I know that...

But it is the result of appellate case decisions. Thus, RP was complying with the letter of the law when he ask anyone had not voted who was present, and when 2 people said they were not, he gave them ballot had them vote, and then announced the total share voted...

THAT IS WHY THESE DISCUSSIONS AND REASERCH ON THESE POINT ARE CRUCIAL FOR OUR UNDERSTANDING OUR RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW, AND WHEN WE CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEYOND MERELY "BITCHIN" HERE...

If you stopped to analyze the bit of information about the last meeting, you will see that 50 million is far less than the "Majority of the shareholders of record" mandate by the ACT. But, they certainly are the "Majority of shareholders "Present""...

I am convinced the bulk of the 50 million are your and mu shares held in the name of the street that are solicited by the company and voted...

Unless we "The shareholders" know our rights under the law, and execise them accordingly, I am certain all that is said here is mere hot air, and the company shall do as always they have done, give you #4 CANNED ANSWERS, and there is nothing we can do about it...

Gil...