It's implicit in the negative. I'm not trying to get weird on this, but it just strikes me that we're saying you have to give it to us, but if you don't have it to give to us, then somehow there has to be some retribution, I would presume, if the party doesn't comply. I know you're trying to put a positive spin on it, but all of a sudden that becomes a negative because they say, what if we don't have the information, or for whatever reason it may not be there? I'm really trying to get my head around what you're trying to accomplish with that.
On December 3rd, 2009. See this statement in context.