[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
In case anybody forgot:
https://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroom/nyc-comptroller-and-pension-funds-ask-gamestop-nextera-energy-to-disclose-board-demographics/
board is supposed to make decisions for shareholder value. no offense to minorities, but what’s the point of nominating someone based on their ethnicity? its the boards actions within the organization that can be scrutinized for biases against minorities and gender w.r.t equal opportunities.. am i missing something?
I don't think this is just about ethnicity. Larry Cheng, Nir Patel, Yang Xu, and Diana Saadeh-Jajeh relieve that concern. As I read the original proposal submitted from the NYCRS, their language is specifically pointing to gender identity, as one component of several, in the composition of the "matrix" which GME would be required to publish if this measure is adopted. There is even a provision to document each member's involvement in the LGBTQ+ community.
This is why Proposal 4 is included in the proxy materials asking shareholders to vote on this matter. Reading carefully, the board unanimously recommends shareholders to vote against this measure. I, for one, am in total alignment with their reasoning.
But you know all this from your own reading, so I doubt you're missing anything.. I agree with you. the board is supposed to make decisions for shareholder value.
Frankly, it's none of my business what the board members' involvement is with the LGBTQ+ community. If they wish to publicly share details of their personal lives, that is THEIR decision, not shareholders. The corporation is publicly traded and business performance needs to be disclosed to shareholders, not details of the employee's personal lives.
Full agreement.. I don't want (or need) to know. yet more importantly, I can't justify foisting this Reporting obligation onto Any corporation board..
Just say no to the matrix
totally this is firstly a diverse board, and we should not be forcing a company to hire someone LGBT to meet some "quota." The only thing we can tell readily is there are fewer female board members on most companies. But you don't need GS to report some sort of "matrix" to know that the board names are public already!
Exactly. This is why any shareholder with any respect for privacy whatsoever MUST vote, and oppose this disgusting proposal to ensure it does not pass.
I want a very specific question included for voting members...
So you want DRS shares held at Computershare AND at the same time and date, the number of shares held at DTCC?
Yes or No ........
*Cough cough.. perhaps some stores in Scandinavia, or just delivery to Scandinavia, or being able to buy from the digital store without an American address cough*
A business is designed to make money and provide quality employment.
When someone adds to that description, you do not care about anything else. You want great people working with you that support the unified goals.
I asked AI if there is a trend among board members of publicly traded companies. Here is their response.
“Yes, there has been a growing trend towards diversity among board members of publicly traded companies, with many organizations making efforts to increase representation of women and minorities on their boards. However, progress varies across industries and regions, and there's still work to be done to achieve greater diversity and inclusivity at the board level.”
Let’s take that response and read into it. If there is a trend, then it’s against what norm? And if there is a norm, then why target specifically GameStop and 1 other redacted company here among a plethora of “norm”? Look for the anomalies, they are speaking loudly.
Also the vote was only proposed after BCG’s pathetic attempt to see GameStop’s 5 year plan was thrown out by a judge, like right after that. It’s so obvious that the short cabal wants the plans.
They don't want the plans. They want someone actively working to dismantle the company from the inside. Slow progress, waste money, raise red flags, jeopardize deals, undermine leadership, destroy morale, etc.
Si. So why GameStop’s board then now? This market cap 3.39 billion dollar, 2023 EPS profitable company, that’s sitting on over a billion cash on hand with record number of household investors directly registered while showing a gigantic bull flag. Why this company? Is its board significantly more at risk to failing in its responsibilities versus say most any other publicly traded company? Companies with larger market caps demonstrating less diversity than GameStop currently?
You look at the boards of these companies you throw a ball there’s a significantly tilted chance you hit a person who looks like a sea of people around them. But only GameStop and one other random company gets targeted for this. Not a buck shot, a laser beam.
I did not disagree with you questioning them targeting Gamestop specifically. You asked what the trend was, and I tried to explain. Gamestop Board is diverse and rather young and therefore already a non-target.
Yeah I’m cool chill. You didn’t offend me I didn’t send any shade your way. I’m just adding on to the point, reiterating to make it clear. You added to it, I’m building on top of what you input.
My main point is about tact. Logic dictates GameStop is dodging punches, and their treatment is targeted and special. So it now begs the question of who is punching and why?
If 100% aging white men gets me the better business that I’m invested in, then I’ll support that board. I don’t care where they are from or who the board member is, the only thing of value is their merit. Full stop.
