Sure, label my post an editorial or even better, an opinion. Isn't that pretty much the case with most of our posts? It seemed clear to me that this was not a case of Jim resigning and Nate and the board begging Jim to stay on. There is no indication Jim was "discouraged" from resigning. The way I read it, Nate felt it was best for Jim to step down. If I misinterpreted Nate's post, I apologize but I also would say if that is the case Nate certainly did not make it clear in his post. I also disagree with your statement that this is necessarily a private matter between Jim and the board. This board represents all club members. I think we should all let the board know our feelings on their actions. I expressed mine that I am sorry and distressed to see Jim no longer our claims director. If others think likewise, I urge them to let their feelings be known, if not on the board then directly to the board members. Finally, notice the word "appear" in my statement on this action making it appear the board did not want a thorough action. Even if this was not the board's intention, firing the investigator in the middle of an ongoing investigation certainly makes this a legitimate question.