN RRR stock forum]: "Algernon2:....I have been a reader of Perry Mason books since 1971 [when I bought my first one at a Village Hall Jumble Sale in Coulsdon so can help out with plotting a strategy of defence if you need me, Kemche...."]

Comment: That concludes the conversation between all the principal parties on LONDON SOUTH EAST RRR AND ADVFN RRR as said. I have to post the above as it refers to this forum so reply is from this forum by me to reference the above.

News, Sun, 3 Aug 2024. Right, I am now off as I have waited for hours now and ALL SILENT FROM ALL PRINCIPAL PARTIES, not outsiders?

P.S II

I do wonder WHY you are repeating RE-HASHING what has already been answered MORE THAN once. As for information, WHY DONT FOLKS like you HELP out with searching for research eg industry news about lithium , gold price , neighbouring sites to RRR? I never take advantage of others , hence I share research about RRR KILMORE, Victoria, Australia and neighbours to RRR at Sunday Creek, some 14 mins away or 5 miles away.

If you want to take issues up, there is NO CEO/CHAIRMAN OF RRR, so kindly contact RRR or go to Twitter as other investors do to ask Mr Bell in a nice way where is he currently ie project country or in London.

THERE IS NO ONE TAKING A CASE AGAINST HELPFUL. But in case, he is busy, I am sure NIKEAIR180 will come along as he said he was at a departure place which means maybe on hols or for work.

Hope that clarifies. As I said, I skim across your post and I am now off as it is now almost 9pm British time and NO ONE is here. News, Sun 3.8.24. @8:45pm. By the way, the same questions over and over again have been answered by everyone already.

P.S

Specinvestor99

Just in case you dont know what FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT MEANS. The official meaning : "FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY. Can prevent ambiguity ..further down the line." [In English].

So, kindly please do not add your own view to that. Thanks. Sun, 3.8.24. If you are not aware, this site has BANNED posters as this is for everyone to post on RRR especially on the weekday when the London Stock Market is open. It is a stock forum and for others, they want to hear about RRR news. O.K with you because folks will not want this to continue which is nothing to do with RRR is it?

MATTER IS NOW CONCLUDED:

This is normal if you dont mind because ALL parties are NOW SILENT. On this forum at London South East RRR, it is a STOCK FORUM, not social chat etc - look at the chat rules. However, matters raised on Sat and Sun have to be REPLIED to and all concerned have done so IE PRINCIPAL PARTIES of which you were not here.

I CAN CALL THE END OF THE CONVERSATION because RIGHT OF REPLY GIVEN and on Monday, 4 Aug 2024, the matter cannot again be raised to reply back and forth. FOLKS WANT TO DISCUSS RRR.

Clear. FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT: It is nothing more than a general term used by me TO HIGHLIGHT that is what I said and easier to see rather than a chunk of conversation. Further to this, I will not reply to you, specinvestor99 as you were not IN on any conversation and NO ONE wants to CONTINUE on Sunday, 3.8.24. Everything has been answered.

News, 3 Aug 2024. For note: You said you are from Canada? That has bearing on conversation on this forum as its talking about British stock with British rules and no one here knows about Canada as us folks here are NOT Canadians.

NIKEAIR180

Thank you for your post of 17:29, Sun, 3 Aug 2024. I must say that you are THE expert in following all the conversations on this forum or across the pond. Ah, you mention departure. Glad we share the same taste in YORKSHIRE tea although I am brewing it from leaves rather than tea bags. I have yet to try the Gold series but have it next to try.

On another note, I will NOT be LOOKING in much at this forum so IF, anything needs answering, KINDLY NOTE THAT I AM NO LONGER LOOKING in as the NEXT NEWS hopefully will be a RNS from RRR as and when there is an update. So, just because I DONT ANSWER doesnt mean I have NO REPLY. So, IF, you would be SO KIND TO TAKE NOTE & help out if it is necessary just to say NEWS on Sun, 3 Aug 2024 said so.

On another note, a more interesting note has shown up by way of the other forum and that will be for Mr Bell's attention as I cant answer for him. FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT: All Questions and Answers have been provided yesterday by me in reply to the comments on this forum etc or other. Today, Sun, 3 Aug 2024, HELPFUL has himself answered relating to the comments about him. SO, UNDER RULE OF LAW IN BRITAIN, there has been question and replies given. it is NOW SILENT and THEREFORE, THE CONVERSATION HAS CONCLUDED. Your help in remembering who said what , when etc is greatly appreciated by me. and thanks to Helpful as well for his links to RRR neighbours.

So, that ends the conversation ---------ALL PARTIES ON THIS FORUM ie resident et all [resident only because shareholders are deemed to be able to vote at RRR AGM whilst those who may not have any RRR shares cant vote so I am not privy who does or doesnt own RRR shares but all welcome to post per this site's rules]. -------ARE NOW SILENT. BOTH SIDES HAVE NOW HAD THEIR FULL RIGHTS OF REPLY under rule of law. MATTER NOW CONCLUDED.

Cant continue to have further discourse ie discussion as this is not a extended conversation ie discourse about the SAME TOPIC again and again. Everyone wants to READ ABOUT RRR , not discourses ie discussion about Question & Answers session and it has to end as it has to be ideally on topic, yah?

News, Sun, 3 Aug 2024 @19:39. DYOR. NIA. Without prejudice.

P.S.

Real name ie USER NAME on ADVFN RRR but I have given time, date, post number so that is for reference to check if one wants to read the verbatim I quoted. Sun, 3.8.24.

THEEEEDUKE: I WAS NEVER IN YOUR INFORMAL PUB GROUP of sayers and WILL NEVER JOIN. I make it a point NEVER to JOIN PRIVATE Telegram groups etc. There are rules about that as well.