>As for Steve leaving, he explained his reasons in the March column. I can verify that since his recent job change, he struggled to get the column done in a timely way. I know he agonized over giving it up. But there's nothing sinister going on here. (I hope I'm misreading the tone of your message.)
>
Nothing sinister at all - an admiration for a job well done by Steve in the past where an error slipped through here that I'd have expected Steve to have caught before the magazine went out the door. A simple statement of thanks for a job well done by him in the past is all that was meant here, at least in my case.