>So you justify a position by casting aspersions at Michel's method which he CANNOT afford to share with you unless he wants future Grovers to be undetectable.
>
>OK, I guess I'm done here.
>
>FWIW, I was disappointed at your earlier "interested" comment though I'm sure you'll tell me you meant nothing by it.

I'm not sure what you are referring to. I am not casting aspersions on anyone. I am responding only to what Michel has posted, nothing more, nothing less. You asked and I replied. I'm done too. I stand by my comment on merging accounts. Even if Michel has what he considers to be proof that Kevin is Grover, the accounts should not be merged.