Colorado Goldfields Inc. (fka CGFI)

[M_T_Pockets]

"As the author, this should be recognizable."

Therein lies the problem. The author is the one who gets to define what his own writings mean.
It is extremely arrogant to try to redefine another's words just to fit a misguided interpretation or opinion.

"Supply chain economics". Look it up. It means that one good paying job can foster several other jobs. It is a simple concept that others have expressed about CGFI.
Your post expressed an "opinion".
My petition expressed a economic theory that is supported by other more learned people.

And no matter how the words I used are twisted, the original statement did not say that the POW mill would employ 100 people. That is a misguided misrepresentation of the petition letter. The theory is even explained in a footnote if one cares to look beyond their own interpretation for clarification.

Spinning till one screws one self into knots will not change what was written or the effect it had on the DRMS, MLRB, and Governor's attention to CGFI's efforts to reopen the mill. We will see that only when the MLRB meeting occurs. (but so far things are proceeding in a positive direction.)
Pursue the definition chosen. It will change nothing. It will only disclose a shortsighted outlook on the events happening before us and the attempt to mislead the readers.

Here is the original letter so others can verify the wording for themselves.
http://drmsweblink.state.co.us/drmsweblink/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=956420&searchid=67514176-22fe-4d03-9c12-b679b089896d&&dbid=0