Quote from: EdoBcn on August 22, 2014, 12:44:53 PM

Quote from: aleph0 on August 20, 2014, 11:38:57 PM

I find it hard to believe that 77% of all votes last time were in favor of spending $60,000 on the A2s.

just to be specific, it is not 77% of all votes, but 77% of the shareholders who voted, based on shares owned.

If there is someone owning 3000 shares, his vote counts as 10% of all shareholders. Assuming most of them didn't even vote, that 10% could easily have more weight in the decision.

(not justifying or denying the vote, here)

Let's see what happens now. Anyway, I lost my investment.

You're right, of course. I should have written that as "77% of the weighted vote". Moreover, when the results were shared, CryptX said that "36% of unitholders have voted". It's not clear if they meant 36% of all the individuals holding units, or individuals who collectively represent 36% of all units held.

In any event, that doesn't really clarify the mystery or alleviate my skepticism concerning the truth of those results: large unitholders suffer greater absolute losses in an underperforming security than small unitholders, so unless large unitholders are disproportionately ignorant (and perhaps a case could be made that anyone holding an outsized number of units in something like this is, in fact, disproportionately ignorant), then why would they be more likely to have voted for the nonsensical A2 purchase?

And of course, none of that matters now. Still no word from CryptX on why this round of voting was halted early or where we're going to net out.