AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - Why arent we aloud to see the "Discussion boards"

My main beef is, the holy "DM DISCUSSION BOARD", Why is it that no one gets to see it but the dms. I mean i understand not letting the populace as a hole not see it, but if it has to do with your request its stupid that you cant see it.

I mean how do you know exactly why the dms said NO. What if two or three dms plain out just Dont Like you, I mean is that reason for them to say no.

Has that happened, has someone been denied because a dm refused them do to a simply conflict. No one will ever know, as we cant see what the dms say about are request. I mean how often does this line get tossed about.

We just don't "FEEL IT" is what where "LOOKING FOR", I mean for things where one should be aloud to explore and find out whats fantastical and what not why should it matter What feels right to the persons not playing.
I mean honestly, a real reason is a real reson no need to make them up.

Simply say hey we dont want full demons or half demon, not we dont "FEEL" your willing to play it the way it needs to be played.

Simply say hey, Your fairy idea was dumb and we dont want a bunch of monk fairies running around. Don't fluff it and say its not the what where "LOOKING FOR".

But I digress, The point is why cant the person who wrote the request see every dms opinion on it. Why do the have something to hide about why we cant see. I mean I personaly think listening to them critize are work on the request whould prove beneficial for future request.

If we cut off all the other reasons, which may be debated, it's techically impossible to allow just one person to read their topic on the DM forums and keep it away from other people. Well, I guess it could be done by moving around a lot of topics and setting and resetting a lot of settings for each and every player when their topic is in discussion and when it's back out of discussion... but that just isn't gonna happen, sorry.

I don't actually think even that would be possible without creating more temporary forums on the boards. That would mean a new forum for each and every DC discussion, though. You can't give access to a certain topic in a certain forum, and block people from the others.

And well... we are a benevolent self-appointed dictatorship, not a publically elected democracy. We reserve rights for private discussion in some matters.

Nekhy wrote:

And well... we are a benevolent self-appointed dictatorship, not a publically elected democracy. We reserve rights for private discussion in some matters.

*Watches Nekhy slam her iron fist.* :twisted:

Aside from that anyway, I don't think we should be permitted to see the discussions about requests at all. You place the request, it's discussed amongst the DM body, and then you're notified if it's accepted/declined. Simple, and doesn't need a change.

Just make sure in your request you try and outline every detail of why you should be granted the request. (Such as understanding the race you've chosen thoroughly, the attributes of their personalities and such, for example.)

Not to mention the simple fact that some people can't take criticism and it would no doubt cause a lot more DM/player conflicts when the players disagreed with the reasoning. *

*Note: If you disagree with that then I hate you.

This way you can also IMAGINE how they go about deciding. I like to think it involves a chicken, grain and the stock market.

Lascivar wrote:

*Watches Nekhy slam her iron fist.* :twisted:

Nah, it's said matter-of-factly. There's no going around the fact, that we are a self-appointed, self-regulated dictatorship and that's all that should be expected of us. We do aim and want to be a benevolent dictatorship, that regulates itself well and keeps things as fair as the circumstances allow, and adheres to internal democracy etc etc. But we're still a dictatorship, that ultimately sets its own rules. You either trust us to be fair, or you don't.

What was it they said about absolute power..?

Nekhy wrote:

Lascivar wrote:

*Watches Nekhy slam her iron fist.* :twisted:

Nah, it's said matter-of-factly. There's no going around the fact, that we are a self-appointed, self-regulated dictatorship and that's all that should be expected of us. We do aim and want to be a benevolent dictatorship, that regulates itself well and keeps things as fair as the circumstances allow, and adheres to internal democracy etc etc. But we're still a dictatorship, that ultimately sets its own rules. You either trust us to be fair, or you don't.

>_> It was a joke and stuff..

allowed*

Nekhy wrote:

If we cut off all the other reasons, which may be debated, it's techically impossible to allow just one person to read their topic on the DM forums and keep it away from other people.

Well maybe not in the seven years old phpBB2, vBulletin however does have this ability. Though I don't support the idea.

My main beef is, the holy "DM DISCUSSION BOARD", Why is it that no one gets to see it but the dms. I mean i understand not letting the populace as a hole not see it, but if it has to do with your request its stupid that you cant see it.

"DM DISCUSSION BOARD", Why is it that no one gets to see it but the dms.

see it but the dms

DM DISCUSSION BOARD

dms

The Incognitos wrote:

What was it they said about absolute power..?

Yeah, it corrupts etc. Glad the DMs don't have absolute power, then. We don't force anyone to play in our dictatorship, after all, but everyone does it by their own choice and free will, hopefully because they enjoy it, as well.

Anyway, if you'd like to hear the comments you can always ask.

Nekhy wrote:

The Incognitos wrote:

What was it they said about absolute power..?

Yeah, it corrupts etc. Glad the DMs don't have absolute power, then. We don't force anyone to play in our dictatorship, after all, but everyone does it by their own choice and free will, hopefully because they enjoy it, as well.

