Re: does laura have a clue???

Posted by vishal R | Sun Aug 25th 2002 1 a.m.

> I and only I (besides bea) have been mentioned as a nungu member since the defunct first version. Mukul and Laura should wonder why this privilege was never offered to them if they have been collaborators throughout. They do not find a mention in the new resume as well.

More lies will only work against Bea. Boyfriends and close pals of Bea should note this.

Is it ethical to mention boyfriends, pets, dependent employees, deceased family members etc as collaborators just to make it seem like nungu is a collective?

Who were the collective members when the grant application was made? Can they write to this list and reveal their mysterious identities? Why does the proposal not mention them? Are they that insignificant? Why is Bea the only grant beneficiary mentioned in the proposal? Do the other collective members want none of it? Why do they want to remain anonymous collaborators who want to work for free even when a grant is being awarded?
Your Reply