What exactly ......
do you believe the ACC should have done last year/ What do you see as the benefits to doing last year what you assert? You say the crux of your argument is what was done last year was done under a delusion and false premise but, what if a case could be made it was a decision not made under delusion or false hope but, for sound business reasons and at minimal cost? Does what you know really indicate the ACC has not made decisions it believes to be in the best interests of their long term survival? What does "treating ND the same way as VT, UVA..." really involve? Just a few questions for you to ponder.
|
(
In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
Posted: 08/26/2021 at 2:17PM