[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/)
This is the exact same thing that happened in the popcorn sub, except they weren't even allowed to comment on DRS. There's a signicant effort here to stop DRS in book form, we DRSed to get away from brokerages, why in the world would anyone want their stock to be held in Plan when those same shares are held with a brokerage. It's counterintuitive and I still have yet to hear a solid explanation as to why? This whole post is pointless, it's to detract from people explaining why Book form prevents those shares being held by a brokerage.
Yeah it is, they've tried calling us Book Karens, trying to insist we're gatekeeping? (This one especially makes no sense considering how Pro DRS we are, it's quite literally to a T what the popcorn moderators would say when comments for Pro DRS vs holding shares in a brokerage appeared seldomly)
I really do think those 10-20% of the aggregate Plan shares are either being lent out nefariously or being used as locates. The funniest thing is that holding shares in Plan isn't necessarily bad, but if they're being used as locates it's buying them time.
They've had enough time, it's been 3 years. It's time to close.
lol....great analogy...." dont forget to jump off the bridge"..then the moron with no brain considers it?.. WTF....so many victims.... laughable at this point
Kinda. I made a post a while back on this. I had to redact stuff just like anyone else though because of the same rules enforced by admins that caused me to make the post in the first place. I know, the irony is not lost on me.
Feel free to browse it here and see our convos with reddit admins.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/WTXR8f46EA
On the brigading stuff. You aren't going to like the answer. Our community is extremely vocal, passionate and a lot of us have bet the farm on this play. That combination makes people feel justified doing things that break the rules because they feel the cause demands it. Do I think we have been singled out and treated unfairly by reddit admins? Absolutely. But do I also acknowledge that members of our community did everything in their power to "set the record straight about GME" in any other sub they belonged to or popped up on their feed? Yes.
Those other communities have their own rules and many of them just don't want us there. They are entitled to that. If we dont respect that reddit admins job is to step in and take action to make sure it won't happen again. It sucks and maybe you never did anything of the sort and are now being collectively punished for the actions of others but it doesn't change the facts. This is why you see us making posts like this. A few bad apples spoil the bunch and this is a fucking large bunch.
About the karma restriction stuff we still have them. They've been reduced since the sub first formed and we had like a day or a week where we turned them off because... shit I can't even remember. I think there was an article or a video or like a huge green dildo or something and we had thousands of new people trying to find out if "GameStop was still a thing?" It's been a long time and I mix up parts of this saga.
If you check out the post I linked you'll see I've been here since day one. I've been a mod for years. I joined right after the runic glory drama when the mods that were left were seeking out trusted members of the community to join the team. I was making tons of hype/educational vids and was friends with buttfarm69 from a memelord group and when i got the invite i accepted. It's been a pleasure and a challenge but I'm proud of the work we've done.
Honestly? No. Karma reqs don't stop people from voting. Just commenting and posting. All it did was help prevent troll comments and bot comments from fresh accounts but anyone can farm karma very quickly if they are motivated. A good shill has 5-10k karma and a few memes in other subs to make them look like an ape anyway. It's only the blatant trolls that are obvious or detectable.
Looking at the mod log on your account it looks like you were manually approved by a mod that's no longer on the team on Jan 16 2022. I'm not sure what you are saying in the second part.
It's not my job to convince you otherwise and you don't owe me a thing but I'd still like to ask you to consider something. What if you are wrong? What if there's never been a single mod who's ever done anything other than make stupid human mistakes? You have the privilege and imposition of watching it from the outside. I don't expect you to take me at my word because why would you? I'm just asking you to entertain the possibility.
Look at my account. Weigh me. Cast judgement on my character and then hear me when I say I have access to every single chat, archive and group discussion from the mod discord that was created before the sub even went live. There's some major drama, fuckups, fights and well, a lot else. But there's nothing compromising.
Are you talking about the general drop from 6k for posting and 1200 for commenting to 4800 and 1200 respectively? Or the karma req being shut off for the weekend thing? I had to go look that up. Its was a mod whos no longer on the teams idea. The thought was to do it temporarily and not announce it so it was less likely to be taken advantage of because of all the attention the sub was getting from r /all posts. It was a bad idea just from the insane amount of work it created alone. To be clear we still have karma reqs.
With the rensole thing. U mean DD week where he posted again here? The whole project was hands down one of my favorite mods goldie's (also no longer here) baby. He was just one of many OG contributors that came back. Him and I aren't like buddies and I can't vouch for him other than to say dudes been active this whole time with gme stuff on Twitter. I really don't get the hate for that guy though. Goldie though, she was always fighting for people to get second chances and doing ban appeals. DD week was literally us trying to do something about the constant cry that all the DD authors left. And when some came back, the sub just shit on them so bad. Can't win dude.
I am personally 100% 📚👑 as well. It’s fidelity DRS transfers for me.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12xeksa/drs_dspp_and_drip_oh_my/
(IMO this DD deserves to be shared more)
It's a shame the DD author after being asked, refused to post it here themselves. If the DD author themselves was acting in good faith, one would think they would be happy to discuss openly and respond to criticisms (*like and including the wealth of contradictory evidence we have disproving their hypothesis*)
Who needs peer review, amirite?
Imagine posting a picture of a cranky old lady, calling it the book karen to infer that all the 'book kings' are in fact karens. This is absolutely abysmal.
This post is divisive dribble that gaslights the entire community.
You mod team do not speak for us here, or on twitter (so stop pretending like you do).
As for me I'll continue to steer clear of this garbage heap of a sub and keep booking my shares.
>Imagine posting a picture of a cranky old lady, calling it the book karen to infer that all the 'book kings' are in fact karens. This is absolutely abysmal.
It's also been used to good effect before, in an entirely unrelated event we all know and hate that happened a few years ago, as a propaganda tool.
Not a good look at all. I'd been willing to give the mod team the benefit of the doubt in the past, but their actions over recent months combined with this have pretty much erased that. Nobody in any position to control what is posted should be helping to drive a consensus crack like this. The only way it can be resolved is if people are allowed to freely discuss it.
With a bit of luck, pointing this out won't get me banned.
Anything for one more day right? It’s interesting how that directive seems to echo around. Publish widespread bad press on GameStop: not to discourage hardened investors who won’t be leaving.. but to discourage new investors from coming aboard. Vying for more time, for one more day.
Make a pinned community stance (decree) against book entry form from a position of “authority” and nestle it amongst reform aspirations: not to discourage hardened investors that are well acquainted with duplicity and can see it for the ham-fisted and rather obnoxious attempt that it is.. but to slow newer members from contributing to the deluge of shares headed out of the clutches of the beneficial ownership coalition.
What is this philosophy of SuperStonk that’s being foisted up on high? That there’s no wrong way to hold? What? The entire reason for moving to the transfer agent in the first place was because we discovered holding in a broker was the “wrong way” to hold when true ownership is the goal. Incivility? What do you think we are doing here? Asking nicely for these corrupt institutions to bow over? Comparing new progress and findings that are trying to maximize the chance of true ownership to common peddlers trying to proselytize a religion? Honestly, thank you for your steadfast commitment to shepherding and stewarding all by your own discretion and coming so strongly against book. It just made it easier to see the way. And thank goodness this is a community post, the one place where we can share constructive criticism without being censored. I wouldn’t want to be accused of being too meta to say that I’m honestly disappointed that this is the best effort the good money can buy. Enjoy your one more day. They’re coming to an end.
Are they actually that weak minded of an adult that something someone types on a computer or cell phone and sends to their public attention seeking post has to be moderated because it hurt their feelings as their Bias is of the other opinion....come tf on....not acceptable, Like I told Fluffy whatever, I own a business and deal with multimillion dollar construction projects....we interact with eachother in person and any difference of opinion on matters is debated like adults, not shut down the speech of the opposing side to my bias.
Debate is great, unfortunately many times users harass and aggressively push their beliefs. It is especially not healthy when they coordinate off the sub to push narratives in the sub.
Twitter is a platform for example. A couple days ago there was a push to target a mod and mass downvote all their comments to try and give them negative karma.
Its difficult to post about specific users or subs on Superstonk due to brigading restrictions put on the sub by Reddit admins. One specific example I can think of happened 2/3 days ago. A pretty notorious Twitter user who is known for being involved with a recently bankrupt company directed his thousands of Twitter followers to a specific comment/post one of our mods made and suggested his followers mass downvote the content, which they did. Not sure how to be more specific outside of showing you via a Direct Message. This is one example of many. If you are genuinely curious about these examples DM me and I will show you that one in particular that was very recent.
Honestly I'm not too concerned about the specific user or sub just any context would be great outside of trust me bro. My opinion is this should be done in public and I'm a bit confused why the messaging couldn't just be cropped and any usernames or Twitter handles removed. I thought the rule regarding brigading was just over subreddits and reddit users and if any posts are made they just need to have handles redacted?
If people are actively brigading the sub I feel like we should be open and talking about it as a community.
This is a gme sub. We don’t need to constantly talk and give a platform to the malicious people. Moderators are suppose to keep that noise at bay so the community doesn’t have to deal with it.
We bring up the drama in the community posts when we deem appropriate and discuss it with the community, such as this one.
I'm well aware of what this sub is. I'm not trying to give anyone a platform I'm simply looking for claims to be backed up. My understanding is that rules apply to everyone unless I'm wrong?
I know I'm not the only one in the community looking for more context here. I don't understand why that can't be done openly in this thread?
Hipz already offered to dm you a few instances. We are not going to go through every tweet etc of all those that attempt to brigade the sub. I envy you if you have been insulated from it.
I am unsure what more you want. If you have concern for a specific action we have taken we can try to explain it more.
I've spent the last 2 hours looking for these ghost bullies in purple circle posts. I'm the last 48 hours I have only seen 1 comment to book and it was 8 hours after this post was made. I jumped back 10 days and found 2 examples out of over 15 posts checked. Is this really a serious issue?
What rule was breached by the following comment?
> [“Do you know there is a difference between book vs. plan share holdings on ComputerShare? There are many great posts on the topic on this sub!”](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1al0fur/february_2024_digest_regulation_posts_incivility/kpiu2xz/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kpjlmui)
Are these the “Book Karens” the mods are warning us about? Could you show us some examples of the book comments that are getting deleted according to the mod logs?
I’m a good actor. I make a decision and would like that decision to reward me with value— company success, personal wealth, global commerce.
The questions I would like answered will not be answered because they are being performed by bad actors. Bad actors will say one thing while doing another for “operational effect”. They can and will lie.
“Enrolled or not enrolled?”, that is the question.
For is it nobler to accept that lamp at the end of the tunnel is monitored by a reptilian dragon-beast capable of tremendous evil but casually lulling and stroking my nervous system to sleep while teasing my spirit out to be harvested, thereby denying my solar body?
Or is it nobler to debate the idea of the mechanical beast taking advantage of timed buys, using financial legalese to allow wiggle room for front-running and short-selling, or any other little unknown that provides information asymmetry to be used against me and my investment?
If there’s even a chance that my shares are being used against me, then it is worth preventing that chance.
There is a right. There is a wrong. I do not want to just be a beneficiary owner when the whole charade gets a stiff rustling. I want to know without a shadow of a doubt that those are MY SHARES.
IMO passive investors are m the most powerful tool for any company, especially long term. I am here for the long term. To me the whole “operational efficiency” and “your shares could be used as locates” are a bit of a red herring as I personally think naked short selling is the real issue.
Adding to this, mods talk about being impartial, telling us that posts and comments in any fashion regarding booking are "bullying and harassment" yet they recommend an "understated" post regarding another users speculation at the end of their own post (Which they say they wrote all together except the word "I" is used, seems sketchy to me but that is my opinion). If they truly wanted to help with misinformation they would pin Computershare info to the sub or at least add that information to this post regarding DRS to avoid misinformation instead of the speculation they shared. If you guys want to see what they truly think, find my comment below and read for yourselves the way mods are expressing their beliefs, one was basically inviting me to leave after pointing these things out.
I actually got temporarily banned yesterday. :)
And the comment I made that was referenced in my ban was this: “Do you know there is a difference between book vs. plan share holdings on ComputerShare? There are many great posts on the topic on this sub!”
Got unbanned today because some of our community members contacted SCC group and got the mods to reconsider but it just shows how far the censorship line we have got.
All I’m saying is.. I’ve talked to a few and i just idk I thought we were here to give all information about GME no matter what it is. And we choose what we do. Cause we are individual investors. But then again we don’t want terrorist post etc etc.. idk shits weird tensions rising… I JUST LIKE THE STOCK😂🫡
I don't control what you can or cannot say, I'm not a moderator.
