Of course they wrote their tungsten asset down, the price of...

Of course they wrote their tungsten asset down, the price of tungsten dropped through the floor and accounting standards dictate you must carry assets at the lower of cost and fair value. The drop in price would've meant that the market value decreased and the value in use was also peanuts because it wasn't profitable at the time. That doesn't mean that the asset is worth nothing and can't/won't be used especially now tungsten has increased in price, it just means it's floating around in their books at a lower amount or to whatever they wrote it down. The board parked that project because it wasn't profitable and sought out other ventures in the meantime, as any board would do. It is profitable now and you can clearly see that they're getting it going again but now with a Lithium project they picked up, in addition to their other gold projects as well.
Also the cost difference of having someone travel from NSW as opposed to working in Chile will be next to nothing, a drop in the ocean in the scheme of things. They'd be paying a living away from home allowance, accommodation in Chile and probably flights to return back to Aus every now and then anyway.
You had an exit strategy, you executed it and part of that was clearly pumping up sentiment before you sold. That's your prerogative but don't get salty when you get called out on it. Current holders are happy with what they have and whilst slightly bemused by your antics, are still happy to hold. Are you trying to bring sentiment back down so you can buy back in? Who knows but don't think your analysis or word is going to carry much weight here anymore.
In saying that, I wish you GL along with all holders.