The Wire, Season 1 - Final Credits!

[Nostredeus]

Kuribo - what's your read on Cdb?

Kise - same question.

Not a fan at all of nostredeus' vote on Sotty. Didn't like kuribo's vote on Sotty either but he removed it so that's all good, but nostredeus' vote was awful on all kinds of levels. Nost. I'd like you to explain what you think Sotty!scum has to gain by spending day one hard defending Jason only to turn around and push him today. How was their interaction forced?

I'll make a real post tomorrow or Wednesday as will other head but now *sleep*

I dunno what to tell you here but frankly scotty comes in with

"Vote jason"

and demands a response to that vote, jason responds with

"Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it. "

to which scotty responds with

"You're not at all interested in what changed our opinion of you?"

then pushes hard with

"Please don't make me wait an entire weekend worth of time for a response this time."

as if Jason hadn't clearly pointed out he'd be V/LA over the weekend in question. Jason responds with

"I replied... I'm not wasting time by chasing after you asking why oh why did you change your mind... if you have a solid reason, you would have posted it by now."

which given that scotty hadn't posted a reason seems reasonable to me, scotty then does two weird things:

1) "So basically you care as much about what changed our position on you as you seemingly have about the game since about the halfway point of day 1?"

Which is clearly not what Jason is saying, maybe we're all speaking different languages but it looks to me like Jason is asking multiple times for the reasoning behind the vote.

2) "See, your early play hit what we know of your town meta to a T, but your play since has basically been coasting, and you've actually spent a large part of the game completely disinterested in our reads, which is another trait that is unlike town Jason and more like scum Jason."

Which strikes me as backwards; Scotty voted BEFORE Jason "seemed"(I'm using quotes given 1) disinterested in scotty's read, this can't be a reason for the vote and if it is it should at least be presented with an example from before the vote.


If Scotty didn't just force that then I honestly don't know what your definition of forced is but for me that's a pretty damn good example of it. I'm happy to say I think at least one of them are scum, I've already given reasons why I don't think it's Jason and now I've given reasons why I think it's scotty; my vote stands.

[The Baltimore Sun]

Day 2, Votecount 10

ChannelDeliBird (3) - Plessiezarus, Zdenek, The Mini-Librarian

kuribo (2) - Cerulean, JasonT1981
JastonT1981 (2) - sottyrulez, ChannelDelibird
sottyrulez (1) - Nostredeus

Not voting (8) :

Benmage, Ser Arthur Dayne, Safetydance, Deasvail, BT, Kise, camn, kuribo

• With 16 alive it takes 9 to lynch.
  
• Deadline is on 22nd of February at 00:30am GMT
  
• Countdown to deadlien: (expired on 2013-02-21 20:30:28)
  
• No one is V/la

[sottyrulez]

Kuribo - what's your read on Cdb?

Kise - same question.

Not a fan at all of nostredeus' vote on Sotty. Didn't like kuribo's vote on Sotty either but he removed it so that's all good, but nostredeus' vote was awful on all kinds of levels. Nost. I'd like you to explain what you think Sotty!scum has to gain by spending day one hard defending Jason only to turn around and push him today. How was their interaction forced?

I'll make a real post tomorrow or Wednesday as will other head but now *sleep*

I dunno what to tell you here but frankly scotty comes in with

"Vote jason"

and demands a response to that vote, jason responds with

"Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it. "

to which scotty responds with

"You're not at all interested in what changed our opinion of you?"

Wow, that quote has been tragically snipped.

2 cops down, thats a great start.

Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it.

Honestly, not too bothered

. I've played with both Sotty and Zach many times, used to them changing stances on me. Though I have never known this tacit from either.

You're not at all interested in what changed our opinion of you?

Bold emphasis mine. He actually said he wasn't too bothered. This can't be anything but you changing the context of what actually happened.

then pushes hard with

"Please don't make me wait an entire weekend worth of time for a response this time."

as if Jason hadn't clearly pointed out he'd be V/LA over the weekend in question. Jason responds with

"I replied... I'm not wasting time by chasing after you asking why oh why did you change your mind... if you have a solid reason, you would have posted it by now."

which given that scotty hadn't posted a reason seems reasonable to me, scotty then does two weird things:

1) "So basically you care as much about what changed our position on you as you seemingly have about the game since about the halfway point of day 1?"