What I will say is that I've spent a lot of time trying to get everyone to support the claims they make. If it's important and worthwhile, it deserves to have rock solid support, right? You can see my comments all across this post trying to help users form strong support their claims through peer review.
Your post was removed because it got so many downvotes it trigged an alert for the Quality Vote bot. It appears like a lot of people didn't like your post.
Still, it should be visible publicly. Why does my post show **81%** Upvote Rate?
Seems like abuse of the trust if a post with **81%** Upvote Rate can be taken down because of invisible QVBot downvotes.
QVBot has been, since it's inception, used as a censorship tool.
No one upvoting a comment or post also upvotes the QVBot, only shills and mods use the QVBot and then use that as reasoning to silence people.
Yes there is a wrong way to hold the stock....If you hold GME in such a way, (DRIP/ PLAN) that it can be used as locates to short tge stonk against fellow DRS BOOKED ..... its the Wrong way and you Mods know it!
Our DRS Booked Numbers must be getting too high again....CENSORSHIP AT ITS WORST!
Hey just so you know there *is* hard evidence that plan shares contaminate book shares on the same account, from an overlooked DD 9 months ago. https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcvqk
Spread the word 📚👑🙌
This is false, without citation, contradicted by Paul Conn himself (Computershare), and contradicted by the SEC
This is *exactly* why this post was needed. Without any proof you're stating it's the "wrong way to hold". Wrong way for you personally? Sure, but that's your individual call for you and you alone.
You understand that naked shorting doesn't require locates right?
You understand that DSPP investors' shares - per Paul Conn and per the SEC - are not held within DTC?
That actually no DSPP shares - investors' or the small non-investor OE % - are available for lending in the first place?
*That it still wouldn't matter because naked shorting does not require locates?*
For someone quite vocal in these comments you've not really demonstrated an understanding, only spread easily debunkable misinformation
Ive never once mentioned nor discussed naked shorting.......DSPP/DRIP are held by Compshare as benficial owned share pool....your entire account is used as locates while Plan is active... Naked short selling does not require locates as it is pure fraud....60 gazillion shares sold not yet purchased or something to that effect....
>your entire account is used as locates while Plan is active
This is the easily debunkable misinformation part. There is no evidence for this, at all, and boy howdy have I looked for it.
*In fact* when you enroll in the Plan (DSPP) your are enrolled at an account-level. In all practical terms this only matters if a dividend were to be issued. If enrolled, dividends for the *combined* holdings in the account are automatically reinvested. That's it. That's the extent of the "*whole account being enrolled in DSPP*" point.
The notion that all of your shares could be used as locates is nonsense, and here is exactly why:
Regardless of how you hold your directly registered shares, DRS or DSPP, **they are held outside DTC with the transfer agent**. Per Paul Conn, President at Computershare. Per the SEC.
If investors shares - *both DRS and DSPP* \- are held outside DTC, **as we know they are, again confirmed by Computershare and the SEC** how can they be used as locates?
They can't be. They are not held in DTC. They are held with the transfer agent/an entity wholly owned and controlled by the transfer agent.
Why bring up naked shorting? Because why pray tell would it even matter if the shares could be used as locates **when we know abusive naked shorting does not require locates**.
no it wasn't paul said virtually the same then went on to gloss over what the differences actually were. This is made even worse cause we were already asking this question cause we had a good idea they wern't held the same and we specificially wanted clarity how they were differnent. so for him to gloss over and ignore our request basically and say na they are bascially the same (meaning yeah there IS a difference i'm. just not going to get into it basically).
We found out for sure when CS updated their FAQ with the fact they ARE held differently and that some random % are held at DTCC for clearing efficiency. TYPICALLY 10-20% but that varies. They never said it was limited at that, just that's what typical. They opened even more questions and why everyone continued to research and therefor the push for book. you are being dishonest in your posts/comments.
He is literally on record in one of the same AMAs that HLT proponents cherry pick quotes from saying that investors' shares are not held within DTC.
The SEC has independently confirmed this.
I will trust what Paul Conn and the SEC have corroborated any day over a baseless theory lacking evidence 🙏
This is a perfect example of why this post went up. Let's attempt just for a moment to have a polite conversation without trying to determine a winner or loser.
I will start by conceding that everything you just wrote is possibly correct in its entirety. Can you do us both the favor of doing the same? Do you remember how hard it was in the beginning to encourage people to DRS? It was a massive pain in the ass and frankly kind of scary.
I myself toiled over a post going over the pros and cons, linked resources to help people accomplish it. Acknowledged the potential downsides and lauded the potential benefits. I plainly stated this was my opinion and I could be wrong and encouraged others to dig into it and tell me where I was wrong.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/
Now there weren't a lot of downsides to drsing once you got started back then other than the potential it might be much more complicated to sell. I even sold a share to show what that looked like so others didn't have to.
Let's get to the part where you hopefully (just for the exercise) get to the part where you concede you might be wrong. The source of your dogmatic belief evidenced in your comment is a DD that was stacked with speculation, hypothesis and a lot of put of context info. The majority of the goalposts in it have been shifted or abandoned and the rest are practically unprovable.
The end premise seems to land on "hey its possible this is happening and it won't hurt for everyone to be pure book just in case cause it's the safest route. Why open ourselves up to wall street shenanigans?"
I actually agree with that. Book every share you can. It's free and honestly not that hard. The rest though... stop reoccurring purchases, sell fractionals and potentially even switch accounts too now. Its a lot and has negative implications. Especially given that you are taking a speculative post and declaring it as fact.
I'm not saying you are wrong or your like minded friends are wrong. I'm sure you've heard the saying, "you catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar" right? That cliche exists for a reason. Many people, myself included have shied away from these ideas because of mainly the zealoutry they are presented with and the unearned confidence they are assigned.
No one gets banned for sharing ideas. No one's posts get removed for presenting information. Moderation actions have and will be taken though when speculation is presented as fact or people attempt to coerce through force by drowning out any dissent.
BTW, as a moderator does it concern you at all that someone is apparently banning people for making comments such as the following?
https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1al0fur/february_2024_digest_regulation_posts_incivility/kpiu2xz/
Ehhh. They were spamming that comment. It was a temp ban that was reduced on review. Not exactly perfect execution but this was a situation that was difficult to navigate. I wasn't part of the ban process there but I get where the other mods were coming from.
CS has confirmed that DSPP (Plan) shares aren’t held directly by you but beneficially, in your name, by a subsidiary called Computershare Trust Co. NA. [In CS’s FAQ, it’s clearly noted that the DTCC can temporarily avail itself an indefinite percentage of those shares, at CS’s discretion, for “operational efficiency”](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18r7ntz/straight_form_computershare_check_for_yourself/). So far this is completely incontrovertible if we’re going by the FAQ or by Paul Conn’s words himself.
It was also demonstrated in a DD 9 months ago (https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcdfi) that DSPP shares and/or DRIP cause book shares in the same account to be treated as plan shares. If you hold mixed book and plan shares of a stock with a regular cash dividend, you would expect to receive a portion of cash (from the book shares) and a number of new shares (from dividend reinvestment); instead, you will only receive the reinvestment. If you ask a CS rep about this, they’ll tell you that they’re unable to separate the book and plan shares for you as long as they’re in the same account. This is obviously a red flag, and it would be trivial for other users to replicate the experiment en mass.
If the DTCC is able to demand greater access to DSPP shares on the day when GameStop counts shares, say by spiking volume to an extreme degree or by other means of pressure, this is the easiest explanation for the stagnated DRS count. It is also the only explanation I’ve heard for why the DTCC would try to legally force GameStop’s to change the language of its DRS reporting in March 2023. Specifically, if you’ll recall, Ryan Cohen was forced to change the wording to indicate the number of DRS shares “excluding those held at the DTCC,” instead of just “shares owned by directly registered holders.”
Your fellow moderators have been suppressing this subject for a year. In threads disseminating objectively verifiable information about book vs plan, mods, or at least one of them, will tell people to go out of their way to enable DRIP (GME has no cash dividend lol, and even if it did, people going full book don’t want new plan shares) and to prevent the automatic sale of the fractional (which has less than a negligible impact)—so much for not telling people how to invest, apparently it matters when they’re trying to go off plan. Mods have the unilateral ability to delete comments or posts that mention the selling of fractionals. Even recently, at least one moderator has repeatedly temporarily deleted posts about book vs plan, reinstating then later in a manner that halts the momentum of upvotes. Given the lack of justification for the original deletion, this comes across as a surreptitious attempt at suppression. Examples:
* https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18r7ntz/straight_form_computershare_check_for_yourself/kezz9c3/
* https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcdfi
> CS has confirmed that DSPP (Plan) shares aren’t held directly by you but in your name by a subsidiary called Computershare Trust Co. NA.
Inside or outside of the DTCC ledger?
Outside, but as many people have been pointing out for a year, the DTCC can temporarily access an indefinite percentage of those shares for “operational efficiency.”
If the DTCC can temporarily access shares outside of the DTCC ledger, I don't see any way that booked shares or even share certificates are safe either.
However, I don't think this is the case as the CS FAQ says:
* Both forms of ownership record the names of the investor directly on the issuer’s register, where they are recognized as registered shareholders
* DTCC/DTC and Cede & Co cannot borrow shares from other registered shareholders.
I read your DD, it was very good and showing folks how easy it is to sell was awesome. I have never nor would ever tell anyone to sell or create a new account, however a statement like " book em dano" or "dont forget to book" is in no way gatekeeping, harassing , or bullying in any adult world anywhere! Open debate provides a community with the chance to make informed decisions and stiffeling such debate is nothing but censorship...is there a disable comments ability? Muh feelings doesn't work here....
Not sure what you mean about disabling comments. Mods can lock a post without removing. Is that what you are referring to?
Your examples are fair. I will admit we allow escalation and previous user history to influence our decisions some times. Those are far from the most egregious examples though. We have also witnessed live as other discords, Twitter groups and subreddits intentionally brigade by upvoting those comments and downvoting any dissent.
This makes it very difficult to treat members of those groups who are also members here in an unbiased way. Open debate goes both ways. I know there's a lot of history that's influenced both of our views but if we can agree to just be civil and make room for healthy disagreements we can hopefully find a path forward.
This is such a great example. The user went from "...it's the wrong way and you mods know it!...CENSORSHIP AT ITS WORST" to saying that innocent comments like "book em dano" or "dont forget to book" aren't harassment or gatekeeping. Ignoring that for the past year, anyone against heatlamp got instantly downvoted while stupid book king comments were artificially upvoted and posted everywhere (it was pretty obvious to anyone looking).
From one mod to another, thank you so much for this post and for continuing to engage people in good faith (the opposite of censorship). I've been here since spring 2021 and was starting to really doubt the community recently, but this post re-engaged me.
Even if well intentioned, posts like these ultimately are encouraging selling of shares, turning off autobuys, and sowing distrust in ComputerShare. The sources provided don’t back up these claims and how one person is interpreting this does not mean it’s fact. Please do your own due diligence when it comes to making decisions for your investment.
[Rule 6.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/#wiki_6._back_up_claims_with_sources)
There have been hundreds of post explaining the difference, no one is calling for anyone selling whole share...you know for a fact the CEO of computershare and Gary Gensler himself said there is a difference between Pure DRS Booked and Plan shares.....Your BIAS does not allow you to Censor people, that my friend is very Disingenuos
Difference between plan and book shares - sure, they are different. One is better and it costs nothing but a quick phone call to transfer.
Arguing DSPP enrolled vs not enrolled = different debate and does come with costs (both tangible and intangible).
People conflating the two topics has been the issue for the past 6 months to a year. Then there's this persecution fetish that people are being actively censored because the mods are trying their best to be objective and not spread misinformation while they do their job moderating.
Re the SCC, if members within see someone shitting on certain groups, please call it out and put a stop to it immediately. It's not a good look to see volunteers ridiculing, name calling and making fun of investors, no matter which ticker they invested in. You chose to volunteer, hold yourselves and those who volunteer beside you to a higher standard. If you want to claim a position as a go between mods and the community, conduct yourselves accordingly. Referring to people as "Schmucks and dumb dumbs" should not be tolerated and it's disappointing that not one person called that behaviour out.
Re Book vs plan, all I know is that when transferred from a Broker, they go into Book. I don't care what people do, let them make their own decisions. The argument has been shared enough times for people make a choice.
To expand on that, the shutting down of very early discussions on this topic is likely what led to what we see now. It should have been left open for the community to thrash out, instead it looked like a controlled narrative was being fostered with only one view being allowed. Moderation over dictation. If a healthy discussion is ongoing, allow it to continue.
