"You don't have any legal rights to tell them what to spend their money on" – settle... you're overreacting. @DISCIPULA has a right to voice an opinion.
While I agree that the board as a whole needs to be sufficiently engaged with the interests of shareholders, I strongly disagree that there is any need for every director to also be a shareholder. The directors must act in the interests of the company, which at times will be opposed to the short term interests of the shareholders. Dividends are a good example of this. A higher dividend will also tend to inflate the share price. If the directors are all over-invested in the company there is the risk that the directors will opt for a payout ratio that leaves the company under-funded for operations, or costs the company opportunities for investments because it has no warchest available.
I think your own post is a good example of this kind of thinking. You're unhappy because your capital value is shrinking. You want something... anything... to lift the share price. You are therefore scratching around for ways to make that happen, and are suggesting things such as directors buying on market that have nothing to do with the running of the business.
I wouldn't want that kind of thinking to be happening on the board of any company I'm invested in.
RRL Price at posting:
$1.90 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Not Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)