Hi Kevin.

I'm posting this to you only becuase you are the thread originator and not because of any issue per se, as I think you know anyway :)

I read a lot of anti-UT management posts at the moment and just wanted to offer the other side of the coin in an attempt at balance.

I certainly don't know the facts of the recent drama but Michel and his team have, for the most part, run the UT in a decent and even manner over the years. Is it not possible that they decline to comment further for privacy and/or other reasons which they feel would be inappropiate to discuss in an open forum? Do they get no credit for past performance? No benefit of the doubt after years of essentially fair play?

It's not like the UT have banished people left, right, and center, afterall, and I dont assume they take the action lightly either. Sure, I don't agree sometimes when Michel has refused to answer questions in the past but, hey, thats his choice.

I think that without the facts one should'nt hammer away at this. And if the facts are not available then the record of UT management should at least account for something in their favour.

Just a thought - looking for balance.

Later