Kommentaarid on kirjutatud EWR lugejate poolt. Nende sisu ei pruugi ühtida EWR toimetuse seisukohtadega.
UuemadVanemad
I don't think any one on the Juhatus or Board of any of community organization wants to sink/do damage to our community. The vote was for proceeding with due diligence. Using simple math, 4 Boards x 10 members = 40 sets of eyes. You would need all 40 not being watchful to pull off something underhanded. Hardly likely. Yes, communications could be enhanced, but to suggest that there is not a focus on the community and its needs? I think voting for the due diligence to proceed makes sense. Kudos to all those organizations and individuals who voted "yes". It was a vote allowing for the doing of the home work to start.
10
2With all due respect, who was asked what was needed for the community? That’s the homework that should have been done to start. Added to that was the secrecy, the short question periods, the questions never dealt with, many still not answered.
Doing simple math, those who were voted in as new board members mimicked the “yes” vote = large blocks of votes in favour of the orgs’ choices. It was evident that without the block votes the yes/no vote would also have been “no”.
With all due respect, if you know anything about the Toronto Estonian community you’d know the majority of the 40 could easily come together to form an alliance for a common cause. The issue this time is that it isn't for the good of the community. Or is it? If common community interests were the focal point, the homework would have been done upfront and everything would be out in the open right now and it's not.
Doing simple math, those who were voted in as new board members mimicked the “yes” vote = large blocks of votes in favour of the orgs’ choices. It was evident that without the block votes the yes/no vote would also have been “no”.
With all due respect, if you know anything about the Toronto Estonian community you’d know the majority of the 40 could easily come together to form an alliance for a common cause. The issue this time is that it isn't for the good of the community. Or is it? If common community interests were the focal point, the homework would have been done upfront and everything would be out in the open right now and it's not.
4
5Now I am really confused. If there were 3276 registered shareholder votes on April 25th and only 2148 votes cast for the "Madison Project", using simple math
2148 divided by 3276 equals 65.56%. This seems to indicate that a 66% margin was not obtained. This changes things a bit does it not? Just asking?
2148 divided by 3276 equals 65.56%. This seems to indicate that a 66% margin was not obtained. This changes things a bit does it not? Just asking?
13
10Please provide the information as to how each EM organization with a block of shares voted - or is there something to hide?
Thank you.
Thank you.
13
8Vastavalt president Remmeli sõnavõtule
koosoleku avamiseks oli registreeritud 928 A aktsiat ja 2348 C aktsiat, kokku 3276 osatähte, mis oli koosoleku kvoorum. Kuna see arv rahuldas kvoorumi nõuded, avati koosolek.
koosoleku avamiseks oli registreeritud 928 A aktsiat ja 2348 C aktsiat, kokku 3276 osatähte, mis oli koosoleku kvoorum. Kuna see arv rahuldas kvoorumi nõuded, avati koosolek.
6
3Kommentaarid sellele artiklile on suletud.
