As many are aware, the SEC recently published Incoming No-Action Requests Under Exchange Act Rule 14a-8, and there were several shareholder proposals submitted by GME shareholders that were rejected by the company that were published there.

There have already been a few discussions of these proposals on Reddit and on X and on Discord at least.

Some of the discussions about the rejected proposals have been nothing but negative and cynical and even disparaging towards those shareholders that submitted proposals.

So I just wanted to make this post to express some gratitude towards those shareholders that submitted a proposal, despite that GameStop rejected them.

It’s really easy to criticize. It’s very easy to sit behind a keyboard and put other people down while otherwise contributing nothing. It takes almost no effort to do this.

It’s hard to build things, it’s much easier to destroy things.

Those shareholders that submitted proposals are the types of people that are builders. They are activists. They are building and advancing our collective knowledge.

Some other people are not builders. They are destroyers. They revel when the builders struggle. They celebrate when the builders face setbacks. They scorn and shame the builders for having tried at all.

I sincerely appreciate the efforts of any shareholder that took the time and energy to submit a proposal, any proposal at all, even if it gets rejected.

Every little thing that GME shareholders do that produces additional knowledge is beneficial overall to all shareholders.

Some parties out there in the world that are in opposition to GME shareholders don’t like this. They don’t like it when GME shareholders get loud and get active. They would much prefer it if we would all just shut up and go away and forget GameStop.

That’s not going to happen. I for one am not going anywhere.

🍻

  • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Can you link to them. Haven’t heard of any of this.

    I’m assuming you have to be a USA resident to put forward stuff

      • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        9 months ago

        So holding 2k over two years. But with shares tumbling in price. How would that work. Was worth higher 2 years ago.

        • Chives@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgMEnglish
          0·
          9 months ago

          It needs to be cumulative - not dipped below the threshold over the window. If an investor has been DRS for those two years and meet the minimum now, you’re probably good, but if an investor doesn’t meet it currently then they don’t qualify.

          • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            9 months ago

            I have 375 shares. Over the last 2 years. So I’ve no idea. Not that I have any proposals. But just in terms of I’d meet criteria

              • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
                0·
                9 months ago

                Would assume so. I don’t really know that much about the proposal aspect.

                Do all members of a group require the criteria or all members have to make up to the 2k over 2 years ?

    • jergy@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgOPEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      The link is in the post, they are all on that page, but here:

      As a reminder, shareholder proposals are submitted by real people with real names. As a matter of courtesy it would be appropriate to respect the privacy of these individuals as much as possible.

      And to my awareness, it does not matter which country a shareholder resides in, the qualifications to submit a proposal are only that a shareholder has held a minimum dollar value of shares for a minimum amount of time, as specified here:

      • ≥$2,000 for at least 3 years, OR
      • ≥$15,000 for at least 2 years, OR
      • ≥$25,000 for at least 1 year
      • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        9 months ago

        Excellent. Thanks

        Couple to do with plan vs book. Interesting.

        The IRA one is pretty good. Would be great to get access to that

  • Chives@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgMEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Love the sentiment here!

    A question unasked also goes unanswered. I am grateful not only for the answers but for the questions too!

  • JensenAbler@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Thanks so much for posting these proposals! I wouldn’t have seen them otherwise. This lemmy instance is where I get my GME info.

  • MossyHabitat@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Agreed, with an addendum. We must simultaneously work to reform the existing system AND build a new system. One incentivizes the other, thereby ensuring the outcome & its expediency. There’s growing public awareness, community participation, and current (& future) activist whales with good intentions to kick-start the journey to a better future on both fronts. Needless to say I’m 100% convinced we need non-fungible securities ownership via NFTs or some equivalent system.

    The “hard to build things, easy to destroy” truth resonates - Markets should be (financially) incentivized to create rather than destroy, which is why I’m against short selling at all - legit or naked/counterfeit. It is simply too easy to destroy a company & profit from its destruction, either forced via massive short positions or plants/sellouts within a board/C-suite.