Here's the deal. This below will happen or we are through. These conditions are not negotiable.

1) You will adhere to the principles to which you agreed at the outset of TEG, just as I have. No unilateral decisions. No exceptions, ever. None. You are NEVER, under any circumstances whatsoever, excepted. If you wish to claim that you don't remember these agreements, then remember them now, agree to them, or we are finished. I will also want them written into the by-laws to help you remember.

2) You currently employ three practices that I have never heard of a journal editor using, and any one of them lowers TEG's standards below those of any other journal I know of. - taking re-votes on articles until you get the results you want - overriding an outright rejection from an expert reviewer for no better reason than that you don't like the reviewer's recommendation - approving an article when the author makes no effort whatsoever to respond to a reviewer's objections and suggestions All three practices will cease.

3) We do what we believe to be right, and we do not waste time worrying about and guessing what "others might think" or overriding our own judgment based on guesses of what "what others might think."

4) We do not post stuff for the purpose of generating attention or controversy. I absolutely disagree with you that posting uninformed rants will be good for TEG. It certainly will get us attention, but exactly the wrong type of attention that most involved in TEG want.

5) We will adopt no policies that are solely supported by you (just as we have never adopted policies solely supported by me).

6) No one but me, or someone I designate, will have access to our Web site. And, nothing will be posted there unless both you and I approve it.

7) Cannell and Innes will be disinvited from TEG, as will any other reviewers who show a proclivity to sabotage TEG's standards and reputation by pontificating on topics in which they have no expertise.

8) Cannell's paper will not be posted in any form.

9) [This gave him veto power over another paper under review. It has been removed to preserve anonymity.]

10) We don't post stuff that we know is wrong. Period.