Matt, Ah the great pissing contest begins...and ends because this is the last I will say on this matter. You contradict yourself my friend. First you say he has root access to the systems and then you say that he has no access to them. Which is it? Can't have the cake and not eat it. As for the junkie analogy, it was only that, an analogy. I could have said that it would be like putting someone with a gambling addiction in the middle of Vegas with a bank roll and telling them not to gamble. I could have said that it was like giving candy to a baby and expecting the child not to partake. The point is that past experience from his actions, supported by others on the list and not just myself, point to the fact that it will in all likely hood happen again. He pays your bills, and you feel the need to defend his actions, actions that regardless of how much of a philanthropist you claim that he is, have been shown to be otherwise. Let's just agree to disagree and call it a day. Keith
