This seems conflicting: >It was at the same time that Travis agreed in writing to modify the company’s voting agreement to ensure that the board was composed o

This seems conflicting: >It was at the same time that Travis agreed in writing to modify the company’s voting agreement to ensure that the board was composed of independent, diverse, and well qualified directors. Despite agreeing in writing to sign these amendments, he has still not done so. then >A number of people have asked why we took legal action before giving Travis the chance to sign these amendments. It doesn't sound like he agreed in writing yet based on their own words. Maybe that's just bad wording though. They also fail to point to any actual actions taken on his part, just references to vague statements or inferences of inaction. Not to say I'm on Travis's side of this, but from what I've read its much more likely Benchmark is trying to stabilize leadership under someone who will focus on shareholder value (not company growth/stability) as they need to divest themselves within the next year or two. This obviously stands contrary to what Travis supposedly wants (and has failed to accomplish), and probably much of the rest of the board.