Denys asserts that the vote has become a referendum on Carly not the merger.
I could not agree more. The 90's saw the rise of the CEO as a cult hero.

Shakespeare has kings referring to themselves and each other as England or
France. I assume that was the practice. The King literally thought of
himself as the nation. He was the nation and the nation was him, Jesuits
Etta, pardon my French. In our more egalitarian age we now want our CEOs to
be HP, Toyota or General Electric.

This did not start with Carly Fiorina. I don't know who we have to
thank/blame for this state of affairs. Jack Welch certainly helped to
enforce the idea on our collective psyches but it my have started before
him. Ken Lay may help to bring the idea of the cult leader CEO to an end.
People may be beginning to be less trustful of those whose only obligation
is to the company's bottom line. Time will tell.

This role may have been Carly's choice or it may have been foisted on her.
In either case she is now Cult Mother of HP. As HP is or does so too does
Carly and vice versa. The zeitgeist makes this vote a referendum on the
cult. Carly is that cult whether anyone likes it or not, including Carly.

When the cult has known values then voting on whether or not  to preserve
the cult is as valid a reason for voting as any other. It is the same as
saying I think the leadership knows what it is doing or not. I believe that
the voters know why they are voting.

The issue of CEO as cult figure can be argued to fruition. We will not solve
the problem. The arguments still must be cogent and civil. Couch the proxy
vote anyway you want it still comes down to Merger: Yes or No. Which is how
it should be.
The opinions expressed herein are my own and not necessarily those of my
employer.
Yosef Rosenblatt

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *