If my proposal is on the proxy, which I doubt, but if it is, my opinion is a lot of those FOR votes were cast by many shareholders who simply did not see any use in an NAY vote assuming their votes would have no effect....or they simply didn't cast their votes.

Hang on for just one second.

If I understand you correctly, many shareholders voted for the BoD, despite being displeased by their actions, believing that it would have no effect.

When it comes to voting, a shareholder has three options, voting for, voting against, or not voting at all. To opine that a reason in voting for the proposals was there was no point in voting against stretches my credulity beyond belief.

As can be seen from the total number of votes cast, over 75% of shareholders failed to vote, and those that voted against coincidentally approximate the number of shares pledged to ronran.

I therefore suggest that those who voted for the resolutions did so because they wanted to vote in the affirmative.

To argue that changing the voting system will somehow exorcize shareholder apathy is not supported by statistics - there always is a large percentage of shareholders who fail to vote.

.

.

.

Be well