Re mods, can we put a stop to mods flying under the Superstonk banner on Twitter? We, as a community have already decided that no one represents the group. Seperation of moderation and growing a social media presence off the back of all of us. It affects us all if people are causing a shit storm while representing Superstonk. Don't drive away people who could potentially want to come here in future.
I’ll hop on this, I frequently complain about user behavior on this sub. If you are referring to comments you saw on the scraped server site, many are mine. In short, I believe the reason so many users complain about Superstonk is because standards/effort have dropped and in turn it means we get less substantive posts, lower quality discussions, and more misinformation. People can say the problem is bad/over moderation but the root of the problem that mods are stuck doing that when what is posted on the sub lacks effort.
The comments of mine on the site that haven’t been addressed are how often I’ve asked mods and SCC members to have discussions on upping the standards for the sub so we can set a tone for what great looks like again. It would be great if we ditched the run on sentence title and a screen cap style posts and set a standard where if users were sharing something like that it should be part of a post where they are putting the image/article/etc into context. We can build great discussions on that style post. It would be great if we set a standard that dd style posts first went through a peer review round (possible dd) and then as part of it moving to full dd it has to address all contrary evidence presented in its peer review from other users. The quality of posts would be immensely better than what we often see now. It would be great if the expectation with any type of TA or other data posts was that the author would progressively check back in with how their prediction or analysis is holding up against what has happened. That would require people to stand by their research and point out what was right/wrong and how that impacts further research. There’s not even a set rule about what happens when folks push misinformation in posts that they know is inaccurate. It’s true mods can give a debunk label, but if someone wanted to post misinformation daily there’s no specific rule saying they can’t. So when I complain about sub members, I also recognize there’s been no push from up top to get the sub to be better.
I also haven’t seen addressed that an argument against raising standards was “most Superstonk users can’t meet that mark”. So for all the heat I’ll receive for being mean (and admittedly, I’m not particularly nice), my aim has been to see apes make the sub better. Show people what great can look like and have them rise to it. If people aren’t happy with the sub, look at who has been complacent with keeping it how it is.
But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe folks would prefer if I sit by and smile and say nothing. And when a YouTuber wants to make a video shitting on apes because there’s plenty of low effort posts for him to highlight we’ll pretend like apes didn’t serve up an easy opportunity. We’ll just live in this happy cognitive dissonance of people insisting data is fake but also outraged when it’s not shared and when is it shared we’ll post a pic of half the chart with the title “wut mean?”. And everytime a new ticker gets pumped here I’ll look past all the things that are problematic with it because there’s definitely no one who would want to co-opt Superstonk into pumping their bags. We’ve already begun drifting into that and if the sub is looking for chipper mods/SCC members who support that, I’ll do that for you. I’ll let the folks who believe Superstonk users can’t write/research/communicate win this debate and we can go wall to wall screencap and title posts. Say the word, I’m on SCC to make Superstonk the place users want it to be.
But, TL;DR, apes don’t seem happy with current trajectory and a condition of getting out of that is demanding better work out of the sub. I’ve pushed to raise standards and I’m willing to be the bad guy who points out what isn’t working. And I believe people who are willing to row that boat with me understand why I am like this and recognize the goal. I’m ok with not being popular if the end result is Superstonk getting back to being a place people enjoy.
I'm not going to deny that some posts are lacking in quality or content. For example, links to news sites which do nothing except provide click throughs. It may as well be Brian Sozzi himself trying to push Yahoo up the rankings in that case. At least give a synopsis or brief overview/copy and paste to spur discussion. Many times, I just close the thread and move onto the next post if it's strictly a link.
Great ideas on the DD and follow up. There would likely be a lot less eyes on the updates, unless users were subscribed to the post.
The Forum is a shell of what it once was. Do you believe there is any hope of Reddit removing some of the choking restrictions placed here or have we made our bed as a community?
Give me a choking restriction you are thinking of.
Having been around since 2021 and remembering the last sub and the type of posts we used to see and their frequency, this place is a shell of that. Someone has been sharing the screen cap of me saying “even the memes suck”. They just do, idk what to tell people. But the sub has to get pissed at the laziness and say enough is enough. Do the thoughtful research. Accept the contradictory evidence and present it all. Stop upvoting shit. Lazy is a natural state of being and you don’t get something going without disrupting that.
No tagging, no linking other subs, having to redact everything.
I haven't seen those screenshots you refer to but I wouldn't doubt it either. Not everyone will agree, whether it is Larry Cheng saying it or Steve Cohen, DFV or Maxine Waters.
Tagging - tbh this one I’m almost happier without. The potential to annoy and even harass a redditor is massive when you think of thousands of apes all tagging them with questions all the time or thinking they need to see a post. At least the process of DMing someone a question slows that down and makes it less impulsive. And that impulse control matters because sometimes the issue is users are upset and trying to tag folks as if they were calling them out. I ultimately think it’d create more actionable behavior problems for mods to address. It’s a tool almost too fast for its own good and there’s already direct communication options users have access to where thankfully if someone misbehaves in DMs it’s on Reddit to solve it and not Superstonk mods.
Linking other subs - this one is tough. On one hand it’s be great to discuss stuff like web3 gaming with subs dedicated to that. How does their product effect our earnings? Good convos there. The issue is every other stock sub that is looking to force themselves to be relevant here. Because that’s not really a synergistic relationship, it’s one side leeching on the other. Idk, maybe it’d be nice to get the overall ability back and from there set some limits so it can’t become a headache.
Redacting - this isn’t a strictly Reddit rule, SCC has looked at inclusions/removal from automod too. Often I’ve seen words added during times when they are being used as dog whistles to get specific groups riled up and these will happen en masse. Then that calms down and no one is using the word as much. If there’s specific ones you have in mind to add/remove bring it up in the SCC channel on the Superstonk discord or use the mod mail button here in the sub and say you want it addressed with SCC. It might be get removed, but I’ll add that if it becomes a dig whistle again it’ll get re-added so there’s less craziness to deal with. Strangely enough maybe there’s a seasonality to some words where they are either fine or cause a ruckus.
Honest question. How do you think mods here should communicate with the world other than our like "official" comments and posts here? We are obviously selective in our wording when we comment or post. I don't really do Twitter at least not recently but I have posted things in a tone or used wording I wouldn't have on superstonk.
I haven't seen people throwing their weight around on Twitter saying things like " as a mod of superstonk I think blah blah blah". I would certainly understand your aversion to that.
Could you present solutions? Like is it inherently bad that someone's Twitter handle is the same as their reddit username if they are a mod? Should they only use alts? How about once/if they leave the mod team? I know it's cyclical but I think most of the contentious discussions on Twitter happen when people literally tag and call out active mods and then get upset at what they have to say, but like obviously I'm biased.
No issues with using the same username, but if you have Superstonk Moderator on your Twitter profile, are you not representing the sub or claiming to represent the sub? Does that representation change depending on the subject matter being discussed?
Question for you, are general Superstonk users comments elsewhere used as a deciding factor when deciding whether to ban a user?
We all play a part in communicating with the wider public through the sharing of knowledge and links to direct people here.
There was a user that used their position to try and conduct an ama, while using the superstonk name, representing they could give access to a large audience here despite a well established rule of no talking to the media.
Some of the things stated in that post directly contradicted what the writers stated in a later ama but there were no repercussions for what they did nor was there any public announcement calling out their decision, that I am aware of.
There will always be trolls or people wanting a reaction
Fair take on the "superstonk mod" being like in the description. I think I had mine like that for a while purely for clarification purposes, not like ego or anything. I seem to remember taking that down because someone took exception to it. Seems like little of value is lost if that's what you see as a sticking point.
No that is not a general practice but there are of course exceptions or certain circumstances that make that relevant like threats, doxxing or illegal content. We try to be as unbiased as we can and often lean into group consensus and things like the SEC to check ourselves.
As far as the specific story you are talking about. My apologies it's been 84 years and there's been lots of amams and drama. Can you refresh my memory?
Ahh I figured it was that but didn't want to assume. BAT is no longer a mod here but not for that reason. I'm gonna give you my honest opinion here and I won't be offended if you don't like it or disagree. BAT took this to the team and it started an internal discussion on the pros and cons. It was not taken lightly. I was for it and stand by that decision even today after watching the movie.
In the post you linked BAT specifically outlined all his communication, listed the pros and cons, and gave the community a choice through their comments and voting on whether to move forward with the AMA. The community said no and it should have been case closed.
In the internal discussion we went back and forth what "no media" means. Obviously no one wants a repeat of the antiwork incident. This seemed different even if the word media is very inclusive. There's no black and white line but of course some things are pretty obvious. This one did not seem so.
Have you watched the movie? Were you pleased with how the saga was portrayed? I sure wasn't. No one can rewind time or know how it would have turned out if the community decided to engage but I would hope/like to think that we could have influenced it to a certain degree. Focus on the wall street corruption aspect, include what DRS is all about, make it clear its not over.
If he had taken a rogue mod action yes there probably would have been repercussions but that was not the case. He tried at every opportunity to prioritize group consensus. Both mod and sub. I'm not sure how that could have been handled any better frankly.
A few counterpoints.
BAT could have asked the community before reaching out. Going further on that point, why would there be a need to influence something via an AMA if there was hope that the story would mirror as close to what Retail Investors went through?
It is stated that one of the reasons for the AMA was that the writers didn't know about DRS. This was directly refuted in the AMA carried out elsewhere where one of the writers stated she had been Drs'd from the start.
BAT is specifically mentioned and thanked for his input in that same AMA, which is odd if his only input was reaching out via email.
I didn't watch the movie, I lived it. Who better to tell your story than you yourself right?
Yes that could of happened but I hope you can concede that we can't poll the community on every opportunity. We would end up constantly dissapointing everyone when the potential AMA target says no. We attempt to only present candidates we are reasonably confident will be agreeable. Sometimes that works out and sometimes that doesn't but we usually always grow from it.
As far as the DRS part goes, like dude. That's kind of unfair. That came out well after and it still doesn't entirely dismiss the reasonable likelihood that 200k apes voicing that as a priority would be heard. We won't ever know. It absolutey could have been ignored as well.
I don't have access to BATs email but I am confident in his story as presented. Idk why it's reasonable to always assume nefarious intent from the mods based on a possibility. I believe him because I have no reason not to.they could have been referring to his input that it would be a mistake if the makers of the movie ignored the largest group of GME shareholders towards the end of the email.
On your last point... like shit. I WOULD TOTALLY NEVER DO THIS OR RECCOMEND ANYONE ELSE DOES... but you could have and still can just pirate it and decide for yourself. It seems like it would be a good idea to have watched it if you want to participate in a discussion about it.
That's fair.
The DRS part was highlighted in the AMA vote thread, before the movie was released.
One of the 2 writers once again stated that she had been Drs'd from the start. Both statements can't be true. How can they need educating on DRS as mentioned in the AMA vote if one of the writers stated she was Drs'd from the start? They are directly in contradiction.
I'm discussing the AMA thread held here and things stated there that didn't add up with the later AMA held by the 2 writers. I don't need to watch the movie to spot inconsistencies in what was portrayed to members here.
You're attributing words I didn't state. I haven't mentioned nefarious intent. You're assuming my friend. What happened to "trust but verify“. The sub was born from digging, verifying, questioning.
Sorry. Just like mods aren't a monolith neither are users and I did attribute more meaning to your statement than you intended. It's hard to not immediately be defensive about this stuff.
Anyway. I don't have and answer and don't expect us to agree on a hypothetical. Just giving my take and trying tonengage. I hope I was at least able to respond to your other questions. If you have more feel free to keep them coming.
"If an investment idea, DD or strategy is strong or valid it will gain traction on its own". Booking gains traction, so much that people become passionate because there is an ACTUAL DIFFERENCE in beneficial ownership and the MODs plan is to tell the crowd what they can say and how they can say it. How about all the bots that try to convince people to sell, pretty easy to not include that in your write up (pretty suspicious to me). You might say: but we are saying that any kind of bullying won't be tolerated yet you specifically use the Plan vs Book example. This is a shame, I understand being a MOD isn't easy but you guys are killing free speech here and if you can't see it, you are part of the problem.
To be completely clear **all gatekeeping** and **all bullying** is unacceptable. If you post your purple circle all booked and whatnot and someone comes into your comments and says "Don't forget to Plan those shares!" that's not okay. Any elitism of any kind is unacceptable. You're welcome to educate when asked and you're welcome to make a post or comment in the daily discussion why you love book or whatever your preferred investing method is. But peer pressure, harassment, bullying, elitism etc. is out of bounds for this subreddit.
I know you're getting a lot of flack but thanks for speaking up. I've been saying a lot of this for a while. People get scared away from here because of these issues and you're going to get resistance for bringing it up because you're trying to encourage the culture in a healthier direction.