Which is clearly not what Jason is saying, maybe we're all speaking different languages but it looks to me like Jason is asking multiple times for the reasoning behind the vote.

Let's establish a couple of things here. Yes, Jason does declare V/LA. He tends to do this over weekends. I tend to devalue it because I know what he tends to do on those weekends, I know he has internet access, I know he's on the internet on the weekends, so I know he can post here if he really wants to.

Part of the purpose of the vote was to see how much he'd care about it. That was certainly accomplished one way or another, but you defending Jason by saying that I'm misrepping him when he directly said he wasn't too bothered is trying to rewrite events a little more than I'm comfortable with.

2) "See, your early play hit what we know of your town meta to a T, but your play since has basically been coasting, and you've actually spent a large part of the game completely disinterested in our reads, which is another trait that is unlike town Jason and more like scum Jason."

Which strikes me as backwards; Scotty voted BEFORE Jason "seemed"(I'm using quotes given 1) disinterested in scotty's read, this can't be a reason for the vote and if it is it should at least be presented with an example from before the vote.

I wasn't talking about just our read on him. I was talking about general disinterest in any of our reads. (This argument is meta based in nature, so I wouldn't expect you to actually understand the full context of the point I'm trying to make here, but you did change reads to read here.)

If Scotty didn't just force that then I honestly don't know what your definition of forced is but for me that's a pretty damn good example of it. I'm happy to say I think at least one of them are scum, I've already given reasons why I don't think it's Jason and now I've given reasons why I think it's scotty; my vote stands.

What leads you to believe this is a scum/town interaction? I'm not even convinced of that at this point because I'm not actually sure Jason is scum. I'm actually trying to figure that out.

[kuribo]

Why did you ask those questions in here instead of the QT? (Especially considering the nature of the first one)

because:

1) re: daytalk--- at the time I posted it, I wasn't aware that the town had already decided that faraday gives daytalk frequently. and on the whole, a neighborhood having daytalk isn't that big a deal, but I wanted your opinion regarding whether it meant the scum had daytalk as well

2) regarding the claim question--- you seemed to waffle at times about Dan's alignment, and I wanted the town to know you had offered to out your role. Not that I thought you actually WOULD have outted your role to him, but rather that you had offered and he had turned it down. I asked you in here because until I invite more people to the neighborhood, you and I are the only witnesses as to what goes down in there. And our alignments aren't known to one another.

That said, I'm still leaning town on you. I'm keeping in mind that game where we were scum together, and your play here feels more genuine.

[ChannelDelibird]

Just writing up something longer but I've got to say: Why is it so hard to grasp that finding a reason to vote better than "totally random" in the early stages does not enter me into some kind of honour-bound guarantee to go after absta later?

[BT]

Reading. In the meantime, CDB, what in my #1095 made you think scum?

[ChannelDelibird]

cdb - Why is DV one of your most confident town reads [

snip, rest of post addressed later -CDB

]?

See, here your just saying "too bad, we differ in views". Which if you are town, doesn't help anybody try to understand your mindset. You haven't discussed why you thought the post was compelling, you're just saying we see it differently from you and dismissing it.

Me saying "we differ in views on this post"

is

me helping you to understand my mindset. My mindset is that I don't think it helps the town to deeply analyse the DeasVail post in question because different people are going to agree and disagree with it without that split being based on alignment.

In 483, I agreed with DV on his explanation of why he felt McStab's posts did not comprise genuine scumhunting. I thought his approach to reading McStab (seeing the psychological pattern) was a town way of scumhunting, ironically the opposite of that of which he was accusing McStab. Not everyone will have seen it the same way but it struck a chord with me.

[ChannelDelibird]

Reading. In the meantime, CDB, what in my #1095 made you think scum?

I've made pretty much that exact post as scum more than once before. Coming back after a few pages to pick up on a single, more visible sentence, while promising a read and adding some specific names to investigate to make it look a bit more concentrated than a simple "I'm working on it".

[BT]

Fair enough, though I name whoever I'm looking at so people know what I think at that exact moment. For instance I'm curious about DV now because his only meaningful mention of Absta during D1 was this waffle, though actually he has some similar waffles in the same post so uh. If I recall correctly he managed to get some solid reads during D1 and I guess this one stayed misty so it's worth a note.