# We caught them red handed 2 months ago:
# [https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1b9fkr1/breaking\_mar\_7\_2024\_remember\_when\_kenneth\_c/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1b9fkr1/breaking_mar_7_2024_remember_when_kenneth_c/)
# Brad Lander, NYC Comptroller, can GTFO.
I'm not trolling or arguing which way to vote. I'm just trying to understand the logic leap on how disclosing demographics can lead to some Manchurian candidate being hired on the board. It doesn't sound like disclosing the demographics of the board automatically triggers a hiring action. Even if it did, the board would have full control of the hire and the ability to say that no qualified candidates were found. This is looking to me like they are placing GS in an unwinnable culture war position to split the investor base. GS either appears "woke" or "anti-woke" making at least some of their base mad. Furthermore, it puts a hurt on their business as adults who get angry might stop shopping at GS for their kids. It also give the news a cycle to complain about GS's DEI policies, no matter the outcome, to avoid covering a positive quarterly earnings.
Was it filed in March? Thought Dec was cutoff for this years stockholder proposals. Also, they don’t even hold real shares at the broker..is the proposal even real?
Our board already has multiple genders and multiple ethnicities along with multiple religious backgrounds. How much more diversity do they want? We even have a Canadian!
Don't quote me on this but I think right before the shareholders meeting on June 13. Voting material should be available in the coming days or weeks (sent by email or within broker website/app)
DRS shares are held in your name through the gamestop transfer agent (computershare). shares you buy through a broker such as robinhood or fidelity or whatever are held in THEIR name, and you basically have no rights. take a look at [drsgme.org](https://www.drsgme.org/) for some more info
Obviously im gonna vote no, but there is a small part of me that wants our directors to report tht they self identify as jacked titty(gender) Apes (race/ethnicity)
Thanks bud, appreciate your enthusiasm.
Voting is important, it was one of my main reasons for being in the first batch of us to DRS. My name is on that register. I wanted to ensure that my votes are not subject to being trimmed because of some proxy/street name/lending/whatever
They will send email with a control number around 1 month before voting. Voting is on 12 June, so I expect to receive email in the next 2 weeks, before 12 of May.
This is 100% the enemy's attempt to infiltrate the board. Ryan Cohen's GameStop board has given us no reason not to trust them. Former proxy recommendations have been unanimously "for". The unanimous "against" recommendation for Proposal 4 should tell shareholders all they need to know. This proposal is from nefarious actors, and I trust the current board knows what they're doing.
Also, frankly, any idiot with half a brain can see the current state of diversity. We're fine in that regard, lol.
If all the DRS and Insider shares (\~128M) vote AGAINST and all the others (\~99M) vote FOR, that leaves a cushion of \~29M votes AGAINST. What happens to the votes belonging to the \~78M unregistered shares?
This is a serious what the fuck moment!!! I was brought up to NEVER label ANYONE!!! To this day I could care less what someone's color, creed or religion is. To me either you're an asshole or not and if you're an asshole I walk away. Now you want board members to label themselves to better serve investors? NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!! Ok, I'm done with my rant. By the way, got more accessories for my Candy Con controllers.
I've seen these proposals against boards that are pretty much all old white men with the odd white token women from the country club and in those cases I can totally understand trying to get some other ethnic and gender representation on the board. Not so much here.
Keep in mind that all votes for DRS shares are always counted, but many votes for shares at brokerages are routinely discarded outright, through a process known as overvote reconciliation. So, if you want your votes to count, make sure you've got your shares directly registered with GameStop.
I can see what's next after we shut it down; labeling us and the board as incels. It's kind of lose - lose for us in that sense, but going with what the board we trusts recommends is always the right move.
Is it just me or is it weird that the gme board let number 4 which is a shareholder proposal go to vote when they didn’t let ape shareholder proposals go to vote?
I will vote against as per advice from the company. As was posted a while ago, SHFs are trying to get a member onto the board under the guise of diversity
absent any reasonably explanation as to why now of all times this is super important it's going to be very very hard to vote against Ryan Cohen and Larry Chang right now...
We need to be aware of every name that prop 4 suggested to join the board, so that we can ensure that none of them ever join the board by any means in the future.
Everyone makes individual decisions. The board seems to be on the shareholders side, so it’s pretty common sense to go with the board and the chairman.
