Thanks for doing this, @abh12345. It's good to know where people are on this issue. There needs to be more of it, not less. More facts, less accusations, less demands, less self-importance and pontification.

Even with all the 'information' that has come to light, it just feels like there's got to be more to it. On all sides. Someone's livelihood being threatened more than what's been divulged, more serious plans laid out somewhere.

Ned said he has logs of the discussions. Have those been published anywhere? It would be nice to know who was involved, so that not all the witnesses get lumped in with the collaborative few.

Sixty people is a significant amount, especially if they're predominantly movers and shakers, but it just seems the like rest of us should be able to get in between the parties with our hands out and say, "Hold on. Let's do some talking, not demands and counter demands.

This is where I have issues with moral equivalency. It's okay in all these situations, but not in this one. I don't know. I feel like I might be too old for this. :)

Edit: I meant to add this the first time:

I know your witness ranking doesn't give you the ability to be a part of the code consensus, but I have to say, you two are not inconsequential. Not to me, and I dare say, not to many others. You matter, what you're doing on the chain matters, and that's all there is to it. :)