[ChannelDelibird]

what feels town about Kuribo?

ActionDan's emotional outburst struck me as a town player losing it, a more extreme case of "getting offended because how could anyone keep doubting I'm town".

Also, why are you basically following Sotty's lead on Jason, yet don't have any read on Sotty?

I'm not really following Sotty's lead on Jason - my read on Jason has been consistent. But it was logical to look at other options on Day 1 when Sotty vouched for him, regardless of Sotty's alignment. Either way, both of them could wait, and letting Sotty have her way on Jason could potentially be the most interesting way to get a better read on her slot later.

[sottyrulez]

On iso of Nostredeus:

So TML has had 0 heat all game which makes me sad, I suppose that can wait until Day 2; I might look at this once TML has more content to consider.

Do you think people

should

be looking at TML? If so, why?

(Looking at your iso, you seem to suggest that TML's 390 is scummy, but you say nothing as to why. Can't see any other mention of him at all.)

I'm unsure at the moment as to TML's alignment, I am worried about the lack of heat though

(I find that players who coast through Day 1 worry me)

; I don't think there's anything especially bad which is why I'm waiting for more content there before deciding either way. As for #390 my problem is TML saying he/she buys #351 but not voting Jason, personally when I said I liked #351 I gave analysis as to why it didn't convince me (namely that I don't see how it shows scum motivation but rather explains why the gambit was bad) given that TML didn't give that sort of analysis I can only assume TML likes #351 in the entirety which is then at odds with his/her vote on absta. *Shrugs*

Bold emphasis mine. One of my points is that Jason was coasting through toward the end of day one. I find it strange that you wouldn't acknowledge that point in attacking me while defending Jason.

I'm looking for the case on TGAH but can't find it, I'll keep at it to see if I agree but until then I'd only be sheeping and that won't help you guys establish reads and what not.

I'm open to being convinced though.

I missed this gem before. I know the traitor thing can be counterargued. Regardless it can also be argued as distancing from what was believed to be a mislynch as well because he says "he's open to being convinced" which means that someone else's points would ultimately be responsible for the lynch..

That feels really town; my real concern is that TGAH had the opportunity to respond to the case pless made in #633 and didn't, that's what I was personally looking for.

Not a fan of this nor DV's wishy-washiness... but this one more so.

The claim read like capitulation, scum caught... not town with fire that its a mislynch... No even "F"-off, just total blah.

Really? That's interesting, I supported a TGAH lynch based on #633 reasoning and said I'd hold off the hammer until deadline so that TGAH would have chance to answer; it seems like that's exactly what I'm doing, is there something wrong with that plan? If not then I'm not sure why me saying "that felt really town" is any different to DV saying it felt town, can you paint the distinction for me since you think one is worse than the other?

Oh man. Way too much justifying of a stance based on someone else's reasoning.

Interested to see some heat on SAD, who it's coming from worries me of course. #1016 is weak sauce and seems to be refuted in the quote SAD quotes but maybe that's just me reading it wrong? #1079 is half a wall of "zdenek is looking bad" with the final sentence of the first paragraph being "but nvm all of that because the claim will sort that out" it just makes the first paragraph largely worthless...

When were you ever suspicious of SAD? Looking through your iso you seem to write him off as town on day 1. This comes out of nowhere and feels like it's just fanning the flames for a wagon.

Unvote: Vote: Nostredeus

Why do you seem to want TML pursued while making no serious effort to go after him? What is your read of him now? I mean I'm not really seeing anything that looks like any kind of process in trying to read him, just you filing off an "uneasiness about his play" and then filing it away.

Also if you're interested in the heat on SAD now, what's flipped your position on him? (The explanations you give aren't exactly strong because you back away from some of the attacks as soon as you make them.) You were less interested in him on day one so this would be changing your position. I mean, that in itself isn't a problem, except that you seem to have found a pretty juicy line of attack on me for doing the same thing.

I'm filing Jason off as lazy town for now. I'm a lot less confident in that read now though.

[ChannelDelibird]

Here are my thoughts in regards to CDB's posts. From reading, there's an air of reservation in them that doesn't sit right with me.