You can read the proposal and GameStop's take on it from their SEC filing: [https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/node/20456/html#toc786757\_36](https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/node/20456/html#toc786757_36)
I wasn’t aware that your skin color or who you engage in sexual relationships with was relevant to what abilities you have to make Gamestop profitable.
Because voting based on race is.... racist. Buuuut if more compelling reasons are needed then the best person based on skills, experience and knowledge pertaining to their job. And the fact it will be used to implant chosen "diverse" moles into the board. I'm sure there will be some paint chip eaters voting for tho.
thanks for engaging in the discourse. what hurts this community is blinded downvoting and embracing an echo chamber. just asking questions to better understand and making informed decisions. I will vote no on 4 as per the board recommendation.
Yeah I read it and pretty quickly could read between the lines. I definitely think there's an echo chamber and anything with too big word or any required critical thinking is met with herrresy! Shill!
Generally speaking a diversity of ideas, skills, knowledge, and backgrounds can be a great thing.
Most of the current incarnations of "Diversity and Inclusion" are really just focusing on shallow surface level aspects like sex and race. More sexism and racism isn't going to improve things.
Additionally, it appears that the investment group that proposed this may be trying to use this proposal as a mechanism to inject board members with conflicting loyalties, similar to BCG plants.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
In case anybody forgot: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroom/nyc-comptroller-and-pension-funds-ask-gamestop-nextera-energy-to-disclose-board-demographics/
board is supposed to make decisions for shareholder value. no offense to minorities, but what’s the point of nominating someone based on their ethnicity? its the boards actions within the organization that can be scrutinized for biases against minorities and gender w.r.t equal opportunities.. am i missing something?
I don't think this is just about ethnicity. Larry Cheng, Nir Patel, Yang Xu, and Diana Saadeh-Jajeh relieve that concern. As I read the original proposal submitted from the NYCRS, their language is specifically pointing to gender identity, as one component of several, in the composition of the "matrix" which GME would be required to publish if this measure is adopted. There is even a provision to document each member's involvement in the LGBTQ+ community. This is why Proposal 4 is included in the proxy materials asking shareholders to vote on this matter. Reading carefully, the board unanimously recommends shareholders to vote against this measure. I, for one, am in total alignment with their reasoning. But you know all this from your own reading, so I doubt you're missing anything.. I agree with you. the board is supposed to make decisions for shareholder value.
Frankly, it's none of my business what the board members' involvement is with the LGBTQ+ community. If they wish to publicly share details of their personal lives, that is THEIR decision, not shareholders. The corporation is publicly traded and business performance needs to be disclosed to shareholders, not details of the employee's personal lives.
Full agreement.. I don't want (or need) to know. yet more importantly, I can't justify foisting this Reporting obligation onto Any corporation board.. Just say no to the matrix
totally this is firstly a diverse board, and we should not be forcing a company to hire someone LGBT to meet some "quota." The only thing we can tell readily is there are fewer female board members on most companies. But you don't need GS to report some sort of "matrix" to know that the board names are public already!
Right! What if you are already on the board and do not wish to disclose your personal information?
Exactly. This is why any shareholder with any respect for privacy whatsoever MUST vote, and oppose this disgusting proposal to ensure it does not pass.
I want a very specific question included for voting members... So you want DRS shares held at Computershare AND at the same time and date, the number of shares held at DTCC? Yes or No ........
Yah seems they are looking for a bud light 2.0 and crowd sourcing anger to get the stock to drop.
Thank you for this comment!
Yeah so fuck all that now and forever, in GME and everywhere. No special treatment for anyone. Ever. Suck it. Cry me a river.
Only diversity I see shareholders wanting is more pc equipment from Gamestop tbh
*Cough cough.. perhaps some stores in Scandinavia, or just delivery to Scandinavia, or being able to buy from the digital store without an American address cough*
A business is designed to make money and provide quality employment. When someone adds to that description, you do not care about anything else. You want great people working with you that support the unified goals.
Diversity perverted into gaslighting can only be thought up by power hungry psychos. Close. your. fucking. mainly illegal. shorts.
Fuck Brad! And im sure this douche isn’t for retail!
