<<But one thing I won't do is question whether Cortex management takes this situation and their responsibility to shareholders seriously>>
How does one 'not' question them based on 3 year performance? Had Cortex management developed a strategy/plan that didn't result in them always running to the financing/dilution well, had they not 'handed' themselves free shares year after year of subpar performance--in the form of options, had they been able to command less lousy financing terms, had they actually spread their IP bearing wings to increase shareholder value, instead of hanging on by a broken wing and a prayer, then at that point, we would have had suitable answers for the questions surrounding management performance. The results alone are reason to question management, but the choices made and misfortune dealt are just icing on top.
I believe management is serious. I don't believe their motivation was proactive, just reactive. This situation we are in, and continue to be in over the years, is a result of management not making the right choices at the right time to avoid it. They rely on the dilution, it is a pattern--it is a predictable and (usually) reliable Plan B with a lethargic Plan A (partnership/equity stake)that is never attained.
My instincts say the science can overcome the mediocre-at-best management, it already has with the RD revelation, but management needs to be more aggressive, which means they need to change their flight direction.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
