I disagree with your comparison of compensation with a VC partnership. A VC fund is an entirely different structure than a closed-end fund and therefore the compensation structures should not mirror each other. In a VC partnership, you share the profit only with the other partners, not a whole load of shareholders. There is more risk and therefore more reward in the VC fund. These are two completely different entities, so your comparison is irrelevant.
Closed-end fund or open-end fund the management should profit ONLY if the portfolio companies are successful. The "scheme" invented by TINY management leads to Mr. Harris and VPs pocketing enormous amounts of money while ordinary investors suffer immensely from a huge share price drop. If TINY had an independent board of directors, such a shameful compensation "scheme" would never be adopted. The board of directors TINY serves Mr. Harris retirement interests instead of serving shareholders. When this bubble bursts, expect to see multiple shareholder derivative suites. As far as Mr. Harris is concerned, he announced that he is retiring soon. Enough of this nanohype bs for him, his mission is already accomplished.