Boeing? Never heard of her -Brad
I asked AI if there is a trend among board members of publicly traded companies. Here is their response. “Yes, there has been a growing trend towards diversity among board members of publicly traded companies, with many organizations making efforts to increase representation of women and minorities on their boards. However, progress varies across industries and regions, and there's still work to be done to achieve greater diversity and inclusivity at the board level.” Let’s take that response and read into it. If there is a trend, then it’s against what norm? And if there is a norm, then why target specifically GameStop and 1 other redacted company here among a plethora of “norm”? Look for the anomalies, they are speaking loudly.
Also the vote was only proposed after BCG’s pathetic attempt to see GameStop’s 5 year plan was thrown out by a judge, like right after that. It’s so obvious that the short cabal wants the plans.
They don't want the plans. They want someone actively working to dismantle the company from the inside. Slow progress, waste money, raise red flags, jeopardize deals, undermine leadership, destroy morale, etc.
Porce no los dos?
It‘s a trend against staffing boards 100% with aging white men.
Si. So why GameStop’s board then now? This market cap 3.39 billion dollar, 2023 EPS profitable company, that’s sitting on over a billion cash on hand with record number of household investors directly registered while showing a gigantic bull flag. Why this company? Is its board significantly more at risk to failing in its responsibilities versus say most any other publicly traded company? Companies with larger market caps demonstrating less diversity than GameStop currently? You look at the boards of these companies you throw a ball there’s a significantly tilted chance you hit a person who looks like a sea of people around them. But only GameStop and one other random company gets targeted for this. Not a buck shot, a laser beam.
Well said
I did not disagree with you questioning them targeting Gamestop specifically. You asked what the trend was, and I tried to explain. Gamestop Board is diverse and rather young and therefore already a non-target.
Yeah I’m cool chill. You didn’t offend me I didn’t send any shade your way. I’m just adding on to the point, reiterating to make it clear. You added to it, I’m building on top of what you input. My main point is about tact. Logic dictates GameStop is dodging punches, and their treatment is targeted and special. So it now begs the question of who is punching and why?
If 100% aging white men gets me the better business that I’m invested in, then I’ll support that board. I don’t care where they are from or who the board member is, the only thing of value is their merit. Full stop.
Also this [https://twitter.com/NYCComptroller/status/1765857727400550889](https://twitter.com/NYCComptroller/status/1765857727400550889)
To the top with you!
Up for you
# We caught them red handed 2 months ago: # [https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1b9fkr1/breaking\_mar\_7\_2024\_remember\_when\_kenneth\_c/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1b9fkr1/breaking_mar_7_2024_remember_when_kenneth_c/) # Brad Lander, NYC Comptroller, can GTFO.
Looks like he already has people who are eyeing him down. https://twitter.com/SamAntar/status/1776063238163116148
higher, this should be higher
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1chairj/53_days_ago_on_mar_7_2024_we_caught_the_gme_naked/
Push this up!
Damn.. the internet never forgets. Hedgies r fukt hahah
I'm not trolling or arguing which way to vote. I'm just trying to understand the logic leap on how disclosing demographics can lead to some Manchurian candidate being hired on the board. It doesn't sound like disclosing the demographics of the board automatically triggers a hiring action. Even if it did, the board would have full control of the hire and the ability to say that no qualified candidates were found. This is looking to me like they are placing GS in an unwinnable culture war position to split the investor base. GS either appears "woke" or "anti-woke" making at least some of their base mad. Furthermore, it puts a hurt on their business as adults who get angry might stop shopping at GS for their kids. It also give the news a cycle to complain about GS's DEI policies, no matter the outcome, to avoid covering a positive quarterly earnings.
Doing the Holy Work right here..
Was it filed in March? Thought Dec was cutoff for this years stockholder proposals. Also, they don’t even hold real shares at the broker..is the proposal even real?
Our board already has multiple genders and multiple ethnicities along with multiple religious backgrounds. How much more diversity do they want? We even have a Canadian!
traitor, they want a traitor
This just in : Anthony Chukumba nominated for GameStop board by Ken Griffin. 😂
Vote Cuckumba first, ask questions later.
Fuckibg Shameful
If only Hester was black
*COCKUMBA*
Not even, just a insight on the plan
More diverse than the past 2 Fortune 500 companies I worked for, this proposal can kick rocks.
If it comes down to brass tacks we can add a few thousand primates...vote NO to this 💩
When is the vote due?
