Was reading through the news, I like it. If anything I'd make a remark about the gold samples. Its a little confusing when you compare the results to the pdf on their website. Its missing units at the top, but I assume its meters.

The first sample is important to note, as it pretty much means the rest of the length of mineralisation is 0 gr/t/m (due to the high concentration in the 1.5 m). Correct me if I'm wrong.

Then the other two samples show similar mineralisation relatively when compared to the real length (ie.

19.5 m > 0.59 g/t ... as compared to ... 1 m > 2,07 g/t and......

54 m > 0.61 g/t ... as compared to ...1 m > 1.92 g/t)

Aren't the values in the pdf more interesting to notify the public with ? Maybe Noront made a mistake with the placement of their decimals?

Anyway...of to bed... might be a nice day tomorrow. A breather perhaps. Good times...