Recently it was this unfunded statement.
Should not be desirable having two assests representing the same asset at the same time but to not specify reasons why it would be desirable is not good. Later in the discussion it turned out that maybe it is necessary to have two assets live at the same time but the argumentation also felt like somewhat of an after construction.
And there was also problems with the SNT supply proposal which also made you question if it should be handled by someone else and then it was handed over to @oetyng.
There was also some further logical strange unfunded statements in that thread that raised concerns.
So there are several reasons from history that has accumulated for raising concerns.
It is difficult to write these comments as it is not because of Jim as a person, he is great in many ways. Even if the discussion has also developed in a direction of some personal rivalry. It is about fear over the quality, logic and reasoning when it comes to the economic parts and optimal solutions for the project. Wishing the best outcome for the project, if it turns out that the solutions proposed are great then I will give credit for that.