sad state of affairsit would be a sad commentary on this company if they have to resort to attempting to scare their own shareholders into not voicing their opinion on matters that affect their life savings. The reputation of this company, after this proposed merger fiasco, will only be eroded further, in my opinion, if the company decided to take this course of action. I could imagine that their would be a mass exodus at that point, as really, who would want to invest in a company that does not act in their shareholders best interest (the jury is still out on that supposition so just opinion at this point - though that seems to be quite a widely help opinion nevertheless) and then attacks shareholders that want management to respect their fiduciary responsibilities. I mean WOW!! I would think management would want to mend fences with shareholders rather then isolate themselves more then they apparently have as of late (if the posters on this board are a representation of investor sentiment). I suppose shareholders will have the last say as they may not stand for such actions especially since it seems they may want to keep a close eye on what management does moving forward (although I have been supportive of managment moving forward while making some internal exectutive changes - many posters here are calling for a full out management replacement which I imagine will only gain support if management spends foolishly with our limited treasury) - but we will see what happens I suppose ....