The VSNU responded today to our petition by acknowledging Pieter Duisenberg's nomination is problematic but defending its unanimous choice nonetheless. They note that our voice, among others, has been heard and invited us to exchange ideas with them. Ironically, the invitation comes instead of a dialogue, which we have tried to start weeks ago by raising some basic questions about this bizarre appointment. What qualifications does Duisenberg bring to the VSNU apart fro his fat Roladex? Are universities in this country really under such terrible stress that they need to swallow this frog to make their voices heard and their needs met? Do we really have no other means to speak up for ourselves than to let an anti-academic do it for us? Assuming he stayed true to his repeated statements on the matter, what vision did PD offer the VSNU that doesn't announce the death knell (morally or politically) of higher education in the Netherlands? The VSNU needs to provide answers to these fundamental questions before appearing to foster dialogue. Their extended silence has backfired once, and it will again. They should not miss another chance to recreate some credibility as our representative organ in The Hague. The petition thus closes with great success in terms of raising awareness nationally. But the VSNU continues to hold itself unaccountable for its disturbing and myopic choice. One effective way forward is to hold constituent members accountable, i.e. the individual CvB members who have signed off on Duisenberg's troubling appointment. At the UvA, RUG, UU, AUC and elsewhere hard questions are being raised directly at these organs' leaders. You can do so too!