For anyone looking for an informative, rational, well written synopsis of the last meeting of the Hyde Park Co-operative Society, czech out the latest post over at Hyde Park Progress. At all costs, avoid today's Hyde Park Herald, though. Or just read the headline and then go straight to the crossword [note: there is no crossword]:"CO-OP BOARD REJECTS MEMBER PLEAS: VOTE LEAVES 170 JOBLESS FOR JANUARY"The Co-op board rejected member pleas in the same way that the electoral college rejected Walter Mondale's pleas--with an overwhelming mandate from its constituents. Sixty-percent (sixty!) of voters endorsed the University's Plan A, in a referendum supervised by an independent elections monitor. So, yeah, the "pleas," muffled as they were, were certainly rejected. That's kind of standard operating procedure in this whole voting thing.As for the co-op employees, the only thing worse than the job itself is losing that job, especially in the middle of the winter. However, if the closing of the Co-op leaves 174 employees out of work, wouldn't the opening of either a Treasure Island (or "TI" as...no one affectionately calls it) or a Dominick's bring in roughly 174 new jobs? And assuming the laid-off co-op employees are at all qualified, I would assume they'd be on the fast track to getting rehired. It's certainly not a doomsday scenario.There's nothing new in the article that isn't farcically one-sided, except for this nugget at the end:"A source told the Herald Monday night that a class action lawsuit is being prepared in response to the prepared shuttering of the cooperative."Uh...what? I'm guessing that former employees are suing the board, but I really can't rule anything out at this point. The way the University has been portrayed throughout this process, it's surprising no one's accusing them of war crimes. If the lawsuit rumor is true, its a sad epilogue to a story that seems to have finally--and thankfully--run its course.