A product of this being a large game with too many walls.

You voted TML in RVS, absta, SafetyDance, and finally TGAH, you dismissed the reasoning to vote absta as argumenting there were more interesing things going on; you had a vote on SafetyDance who you now have as leaning town. Your vote on TGAH comes at a point were the wagon is very much a given. As Cerulean points, you are now voting Jason out of a rekindlement with your D1 arguments only after a vote provided by a slot you don't have a read on. One of your most solid town reads is somebody you considered voting in #311 as an alternative to your SD vote, a wagon you preferred (#429) for even after you had stated thinking their push on Arthur seemed genuine in #311.

So, the question is: Why are you happy with your D1 votes again?

I'm happy with my Day 1 votes because they reflected how I felt at the time. The SafetyDance vote made sense at the time but the impression of him playing it too safe diminished as he got more into the game. You can make inferences about the timing of my TGAH vote if you like (it's not like I was posting and biding my time until the wagon looked inevitable, I simply wasn't there - and anyone will tell you that's not a tell either way for me) but I'm happy that I was on a scum lynch.

Re: DV, reads change. That's natural. There's a sliding scale of flexibility with one's opinions and it's scummy to be at either end, but it's not so strange that my view on DV might shift from considering a vote to having a solid town read on him.

[ChannelDelibird]

Will read over Jason's response to sotty a little later on today; sorry, because I know that being only in a defensive, responding-to-things-aimed-at-me-only mode is not actually all that protown, but I need a bit of a break.

[BT]

Don't like Sotty's Nost vote at a glance (haven't read their other posts for background but the post as a post is no) mostly because it's on Nost and their reasons are kind of nitpicky. Would you consider this your strongest choice for a vote right now? What do you think of people universally reading his D1 as town?

CDB, do you think DV's Absta waffle is circumstantial then? That didn't look like a reply to my post but whatever.

[sottyrulez]

Don't like Sotty's Nost vote at a glance (haven't read their other posts for background but the post as a post is no) mostly because it's on Nost and their reasons are kind of nitpicky. Would you consider this your strongest choice for a vote right now? What do you think of people universally reading his D1 as town?

People can be wrong? If he was universally read as town, I'm not seeing why.

~Duplicate post on Zachrulez deleted

[sottyrulez]

Grrr

Don't like Sotty's Nost vote at a glance (haven't read their other posts for background but the post as a post is no) mostly because it's on Nost and their reasons are kind of nitpicky. Would you consider this your strongest choice for a vote right now? What do you think of people universally reading his D1 as town?

People can be wrong? If he was universally read as town, I'm not seeing why.

[Nostredeus]

Oh you're voting me, I'm shocked, truly I am...

I suppose if you ignore all of the words around Jason saying "I'm not bothered" then I you can probably pretend that Jason only responded with "I'm not bothered", if however you go ahead and read all of Jason's stuff you'll see things like the line I quoted:

"I replied... I'm not wasting time by chasing after you asking why oh why did you change your mind... if you have a solid reason, you would have posted it by now."

Or directly from the same post you quoted:

"Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it."

I dunno how that can be read other than Jason wanting an explanation before responding.


With regards to V/LA, like, V/LA is V/LA I dunno why Jason can't post over the weekends but honestly I don't care as long as it is consistent both when Jason is town/scum; which, you know, it is...

Given that ^ there's probably a difference between someone coasting over a weekend when it's clearly not a scum-tell and someone coasting in the sense that they didn't have to respond to any heat on them for an entire in-game day; sure we've used the same words but frankly we have different meanings when we say "coasting" and yours is crap.


This stuff about how I've brought a read on SAD out of no where is really odd, given that you've just dragged a read out of no where on Jason after calling him town D1 I'm not sure who you think that's gunna be convincing? The difference between us is I gave reasons and allowed others to provide input on those reasons, you voted then gave reasons a number of posts later based on stuff that happened AFTER the vote.


The stuff on TML is a general worry/observation that no one has made any effort towards looking into TML, that's all I'm saying there, if I say something more you can read into that all you want but I recommend you wait for me to say something more first.


I'll vote based on other people's reasoning all I want, and change stance based on other people's reasoning too; see me changing stance on the mass name claim early D1, shockingly other people can have convincing thoughts too.


tl;dr: herp derp bro?

