I apologize if they come off as offensive. That was not the intent. I wasn't trying to attack him -- it's not personal. I'm criticizing a system he has in place, which this incident highlighted.

I'm also suggesting an alternative which I /think/ would have more privacy and more business value. I'm not an insider, so I could be wrong about either of those, but that's the point of a conversation. This way, he knows what would work for me, as a potential user. He can take it and run with it, take it as a problem statement and run with a different solution, or take me as 0.0001% of the market and ignore it. In his shoes, I've done all three at different times.

> > Your team has a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value

> That’s actually not true.

@woofie11, you should internalise this.

What the board has a duty to do is enact the desires of shareholders as they have made those desires clear. If the shareholders want to sacrifice profitability for some other goal, that's fine, normal, expected, and ordinary.

There is no fiduciary duty to maximise shareholder value.

Obviously negligence, fraud, and other possibly criminal or immoral behaviour that reduces or ruins shareholder value can certainly be a problem, but that's a separate issue.