Obviously, you still don't get it. The issue I raise isn't necessarily whether he bears any responsibility (each will have to come to their own conclusion on that), it's the criticism. It is simply the fact that when one makes an informed decision on the merits, then criticizes that very same decision made by others, it is rather "ackward".

Perhaps there was a change of heart later, after some practical experience, and that's fine. But it is still an ackward argument.

Granted, he probably was not involved at all in the formation of the agreements with TPL, and probably was not solicited for input regarding alternatives. He was very likely presented a final work product. Thus, IMO he cannot possibly be held to the same level of responsibility as other parties to those agreements. It wasn't his job to make the deal happen.

But his approval was required and gained. Had he rejected, it may have sent the primary parties back to the negotiating table and a better deal addressing his concerns may have been struck. We'll never know.

FWIW,

SGE