There are board specific issues that will suffer even more heavily then they already do.
For instance, I have moderated a board that has a CEO who came from another failed company. Several investors of the previous failure have sworn to destroy the CEO. It's like a frenzy, it's all they talk about. Even though the new company is not failing and the CEO has not "scammed" anybody as they claim, this roving pack of old investors come to the board just to destroy him. So even though they have no stock, and have no opinion of the stock in and of itself, they merely try to hurt the CEO and anybody associated with him or the company with any kind of ruthless fabrication, which of course in-turn causes a ruckus on the board.
Now, dissent is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE and encouraged. Heck, I know this start-up has issues and I'll be the first to list them. Having them as moderators makes me cringe as it will most likely empower them in their openly admitted desire to destroy this new company, which I believe deserves a fair chance to succeed on its own merit.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
