I think that too many of you here are letting your emotions dictate your thinking (Emotionally reacting?).

Easiest first:
In just about all reports there are statements to the effect that the management off loads it's resonsibility onto the investor i.e the share holder. Buyer beware type.

Next options:
How many here would not grant themselves such if allowed? Now be sincere, I suspect everybody, myself included.
We as shareholders are allowing them through inaction, complaisance or plainly gave up in a hopeless cause to stop them.

Last but most:
Wes is not completely responsible. Remember he was chosen by the Board and well after Nemis was ousted. Wes is mostly a puppet of the board, imho ( Poster boy?).

It is the Board that is totally responsible and indirectly all of us shareholders because of how we vote at AGMs.
Ok the major shareholders (Funds Etc.) shoulder a lot of the blame and not us little & powerless folk with a few shares.
Sooo, just keep that in mind when the next time to vote comes. I always vote No to all requests favourable to such Boards. I keep repeating this not only on this forum but did so on many others in the past, with little effect.

Why you ask?
Major shareholders and brokers are the cause and they are not necessarily voting with their shares but with yours and mine due to us not directly participating in the voting process. i.e. they hold your shares and vote them in place of you, proxys for your trust in them.

Again standing tall on my soap box and preaching ( I know, mostly to the converted but there must be a few who are unaware), cheers. Ed.