DISCLAIMER:  I suck at math.

  Date                  Dividend/Share
25-Jan-2014      Overpayment day
01-Feb-2014      0.00040567
08-Feb-2014      0.00043432
15-Feb-2014      0.00043547
22-Feb-2014      0.00024280
01-Mar-2014      0.00036032
08-Mar-2014      0.00025698
       Contract Split                 If Bonds hadn't split
15-Mar-2014      0.00009648     0.00028944
22-Mar-2014      0.00008908     0.00026725
29-Mar-2014      0.00007614     0.00022843
05-Apr-2014      0.00007495     0.00022486
12-Apr-2014      0.00005861     0.00017583
19-Apr-2014      0.00005671     0.00017012
26-Apr-2014      0.00004973     0.00014920
03-May-2014     0.00004359     0.00013076
  Accepted New Contract
10-May-2014     0.00066619      0.00199856     (~15.28x increase over the week before)

Zach claims he wants to show those that won't listen how its going to be. What condition exists that prevents him from holding on to the dividends of those that are not yet prepared to accept the new contracts based on faith? I can't think of any reason. Can you? It's not as if faith is a common way of doing business anyway. Logic tells me that if he really wanted to show us how it's going to be in good faith he wouldn't steal our dividends. He would simply demonstrate his point and go on to allow others to convert to the new contract WITHOUT stealing their dividends. How do you explain this?

Lab_Rat - I really hope you step up and say something well before your May 10 deadline.

Personally, I need to see two things before I can even consider agreeing to new terms (and by "new" I mean anything other than the generally accepted position prior to your purported unilateral change on 8 March).

First is an undertaking by LRM to provide, on a weekly basis, basic information regarding total hashrate, estimated future hashrate based on incoming hardware, mining proceeds, costs and any amounts set aside for reinvestment.  See any of the weekly updates by peta-mine as an example of how things ought to be done - short, concise and reassuring.  This is basic information that should not be difficult to provide.

Second is some additional information regarding the bonus itself.  I understand what you are trying to do (whether I think it is stictly necessary, legally, is another matter).  I could, possibly, get comfortable with the concept of a discretionary bonus if you at least set out what the bonus, if paid, would be based on.  Even if you say, "LRM intends to pay, on a weekly basis, a bonus based on mining proceeds less costs and reinvestment, but investors should be aware that any such bonus is discretionary and the payment of a bonus one week is neither representative nor a guarantee of a bonus to be paid the following week" - this achieves exactly the same thing (ie discretionary bonus) but it is couched in slightly friendlier terms; it presents evidence of good faith and best intentions on your part.  Probably not enough to rescue the share price, which is ruined, but combined with the undertaking above it would, I believe, make the decision slightly easier/less stressful for some.