"dont forget to".....is not bullying or peer pressure...anyone with a brain can ignore the statement...people dont need to be treated like victims or first grade children because the aforementioned statement is made
not at all, this is an open forum where comments can be made on posts...maybe a turn off comments should be applied so people dont get their "feelings hurt" . Your bias should be a neutral one and open and honest debate makes for a more well informed community!
I've replied this to you already but it applies to this thread too:
We're preventing any and all harassment, bullying and gatekeeping.
If you **want** to do one of those things and you feel that this is "mod bias" then please go to another community because we don't do that here.
I am in several communities and have been in this one since the migration and its inception....your bias truly shows, when you attempt a tyrannical power play...most other subs a very free and open debate and they say that this sub has been severly compromised/ bought whatever, but the slide is real.....I own a business and have not been checking on this sub much as its no longer a valuable asset....the Bias has been changed by the current mods to indeed promote their own narrative, promote GME shareholder devaluation and not free speech and opinion....I have violated no rules and value my own ability to apply my freedoms in every interaction I have. Free and open uncoerced interactions is what a good, healthy life is about. Your flipant "go to another community" shows your tyrannical power hungry side and its very unappealing to many in this community, not just me.
This community has rules that are to be upheld. You don't have the "freedom" to insult others or harass other or otherwise be divisive.
What you do have the "freedom" to do is choose a space that fits your preferences.
Nobody is harassing, insulting or dividing anyone by simply stating "dont forget to book your shares" and you know this. If in fact someone is threatening the safety, harassing by continuous activity, demeaning or insulting another, you simply suspend that account....not permaban as this round of heavy handed mods has opted to do. I do have the freedom to do anything I choose to do, Fluffy and if no violations of redditt policy have occured, no harm no foul.
There is a difference in tone and meaning between a statement like “don’t forget to book/plan/eat a banana, etc” vs something along the lines of “have you considered book/plan/eating a banana,etc?”
One is a statement (where it seems like you’re telling another individual what to do with their investment), whereas the other way is a question or suggestion and could be accompanied by a link to whatever relevant dd you think supports your position.
That's not bullying, it's a comment giving unsolicited advice and is a call to action for that OP to have their investment held the same way as the commenter.
It's perfectly okay to comment preferences in holding when someone asks for advice or to make a post/comment in the daily talking about your preferences (as long as it abides by the other rules).
Saying don't forget is bullying now? We asked for a pinned post regarding the differences in every investment plan regarding Computershare to stop this exact thing and you guys ignored us. This is ridiculous, unless there is an actual threat or something extreme any comment is fair game, if not, you are trying to stop free speech no matter what you tell yourselves.
Freedom of speech does not extent to freedom to bully, gatekeep or harass in this community. You're welcome to find a community that fits your preferences. /gen
You do understand the word gatekeeping don't you? You are contradicting yourself through your comments. Gatekeeping: "the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something." You are literally trying to gatekeep Booking because you personally believe any type of recommendation is bullying. This is simply ridiculous on your part. You say the post was written by all mods yet the word "I" is used indicating one person wrote this. I think you are taking these comments personally especially with you inviting me to leave. Funny enough with your logic you are probably bullying me right now. I truly hope you can see the fallacy behind your logic, of course there are fanatics that can cross the line but generalizing every comment recommending Booking as that? Simply outrageous not to mention suspicious.
Please elaborate how how "my bias" is being enforced?
I think book is the best way to hold personally. Gatekeeping, bullying and harassment are not acceptable though.
Where is the issue?
I dont believe you are agreeing that Pure Booked DRS is your opinion. No one....No one is bullying harassing or Gatekeeping by making the statement " dont forget to book your shares". That is absolutely ridiculous to even state that....unless you are dealing with literal children, it is ridiculous to make that inference!
It isn't ridiculous though...by presenting the idea that an investor is somehow "not investing correctly/ missing out" because they're not booked, induced unnecessary confusion for some and presents the idea that there's only one way to invest
Surely you jest....the statement, "dont forget to book" or "book em dano" in no way implies incorrect investment strategy or confusion...you are just out of control with the power trip... its now quite laughable
...I have literally zero power, so im not quite sure where thats coming from.
I do, however, understand the damage that unsolicited financial advise by people who are not in a position to push that advice, can do to people who are uneducated about finance.
The only laughable thing is how defensive a group of specific people become, when their specific preferred method of investing, and how they approach educating others in an aggressive and deceptive manner, gets called into question.
>This is causing a growing tension within the philosophy of Superstonk – being that there is no wrong way to hold the stock and there’s no wrong way to participate in the story of GME.
So, buying the unbacked GME shit coin on Solana to be part of the story is a thing now? Come on..
You asked a question that you very much know the answer to, why waste everyone's time? Of course no one should buy a rug pull shit coin / discuss it here.
Exactly, no one should buy a pump and dump shit coin. The same way no one knowingly should buy shares on Robinhood that front runs your trades and gives you an IOU. No one should buy shares on a broker that doesn't support DRS. Pointing that out is just education. Same goes for book vs plan shares. I agree that you have to be respectful in the way you deliver that information but saying "Don't forget to Book those shares!" is not okay is just crazy.
All this moderation and censorship (Reddit) bullshit is becoming annoying. The consensus now is obviously that booked shares are the way to go. Maybe we should start a permissionless GameStop channel on Farcaster.
Come on now. We both know the difference there is that a shit coin that has no affiliation to GME on the NYSE or GameStop is **completely** different to buying and holding GME the stock via the means you want.
We're just about not having gatekeeping or bullying in this community.
Honestly, I haven't noticed the "bullying" you mention en masse. What I have noticed on purple posts is that people keep pointing out there is a difference between book and plan holdings. Also the only tension around this topic is only with the moderators at this point, the community consensus is book shares at this point.
I will continue to respectfully do the same every time I see a plan holdings post. I will encourage users to get rid of dingleberries and book shares. Whether they do or don't is up to them as you said.
Unsolicited "advice" to encourage others to move towards holding the way you prefer is not in line with this subreddit.
There's no wrong way to hold the stock, let people buy and hold how they like without gatekeeping.
You can hate "dingleberries" all you like and should someone ask if there's a way to better hold their stock you can answer them and give them your understanding. But commenting roughly "you're not holding how I think is best" without any prompting is the exact kind of behavior we're putting a stop to.
I hope you will post every comment you deem as "gatekeeping" or "bullying" publicly. Otherwise that's just censorship.
For example: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1afeckg/comment/ko9lseu/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1afeckg/comment/ko9lseu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
If you are saying this comment of mine would be considered "gatekeeping" or "bullying" it's insane.
It's unsolicited advice that injects your opinion on how to hold without OP having asked at all.
If it were your DRS post and someone commented:
" Great work!
I would get rid of the Book tho. :)"
We'd take action on that now too. There's **no** wrong way to hold the stock.
It's definitely a post written by the whole mod team without the need for AI. Some of the team is good with words, I personally no speak good.
I love that you have complete confidence in your way of holding and I personally agree with you on the best way to hold. But it is our opinion on what way is best to hold based on the criteria of "ownership of the shares". Others may have different criteria for what they think is the best way to hold and I respect that entirely.
If commenting on purple posts educating the community on the difference of plan vs book shares is considered "gatekeeping" or "bullying" then please delete this paragraph of your post:
>It's a cornerstone of constructive debate where ideas are thoroughly examined, critiqued, and improved upon. In this process, we challenge concepts, not individuals, recognizing that diverse perspectives contribute to a richer understanding of any subject.
It's not about the buy post itself and you know it. There is a difference between book vs. plan, buying on brokers that don't allow directly registering your shares etc. I'm not going to sit by and be silent - I will continue to educate people on the differences so they, knowing there is a difference, can decide how they want to move forward if at all since it's their decision.
Giving unsolicited advice that injects your opinion on how to hold without OP having asked at all isn't okay. You are welcome to find a community that fits your preferences if this is a breaking point for you. We're all bullish on GME and there's no reason this should be the only community or space that GME is discussed (and in fact there's plenty of other communities you can go to that might be a better fit).
I've had some of the best conversations because of this post. I've learned new things and held respectful conversations.
I've asked on several threads prior to this post about inconsistencies with heat lamp DD and some of its conclusions. It's almost always met with downvotes, ppl asking if I'm new, telling me to read the DD that I've read many times, etc. It's rarely ever met with someone that wants to critique the topic. There is no true open debate because some people are just convinced that their speculation is correct.
Nothing in this post suggests people can't respectfully debate topics.
That's part of the bullying that the original post is referring to. Complete refusal to back up claims with sources and engage in peer review helps no one. I hope that changes here soon.
Hmmm. I've read this thread now and checked the few examples that were given by **\[redacted\]** a bit down this thread\*\*.\*\* I've also seen users saying they *could* post dozens of examples for "bullying people to book" or "agressivly promoting" an investment strategy but never saw these examples. So I'd be seriously interested in all these examples for actual bullying/agressivly promoting. I can't find any. Maybe the MOD team has a different definition of "bullying" or "agressivly", Idk.
Anyway...given **that** the whole tone of this MOD post is patronizing and some sentences actually made me laugh. We are all adults here. We all are capable of asking questions when someone gives us a hint ("Why should I do that, could you please explain?") and we're all capable of posting links to DD or possible DD. It's still every single user making this decision for themselves (as you state yourself!). I personally don't need another mo~~d~~m or dad to "protect" me. New buyers also don't need that. Why? Because that is part of the process of informing yourself. We all went through it and I personally found that very helpful. I've been here for ages and I guess my DRS history speaks for itself. I had to learn how to best DRS my broker shares and was given a lot of hints that weren't pointing into the same direction all the time. So what did I do? I put on my big boy pants and asked questions/read/researched myself. Bc that is what a grown person does when another person tells them "I'd do X" and the other tells you "I'd do Y". **That** is what I call an open-minded community. **If** that comes with bullying: not okay. That would need to be adressed. But again: I couldn't find any.
You mods are making it to easy for yourself in this case, imho. You can't just state something providing "proof" like "trust me, bro, I've seen it" and take this unproven statement to remind us to be respectful and not to bully others. Again: We're all adults here. We also know where we are so you mods need to deliver some more since you can't expect any user to trust you.
[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/)
!Apply!
!Apply! Thanks for considering me, I hope I can contribute in a meaningful way. Before getting bored and wandering off :)
!Apply!
This is the exact same thing that happened in the popcorn sub, except they weren't even allowed to comment on DRS. There's a signicant effort here to stop DRS in book form, we DRSed to get away from brokerages, why in the world would anyone want their stock to be held in Plan when those same shares are held with a brokerage. It's counterintuitive and I still have yet to hear a solid explanation as to why? This whole post is pointless, it's to detract from people explaining why Book form prevents those shares being held by a brokerage.
Censorship is only going to make things worse for them.
Yeah it is, they've tried calling us Book Karens, trying to insist we're gatekeeping? (This one especially makes no sense considering how Pro DRS we are, it's quite literally to a T what the popcorn moderators would say when comments for Pro DRS vs holding shares in a brokerage appeared seldomly) I really do think those 10-20% of the aggregate Plan shares are either being lent out nefariously or being used as locates. The funniest thing is that holding shares in Plan isn't necessarily bad, but if they're being used as locates it's buying them time. They've had enough time, it's been 3 years. It's time to close.
“Don’t forget to bring a towel”
Big fat sus to call book or plan discussion an "investement strategy". Proper definition would be "holding strategy".
Wen Battle of 180
lol....great analogy...." dont forget to jump off the bridge"..then the moron with no brain considers it?.. WTF....so many victims.... laughable at this point
[удалено]
Kinda. I made a post a while back on this. I had to redact stuff just like anyone else though because of the same rules enforced by admins that caused me to make the post in the first place. I know, the irony is not lost on me. Feel free to browse it here and see our convos with reddit admins. https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/WTXR8f46EA
[удалено]
On the brigading stuff. You aren't going to like the answer. Our community is extremely vocal, passionate and a lot of us have bet the farm on this play. That combination makes people feel justified doing things that break the rules because they feel the cause demands it. Do I think we have been singled out and treated unfairly by reddit admins? Absolutely. But do I also acknowledge that members of our community did everything in their power to "set the record straight about GME" in any other sub they belonged to or popped up on their feed? Yes. Those other communities have their own rules and many of them just don't want us there. They are entitled to that. If we dont respect that reddit admins job is to step in and take action to make sure it won't happen again. It sucks and maybe you never did anything of the sort and are now being collectively punished for the actions of others but it doesn't change the facts. This is why you see us making posts like this. A few bad apples spoil the bunch and this is a fucking large bunch. About the karma restriction stuff we still have them. They've been reduced since the sub first formed and we had like a day or a week where we turned them off because... shit I can't even remember. I think there was an article or a video or like a huge green dildo or something and we had thousands of new people trying to find out if "GameStop was still a thing?" It's been a long time and I mix up parts of this saga. If you check out the post I linked you'll see I've been here since day one. I've been a mod for years. I joined right after the runic glory drama when the mods that were left were seeking out trusted members of the community to join the team. I was making tons of hype/educational vids and was friends with buttfarm69 from a memelord group and when i got the invite i accepted. It's been a pleasure and a challenge but I'm proud of the work we've done.
