As I said in my post I think he could/should have presented the issues in a different manner. If that's an apologist then so be it. I just think that anyone who looks at this objectively understands this was a board meeting and therefore the board bears some responsibility for what does or doesn't happen in a meeting when they control the agenda and the floor.

Why did you keep it (golf) on the agenda when the only reason to do so was because he said he had questions? What did you think he was going to ask, for a tee time? And when he went to process questions, why wasn't he shut down? Or why didn't Collins simply make a statement regarding the issue and close it out? This was a board meeting and the board members are in control and should or could have limited or controlled discussion as soon as he asked the first question. 

The decision on the golf club operator was already made so any attempt by the GM to go sideways should have been dealt with directly and shut down. Its called meeting control. Instead it was allowed to proceed. The reality was that the vote wasn't going to change or for that matter be even reconsidered. 

In the end nothing was going to change and while there may or may not be legitimate questions about the process, the GM would have been far better served by keeping his mouth shut and saying nothing and the Board would have been far better served by shutting down the discussion as soon as it was evident where it was going. I am simply saying this isn't a one way street.

Ted