HNW, DST, CC Voting - Final Statement

Posted 19/07/2009 - 15:45 by HOPPER

This is my last posting on this topic. Since ng has chosen to close the forum, I did not get a chance to post it there as a reply to the DST posting calling to end the debate. Hence a blog so that it does not lead to replies. On the contentious forum where the CC debate has taken place, user "DST" entered the following.

"Laurence, Elgee, has devoted a huge amount of time and effort to the cause of all depositors with absolutely no risk of personal gain. DST would defend his contribution to the hilt.
However, enough is enough.. there will be no further responses from DST as this has dscended to an unnecessarily personal and hurtful level.
It's too easy to sit at a computer and type provocative nonsense which spirals down into the gutter."

I am glad that this debate has ended. But I would remind you that I did try and stop this debate happening in the first place. When I suggested this Elgee, among others on the forum, accused me of trying to hide things. Yes, I was trying to hide things - the mistakes of the DST. That is also why I suggested to Sleeplessnight on Friday afternoon that we put out a joint statement to try and prevent this scenario happening. I knew that if I published the facts it would make DST look very bad. I did not want to do this. The offer of a joint statement was rejected, and Nixi and elgee went on the attack, using false claims and incorrect facts to justfiy their views. Hence the detail in my blog with the proof to back up my statements.

http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/blog-entry/cc-voting-what-happened-more...

Before ending this final blog, I would observe that DST has withdrawn itself from the debate by citing the "personal abuse" taking place. Rather convenient to use this excuse at this stage given what has been disclosed in the various blogs. Now that I have been coerced/"baited" by elgee and others over the past few days to justify how the HNW proxy was used, it seems that the truth is not what they were expecting to find out.

The truth, it seems, is proving rather uncomfortable for the DST.

In fact, no member of DST, elgee, Nixi or others have made any attempt whatsoever to answer any of the key questions I have raised, namely,

1.Why did you agree to have your candidate, Stuart Roberts, on the block resolution of 4, then change your mind and vote against it on the day?
2.Why did you reject the guaranteed 2/2/2/1 offer put together by the HNW Group in agreement with the insurers? Why not accept two guaranteed seats rather than risk having no seats whatsoever? Or just one seat had Michael Lees not (luckily) withdrawn?
3.Why did DST fail to disclose to the HNW how it intended to vote? Why did DST not attempt to have at least a dialogue with HNW prior to the vote?
4.Why did DST vote for the insurers, but the insurers not vote for DST in return?

Rather than address these important issues, "there will be no further responses from the DST". Rather convenient.

It seems it is okay for members of the DST to attack the HNW for its actions and force it to justify itself on this forum, but I find it outrageous that the DST seems to believe it has no obligation to justify its own actions & behaviour. Especially when it is now clear that the DST made some very serious mistakes over how it handled the CC vote. One set of rules for the HNW, a different set of rules for the DST....

Anyway, as promised, my last comment on this topic.

Let's hope something comes out of the third offer of mutual support which is currently on the table.

3.32
Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (25 votes)