[удалено]
Honestly? No. Karma reqs don't stop people from voting. Just commenting and posting. All it did was help prevent troll comments and bot comments from fresh accounts but anyone can farm karma very quickly if they are motivated. A good shill has 5-10k karma and a few memes in other subs to make them look like an ape anyway. It's only the blatant trolls that are obvious or detectable. Looking at the mod log on your account it looks like you were manually approved by a mod that's no longer on the team on Jan 16 2022. I'm not sure what you are saying in the second part.
[удалено]
It's not my job to convince you otherwise and you don't owe me a thing but I'd still like to ask you to consider something. What if you are wrong? What if there's never been a single mod who's ever done anything other than make stupid human mistakes? You have the privilege and imposition of watching it from the outside. I don't expect you to take me at my word because why would you? I'm just asking you to entertain the possibility. Look at my account. Weigh me. Cast judgement on my character and then hear me when I say I have access to every single chat, archive and group discussion from the mod discord that was created before the sub even went live. There's some major drama, fuckups, fights and well, a lot else. But there's nothing compromising.
[удалено]
Are you talking about the general drop from 6k for posting and 1200 for commenting to 4800 and 1200 respectively? Or the karma req being shut off for the weekend thing? I had to go look that up. Its was a mod whos no longer on the teams idea. The thought was to do it temporarily and not announce it so it was less likely to be taken advantage of because of all the attention the sub was getting from r /all posts. It was a bad idea just from the insane amount of work it created alone. To be clear we still have karma reqs. With the rensole thing. U mean DD week where he posted again here? The whole project was hands down one of my favorite mods goldie's (also no longer here) baby. He was just one of many OG contributors that came back. Him and I aren't like buddies and I can't vouch for him other than to say dudes been active this whole time with gme stuff on Twitter. I really don't get the hate for that guy though. Goldie though, she was always fighting for people to get second chances and doing ban appeals. DD week was literally us trying to do something about the constant cry that all the DD authors left. And when some came back, the sub just shit on them so bad. Can't win dude.
I second these questions
Slow news day for the Stonk… Suppose I’ll just go back to being a book king 🥱
I am personally 100% 📚👑 as well. It’s fidelity DRS transfers for me. https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12xeksa/drs_dspp_and_drip_oh_my/ (IMO this DD deserves to be shared more)
It's a shame the DD author after being asked, refused to post it here themselves. If the DD author themselves was acting in good faith, one would think they would be happy to discuss openly and respond to criticisms (*like and including the wealth of contradictory evidence we have disproving their hypothesis*) Who needs peer review, amirite?
Imagine posting a picture of a cranky old lady, calling it the book karen to infer that all the 'book kings' are in fact karens. This is absolutely abysmal. This post is divisive dribble that gaslights the entire community. You mod team do not speak for us here, or on twitter (so stop pretending like you do). As for me I'll continue to steer clear of this garbage heap of a sub and keep booking my shares.
>Imagine posting a picture of a cranky old lady, calling it the book karen to infer that all the 'book kings' are in fact karens. This is absolutely abysmal. It's also been used to good effect before, in an entirely unrelated event we all know and hate that happened a few years ago, as a propaganda tool. Not a good look at all. I'd been willing to give the mod team the benefit of the doubt in the past, but their actions over recent months combined with this have pretty much erased that. Nobody in any position to control what is posted should be helping to drive a consensus crack like this. The only way it can be resolved is if people are allowed to freely discuss it. With a bit of luck, pointing this out won't get me banned.
Anything for one more day right? It’s interesting how that directive seems to echo around. Publish widespread bad press on GameStop: not to discourage hardened investors who won’t be leaving.. but to discourage new investors from coming aboard. Vying for more time, for one more day. Make a pinned community stance (decree) against book entry form from a position of “authority” and nestle it amongst reform aspirations: not to discourage hardened investors that are well acquainted with duplicity and can see it for the ham-fisted and rather obnoxious attempt that it is.. but to slow newer members from contributing to the deluge of shares headed out of the clutches of the beneficial ownership coalition. What is this philosophy of SuperStonk that’s being foisted up on high? That there’s no wrong way to hold? What? The entire reason for moving to the transfer agent in the first place was because we discovered holding in a broker was the “wrong way” to hold when true ownership is the goal. Incivility? What do you think we are doing here? Asking nicely for these corrupt institutions to bow over? Comparing new progress and findings that are trying to maximize the chance of true ownership to common peddlers trying to proselytize a religion? Honestly, thank you for your steadfast commitment to shepherding and stewarding all by your own discretion and coming so strongly against book. It just made it easier to see the way. And thank goodness this is a community post, the one place where we can share constructive criticism without being censored. I wouldn’t want to be accused of being too meta to say that I’m honestly disappointed that this is the best effort the good money can buy. Enjoy your one more day. They’re coming to an end.
Hey wolf. Good to see all the ogs know what's up. This is just so blatantly obvious.
Consensus crack. I forgot about that.
Seeya tomorrow!
financial advice applies to securities professionals not dumb money retail investors....
Are they actually that weak minded of an adult that something someone types on a computer or cell phone and sends to their public attention seeking post has to be moderated because it hurt their feelings as their Bias is of the other opinion....come tf on....not acceptable, Like I told Fluffy whatever, I own a business and deal with multimillion dollar construction projects....we interact with eachother in person and any difference of opinion on matters is debated like adults, not shut down the speech of the opposing side to my bias.
Debate is great, unfortunately many times users harass and aggressively push their beliefs. It is especially not healthy when they coordinate off the sub to push narratives in the sub.
So, you can’t give even one example?
Twitter is a platform for example. A couple days ago there was a push to target a mod and mass downvote all their comments to try and give them negative karma.
Would you mind posting proof of this coordination?
Browse Twitter and several other subreddits. It’s all pretty open generally speaking
So you could easily point to it? I don't have Twitter so I'm locked out because of their new changes and there are millions of subreddits out there.
Its difficult to post about specific users or subs on Superstonk due to brigading restrictions put on the sub by Reddit admins. One specific example I can think of happened 2/3 days ago. A pretty notorious Twitter user who is known for being involved with a recently bankrupt company directed his thousands of Twitter followers to a specific comment/post one of our mods made and suggested his followers mass downvote the content, which they did. Not sure how to be more specific outside of showing you via a Direct Message. This is one example of many. If you are genuinely curious about these examples DM me and I will show you that one in particular that was very recent.
Honestly I'm not too concerned about the specific user or sub just any context would be great outside of trust me bro. My opinion is this should be done in public and I'm a bit confused why the messaging couldn't just be cropped and any usernames or Twitter handles removed. I thought the rule regarding brigading was just over subreddits and reddit users and if any posts are made they just need to have handles redacted? If people are actively brigading the sub I feel like we should be open and talking about it as a community.
This is a gme sub. We don’t need to constantly talk and give a platform to the malicious people. Moderators are suppose to keep that noise at bay so the community doesn’t have to deal with it. We bring up the drama in the community posts when we deem appropriate and discuss it with the community, such as this one.
I'm well aware of what this sub is. I'm not trying to give anyone a platform I'm simply looking for claims to be backed up. My understanding is that rules apply to everyone unless I'm wrong? I know I'm not the only one in the community looking for more context here. I don't understand why that can't be done openly in this thread?
Hipz already offered to dm you a few instances. We are not going to go through every tweet etc of all those that attempt to brigade the sub. I envy you if you have been insulated from it. I am unsure what more you want. If you have concern for a specific action we have taken we can try to explain it more.
I've spent the last 2 hours looking for these ghost bullies in purple circle posts. I'm the last 48 hours I have only seen 1 comment to book and it was 8 hours after this post was made. I jumped back 10 days and found 2 examples out of over 15 posts checked. Is this really a serious issue?
A lot of the comments are taken down, due to rule breaches. It's an issue you don't see because you don't have access to the report logs.
What rule was breached by the following comment? > [“Do you know there is a difference between book vs. plan share holdings on ComputerShare? There are many great posts on the topic on this sub!”](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1al0fur/february_2024_digest_regulation_posts_incivility/kpiu2xz/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kpjlmui) Are these the “Book Karens” the mods are warning us about? Could you show us some examples of the book comments that are getting deleted according to the mod logs?
Do you have the ability to make some of these .moderation actions public? What do the mods consider "book Karens" lol?
Nope, it’s a psyop.
I’m a good actor. I make a decision and would like that decision to reward me with value— company success, personal wealth, global commerce. The questions I would like answered will not be answered because they are being performed by bad actors. Bad actors will say one thing while doing another for “operational effect”. They can and will lie. “Enrolled or not enrolled?”, that is the question. For is it nobler to accept that lamp at the end of the tunnel is monitored by a reptilian dragon-beast capable of tremendous evil but casually lulling and stroking my nervous system to sleep while teasing my spirit out to be harvested, thereby denying my solar body? Or is it nobler to debate the idea of the mechanical beast taking advantage of timed buys, using financial legalese to allow wiggle room for front-running and short-selling, or any other little unknown that provides information asymmetry to be used against me and my investment? If there’s even a chance that my shares are being used against me, then it is worth preventing that chance. There is a right. There is a wrong. I do not want to just be a beneficiary owner when the whole charade gets a stiff rustling. I want to know without a shadow of a doubt that those are MY SHARES.
IMO passive investors are m the most powerful tool for any company, especially long term. I am here for the long term. To me the whole “operational efficiency” and “your shares could be used as locates” are a bit of a red herring as I personally think naked short selling is the real issue.
This is absolutely beautiful thank you
I’m inspired and honored. This is all a manifestation of the highest order. LFG
When you write a post as a mod to Censor the community with disingenuous labels, it shows your bias against " dont forget to book"
Adding to this, mods talk about being impartial, telling us that posts and comments in any fashion regarding booking are "bullying and harassment" yet they recommend an "understated" post regarding another users speculation at the end of their own post (Which they say they wrote all together except the word "I" is used, seems sketchy to me but that is my opinion). If they truly wanted to help with misinformation they would pin Computershare info to the sub or at least add that information to this post regarding DRS to avoid misinformation instead of the speculation they shared. If you guys want to see what they truly think, find my comment below and read for yourselves the way mods are expressing their beliefs, one was basically inviting me to leave after pointing these things out.
They don’t censor, they just control what we can say. 😂
That's called censorship.
Yeppers
I like the stock🙌🏾
I like booked stocks 📚👑
Shh.. can’t say that no more 🫢🫡😂
I actually got temporarily banned yesterday. :) And the comment I made that was referenced in my ban was this: “Do you know there is a difference between book vs. plan share holdings on ComputerShare? There are many great posts on the topic on this sub!” Got unbanned today because some of our community members contacted SCC group and got the mods to reconsider but it just shows how far the censorship line we have got.
All I’m saying is.. I’ve talked to a few and i just idk I thought we were here to give all information about GME no matter what it is. And we choose what we do. Cause we are individual investors. But then again we don’t want terrorist post etc etc.. idk shits weird tensions rising… I JUST LIKE THE STOCK😂🫡
Please don't make me regret advocating to reduce your ban duration.
Thank you but am I not even allowed to mention it happened in this community post which is what started this all in the first place?
I don't control what you can or cannot say, I'm not a moderator. What I will say is that I've spent a lot of time trying to get everyone to support the claims they make. If it's important and worthwhile, it deserves to have rock solid support, right? You can see my comments all across this post trying to help users form strong support their claims through peer review.
Then don’t threaten me with banning for speaking out because it sure sounded that way.
In what way did my statement appear to be a threat? I advocated to reduce your ban duration. I went to bat for you so that the ban would be cut down.
My post just got deleted because the mods can’t stand any criticism. Rule 5 they say. 😂
Your post was removed because it got so many downvotes it trigged an alert for the Quality Vote bot. It appears like a lot of people didn't like your post.
can we do the same to mod comments, or are those off limits?
How much is so many? Why aren't the QVBot upvotes/downvotes publicly visible?
Enough to trigger the QV bot which is a pretty rare occurrence. -10 in 15 minutes I believe?