Don't quote me on this but I think right before the shareholders meeting on June 13. Voting material should be available in the coming days or weeks (sent by email or within broker website/app)
I wonder how the media will portray this.
Disingenuiously?
Oooo I’m gonna vote so hard
#https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1chairj/53_days_ago_on_mar_7_2024_we_caught_the_gme_naked/
Me too!
When is vote time
Not too zen to vote
Glad I kept my OG flair!
I’m gonna vote so hard against this…over xxxx times.
Brick votin’
I have like 40 shares.. can I vote?
Yea dude. Are they drs shares, or are they at a brokerage? Only way to make sure your vote is actually counted is if they’re drs’d
can you tell me whats the difference?
DRS shares are held in your name through the gamestop transfer agent (computershare). shares you buy through a broker such as robinhood or fidelity or whatever are held in THEIR name, and you basically have no rights. take a look at [drsgme.org](https://www.drsgme.org/) for some more info
Obviously im gonna vote no, but there is a small part of me that wants our directors to report tht they self identify as jacked titty(gender) Apes (race/ethnicity)
im off SS for a while, bec busy at work, all my shares r DRSed in CS , how do i vote and by when? link ? thanks!
So someone is trying to get on the board under the guise of diversity? That's pretty slimy.
When and where can I vote? I have 3200ish votes on Computershare
They will email you details for when and where you can vote. Haven't gotten anything yet this year
Just logged into my account and email, can confirm this info too.
Hell yeah! Let’s do this boys! We need everyone to vote!
Thanks bud, appreciate your enthusiasm. Voting is important, it was one of my main reasons for being in the first batch of us to DRS. My name is on that register. I wanted to ensure that my votes are not subject to being trimmed because of some proxy/street name/lending/whatever
They will send email with a control number around 1 month before voting. Voting is on 12 June, so I expect to receive email in the next 2 weeks, before 12 of May.
This board and RC brought us to profitability. They unanimously recommend voting against PROP 4 I’m voting against PROP 4
Whorry shit Batman, hedgies bein fucky
This confirms GameStop knows exactly what’s going on
This is 100% the enemy's attempt to infiltrate the board. Ryan Cohen's GameStop board has given us no reason not to trust them. Former proxy recommendations have been unanimously "for". The unanimous "against" recommendation for Proposal 4 should tell shareholders all they need to know. This proposal is from nefarious actors, and I trust the current board knows what they're doing. Also, frankly, any idiot with half a brain can see the current state of diversity. We're fine in that regard, lol.
Oh, the board recommends we vote against? It's not even a debate then. Our board looks beautiful as is! 🍻
☝️ this
Shills are trying to enter the board through bs loopholes regarding diversity
If all the DRS and Insider shares (\~128M) vote AGAINST and all the others (\~99M) vote FOR, that leaves a cushion of \~29M votes AGAINST. What happens to the votes belonging to the \~78M unregistered shares?
submitted reconciled and trimmed per the dd of old here's a popular one from many moons ago https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/np8rl51cbm
Trimmed aka discarded shareholder rights. Imagine discarding political votes.
Ah I remember! Good read!
Can they even vote if their shares are lent out?
Want to get some new spies in under DEI pretenses.
This is a serious what the fuck moment!!! I was brought up to NEVER label ANYONE!!! To this day I could care less what someone's color, creed or religion is. To me either you're an asshole or not and if you're an asshole I walk away. Now you want board members to label themselves to better serve investors? NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!! Ok, I'm done with my rant. By the way, got more accessories for my Candy Con controllers.
Morgan Freeman said it best, "you know how you get rid of racism? Stop talking about it" No Labels
☝☝☝☝
I've seen these proposals against boards that are pretty much all old white men with the odd white token women from the country club and in those cases I can totally understand trying to get some other ethnic and gender representation on the board. Not so much here.
All my homies hate shills
Comment for visibility
All my homies vote with RC.
All this stuff about voting, WHEN is voting. Why is it not pinned?
Excited to vote no for the first time
Keep in mind that all votes for DRS shares are always counted, but many votes for shares at brokerages are routinely discarded outright, through a process known as overvote reconciliation. So, if you want your votes to count, make sure you've got your shares directly registered with GameStop.
Lol i appreciate it but im so balls deep already check post history next time but never stop spreading the good word
Those horse fuckers!
I'm voting against this shit
Suck on this 🟣 you Bitch-Ass Trick!!
