I think you are over-reacting but you are entitled to your own opinion. I really don't think that lodge considered it an attack.

The assumption that he made was one that we probably all made initially. It was logical to believe that a R/S would also carry through and reduce the number of authorized but not issued shares. Unfortunately that is not the case.

If I'm not mistaken, lodge thanked me for pointing that out. Not that it changed his mind in any way. If anything it strengthened and reinforced his decision to vote against the R/S proposal. If others are sitting on the fence, hopefully it will help them with their decision. This is actually the real reason I posted the "correction", otherwise I would have just sent him a private message.