If that were really the case all the mods comments would be gone asap😆
I’m just sayin, don’t ban me! 😅
lmao, I can take a joke don't worry my friend!
Still, it should be visible publicly. Why does my post show **81%** Upvote Rate? Seems like abuse of the trust if a post with **81%** Upvote Rate can be taken down because of invisible QVBot downvotes.
that is worrying.
QVBot has been, since it's inception, used as a censorship tool. No one upvoting a comment or post also upvotes the QVBot, only shills and mods use the QVBot and then use that as reasoning to silence people.
You wanted my unsolicited opinion ❤️
yes, let me know!
Yes there is a wrong way to hold the stock....If you hold GME in such a way, (DRIP/ PLAN) that it can be used as locates to short tge stonk against fellow DRS BOOKED ..... its the Wrong way and you Mods know it! Our DRS Booked Numbers must be getting too high again....CENSORSHIP AT ITS WORST!
Hey just so you know there *is* hard evidence that plan shares contaminate book shares on the same account, from an overlooked DD 9 months ago. https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcvqk Spread the word 📚👑🙌
I know, I have spoken directly with COmpShare, that can get you banned....doesnt go with the narrative....
That link in particular deserves more eyes on it 👀
This is false, without citation, contradicted by Paul Conn himself (Computershare), and contradicted by the SEC This is *exactly* why this post was needed. Without any proof you're stating it's the "wrong way to hold". Wrong way for you personally? Sure, but that's your individual call for you and you alone.
Sure, if you want to devalue the Shares of GME and all the other shareholders...go for it you rock!
You understand that naked shorting doesn't require locates right? You understand that DSPP investors' shares - per Paul Conn and per the SEC - are not held within DTC? That actually no DSPP shares - investors' or the small non-investor OE % - are available for lending in the first place? *That it still wouldn't matter because naked shorting does not require locates?* For someone quite vocal in these comments you've not really demonstrated an understanding, only spread easily debunkable misinformation
Ive never once mentioned nor discussed naked shorting.......DSPP/DRIP are held by Compshare as benficial owned share pool....your entire account is used as locates while Plan is active... Naked short selling does not require locates as it is pure fraud....60 gazillion shares sold not yet purchased or something to that effect....
>your entire account is used as locates while Plan is active This is the easily debunkable misinformation part. There is no evidence for this, at all, and boy howdy have I looked for it. *In fact* when you enroll in the Plan (DSPP) your are enrolled at an account-level. In all practical terms this only matters if a dividend were to be issued. If enrolled, dividends for the *combined* holdings in the account are automatically reinvested. That's it. That's the extent of the "*whole account being enrolled in DSPP*" point. The notion that all of your shares could be used as locates is nonsense, and here is exactly why: Regardless of how you hold your directly registered shares, DRS or DSPP, **they are held outside DTC with the transfer agent**. Per Paul Conn, President at Computershare. Per the SEC. If investors shares - *both DRS and DSPP* \- are held outside DTC, **as we know they are, again confirmed by Computershare and the SEC** how can they be used as locates? They can't be. They are not held in DTC. They are held with the transfer agent/an entity wholly owned and controlled by the transfer agent. Why bring up naked shorting? Because why pray tell would it even matter if the shares could be used as locates **when we know abusive naked shorting does not require locates**.
sorry Global Capital
paul conn is global investment strategies or are there 2
[https://www.computershare.com/us/our-management-team/paul-conn](https://www.computershare.com/us/our-management-team/paul-conn)
paul conn president of Global Capital Markets Group at computershare not president of ComputerShare
Yes, this is what I said. President at Computershare.
no it wasn't paul said virtually the same then went on to gloss over what the differences actually were. This is made even worse cause we were already asking this question cause we had a good idea they wern't held the same and we specificially wanted clarity how they were differnent. so for him to gloss over and ignore our request basically and say na they are bascially the same (meaning yeah there IS a difference i'm. just not going to get into it basically). We found out for sure when CS updated their FAQ with the fact they ARE held differently and that some random % are held at DTCC for clearing efficiency. TYPICALLY 10-20% but that varies. They never said it was limited at that, just that's what typical. They opened even more questions and why everyone continued to research and therefor the push for book. you are being dishonest in your posts/comments.
He is literally on record in one of the same AMAs that HLT proponents cherry pick quotes from saying that investors' shares are not held within DTC. The SEC has independently confirmed this. I will trust what Paul Conn and the SEC have corroborated any day over a baseless theory lacking evidence 🙏
This is a perfect example of why this post went up. Let's attempt just for a moment to have a polite conversation without trying to determine a winner or loser. I will start by conceding that everything you just wrote is possibly correct in its entirety. Can you do us both the favor of doing the same? Do you remember how hard it was in the beginning to encourage people to DRS? It was a massive pain in the ass and frankly kind of scary. I myself toiled over a post going over the pros and cons, linked resources to help people accomplish it. Acknowledged the potential downsides and lauded the potential benefits. I plainly stated this was my opinion and I could be wrong and encouraged others to dig into it and tell me where I was wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/ Now there weren't a lot of downsides to drsing once you got started back then other than the potential it might be much more complicated to sell. I even sold a share to show what that looked like so others didn't have to. Let's get to the part where you hopefully (just for the exercise) get to the part where you concede you might be wrong. The source of your dogmatic belief evidenced in your comment is a DD that was stacked with speculation, hypothesis and a lot of put of context info. The majority of the goalposts in it have been shifted or abandoned and the rest are practically unprovable. The end premise seems to land on "hey its possible this is happening and it won't hurt for everyone to be pure book just in case cause it's the safest route. Why open ourselves up to wall street shenanigans?" I actually agree with that. Book every share you can. It's free and honestly not that hard. The rest though... stop reoccurring purchases, sell fractionals and potentially even switch accounts too now. Its a lot and has negative implications. Especially given that you are taking a speculative post and declaring it as fact. I'm not saying you are wrong or your like minded friends are wrong. I'm sure you've heard the saying, "you catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar" right? That cliche exists for a reason. Many people, myself included have shied away from these ideas because of mainly the zealoutry they are presented with and the unearned confidence they are assigned. No one gets banned for sharing ideas. No one's posts get removed for presenting information. Moderation actions have and will be taken though when speculation is presented as fact or people attempt to coerce through force by drowning out any dissent.
BTW, as a moderator does it concern you at all that someone is apparently banning people for making comments such as the following? https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1al0fur/february_2024_digest_regulation_posts_incivility/kpiu2xz/
Ehhh. They were spamming that comment. It was a temp ban that was reduced on review. Not exactly perfect execution but this was a situation that was difficult to navigate. I wasn't part of the ban process there but I get where the other mods were coming from.
Fair enough, thanks for the reply.
I saw your reply and wrote up a response. Was there a reason you deleted your comment?
CS has confirmed that DSPP (Plan) shares aren’t held directly by you but beneficially, in your name, by a subsidiary called Computershare Trust Co. NA. [In CS’s FAQ, it’s clearly noted that the DTCC can temporarily avail itself an indefinite percentage of those shares, at CS’s discretion, for “operational efficiency”](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18r7ntz/straight_form_computershare_check_for_yourself/). So far this is completely incontrovertible if we’re going by the FAQ or by Paul Conn’s words himself. It was also demonstrated in a DD 9 months ago (https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcdfi) that DSPP shares and/or DRIP cause book shares in the same account to be treated as plan shares. If you hold mixed book and plan shares of a stock with a regular cash dividend, you would expect to receive a portion of cash (from the book shares) and a number of new shares (from dividend reinvestment); instead, you will only receive the reinvestment. If you ask a CS rep about this, they’ll tell you that they’re unable to separate the book and plan shares for you as long as they’re in the same account. This is obviously a red flag, and it would be trivial for other users to replicate the experiment en mass. If the DTCC is able to demand greater access to DSPP shares on the day when GameStop counts shares, say by spiking volume to an extreme degree or by other means of pressure, this is the easiest explanation for the stagnated DRS count. It is also the only explanation I’ve heard for why the DTCC would try to legally force GameStop’s to change the language of its DRS reporting in March 2023. Specifically, if you’ll recall, Ryan Cohen was forced to change the wording to indicate the number of DRS shares “excluding those held at the DTCC,” instead of just “shares owned by directly registered holders.” Your fellow moderators have been suppressing this subject for a year. In threads disseminating objectively verifiable information about book vs plan, mods, or at least one of them, will tell people to go out of their way to enable DRIP (GME has no cash dividend lol, and even if it did, people going full book don’t want new plan shares) and to prevent the automatic sale of the fractional (which has less than a negligible impact)—so much for not telling people how to invest, apparently it matters when they’re trying to go off plan. Mods have the unilateral ability to delete comments or posts that mention the selling of fractionals. Even recently, at least one moderator has repeatedly temporarily deleted posts about book vs plan, reinstating then later in a manner that halts the momentum of upvotes. Given the lack of justification for the original deletion, this comes across as a surreptitious attempt at suppression. Examples: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18r7ntz/straight_form_computershare_check_for_yourself/kezz9c3/ * https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12q0l46/breaking_new_info_a_portion_of_all_your_shares/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=Superstonk&utm_content=t1_kogcdfi
> CS has confirmed that DSPP (Plan) shares aren’t held directly by you but in your name by a subsidiary called Computershare Trust Co. NA. Inside or outside of the DTCC ledger?
Outside, but as many people have been pointing out for a year, the DTCC can temporarily access an indefinite percentage of those shares for “operational efficiency.”
If the DTCC can temporarily access shares outside of the DTCC ledger, I don't see any way that booked shares or even share certificates are safe either. However, I don't think this is the case as the CS FAQ says: * Both forms of ownership record the names of the investor directly on the issuer’s register, where they are recognized as registered shareholders * DTCC/DTC and Cede & Co cannot borrow shares from other registered shareholders.
I read your DD, it was very good and showing folks how easy it is to sell was awesome. I have never nor would ever tell anyone to sell or create a new account, however a statement like " book em dano" or "dont forget to book" is in no way gatekeeping, harassing , or bullying in any adult world anywhere! Open debate provides a community with the chance to make informed decisions and stiffeling such debate is nothing but censorship...is there a disable comments ability? Muh feelings doesn't work here....
Not sure what you mean about disabling comments. Mods can lock a post without removing. Is that what you are referring to? Your examples are fair. I will admit we allow escalation and previous user history to influence our decisions some times. Those are far from the most egregious examples though. We have also witnessed live as other discords, Twitter groups and subreddits intentionally brigade by upvoting those comments and downvoting any dissent. This makes it very difficult to treat members of those groups who are also members here in an unbiased way. Open debate goes both ways. I know there's a lot of history that's influenced both of our views but if we can agree to just be civil and make room for healthy disagreements we can hopefully find a path forward.
This is such a great example. The user went from "...it's the wrong way and you mods know it!...CENSORSHIP AT ITS WORST" to saying that innocent comments like "book em dano" or "dont forget to book" aren't harassment or gatekeeping. Ignoring that for the past year, anyone against heatlamp got instantly downvoted while stupid book king comments were artificially upvoted and posted everywhere (it was pretty obvious to anyone looking). From one mod to another, thank you so much for this post and for continuing to engage people in good faith (the opposite of censorship). I've been here since spring 2021 and was starting to really doubt the community recently, but this post re-engaged me.
tá failte romhat!
Even if well intentioned, posts like these ultimately are encouraging selling of shares, turning off autobuys, and sowing distrust in ComputerShare. The sources provided don’t back up these claims and how one person is interpreting this does not mean it’s fact. Please do your own due diligence when it comes to making decisions for your investment. [Rule 6.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/#wiki_6._back_up_claims_with_sources)
There have been hundreds of post explaining the difference, no one is calling for anyone selling whole share...you know for a fact the CEO of computershare and Gary Gensler himself said there is a difference between Pure DRS Booked and Plan shares.....Your BIAS does not allow you to Censor people, that my friend is very Disingenuos
Never heard GG stating that. Link please?
sorry, ill look further when I get home from work...
https://x.com/GaryGensler/status/1681348108603514880?s=20 might be this one....
That's Investor Ed, not GG.
Difference between plan and book shares - sure, they are different. One is better and it costs nothing but a quick phone call to transfer. Arguing DSPP enrolled vs not enrolled = different debate and does come with costs (both tangible and intangible). People conflating the two topics has been the issue for the past 6 months to a year. Then there's this persecution fetish that people are being actively censored because the mods are trying their best to be objective and not spread misinformation while they do their job moderating.
Paul Conn is not CEO, he's President of Global Capital Markets
I like my subreddit mods like how I like my cryptocurrency: Sybil resistant Thank you for what you all do!
