However, there is another “category” of LOR: letters in support of academic promotion. Interestingly, the literature on these letters is even scarcer. I have been able to find only one article (4) discussing more specifically the nature and ethical considerations of LOR to support applications for faculty promotion. Yet, as the authors of this single article (4) note, “Faculty letters, however, may create unique ethical, political, and interpersonal challenges.” They also suggest that “The lure of academic celebrity or the desire of an individual candidate for a flattering letter must not threaten the veracity of the content.” This, similar to the report of MacLean et al. (3) implies possible pressures to write a positive, or inflated, letter. Dealing with this pressure may be quite delicate and challenging. Roberts and Termuehlen (1) suggest that “if a writer finds that he or she cannot in good conscience write a positive letter, rather than simply declining the invitation, he or she may talk with the candidate about realistic career goals, the issues of concern, and what the applicant could do to strengthen his or her candidacy.” This is an excellent suggestion, using honesty in dealing with the LOR (1, 4). However, it does not suggest how to deal with another possible pressure to write a positive letter: possible pressure by the institution asking for an independent evaluation of an applicant for promotion in a form of an LOR. This pressure could be subtle, hardly detectable. In all fairness, it probably does not occur too frequently, but it occurs. There are no data to prove it, but it has happened to me and some of my colleagues (informal inquiry).