You follow the board meetings much closer than I. Was there a resolution authorizing the placement of those ads for those four or five weeks? What was the vote in favor? Those who voted in favor had to know that the statements were false. Especially after the fact that there was an immediate public backlash about them. Why weren't they pulled or edited? Why was the wording included in the mailings? Liars is such a loaded word. Would you rather I use malfeasance? And would you rather ignore precedent when evaluating subsequent events?