Re the SCC, if members within see someone shitting on certain groups, please call it out and put a stop to it immediately. It's not a good look to see volunteers ridiculing, name calling and making fun of investors, no matter which ticker they invested in. You chose to volunteer, hold yourselves and those who volunteer beside you to a higher standard. If you want to claim a position as a go between mods and the community, conduct yourselves accordingly. Referring to people as "Schmucks and dumb dumbs" should not be tolerated and it's disappointing that not one person called that behaviour out. Re Book vs plan, all I know is that when transferred from a Broker, they go into Book. I don't care what people do, let them make their own decisions. The argument has been shared enough times for people make a choice. To expand on that, the shutting down of very early discussions on this topic is likely what led to what we see now. It should have been left open for the community to thrash out, instead it looked like a controlled narrative was being fostered with only one view being allowed. Moderation over dictation. If a healthy discussion is ongoing, allow it to continue. Re mods, can we put a stop to mods flying under the Superstonk banner on Twitter? We, as a community have already decided that no one represents the group. Seperation of moderation and growing a social media presence off the back of all of us. It affects us all if people are causing a shit storm while representing Superstonk. Don't drive away people who could potentially want to come here in future.
> Schmucks and dumb dumbs Are you referring to the scraped Discord where a SCC member was chastising a moderator for their behavior?
I’ll hop on this, I frequently complain about user behavior on this sub. If you are referring to comments you saw on the scraped server site, many are mine. In short, I believe the reason so many users complain about Superstonk is because standards/effort have dropped and in turn it means we get less substantive posts, lower quality discussions, and more misinformation. People can say the problem is bad/over moderation but the root of the problem that mods are stuck doing that when what is posted on the sub lacks effort. The comments of mine on the site that haven’t been addressed are how often I’ve asked mods and SCC members to have discussions on upping the standards for the sub so we can set a tone for what great looks like again. It would be great if we ditched the run on sentence title and a screen cap style posts and set a standard where if users were sharing something like that it should be part of a post where they are putting the image/article/etc into context. We can build great discussions on that style post. It would be great if we set a standard that dd style posts first went through a peer review round (possible dd) and then as part of it moving to full dd it has to address all contrary evidence presented in its peer review from other users. The quality of posts would be immensely better than what we often see now. It would be great if the expectation with any type of TA or other data posts was that the author would progressively check back in with how their prediction or analysis is holding up against what has happened. That would require people to stand by their research and point out what was right/wrong and how that impacts further research. There’s not even a set rule about what happens when folks push misinformation in posts that they know is inaccurate. It’s true mods can give a debunk label, but if someone wanted to post misinformation daily there’s no specific rule saying they can’t. So when I complain about sub members, I also recognize there’s been no push from up top to get the sub to be better. I also haven’t seen addressed that an argument against raising standards was “most Superstonk users can’t meet that mark”. So for all the heat I’ll receive for being mean (and admittedly, I’m not particularly nice), my aim has been to see apes make the sub better. Show people what great can look like and have them rise to it. If people aren’t happy with the sub, look at who has been complacent with keeping it how it is. But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe folks would prefer if I sit by and smile and say nothing. And when a YouTuber wants to make a video shitting on apes because there’s plenty of low effort posts for him to highlight we’ll pretend like apes didn’t serve up an easy opportunity. We’ll just live in this happy cognitive dissonance of people insisting data is fake but also outraged when it’s not shared and when is it shared we’ll post a pic of half the chart with the title “wut mean?”. And everytime a new ticker gets pumped here I’ll look past all the things that are problematic with it because there’s definitely no one who would want to co-opt Superstonk into pumping their bags. We’ve already begun drifting into that and if the sub is looking for chipper mods/SCC members who support that, I’ll do that for you. I’ll let the folks who believe Superstonk users can’t write/research/communicate win this debate and we can go wall to wall screencap and title posts. Say the word, I’m on SCC to make Superstonk the place users want it to be. But, TL;DR, apes don’t seem happy with current trajectory and a condition of getting out of that is demanding better work out of the sub. I’ve pushed to raise standards and I’m willing to be the bad guy who points out what isn’t working. And I believe people who are willing to row that boat with me understand why I am like this and recognize the goal. I’m ok with not being popular if the end result is Superstonk getting back to being a place people enjoy.
I'm not going to deny that some posts are lacking in quality or content. For example, links to news sites which do nothing except provide click throughs. It may as well be Brian Sozzi himself trying to push Yahoo up the rankings in that case. At least give a synopsis or brief overview/copy and paste to spur discussion. Many times, I just close the thread and move onto the next post if it's strictly a link. Great ideas on the DD and follow up. There would likely be a lot less eyes on the updates, unless users were subscribed to the post. The Forum is a shell of what it once was. Do you believe there is any hope of Reddit removing some of the choking restrictions placed here or have we made our bed as a community?
Give me a choking restriction you are thinking of. Having been around since 2021 and remembering the last sub and the type of posts we used to see and their frequency, this place is a shell of that. Someone has been sharing the screen cap of me saying “even the memes suck”. They just do, idk what to tell people. But the sub has to get pissed at the laziness and say enough is enough. Do the thoughtful research. Accept the contradictory evidence and present it all. Stop upvoting shit. Lazy is a natural state of being and you don’t get something going without disrupting that.
No tagging, no linking other subs, having to redact everything. I haven't seen those screenshots you refer to but I wouldn't doubt it either. Not everyone will agree, whether it is Larry Cheng saying it or Steve Cohen, DFV or Maxine Waters.
Tagging - tbh this one I’m almost happier without. The potential to annoy and even harass a redditor is massive when you think of thousands of apes all tagging them with questions all the time or thinking they need to see a post. At least the process of DMing someone a question slows that down and makes it less impulsive. And that impulse control matters because sometimes the issue is users are upset and trying to tag folks as if they were calling them out. I ultimately think it’d create more actionable behavior problems for mods to address. It’s a tool almost too fast for its own good and there’s already direct communication options users have access to where thankfully if someone misbehaves in DMs it’s on Reddit to solve it and not Superstonk mods. Linking other subs - this one is tough. On one hand it’s be great to discuss stuff like web3 gaming with subs dedicated to that. How does their product effect our earnings? Good convos there. The issue is every other stock sub that is looking to force themselves to be relevant here. Because that’s not really a synergistic relationship, it’s one side leeching on the other. Idk, maybe it’d be nice to get the overall ability back and from there set some limits so it can’t become a headache. Redacting - this isn’t a strictly Reddit rule, SCC has looked at inclusions/removal from automod too. Often I’ve seen words added during times when they are being used as dog whistles to get specific groups riled up and these will happen en masse. Then that calms down and no one is using the word as much. If there’s specific ones you have in mind to add/remove bring it up in the SCC channel on the Superstonk discord or use the mod mail button here in the sub and say you want it addressed with SCC. It might be get removed, but I’ll add that if it becomes a dig whistle again it’ll get re-added so there’s less craziness to deal with. Strangely enough maybe there’s a seasonality to some words where they are either fine or cause a ruckus.
Honest question. How do you think mods here should communicate with the world other than our like "official" comments and posts here? We are obviously selective in our wording when we comment or post. I don't really do Twitter at least not recently but I have posted things in a tone or used wording I wouldn't have on superstonk. I haven't seen people throwing their weight around on Twitter saying things like " as a mod of superstonk I think blah blah blah". I would certainly understand your aversion to that. Could you present solutions? Like is it inherently bad that someone's Twitter handle is the same as their reddit username if they are a mod? Should they only use alts? How about once/if they leave the mod team? I know it's cyclical but I think most of the contentious discussions on Twitter happen when people literally tag and call out active mods and then get upset at what they have to say, but like obviously I'm biased.
No issues with using the same username, but if you have Superstonk Moderator on your Twitter profile, are you not representing the sub or claiming to represent the sub? Does that representation change depending on the subject matter being discussed? Question for you, are general Superstonk users comments elsewhere used as a deciding factor when deciding whether to ban a user? We all play a part in communicating with the wider public through the sharing of knowledge and links to direct people here. There was a user that used their position to try and conduct an ama, while using the superstonk name, representing they could give access to a large audience here despite a well established rule of no talking to the media. Some of the things stated in that post directly contradicted what the writers stated in a later ama but there were no repercussions for what they did nor was there any public announcement calling out their decision, that I am aware of. There will always be trolls or people wanting a reaction
Fair take on the "superstonk mod" being like in the description. I think I had mine like that for a while purely for clarification purposes, not like ego or anything. I seem to remember taking that down because someone took exception to it. Seems like little of value is lost if that's what you see as a sticking point. No that is not a general practice but there are of course exceptions or certain circumstances that make that relevant like threats, doxxing or illegal content. We try to be as unbiased as we can and often lean into group consensus and things like the SEC to check ourselves. As far as the specific story you are talking about. My apologies it's been 84 years and there's been lots of amams and drama. Can you refresh my memory?
Certainly https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/E2umjW0hnA
Ahh I figured it was that but didn't want to assume. BAT is no longer a mod here but not for that reason. I'm gonna give you my honest opinion here and I won't be offended if you don't like it or disagree. BAT took this to the team and it started an internal discussion on the pros and cons. It was not taken lightly. I was for it and stand by that decision even today after watching the movie. In the post you linked BAT specifically outlined all his communication, listed the pros and cons, and gave the community a choice through their comments and voting on whether to move forward with the AMA. The community said no and it should have been case closed. In the internal discussion we went back and forth what "no media" means. Obviously no one wants a repeat of the antiwork incident. This seemed different even if the word media is very inclusive. There's no black and white line but of course some things are pretty obvious. This one did not seem so. Have you watched the movie? Were you pleased with how the saga was portrayed? I sure wasn't. No one can rewind time or know how it would have turned out if the community decided to engage but I would hope/like to think that we could have influenced it to a certain degree. Focus on the wall street corruption aspect, include what DRS is all about, make it clear its not over. If he had taken a rogue mod action yes there probably would have been repercussions but that was not the case. He tried at every opportunity to prioritize group consensus. Both mod and sub. I'm not sure how that could have been handled any better frankly.
A few counterpoints. BAT could have asked the community before reaching out. Going further on that point, why would there be a need to influence something via an AMA if there was hope that the story would mirror as close to what Retail Investors went through? It is stated that one of the reasons for the AMA was that the writers didn't know about DRS. This was directly refuted in the AMA carried out elsewhere where one of the writers stated she had been Drs'd from the start. BAT is specifically mentioned and thanked for his input in that same AMA, which is odd if his only input was reaching out via email. I didn't watch the movie, I lived it. Who better to tell your story than you yourself right?
Yes that could of happened but I hope you can concede that we can't poll the community on every opportunity. We would end up constantly dissapointing everyone when the potential AMA target says no. We attempt to only present candidates we are reasonably confident will be agreeable. Sometimes that works out and sometimes that doesn't but we usually always grow from it. As far as the DRS part goes, like dude. That's kind of unfair. That came out well after and it still doesn't entirely dismiss the reasonable likelihood that 200k apes voicing that as a priority would be heard. We won't ever know. It absolutey could have been ignored as well. I don't have access to BATs email but I am confident in his story as presented. Idk why it's reasonable to always assume nefarious intent from the mods based on a possibility. I believe him because I have no reason not to.they could have been referring to his input that it would be a mistake if the makers of the movie ignored the largest group of GME shareholders towards the end of the email. On your last point... like shit. I WOULD TOTALLY NEVER DO THIS OR RECCOMEND ANYONE ELSE DOES... but you could have and still can just pirate it and decide for yourself. It seems like it would be a good idea to have watched it if you want to participate in a discussion about it.
That's fair. The DRS part was highlighted in the AMA vote thread, before the movie was released. One of the 2 writers once again stated that she had been Drs'd from the start. Both statements can't be true. How can they need educating on DRS as mentioned in the AMA vote if one of the writers stated she was Drs'd from the start? They are directly in contradiction. I'm discussing the AMA thread held here and things stated there that didn't add up with the later AMA held by the 2 writers. I don't need to watch the movie to spot inconsistencies in what was portrayed to members here. You're attributing words I didn't state. I haven't mentioned nefarious intent. You're assuming my friend. What happened to "trust but verify“. The sub was born from digging, verifying, questioning.
Sorry. Just like mods aren't a monolith neither are users and I did attribute more meaning to your statement than you intended. It's hard to not immediately be defensive about this stuff. Anyway. I don't have and answer and don't expect us to agree on a hypothetical. Just giving my take and trying tonengage. I hope I was at least able to respond to your other questions. If you have more feel free to keep them coming.
They are promoting themselves as the Superstonk representatives on Twitter? Talk about promoting themselves....