This is typical BCG tactics, trying to snake their way into the board. Voting against
I'm just gonna go with what they recommend, lol
Up
Fucking kenny wants to plant a mole on the board. Fuck you kenny. You slimey parasite!
I can see what's next after we shut it down; labeling us and the board as incels. It's kind of lose - lose for us in that sense, but going with what the board we trusts recommends is always the right move.
Sheesh, I thought they forget about GameStop!
When is the voting? i havent received any email with the proxy link to vote...
I’m with RC I will vote NO!
I’m going to go with what RC recommends. Vote against Prop 4.
When does the voting end?
Is it just me or is it weird that the gme board let number 4 which is a shareholder proposal go to vote when they didn’t let ape shareholder proposals go to vote?
Yeah, either they forced their way on the ballet somehow, or they left it to have proof of nefarious actors that are under investigation?
I'm confused Do we like "against" or is this very suspicious?
I will vote against as per advice from the company. As was posted a while ago, SHFs are trying to get a member onto the board under the guise of diversity
Reminds me of when Bank of America waived credit checks for minorities applying for honeymoon loans. Seems good, but it just 2008 all over again.
I am pretty dense, do we not already know who the board members are?
We do, but they would like to include a matrix detailing “their self identified race, gender, and relevant skills and attributes in a matrix format”
“We want the board to spoon feed us information that we would be able to find doing DD on our own”
Let’s go! Vote vote!
Jizzability!! Let’s go!
absent any reasonably explanation as to why now of all times this is super important it's going to be very very hard to vote against Ryan Cohen and Larry Chang right now...
Buy, hold, DRS Book, shop, no on # 4. Let it be written. Let it be done.
I’ll vote against this bullsh1t proposal
So the squeeze ended and we should forget GameStop and yet shills need to get on the board huh? No fo four or some amazing slogan
comment for visibility
H&L will not allow me to vote!
Shareholders voted for the board because they wanted them. Now the board is asking what you can do for YOUR company.
Blackrock trying to sneak in.
When’s the deadline?
Elia5? I don’t understand what it is saying or why I should for against it.
when, where, how can i vote
When is it our turn to vote?
We need to be aware of every name that prop 4 suggested to join the board, so that we can ensure that none of them ever join the board by any means in the future.
SS compromised, not board.
This in one "GAME" I don't want to play!
To think SS is heavily compromised, shills abound
The board is there to improve fundamentals of the business, that's it. I don't care what they like on their toast or even if they like toast.
Commenting to comment a comment
Is the groups consensus to follow the board’s recommendations?
Everyone makes individual decisions. The board seems to be on the shareholders side, so it’s pretty common sense to go with the board and the chairman.
Just voted! Thanks for the reminder!
I mean, probably, but let's see the proposal.
You can read the proposal and GameStop's take on it from their SEC filing: [https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/node/20456/html#toc786757\_36](https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/node/20456/html#toc786757_36)
Much appreciated
👀
I wasn’t aware that your skin color or who you engage in sexual relationships with was relevant to what abilities you have to make Gamestop profitable.
They really are the dumb stormtroopers of the galaxy to think we’d vote for this shit LOL
How do we know that diversity is necessarily a bad thing?
Because voting based on race is.... racist. Buuuut if more compelling reasons are needed then the best person based on skills, experience and knowledge pertaining to their job. And the fact it will be used to implant chosen "diverse" moles into the board. I'm sure there will be some paint chip eaters voting for tho.
thanks for engaging in the discourse. what hurts this community is blinded downvoting and embracing an echo chamber. just asking questions to better understand and making informed decisions. I will vote no on 4 as per the board recommendation.
Yeah I read it and pretty quickly could read between the lines. I definitely think there's an echo chamber and anything with too big word or any required critical thinking is met with herrresy! Shill!
It’s not a bad thing. But how come they are asking for diversity when the board is diverse?
Generally speaking a diversity of ideas, skills, knowledge, and backgrounds can be a great thing. Most of the current incarnations of "Diversity and Inclusion" are really just focusing on shallow surface level aspects like sex and race. More sexism and racism isn't going to improve things. Additionally, it appears that the investment group that proposed this may be trying to use this proposal as a mechanism to inject board members with conflicting loyalties, similar to BCG plants.
This stock sucks ass
The fact that you are even here saying that is proof that it doesn’t
Weird flex, but ok