>What you are describing is "bias": apart from speculation from a detractor, there is absolutely no reason to believe that UT had anything to do with this external interpersonal dispute. Which is what Michel said. Perhaps he should have created a sensational web page to milk his grievance for all it is worth?
>
>FWIW, I think the initial "crime" has been blown completely out of proportion which is appreciated only by those who are enjoying the theater. You can imagine the harm that might have been done had somebody malicious guessed such an obvious password, which hopefully is less likely now. That's definitely my last word on the topic.
>
>I disagree with everything you've said here. I'm also not certain that you're correct in your assertion about Michel and the UT. So we'll have to leave it at that.


Have you noticed that after you make a post, John Ryan pops out of no where to make a snide comment (to foster somekind of argument), then retreats (when you give up) and waits for the next opportunity?