I can understand why someone new to SLI may have some qualms about electing a new BOD, but anyone paying attention for the last 15 months shouldn’t have any difficulty making the decision.

Why it was easy for me to vote GREEN.

Reason 1.

We received three news reports updating shareholders with the Tesoro “DEEP” drilling results.

Average

Assay

News Report

Total

Average

Bottom

Results

Date

Holes

Meters

Depth

Not Rpt

Reported

Jan 23, 2012

DDH_TE_01 - 13

4,374.50

397.60

195.27

10.87

0.25%

May 24, 2012

DDH_TE_14 - 35

3,539.85

272.30

56.81

26.14

0.74%

Jul 26, 2012

DDH_TE_36 - 43

964.80

192.96

44.79

7.78

0.08%

Sub Totals:

8,879.15

306.18

106.33

44.79

0.05%

Holes Not Reported

12,13,15,16,18,19,

20,31,32,33,34,40,

42,43

3,860.85

275.78

Totals:

12,740.00

296.28

44.79

0.35%

Of the total 12,740 meters drilled only 44.79 meters have been reported and of the 29 holes with any information provided, on average the bottom 106.33 meters have no reported results.This means that on average we only have a small reported sampling from the top 200 meters of the drill program. This doesn’t sound like a deep drill program for an anomaly that has a centre around 600 meters.

We have only received reports of what was assayed in excess of 0.5gm/t, a trivial 0.35% of the total 12,740 meters of drill core. There has been no indication of the total number of meters assayed and when asked about any field analysis (PIMA, XRF or something else?) of samples we don’t get clear direct answers.Lori has stated at length that she does not rely on visual estimates by anyone, she indicated that some of the highest grades she has seen have come from samples with no visible gold and that the exact opposite is often true (visible gold but low grade). Yet now she wants us to accept 0.35% of the drill core (that apparently was selected visually) as a representative sample.

The Quantec Titan-24 program identified 26 Primary and 26 Secondary drill targets.However, there has been no correlation provided by management between the drill program and the recommended targets.

If there is proof of insufficient gold at Tesoro, Lori could have appeased shareholders by disclosing complete and clear results.I’ve seen many examples of where other companies report assays for the entire drill core at 2 meter intervals.I’ve also seen somewhere over the last year that the lab assay cost was around $37/sample.There are probably many additional costs with logging, preparation, transportation, etc. however if we had taken the $150,000 spent on Georgeson to quell dissent and used it to pay for 8,000 meters of drill core lab assays and reported them we likely would not have this proxy battle.$150,000/$37 = 4,054

If SLI management believe they have provided sufficient information to shareholders, then they clearly have some sort of disconnect with reality. Otherwise a person can only assume that there is a hidden agenda.

Reason 2

Lori has sold the majority of her shares in SLI over the last 6 months helping to drive our share price down. She then announces a non-brokered private placement at a discounted price to the 52 week share price low for an overwhelming controlling interested without shareholder approval, sufficient enough to take the company private.In addition a 10% finder’s fee in cash/shares worth $1million/10million shares, it’s hard not to see a conflict of interest. This certainly cannot be seen as being in the best interest of SLI shareholders.

VOTE GREEN, unless you want more of the same.

Something that came to mind a few days ago while speaking with my son about SLI, has left me with a very uneasy feeling.

In January when Duncan Bain and Allan St. James resigned as directors and then two days later Paul McDonald, Donald Bastien and Lloyd Brewer were appointed as their replacements.

By what mechanism was Lori able to create an additional director position?

I’m speculating but what if Lori was initially not 100% confident with Paul's and Donald’s loyalty to her cause and therefore balanced the equation. i.e. Lori, Tina, Lloyd .vs. Murry, Paul, Donald

And once she had a couple of months to reassure herself that Paul and Donald were on side, Lloyd’s questionable directorship was unnecessary and hence Lloyd’s resignation (Apr 26).The reason put forth was that the directorship would interfere with Lloyd’s primary role of advancing the Company’s properties.I remember someone posting that Murry said there hasn’t been a board meeting since January.

My concern; is Lori able to change the size of the board without shareholder approval, to for example 9 members.

i.e. Lori, Tina, Paul, Donald, Lloyd .vs. Murry, 3 new nominees.