[BT]

@Sotty I don't feel like searching the thread for other people's reasons right now seeing as I have like 15 pages to read without it but I think my own town read started at this post. IIRC there was a wagon on him and his response to it was reasonable+.

[ChannelDelibird]

CDB, do you think DV's Absta waffle is circumstantial then? That didn't look like a reply to my post but whatever.

Hmm, I must have missed that at the time. I'm not sure what to make of it - it seems like something that he would have known would tie him to absta if he flipped scum, so it doesn't strike me as especially beneficial to say it for DVscum, but it does make for slightly uncomfortable reading. I still wouldn't touch DV today.

[BT]

It's ~*~a comment~*~. Without it DV would have completely skipped theoretical scumbuddy absta D1 when he had slight wagon potential and it came with a bunch of other waffles to make it blend in (yeah actually I don't like that part at all). Though I'm saying this right now without properly reading his newer posts so whatever. As I said, a note.

[BT]

By the way I see some really bad PoE on TML's part ("uhh automatic scumreads are a go"). These are the instances where you want to reconsider some of those reads / question if you gave out townclears too easily and I don't see you doing that. (Not scummy, just a complaint.)

[Zachrulez]

Oh you're voting me, I'm shocked, truly I am...

I suppose if you ignore all of the words around Jason saying "I'm not bothered" then I you can probably pretend that Jason only responded with "I'm not bothered", if however you go ahead and read all of Jason's stuff you'll see things like the line I quoted:

"I replied... I'm not wasting time by chasing after you asking why oh why did you change your mind... if you have a solid reason, you would have posted it by now."

Or directly from the same post you quoted:

"Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it."

I dunno how that can be read other than Jason wanting an explanation before responding.

It can be read by interpreting him saying he's not too bothered meaning that he's actually not too bothered. Are you actually being serious here? Really?

It's not insignificant that you omitted him saying that either.

With regards to V/LA, like, V/LA is V/LA I dunno why Jason can't post over the weekends but honestly I don't care as long as it is consistent both when Jason is town/scum; which, you know, it is...

Given that ^ there's probably a difference between someone coasting over a weekend when it's clearly not a scum-tell and someone coasting in the sense that they didn't have to respond to any heat on them for an entire in-game day; sure we've used the same words but frankly we have different meanings when we say "coasting" and yours is crap.

It wasn't just about that V/LA. (It is part of it, but it's not

everything

in regards to the coasting.) That post was my annoyance with him going on V/LA and delaying any progress in a read on him over the weekend.

This stuff about how I've brought a read on SAD out of no where is really odd, given that you've just dragged a read out of no where on Jason after calling him town D1 I'm not sure who you think that's gunna be convincing? The difference between us is I gave reasons and allowed others to provide input on those reasons, you voted then gave reasons a number of posts later based on stuff that happened AFTER the vote.

You flipped, made a weak attempt to explain your change in position, and didn't even put a vote behind it. What's the crux of what is scummy about my play if your similar play there was not? The fact that I didn't immediately explain the vote? The fact that I actually voted based on my changed read? (A play that generally accomplishes more than not voting.)

Not to not immediately explaining, part of purpose of the play was to get reactions

before

explaining the vote. If I say I intend to explain the vote and eventually do, what does it matter if it's not immediately when cast? It just seems like you're opportunistically attacking me for breaking some concept of expected play meta.

The stuff on TML is a general worry/observation that no one has made any effort towards looking into TML, that's all I'm saying there, if I say something more you can read into that all you want but I recommend you wait for me to say something more first.

See you're putting the fact that no one is interested in looking into TML on the town. You have a vote. You have the ability to question and pressure to try to get a better read. You're not doing that in regards to TML. The result of your action is an attempt to cast a dark cloud (and somewhat vaguely.) over TML while putting the onus on the town to actually pursue him. It shouldn't be hard to see why I find it hard to see that coming from a pro-town mindset.

I'll vote based on other people's reasoning all I want, and change stance based on other people's reasoning too; see me changing stance on the mass name claim early D1, shockingly other people can have convincing thoughts too.

tl;dr: herp derp bro?

