On Feb 11, 2008 4:06 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/02/2008, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
I don't have a problem with the statement. I have a problem with someone voting to approve a statement that they don't understand.
Acknowledging that something is misleading is not the same as not understanding it.
No, it isn't. But I've applied Hanlon's razor here.
If she didn't understand it, she most likely asked someone to explain it to her before voting. She said she wasn't happy with the way it was presented, not that she wasn't happy with the facts.
The whole point of the financial statements is to clearly present the facts. When you vote to approve the financial statements, you are voting to approve the presentation, not voting to approve the facts (the facts can't be changed, they don't need approving).
I'm sorry, I stand by my statement that you shouldn't vote to approve financial statements if you "know" they're misleading and are not happy with the way they present things. When you vote "yes" to such a resolution, you're pretty much explicitly saying you're happy with the way they present things. That's the whole point of the vote. If you aren't happy, you don't vote "yes". You either get an explanation so that you are happy, you abstain, or you vote "no".