The approach we take is a very objective as opposed to subjective one. It's not, for example, what the commissioner thinks is an apparent conflict of interest that carries the day. It's what the reasonable person thinks—reasonably well informed and bringing, fairly, an assessment to the situation. That's actually the whole basis on which the law of negligence in this country is based, and it's very much the same in our situation.
It's case by case; there's no question about it. Coming up with a formula of what will be or not be, in a black and white situation, an apparent conflict of interest has really everything to do with the circumstance that brings you to that point in time. It's why contact between our office and the members—there are only 87 of them, so it's easy to maintain it—is so valuable. People will come and do come.