That is the exact sentiment I had back in December 2016. There...

That is the exact sentiment I had back in December 2016. There was little time to dig into the issue, especially John selling shares. When Martin stepped back in 2017 and Stacey... I realized without a company secretary and CFO it would be the end of Troy. If you enter such a position with the attached risk (negative working capital 40m) you will have to pay premium. So I am very glad that Gerry took up the position. And I am sure this was only possible due to John being around. So if your idea had been implemented back then there would be no Troy now. I also had a deep look into John's selling. Notice he kept his personal shares and sold shares held via a company where he is only owner of 30% or so. There might have been reasons that had more to do with that company than with Troy...
I am all for saving money and lower wages if performance does not suffer. If RIM had their way back in 2017, would that management have brought us Ohio Creek? Had they been able to pay down as much debt as current management did or would they have required dozens of millions in immediate fund raising? Would we have a CEO on-site?
While I do understand your frustration it is a distraction of the important issues. What about the US$3m refundable vat? The problem with director renumeration is that you will only save money over time. Does it make sense to do so when we have LOM (current ops) of ca. 12 months? 12 months down the road Troy will either be toast or OC will be in production, so what you are suggesting has only potential to save a couple hundred thousands. Convening an EGM will probably be more expensive than what you will save...
No, I would suggest to recheck director renumeration when financial conditions are stable again which implies OC being in production. Then compare what they earn with other directors and compare performance. And not via expensive EGMs but at the annual meeting.