> Again, I'm not going to try and present information contrary to what you know (it would likely just be attacked for being biased) This is silly. "I could ref

> Again, I'm not going to try and present information contrary to what you know (it would likely just be attacked for being biased) This is silly. "I could refute your point of view, but you would just make a baseless character attack against me, so I can't. Your fault really." Fowler put forth what I and many others have found to be a cool headed, well documented, and credible account of events. The ball is in Uber's court. So far they hired Eric Holder and there have been some resignations. Too soon to know for sure, but it does seem to lend further credence to Fowler's account. If Fowler made something up, it will be up to you guys make that point. I don't find the "I won't provide my version of events because you guys are not discussing this in good faith" very convincing. It's passive aggressive. If you can't discuss because of legal issues or an agreement with your employer, that's fine. But don't blame us.