There is strength in numbers. I ask that there is a vote or open conversation on what reporters will quote our group as saying. Even if I am against an issue in the group vote I may still stay as there is strength in numbers. My concern is that you were quoted or misquoted as saying you believe in pxp and would take their shares" I never saw a vote for that and I stayed from the beginning that I do not give you power of attorney to do so on my behalf. If you can make a vote or phrase your statements as "we would consider" and put a vote to it later, then it makes a world of difference. Yes I want profits too!!! I think I speak for all of us that if you want to represent the group as a whole , and it is a difficult task I know, you should consider us equally and not just your direct investors in looking glass as to what final deal should be made.
I hope I was clear and that it answers your question. I think what I am saying is very reasonable but if you disagree with my simple request then yes by all means , respectfully, remove me from your group and I'm sure others will follow my lead. Everyone wants their voice and vote to be heard and not hijacked without a vote or proper consideration. I believe we were mostly for an open auction bidding process and not ten cents. Although I might except it as a final offer I didn't expect to see an offer reported like that. If there is a negotiation it should be higher and settle for lower.
Furthermore , would you consider us as a group reintroducing us to the Canadian securities and exchange commission with a united effort against wallaces threats and past actions? Maybe make this injunction thru them instead of personal lawyers with future expenses? They are the ones that can force past embezzled forum shares back into fecof shareholders hands. Sounds like a long shot but it's more likely than you think. There's precedent off such cases. Thank you
