Posted on March 31, 2015


We are in the process of buying a house. This happened very quickly and many shareholders have expressed that this should have been a shareholder vote. Some aspects of life, even a publicly-traded life, happen quickly and we took the action that we felt was best for everyone.

We understand that this should have been a shareholder decision, and so we offer the following resolution which formalizes the complaint of the shareholders and urges us to work towards correcting the problem.


WHEREAS, the criteria used to determine which decisions are brought to the Shareholders are not clear; and

WHEREAS, the shareholders have proven to have the best interests of KmikeyM in mind upon voting on his personal and professional life; and

WHEREAS, KmikeyM has, without consultation, entered into an agreement to purchase property; and

WHEREAS, the shareholders, while likely approving the purchase of a home, do not approve the means; and

?NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Shareholders of KmikeyM continue to be opposed to major life decisions being made without consultation in general; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the shareholders in this specific instance oppose the decision to purchase property without approval; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the shareholders, in understanding that some major decisions require swift action, urge KmikeyM to develop systems which allow for a more rapid response from shareholders.?

A yes vote adds your name to this resolution, and encourages more shareholder involvement in choices.
A no vote represents an understanding that some choices are made quickly, and that the current system is working.

Yes - 4489.0

aaronpk 1115.0
davehayden 724.0
GeneM 471.0
Douglas Dollars 415.0
Marcus 260.0
Steve Schroeder 210.0
chrishiggins 146.0
bertrandom 108.0
Ryan Feigh 105.0
Matthew Stadler 100.0
Ryan Thompson 80.0
WinSolstice 74.0
Alex Malinovich 67.0
Curt 53.0
brendanjones 50.0
George 50.0
awmahan 40.0
xakxrusx 32.0
spy1d 25.0
GenBSweet 24.0
adamd 23.0
AF Jamison 23.0
Abraham Ingle 22.0
Azure Akamay 20.0
patr1ck 20.0
CelestiaGrace 19.0
Andy 17.0
mberezin 16.0
smtlaissezfaire 14.0
hoytster 12.0
stan 10.0
joshuajabbour 10.0
egli 10.0
humanclock 8.0
rvdm 8.0
Xavier 8.0
macsam 7.0
wandersean 7.0
reifi 6.0
z-archer 5.0
maxbrown 5.0
JayHaines 5.0
RobWilcoxJr 4.0
Thomas King 4.0
Daniel O'Toole 4.0
worldkiss 4.0
Ilya Lichtenstein 4.0
Jesse Malmed 3.0
spencerian 3.0
ceamba 2.0
sidjun 2.0
njg 2.0
magisys 2.0
4005siw 2.0
pdc 2.0
Erik 2.0
Lisa 2.0
E*Rock 2.0
KevinGabbert 2.0
kyanov1 2.0
kimsal 2.0
Pollard 2.0
jwbannister 2.0
raymond69 1.0
waferbaby 1.0
jhf3488 1.0
kitschpatrol 1.0
GregWick 1.0
JDutil 1.0
Meg Scheminske 1.0
Gary Pratt 1.0
timjcoulter 1.0
Shannon 1.0
garrett 1.0
peretz 0.0

No - 527.0

mathowie 200.0
arijkem 200.0
Matthew Spencer 51.0
Anjou Wu 46.0
danielpunkass 10.0
Jos 6.0
ksouth 5.0
nlambert 4.0
Internev 3.0
mzocher 2.0

Past Discussion

Mike Merrill
Interesting! I'm attracted to additional bureaucracy! The problem of issuing the shares is that I currently hold the majority. I don't want them, but the demand does not yet exist to sell them. I do think they should be offered in a more regular fashion. I wonder if it should be automated somehow? Or at least a system...
danielpunkass (10.0 shares, voted no)
Is it not just the quickness of some life decisions, but also the necessity for privacy to achieve strategic ends? Not every home purchase works this way, but for example, in some situations knowledge of a pending home purchase offer could be a tip off to others to either hold out for a higher price, tip off competiting bidders, whatever. I haven't tuned in much to the forums here yet, but has it been discussed yet that for the sake of strategic confidentiality some major decisions, even those that happen pondersously and over a longer period of time, must be kept confidential from shareholders in order to increase the odds of the individual's long term successes? Voting no with a comment that yes, thought should be given to how shareholders are meaningfully brought into the discussion when possible, but shouldn't necessarily be hyper-focused on giving shareholders either insight into confidential matters or building infrastructure for ultimately unnecessary last minute decision approval. Perhaps there is a whole class of life decisions that are more likely to come up than others, and should have been discussed/approved in the abstract to satisfy shareholder interests while still affording some flexibility in execution. Congrats on the house!
RobWilcoxJr (4.0 shares, voted yes)
The KMikeyM needs to move to the next level of strategy. It is likely that the idea of purchasing a home was present for more than 3 months. Should we have a quarterly management by objectives? Google does. I think Peter Drucker may have originated. I prefer direct shareholder guidance over a secretive board, and I don't believe KMM needs that level of bureaucracy (yet). In this case, the Objective would be to enhance the standing of KMM in the community and ensure its long term financial stability and the Result would be Explore purchasing owner-occupied residential property, and complete the purchase as the opportunity arises. Questions for the shareholders could continue to come up within the quarter, independent of the Objectives.