.

The Secret Squirrel comment?
Just a good-natured dig at those previously calling the company and receiving "insider" info that was spread in this forum and through pm. As predicted, company shenanigans proved out the true end-game. Anyway, everyone now knows better than to call any company for "insider" info.

The Hail Mary sounds good for the unrepresented shareholder, but reading it raises questions...
Why the emphasis on confidentiality?
Unrepresented shareholder representation should not be secret.
Who pays for attorney fees or web site?
Not disclosed in motion, so where do the bucks come from? Only way is similar to Tenor's payment - with a piece of the possible award. Anyone pick up on the part about paying for the notice in the G&M, WSJ, and French translation with Crystallex estate money? Keep in mind that paying out of the company estate money eventually also leads to added give-aways.
How were those share amounts confirmed?
FINRA (official bean counter) will not do so for revoked securities.

There are many other questions, but have to ask...
How does the committee interact with unrepresented shareholders?
Nice set of bylaws. But, no where is there any mention of how the committee interacts with the unrepresented shareholders. Seems to be a main claim of the motion, right? So, where are the bylaw details of committee-unrepresented interaction? No scheduled unrepresented shareholder meetings, or call in number. Mention of a web site, but no other details. A fair amount emphasizing confidentiality, while making clear the law firm represents the committee and not unrepresented shareholders. Is the ommission intentional? Secret squirrel? Seems odd, but who knows.

Have a sneakin' suspicion some of the same "insiders" are on this self-appointed committee, but it really doesn't matter. Can't fault folks for doing what they can to protect their interests. Maybe making it sound like representing all unrepresented shareholders is just a part of the game to make it fly. Good for them that they took the initiative.

None of this post is meant to, in any way, be a criticism of the motion.
Really hope this turns out to benefit the "little guy" shareholder.