Hopefully you've read up on the SEC requirements that there not only be an audit committee, but that it be made up of indendent directors, and chaired by someone considered a financial expert. And that will also be required of Compensation Committees as well very soon.

And since you want to focus on what is "customary", now perhaps you can then look at the SEC filings for PTSC and see what has also been customary for PTSC for all of the roles for the last 6 years at least. ALL OF THESE ROLES have been customarily fille by BOD members. Furthermore, that's not an accident, but obviously a way to spiff the particular BOD member to entice them to serve of the BOD / reward them, as well as fill roles that may or may not be "required" by regulation or practicality.

Mistry, Schrock, and Turley, each served in chair capacities that in reality served no purpose for our company.

I can appreciate that you WANT to look at "compensation" a certain way, but that's NOT how the company or the SEC looks at it, so to pontiifcate about something so generally and broadly accepted by most, and practiced by the company in accordance with that accepted definition, but to then try to narrowly define differently is misleading. Hence the need to respond to clear the record. Your experience from long ago might have applied back then, but it hasn't applied for quite a while now, nor has it ever applied to PTSC since they started paying the BOD members cash compensation.