Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Yukon Nevada Gold Corp T.YNG



TSX:YNG - Post by User

Comment by aristoenigmaon Dec 04, 2009 1:41am
393 Views
Post# 16553266

RE: RE: The Question Was...

RE: RE: The Question Was...AlMer300 is correct. I experienced the same thing. Horns of a dilemma when voting against and then confirming two out of three points in the second question and being forced to confirm the third illogical follow through point. Badly written or contrived?. What happened to my vote? Did that inconsistency spoil the vote and not let it count count in which case it didn't matter at the electronic stage. But if the "fors" already have their votes in and counted for use in a physical real time shareholder meeting by tricky design without the negative voters having the same treatment I think that stacking is dirty pool and unfair to the disinterested shareholders in the most egregious way I have ever witnessed or heard of. There should be a requirement that the vote at a shareholders meeting be balanced and equal in all ways.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>