I'm not saying other people can't have convincing thoughts. I'm saying that it's concerning that your positions follow (and seem to depend on.) other people's convincing thoughts. This is a great way to avoid responsibility for lynches, and also a great way to put that responsibility on others. It's a great position for scum to be in.

[sottyrulez]

Oh you're voting me, I'm shocked, truly I am...

I suppose if you ignore all of the words around Jason saying "I'm not bothered" then I you can probably pretend that Jason only responded with "I'm not bothered", if however you go ahead and read all of Jason's stuff you'll see things like the line I quoted:

"I replied... I'm not wasting time by chasing after you asking why oh why did you change your mind... if you have a solid reason, you would have posted it by now."

Or directly from the same post you quoted:

"Not too sure what to make of Sottys vote TBH it is kinda weird they want me to respond to their vote before explaining it."

I dunno how that can be read other than Jason wanting an explanation before responding.

It can be read by interpreting him saying he's not too bothered meaning that he's actually not too bothered. Are you actually being serious here? Really?

It's not insignificant that you omitted him saying that either.

With regards to V/LA, like, V/LA is V/LA I dunno why Jason can't post over the weekends but honestly I don't care as long as it is consistent both when Jason is town/scum; which, you know, it is...

Given that ^ there's probably a difference between someone coasting over a weekend when it's clearly not a scum-tell and someone coasting in the sense that they didn't have to respond to any heat on them for an entire in-game day; sure we've used the same words but frankly we have different meanings when we say "coasting" and yours is crap.

It wasn't just about that V/LA. (It is part of it, but it's not

everything

in regards to the coasting.) That post was my annoyance with him going on V/LA and delaying any progress in a read on him over the weekend.

This stuff about how I've brought a read on SAD out of no where is really odd, given that you've just dragged a read out of no where on Jason after calling him town D1 I'm not sure who you think that's gunna be convincing? The difference between us is I gave reasons and allowed others to provide input on those reasons, you voted then gave reasons a number of posts later based on stuff that happened AFTER the vote.

You flipped, made a weak attempt to explain your change in position, and didn't even put a vote behind it. What's the crux of what is scummy about my play if your similar play there was not? The fact that I didn't immediately explain the vote? The fact that I actually voted based on my changed read? (A play that generally accomplishes more than not voting.)

Not to not immediately explaining, part of purpose of the play was to get reactions

before

explaining the vote. If I say I intend to explain the vote and eventually do, what does it matter if it's not immediately when cast? It just seems like you're opportunistically attacking me for breaking some concept of expected play meta.

The stuff on TML is a general worry/observation that no one has made any effort towards looking into TML, that's all I'm saying there, if I say something more you can read into that all you want but I recommend you wait for me to say something more first.

See you're putting the fact that no one is interested in looking into TML on the town. You have a vote. You have the ability to question and pressure to try to get a better read. You're not doing that in regards to TML. The result of your action is an attempt to cast a dark cloud (and somewhat vaguely.) over TML while putting the onus on the town to actually pursue him. It shouldn't be hard to see why I find it hard to see that coming from a pro-town mindset.

I'll vote based on other people's reasoning all I want, and change stance based on other people's reasoning too; see me changing stance on the mass name claim early D1, shockingly other people can have convincing thoughts too.

tl;dr: herp derp bro?

I'm not saying other people can't have convincing thoughts. I'm saying that it's concerning that your positions follow (and seem to depend on.) other people's convincing thoughts. This is a great way to avoid responsibility for lynches, and also a great way to put that responsibility on others. It's a great position for scum to be in.

[sottyrulez]

@Sotty I don't feel like searching the thread for other people's reasons right now seeing as I have like 15 pages to read without it but I think my own town read started at this post. IIRC there was a wagon on him and his response to it was reasonable+.

Well that tells me you have a town read on him, but that's a far cry from universal. I'm not going to go back and reread day 1 just to verify your statement that he had a universal town read either.

[Cerulean]

Pless - the read on sad will probably come tomorrow or Thursday. I had him leaning town for a few minor things; he's at least not screaming scum at me the way he was in the game we recently finished. Empire wants me to read through the scum game he posted and go over my thought with him. We both have really busy Tuesday's so that probably won't happen until tomorrow.

I'll respond to other things in a bit.