>><snip>
>>>
>>>Accountability has to be paid for?
>>>
>>>I must say I am disappointed by the docility with which many members are viewing this.
>>
>>I've been a subscriber to the UT since mid 1996 and in all these years I've never had reason to question Michels decisions, including the current issue.
>
>I do not fundamentally disagree with what you say. Some seem to think this is some personal diatribe against Michel, which it is not. I respect and appreciate the way he has run this site and have said that many times. In this specific case, and given Kevin's convincing sounding statements that he is innocent, I wanted to be convinced. Again repeating myself from earlier posts, I do not believe Michel has acted with any malice. I'm sure he believes Kevin and Grover are one and the same. My concern is that the hacker may have fooled him with fake "proof." The last email I received from Kevin said he doesn't care whether he is readmitted and doesn't even want to come back. The part that infuriates him is that his account was merged, so anyone who does a search on him might turn up the over-the-top posts by "Grover." None of us can ever say Kevin does not have a serious professional career. He takes his good name seriously.

How did Kevin explain the points that led Michel to believe it was him?

1. Why did he set up a watch for Grover?
2. Why his sessions end and start exactly at the same time when Grover's session finished?
3. Why Grover's city was Kevin's favorite team?