Relic nicely articulates the reasons for voting:

http://www.stockigloo.com/discussion/century-mining/agm-vote-please-read/

In Summary Relic states:

"As mentioned in other posts we can not vote out the current directors due to some archaic and soon to be changed laws. We can only vote "For" or "Withhold"

In my opinion if you are not in favour of the "Business Combination" aka merger of CMM and WTG you should vote "Withhold" next to each directors name. If you are in favour then you should vote "For" each director. I am making it clear here that I am NOT telling people to vote "withhold" or "for".

*I* am personally voting "withhold" and *I* will tell you why *I* think it is important for me to do so. I feel that although a "withhold" vote has no power under the current rules, it will give us an indication of how the merger vote will proceed. Think of this as a pre-vote or trial run. If the tally of the "withhold" votes exceeds the majority of the minority then we are pretty much guaranteed that the merger vote will result in a victory for the "NO" votes.

There is a secondary reason why *I* am voting "withhold". Companies that practice good governance have a policy whereby a director will resign if the "withhold" votes exceed the "for" vote. Since a director is not required to resign if this happens you may be wondering what is the point in the case of Century Mining. If the current directors receive more "withhold" votes than "for" votes, we can be assured that a dissident slate of directors will be successfully voted in during a special meeting called by shareholders. So either a director resigns(the right thing to do) or he is replaced during a special meeting and vote by shareholders. Either way he is gone."