Once the leadership got involved, as well as the records office, things became even more confusing. During the first review of our report, your father noticed that my name was not there under key personnel, so he took the liberty of putting it there. In fact, he erased his own name and put mine in its place. Then the report passed to me. Upon seeing the changes he had made, I couldn’t help but do the same as your father: I erased my own name and put his back in. During the second review, your father made a further adjustment: he placed his own name after mine, trying to indicate the order in which credit should be given. Once I saw the report, without hesitation, I scribbled out my name. Perhaps our more senior comrades who witnessed our repeated rewriting of names believed that your father’s efforts to give me greater credit came from a pure and simple sense of friendship – love for one’s disciple, as it were. In other words, even though we both kept trying to give the other person the lion’s share of the credit for deciphering FIRE, the senior officials, perhaps not unexpectedly, felt that my efforts to put your father’s name first were real and genuine whereas your father’s weren’t. They believed he was doing it for my benefit, to raise my standing, to help out his junior colleague. But can such honours be bandied back and forth? If so, wouldn’t the senior comrades suspect that someone had neglected their duty? Unsurprisingly, in the end, the report ended up as it was at first: my name was not included.