| Ian,
My comment referred to your opening line in that e-mail, which you may have felt was justified given my 11th hour involvement in the constitution redrafting, or it may simply have been an inoccuous introduction to the main body of your text.
The thought that 'you were aware' of something, in the light of these revelations about PM's, does make me very uncomfortable. As we haven't discussed anything directly, you may have gleaned this particular 'awareness' from another member's comments, rather than from PM's, in which case I apologise.
In the words of Paul James, I am a staunch member of the DSC and I shall wait for the AGM to raise this, and other issues. In the meantime, I shan't be using 'PM's' until we are all assured that they are what they claim to be, private. |