it's clear that LinkedIn is neither controlled by, nor an official soure of information for, POET.

when asked about it, Chris saying last week "can't discuss it, it's not for discussion" seems to tell us that NO! it's not intended for the public, it was a mistake. unauthorized disclosure.

consider, Chris/Suresh didn't change their mind 180 degrees from "cannot be discussed", until after it leaked.

to me, finding out whether the info was actually authorized for disclosure or not, is important.

imo, seeking official clarification (and respecting it once received) is really no different than

"hi, did you forget your wallet on the table?" (instead of keeping it)
"pardon, I think you dropped your keys?" (instead of stealing their car)
"pssst. your fly is open." (instead of waiting to heckle once they're at the podium spotlight)

THAT is the point I was trying to make!

*especially* after Ajit's comment at AGM, about how the forum's "digging" has fouled up his plans on more than one occasion.

I hope that make sense.

thanks,

Rob.