Hi Jay. imo, one should always go easy when questioning someone's ethics especially in this case where the UT management have no record of unethical behaviour in years of running this site. You know, America is famous the world over for the "innocent until proven guilty" idea. I watched LA Law :)

All I'm saying is we don't know. Therefore lets give some benefit of the doubt until new facts emerge that may enlighten us further.



>You can call me Ray... <g>
>
>I haven't broken any rules. That I've been informed about anyway.
>
>In my opinion if they didn't want humongous sigs then they should use LEFT(UTTable.Sig,m.SigLimit). :-) Not really, just haven't got my web space up right now.
>
>Yeah, I agree in part about the lack of facts, but the email and the timing were enough to convince me of his ethics.
>
>
>>Hi Lola <g>
>>
>>It is very possible that Michel was asking for verification for some possible action. I dont know. But you assume what that action might be and it has not yet happened. I'm sure though that if you want to get banished that you will achieve it by either (a) breaking the rules, or (b) continuing to use that humungous signature :)
>>
>>iro JVP we dont know the facts. We can sit here all day condemning and arguing and judging and whatever but at the end we dont know what the facts really are. You can argue that UT should disclose the facts but really, we can all think of various scenarios where it would be inappropiate to discuss such things in public.
>>
>>The only thing we do know is that the UT management have never abused their position or acted in a prejudiced way before and surely this must give some credit to them.
>>
>>Later.