I don't follow. You seem to be suggesting that we simply repeat a proposition for which we have no good evidence ("Steele was paid $2.5 million"), or a proposit

I don't follow. You seem to be suggesting that we simply repeat a proposition for which we have no good evidence ("Steele was paid $2.5 million"), or a proposition which is verifiably false ("the Form 990 says that Steele was paid $2.5 million"), until someone can convince us to stop. First of all, I would have thought I've already provided enough evidence to correct the latter assertion to any reasonable person's satisfaction. And second, simply repeating an accusation for which we have no solid evidence is, at best, inconsistent with rational discourse. And at worst will get you sued for defamation. I have no problem at all with people asking where the money went. Bot that's not what you seem to be suggesting, and it's certainly not what I recommended people stop doing. It's also worth noting that Nautilus itself has weighed in to address this elsewhere in this thread: >In 2015 Nautilus was transferred from an LLC to a 501(c)(3). As the transfer was in process, NautilusThink paid Nautilus Venture LLC to produce the magazine because the staff and contracts were still in the name of Nautilus Ventures. Is was a cost passthrough. Nautilus is fully owned by NautilusThink and Nautilus Ventures was closed.