Now that is a much better post, thanks, and I agree. That makes a lot more sense which is where I am as well. We invested in Scott Keevil and the potential of the assets. That is why it serves no purpose to vote NO as there isn't a viable alternative, something that Newbie doesn't seem to understand.
I am sure that there are some legal issues here for the failure of total disclosure and that once the vote tallied and passes there will be plenty of disclosure. All we have now is faith in Scott and what we do know about the assets in the ground.