|
-------- Original Message --------
| From: |
Bob |
| To: |
Harold Lance |
| Subject: |
Re: Confidentiality agreement |
| Date: |
Thu, 25 Jan 2007 18:26:58 -0600 |
|
Thanks for your reply, Harold.
For the record, I did publicly raise the question of the confidentiality
agreement soon after ASI's decision, but I did not forward my
concerns to you. I probably should have done so. I was clear
enough on this issue that Gregory wrote publicly, "if [Harold
Lance] thinks I have violated any agreement, he can say so, and
I will post it."
I am a little concerned since a friend of mine forwarded your
statement to me this morning, indicating that it is circulating
widely.
When you say, "We had no agreement, that was the problem,"
you are speaking of the agreement regarding the process, not
the confidentiality agreement regarding the discussions that
attempted to put together a process, correct? It was always my
understanding that we had a definite agreement regarding confidentiality,
and that that definite agreement was intended to protect us all
and you in particular while we explored whether a second agreement
could be reached as to a process for an ASI review.
If any of us write up our perspective, could we have the privilege
of having it circulated by you to the same people you sent your
statement to, assuming that whatever was written was courteous?
I would definitely feel better about things if you can assure
me that Walt Thompson's statement about trying to get ASI to
help them out had absolutely nothing to do with the statement
that you issued. And it would also help if you can assure me
that no one that could be associated with Danny's side saw your
statement before it was sent out to Gregory, Gailon, Linda, or
myself. Your assurance on these two points would help people
know that ASI did indeed try to be impartial. Can you help me
out on these two points?
God bless.
Bob
| 
