I think it's relevant. Just like it's relevant that he's threatened to take parts of Tesla elsewhere. Also, He helped tank the stock with selling massive amounts of shares on the open market. I don't think all of his political tweets have helped the stock price either, or not turned people off from buying Tesla products. It's one thing to buy twitter and uphold free speech which I commend him for. If the current stock price is below where it needed to be to get his compensation package that is relevant. I'm not saying it is below that price, I'm just asking if it is or not. I want Elon to stay with Tesla, and that is relevant too. I plan on voting yes, but I would like to be more sure that it's the right way to vote.
First,
The decision to offer Elon the package in 2018 should be based on company performance. How was it performing at that time? How was it performing at the end of the pay package term?
This is a unique situation where we actually get to apply that elusive 20/20 hindsight. If, when the original vote happened, we could see what the company performance would be like under Elon's command through the end of the period specified for the contract, would any shareholder in their right mind not vote for the package?
This is the extent of which facts should be applied to determine this vote.
All personal bias which might be based on feelings being hurt by social media posts, or someone's personal interpretations of political aspects, are at their root emotional choices. Rather than choices based upon the company performance over this period of time the package applies to.
Second,
Would anyone think that punishing Elon by taking away his pay for that period is justified in any way if the choice is strictly due to an emotional bias related to things that can never have a direct impact on past company performance? Such a reason for a No vote would be both irrational and illogical.
Third,
How would voting against the 2018 pay package possibly offer any benefit to Tesla, TSLA, or the stakeholders in a way that could outweigh the risk of losing Elon's future commitment to the undisputed talents that created Tesla to begin with?
If there is no substantial benefit based in company performance to be gained from voting No, that alone should seal the Yes vote.
The term, "Shooting oneself in the foot" comes to mind when considering a No vote. I can think of nothing good for the company and the shareholders that would come from making that choice.
Hope this helps.