On Feb 11, 2008 4:06 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/02/2008, Anthony <wikimail(a)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".