Is the Board’s Action with respect to the Annual Members Meeting Legal?

John, my deepest apologies for the hijacking of your thread and then not being able to return to the original context. I am truly disappointed this happened and will not be returning to the thread to continue with this matter. Please forgive me, I will not do this again to you.

 

You keep saying I am insulting, harassing, berating and threatening people yet you never post anything to back up your claims. I will respond to people who call me names, etc, but I don't remember initiating any. Maybe in the political thread but politics is a whole different animal. I don't drop f bombs. You are accusing me with no proof to back it up, again. You are not a psychologist; you have never met me so you can't diagnose me or anyone for that matter with any type of mental illness.

Your opinions are not factual, and I don't know how many times you have to see this to understand but here you go again:

Suing for slander, libel, or defamation brings a civil suit in a state court and alleges that under the slander laws or libel laws of that state the person who brought about the lawsuit was damaged by the conduct of the person who made the false statement.

As far as exiting a shitshow that would be solely your choice. No one here is forcing you to do anything.

Regarding the owners of this site they are not involved at all other than me reporting posts and sending examples.

Now, I need to get back to work as I only have a short period of time to finish for the printer.

Have a good evening.

 

It had become such a chore to answer someone in threads because of all the junk that gets written in between. I went way back in this thread to say Thank You for reaching out to the Board to see if the Annual Membership Meeting (AMM) could be delayed; however, that poses a problem because all the proxies are dated for March 11th. I sent the following questions to the entire BOD; I haven't heard anything back yet. By the way, I was told by one Board member that when emails are sent to them, the person who is the most invested in the question answers it. The entire Board does not. So, while there might be one Board member who would answer it quickly, because I addressed it to the president and cc'd everyone else, he is the one who answers.

"**Are the Members going to be allowed to speak at "their" meeting if the 500 person/proxy quorum is met?
**What are they going to be allowed to speak on? (All the motions submitted have been taken off the table.)
**The Board's agenda states New Business. Who is allowed to bring new business to the floor? The Members?
**How long does the Board have to "study" the Motions?
**Proxy votes are only good for the date on the proxy; are Members going to have to meet the 500 person quorum again in order to hear the results of the study? That means another meeting will have to be called and we don't know if the proxies already collected will be valid.
**Is it going to be in the time frame when the Snow Birds are here?
I do hope that before March 11th at 6 pm, we, the MEMBERSHIP, will be advised as to what to expect at that meeting."

 

It does, Remember Heather Cox Richardson.

 

I was browsing some legal opinions about proxies and found this, from dbmlaw.com

1. If a proxy instrument is completed for a specific meeting, or if it invites shareholders to appoint a particular person as proxy, the proxy instrument signed and delivered by a shareholder in those circumstances will only be valid until the end of the meeting at which it was used.
   
   
2. In all other cases, the proxy instrument is valid for one year from date of signature.

So, if the proxy is for a particular meeting, and the date is changed, wouldn’t it hold the proxy follows the meeting, not the date?
Other comments on the web seems to indicate the proxy is issued for a particular meetings or event, then it should be valid, as indicated for a year. I am speculating, as I found no particular quote to offer.

 

Well, if they study the motions and decide to address any of them, we can only hope that a Special Meeting is called and they allow the Proxies from March 11th to be honored. At this point, who knows what they are going to come up with next to throw at us!

 

They should "Fix the time to which to adjourn," which means a continuation of this same meeting will occur at the day and time the motion specifies. That way we know for sure that the proxies are still good.

 

Excellent point FYI, for the continuation of the original meeting. The necessary motion is needed for proper adjournment.

 

A response to your comment. I have repeatedly stated that the posts were my opinion. As a matter of fact, the first line says “In my opinion”.
I have not specified any particular thread as to what your repeated harassment is involved in. The other threads, including ones that you were prolific in, all count as evidence of the opinion post I made. You don’t get to pick and choose what evidence is presented and germane to the defense of my position. You are claiming you were damaged? How? We are all aware of your reputation, and nothing I said or wrote is news to readers of TOSC.
Please read the legal definition below. It provides clarity to your opinion for a suit against another poster.

Opinion and Fair Comment
Opinions enjoy protection under the First Amendment, differentiating them from factual statements. If a statement expresses a subjective opinion rather than an assertion of fact, it doesn’t qualify as libel. Fair comment, a subset of this defense, also protects honest criticism or commentary about public figures or matters of public interest, as long as the opinions are based on true facts and not influenced by malice. This defense aids defendants in asserting their right to free expression while maintaining boundaries against defamatory assertions.

Furthermore, I should bring a lawsuit against you for the continued harassment and intimidation you have caused me with your comments and posts. My position is clearly superior to yours, as every post you make about me is designed to inflict harm and fear of retaliation and potential litigation.
I posted opinions, you clearly post threats. I hope your attorney is wise enough to advise you of the conditions required to prevail. I know my position is clearly defensible, and under the First Amendment, I am protected from frivolous lawsuits.
I apologize to those reading this. My intent is try to bring closure to this unfortunate banter. I will attempt to stay away from additional content on this topic.

 

Look who is calling the kettle black!