Please, if there is someone familiar with SLI’s corporate bylaws that could reassure me that something like this isn’t possible.It would make me feel a lot more comfortable about a positive outcome at the AGM. Positive meaning Lori gets ousted.

Personally, I would rather that they didn't provide any more detail regarding yesterdays’ hastily prepared release, no need to compound the problem. They should have given an update on drilling (meters completed), what drills are on site and when we could expect an analysis of the first drilling results.

I guess I would be leaning towards Primed H09.

But I'm more interested to see results for H22 and H19.

Roguey,

There are always going to be those who need to sell for whatever there personal reason.

You kind of answered your own question, you don't expect news before March. In the mean time it would be nice if the share price is maintained.

Another part of the plan I forgot to mention is not doing PP with institutions to raise capital, as they can end up with to much control, and can be in and out for reasons that have nothing to do with the company.

So the B & B's I would suggest are a good thing, calm existing investors and bring in a few to maintain the price until news.

For clarity, the Do it right or not at all … over and over and over again was supposed to be a joke.

Personally I’ve heard it far too often and I’ve only been here for a few months, I can only feel sorry for the long time longs.

I agree with phockeyboy, it almost sounds like you guys are upset because your pipeline has a kink in it, he was far more diplomatic.

Which directors have you been talking with? Are they all in agreement with your assessment? To be clear; are you saying that the directors are saying things are not going to plan? I know that is not exactly what you said, however if one of the directors is unclear as to the plan and the status of that plan, I find it very disturbing that one of the directors would be vetting those concerns with investors, rather than obtaining clarity with the other directors. Are you saying that all avenues of communication have broken down? On the other hand if there is no material new news over the holidays, is that really shocking, given where we are in the process?

I’ve not met any of the directors, but Murry seems to be held in very high regard by many who post here. I’m sure he and his wife are very nice individuals and are almost like family to many of you.

I don’t like the disunity that seems to be occurring recently, this is the one thing we do not need at this stage of the process. It would normally be used as a tactic by someone trying to take control, normally not in the best interests of shareholders.

I’m not a director, and I’ve only been here for a few months, yet the plan seems relatively clear to me.

1. Maximize the use of technology to minimize the expense of defining drill targets.

2. Maintain a tightly united Board of Directors.

3. Do not sign non-disclosure agreements with potential buyers, as they are not in the best interests of shareholders, unless you really what to be left in the dark.

4. Do not release information prematurely and negatively impact shareholder value from a buyout.

5. Spinout properties whose value would be overshadowed/cloud the fair value of Tesoro.

6. Maximize world equity markets access to SLI. AMEX, China, Europe

7. Obtain as much exposure as possible to increase awareness, hence more offers. China, NY, SF …

8. Submit samples for assay in a manner that maximizes value without prompting a premature buyout offer. (Not likely to get an offer without trenching results which are now just a matter of processing and compilation).

9. Be in a position to drill more holes to provide further proof as necessary.

10. Acquire sufficient information to ensure shareholders receive fair value on buyout.

At this point I believe we are waiting for sufficient information to ensure we as shareholders receive a fair value on take out.

We should start getting news when they have received the first phase of the shallow drill program which may or may not have occurred yet. I would hope for some analysis providing a correlation to the Titan 24 survey, however that may be overly optimistic on my part considering the need for news. I’m sure prospective buyers will be making more timely sense of individual drill hole results than our average shareholder. I’m not sure that’s in the best interests of shareholders value.

Now if you’re talking about not being made aware of field assays which Lori strongly denies take place at SLI (so strongly that it almost sounds ludicrous) or not being privy to some of the drilling results which may have been received, welcome to the world of the common investor. You know, Lori seemed to be awfully concerned at the AGM about insider information (Martha Stewart over and over and over again).

By the way, I never knew there was such a thing as an insider blackout until I was following SLI.

I may be ignorant to many facets of the inner workings of SLI as a newcomer, but I’m having a hard time seeing what the problems are with the progression of the Tesoro plan.

Sorry for being abrasive, it seems to be the current tone of the board.

BubaBob.