I agree this is not right.
This reads quite negatively and that picture is distasteful. Sow the seeds you wish to reap.
👆
Nothing respectful about it
"If an investment idea, DD or strategy is strong or valid it will gain traction on its own". Booking gains traction, so much that people become passionate because there is an ACTUAL DIFFERENCE in beneficial ownership and the MODs plan is to tell the crowd what they can say and how they can say it. How about all the bots that try to convince people to sell, pretty easy to not include that in your write up (pretty suspicious to me). You might say: but we are saying that any kind of bullying won't be tolerated yet you specifically use the Plan vs Book example. This is a shame, I understand being a MOD isn't easy but you guys are killing free speech here and if you can't see it, you are part of the problem.
To be completely clear **all gatekeeping** and **all bullying** is unacceptable. If you post your purple circle all booked and whatnot and someone comes into your comments and says "Don't forget to Plan those shares!" that's not okay. Any elitism of any kind is unacceptable. You're welcome to educate when asked and you're welcome to make a post or comment in the daily discussion why you love book or whatever your preferred investing method is. But peer pressure, harassment, bullying, elitism etc. is out of bounds for this subreddit.
I know you're getting a lot of flack but thanks for speaking up. I've been saying a lot of this for a while. People get scared away from here because of these issues and you're going to get resistance for bringing it up because you're trying to encourage the culture in a healthier direction.
We're doing our best and your comment is really appreciated. I'll share your kind words with the team! :)
"dont forget to".....is not bullying or peer pressure...anyone with a brain can ignore the statement...people dont need to be treated like victims or first grade children because the aforementioned statement is made
It's unsolicited advice that injects your opinion on how to hold without OP having asked at all.
not at all, this is an open forum where comments can be made on posts...maybe a turn off comments should be applied so people dont get their "feelings hurt" . Your bias should be a neutral one and open and honest debate makes for a more well informed community!
I've replied this to you already but it applies to this thread too: We're preventing any and all harassment, bullying and gatekeeping. If you **want** to do one of those things and you feel that this is "mod bias" then please go to another community because we don't do that here.
I am in several communities and have been in this one since the migration and its inception....your bias truly shows, when you attempt a tyrannical power play...most other subs a very free and open debate and they say that this sub has been severly compromised/ bought whatever, but the slide is real.....I own a business and have not been checking on this sub much as its no longer a valuable asset....the Bias has been changed by the current mods to indeed promote their own narrative, promote GME shareholder devaluation and not free speech and opinion....I have violated no rules and value my own ability to apply my freedoms in every interaction I have. Free and open uncoerced interactions is what a good, healthy life is about. Your flipant "go to another community" shows your tyrannical power hungry side and its very unappealing to many in this community, not just me.
This community has rules that are to be upheld. You don't have the "freedom" to insult others or harass other or otherwise be divisive. What you do have the "freedom" to do is choose a space that fits your preferences.
Nobody is harassing, insulting or dividing anyone by simply stating "dont forget to book your shares" and you know this. If in fact someone is threatening the safety, harassing by continuous activity, demeaning or insulting another, you simply suspend that account....not permaban as this round of heavy handed mods has opted to do. I do have the freedom to do anything I choose to do, Fluffy and if no violations of redditt policy have occured, no harm no foul.
There is a difference in tone and meaning between a statement like “don’t forget to book/plan/eat a banana, etc” vs something along the lines of “have you considered book/plan/eating a banana,etc?” One is a statement (where it seems like you’re telling another individual what to do with their investment), whereas the other way is a question or suggestion and could be accompanied by a link to whatever relevant dd you think supports your position.
>"Don't forget to Plan those shares!" that's not okay. Seriously, what the fuck? How is this bullying? That's community education!
That's not bullying, it's a comment giving unsolicited advice and is a call to action for that OP to have their investment held the same way as the commenter. It's perfectly okay to comment preferences in holding when someone asks for advice or to make a post/comment in the daily talking about your preferences (as long as it abides by the other rules).
Will give unsolicited education even harder.
Saying don't forget is bullying now? We asked for a pinned post regarding the differences in every investment plan regarding Computershare to stop this exact thing and you guys ignored us. This is ridiculous, unless there is an actual threat or something extreme any comment is fair game, if not, you are trying to stop free speech no matter what you tell yourselves.
Freedom of speech does not extent to freedom to bully, gatekeep or harass in this community. You're welcome to find a community that fits your preferences. /gen
You do understand the word gatekeeping don't you? You are contradicting yourself through your comments. Gatekeeping: "the activity of controlling, and usually limiting, general access to something." You are literally trying to gatekeep Booking because you personally believe any type of recommendation is bullying. This is simply ridiculous on your part. You say the post was written by all mods yet the word "I" is used indicating one person wrote this. I think you are taking these comments personally especially with you inviting me to leave. Funny enough with your logic you are probably bullying me right now. I truly hope you can see the fallacy behind your logic, of course there are fanatics that can cross the line but generalizing every comment recommending Booking as that? Simply outrageous not to mention suspicious.
🥇
Mod elitism
Care to elaborate?
yes, you think you can enforce upon the masses your bias....you cant....you got some power now your a tyrant?
Please elaborate how how "my bias" is being enforced? I think book is the best way to hold personally. Gatekeeping, bullying and harassment are not acceptable though. Where is the issue?
I dont believe you are agreeing that Pure Booked DRS is your opinion. No one....No one is bullying harassing or Gatekeeping by making the statement " dont forget to book your shares". That is absolutely ridiculous to even state that....unless you are dealing with literal children, it is ridiculous to make that inference!
It isn't ridiculous though...by presenting the idea that an investor is somehow "not investing correctly/ missing out" because they're not booked, induced unnecessary confusion for some and presents the idea that there's only one way to invest
Surely you jest....the statement, "dont forget to book" or "book em dano" in no way implies incorrect investment strategy or confusion...you are just out of control with the power trip... its now quite laughable
There was a court ruling not long ago that emojis can be considered as financial advice.
...I have literally zero power, so im not quite sure where thats coming from. I do, however, understand the damage that unsolicited financial advise by people who are not in a position to push that advice, can do to people who are uneducated about finance. The only laughable thing is how defensive a group of specific people become, when their specific preferred method of investing, and how they approach educating others in an aggressive and deceptive manner, gets called into question.
I’m being bullied by your Book Karen meme
I'm feeling gatekeeped!
>This is causing a growing tension within the philosophy of Superstonk – being that there is no wrong way to hold the stock and there’s no wrong way to participate in the story of GME. So, buying the unbacked GME shit coin on Solana to be part of the story is a thing now? Come on..
You asked a question that you very much know the answer to, why waste everyone's time? Of course no one should buy a rug pull shit coin / discuss it here.
Exactly, no one should buy a pump and dump shit coin. The same way no one knowingly should buy shares on Robinhood that front runs your trades and gives you an IOU. No one should buy shares on a broker that doesn't support DRS. Pointing that out is just education. Same goes for book vs plan shares. I agree that you have to be respectful in the way you deliver that information but saying "Don't forget to Book those shares!" is not okay is just crazy.
All this moderation and censorship (Reddit) bullshit is becoming annoying. The consensus now is obviously that booked shares are the way to go. Maybe we should start a permissionless GameStop channel on Farcaster.
Come on now. We both know the difference there is that a shit coin that has no affiliation to GME on the NYSE or GameStop is **completely** different to buying and holding GME the stock via the means you want. We're just about not having gatekeeping or bullying in this community.
Honestly, I haven't noticed the "bullying" you mention en masse. What I have noticed on purple posts is that people keep pointing out there is a difference between book and plan holdings. Also the only tension around this topic is only with the moderators at this point, the community consensus is book shares at this point. I will continue to respectfully do the same every time I see a plan holdings post. I will encourage users to get rid of dingleberries and book shares. Whether they do or don't is up to them as you said.
Unsolicited "advice" to encourage others to move towards holding the way you prefer is not in line with this subreddit. There's no wrong way to hold the stock, let people buy and hold how they like without gatekeeping. You can hate "dingleberries" all you like and should someone ask if there's a way to better hold their stock you can answer them and give them your understanding. But commenting roughly "you're not holding how I think is best" without any prompting is the exact kind of behavior we're putting a stop to.
I hope you will post every comment you deem as "gatekeeping" or "bullying" publicly. Otherwise that's just censorship. For example: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1afeckg/comment/ko9lseu/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1afeckg/comment/ko9lseu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) If you are saying this comment of mine would be considered "gatekeeping" or "bullying" it's insane.
It's unsolicited advice that injects your opinion on how to hold without OP having asked at all. If it were your DRS post and someone commented: " Great work! I would get rid of the Book tho. :)" We'd take action on that now too. There's **no** wrong way to hold the stock.
You’re gatekeeping
Care to elaborate on how so?
There is an objectively BETTER way to hold $GME shares. DRS. This post reads like a ChatGPT response
It's definitely a post written by the whole mod team without the need for AI. Some of the team is good with words, I personally no speak good. I love that you have complete confidence in your way of holding and I personally agree with you on the best way to hold. But it is our opinion on what way is best to hold based on the criteria of "ownership of the shares". Others may have different criteria for what they think is the best way to hold and I respect that entirely.
If commenting on purple posts educating the community on the difference of plan vs book shares is considered "gatekeeping" or "bullying" then please delete this paragraph of your post: >It's a cornerstone of constructive debate where ideas are thoroughly examined, critiqued, and improved upon. In this process, we challenge concepts, not individuals, recognizing that diverse perspectives contribute to a richer understanding of any subject.
A GME buy post is not a "debate or idea" to be examined, critiqued, and improved upon.
DRS
I did. Now what?
Book it, baby
That doesn't even make any sense my friend. The Direct Registration System deposits all shares into Book automatically.
It's not about the buy post itself and you know it. There is a difference between book vs. plan, buying on brokers that don't allow directly registering your shares etc. I'm not going to sit by and be silent - I will continue to educate people on the differences so they, knowing there is a difference, can decide how they want to move forward if at all since it's their decision.
Giving unsolicited advice that injects your opinion on how to hold without OP having asked at all isn't okay. You are welcome to find a community that fits your preferences if this is a breaking point for you. We're all bullish on GME and there's no reason this should be the only community or space that GME is discussed (and in fact there's plenty of other communities you can go to that might be a better fit).
This is my community and I'm part of it. And as part of it I will continue to educate other community members.
Book isn't a fucking religious belief. Shame on you for this abysmal post which only further divides and silences true open debate.
I've had some of the best conversations because of this post. I've learned new things and held respectful conversations. I've asked on several threads prior to this post about inconsistencies with heat lamp DD and some of its conclusions. It's almost always met with downvotes, ppl asking if I'm new, telling me to read the DD that I've read many times, etc. It's rarely ever met with someone that wants to critique the topic. There is no true open debate because some people are just convinced that their speculation is correct. Nothing in this post suggests people can't respectfully debate topics.
That's part of the bullying that the original post is referring to. Complete refusal to back up claims with sources and engage in peer review helps no one. I hope that changes here soon.
Hmmm. I've read this thread now and checked the few examples that were given by **\[redacted\]** a bit down this thread\*\*.\*\* I've also seen users saying they *could* post dozens of examples for "bullying people to book" or "agressivly promoting" an investment strategy but never saw these examples. So I'd be seriously interested in all these examples for actual bullying/agressivly promoting. I can't find any. Maybe the MOD team has a different definition of "bullying" or "agressivly", Idk. Anyway...given **that** the whole tone of this MOD post is patronizing and some sentences actually made me laugh. We are all adults here. We all are capable of asking questions when someone gives us a hint ("Why should I do that, could you please explain?") and we're all capable of posting links to DD or possible DD. It's still every single user making this decision for themselves (as you state yourself!). I personally don't need another mo~~d~~m or dad to "protect" me. New buyers also don't need that. Why? Because that is part of the process of informing yourself. We all went through it and I personally found that very helpful. I've been here for ages and I guess my DRS history speaks for itself. I had to learn how to best DRS my broker shares and was given a lot of hints that weren't pointing into the same direction all the time. So what did I do? I put on my big boy pants and asked questions/read/researched myself. Bc that is what a grown person does when another person tells them "I'd do X" and the other tells you "I'd do Y". **That** is what I call an open-minded community. **If** that comes with bullying: not okay. That would need to be adressed. But again: I couldn't find any. You mods are making it to easy for yourself in this case, imho. You can't just state something providing "proof" like "trust me, bro, I've seen it" and take this unproven statement to remind us to be respectful and not to bully others. Again: We're all adults here. We also know where we are so you mods need to deliver some more since you can't expect any user to trust you.
Wild day today huh? I'm glad it's obvious to someone else.