The last question is a good one, of course. But I think that what I've offered already suffices as a sort of response. Your whole reply centers on an assumption of the ethical (for lack of a better word) character of management, insofar as it assumes they have been, and will be, forthright. But it is past experience that has, of course, worried many about the grounds for that assumption. Now one can argue that failure of management to keep their word on deadlines does not necessarily suffice as evidence of potential malignant (again, for lack of a better word) intent. But it has obviously raised many eyebrows, or we wouldn't be having this several month long conversation.
I want the optimists to be right. I am all in, and I incline to give management the benefit of the doubt. But I don't think any of the above sentiment is irrational.
