I know. In the case of Miovision, you weren't there anymore and you weren't an investor. However, it's an example of a project that received SDTC funding, even though the external expert reviewer advised against it. The reviewer was subsequently asked to rewrite their opinion.
In another case, you were still at SDTC. You weren't an investor, so there wasn't a conflict of interest, but there was a problem in that the project didn't meet the eligibility criteria. I'm talking about Farmers Edge. SDTC asked the external expert reviewer to revise their recommendation on the company. You told me that you tried to balance the opinions of the external expert reviewer; the SDTC team, staff and management; the project review committee; and the board. You said there seemed to be a balance. Why, then, ask an external expert reviewer to revise their recommendation on a project submitted by a company that had ties to someone at SDTC?