Some observers have accused Stringer and Glamser of "selling out" and benefiting financially from the "settlement." I would like to point out that Professors Stringer and Glamser and their families experienced a two-month pillorying in the press and spent no less than $6,000 of their own money in defending themselves against unsubstantiated charges. The manner with which the charges were filed, and the procedures which were established for investigating the matter, were strange indeed. While their contributions to their respective disciplines will endure, their careers are effectively ended. The settlement terms put a "muzzle" on these two men. But the settlement terms did not put neither a "leash" or a "muzzle" on the current IHL President. Some feel he is able to make post-hearing statements with reckless abandon and impunity. Professors Stringer and Glamser have been willing to explain their rationale to their supporters since the beginning. Their rationale underlying the decision to "settle" in Hattiesburg, rather than to face what would likely have been a "Kangaroo Court" in Jackson, is convincing. The playing field is, indeed, unequal. I ask the critics: "Would you play by these same rules?"