Anyway, if you'd like to hear the comments you can always ask.

Yes, comparing a political concept like equal rights to a game world is silly(I really mean that, I was trying to make a smug joke with the whole absolute power thing).

Last edited by TormakSaber on Sat, May 23 2009, 9:31 AM, edited 1 time in total.

Private discussion is a necessity. t's part of the DM/player hing. Sometimes you just don't get to see behind the curtain. I'm sorry your earlier PC requests were denied, and that you feel it was because it was personal against you: I assure you it wasn't.

Due to the nature of the more exotic and out there races, we do have to reserve judgment for the ones that we feel will be best for the server. It's a privilege, not a right, to play these 'oddball' races. Sometimes requests get denied because, yes, "we don't feel it fits into Amia" or other various reasons.

I also assure you that requests are not denied simply because of a personal beef. I'm sure some may take this the wrong way and others will interpret it for what it is: I am one of the people that headline requests. If the reason ever comes up "I simply don't like this person", they are asked to abstain from the discussion, or look at the item/request on its own merits. Requests are not passed or declined based on personal bias. I will be the first to admit it has come up. "I really really don't like this person." Normally the DM abstains from the requets discussion to avoid bias. In unavoidable cases, the reasonings are given, and there are a large percentage of requests where the reason the request was approved was in fact because of the aforementioned biased-against-the-player DM.

DM bias re: personal thoughts happens because we're human. Some of us don't like each other. It comes down to having faith in the DM team that we're doing the right thing. We may be an "internally elected socialistic benevolt dictatorship" or whatever fancy political works Nekh wans to use, but at the core, we're people too. People dedicated to keeping the server safe, fun, and fair.

On top of the previously mentioned reasons, we have a simpler reason for moving requests: Organization. The DM DC Item Request forum is chock full of stickies. Every sticky represents a separate request. Right now there are... 22 stickies, and some of them are combination requests. There are a dozen more in the forum that require specific scripting by Disco. Those 22 represent ones that don't need unique scripting. On top of that, there are requests that are *unstickied* but unlocked. This means the request is "on hold", by request of the player, perhaps, or the request is approved, but the player doesn't have the DCs, or etc. I'm not even going to count that backlog. It's prodigious, it really is. There's a lot going on there, and we need 2 separate forums *just* for DC Item Requests. Robert, Kjetta, and I all spend a great deal of time trying to ensure requests flow smoothy.

To use a phrase Cobbit mentioned earlier tonight on the DM forums, "We're not just DMs, we're fungineers."

To conclude: Have some faith and trust in us. We try to show the same for you guys, we really do. PM boxes are always open for questions re: your request, and I'm sure more than a few people can vouch for the fact that we try to keep in PM conversation with requesters to try to keep them up to date, either of our own volition or at the requester's... request. I'm sorry we can't show you the DM forums. But that's how it goes. Some dice rolls just get made behind the big laminated screen.

EDIT: Clarified a few sentences, fixed a... very sentnece changing typo.

The Incognitos wrote:

What was it they said about absolute power..?

That I must have it?

Why cant you see the DM DISCUSSION BOARD?

Hmm maybe because its the DM!!!! Discussion Board. Are you a DM?

No

Hence you cant see it. K thnx bye

The Incognitos wrote:

Yes, comparing a political concept like equal rights to a game world is silly(I really mean that, I was trying to make a smug joke with the whole absolute power thing).

My technical terminology should be taken with a pinch of salt. When I write long essays, that require very umm... proper and square use of language, it gets everywhere. Disco got upset at me for talking about "being dehydrated" when I was thirsty, so it's that bad. :roll:

Draken Runeblade wrote:

My main beef is, the holy "DM DISCUSSION BOARD", Why is it that no one gets to see it but the dms. I mean i understand not letting the populace as a hole not see it, but if it has to do with your request its stupid that you cant see it.

I mean how do you know exactly why the dms said NO. What if two or three dms plain out just Dont Like you, I mean is that reason for them to say no.

Has that happened, has someone been denied because a dm refused them do to a simply conflict. No one will ever know, as we cant see what the dms say about are request. I mean how often does this line get tossed about.

the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Quote:

the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

You mean "just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen"?

I am telling you as sincerely as I can, that we do everything in our power to never approve or deny based on personal feelings regarding the player.

It could happen, but it doesn't really happen. Our self-regulation regarding biases works pretty well. If there's a chance of bias, real or assumed, it'll be pointed out by other DMs.

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

You mean "just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen"?

I am telling you as sincerely as I can, that we do everything in our power to never approve or deny based on personal feelings regarding the player.

kind of ment it as both

as "most" people have lack of evidence for both sides of the argument.

I trust the DMs to work as fairly as possible. I don't need to see what they're doing, since almost everything there is stuff I shouldn't see.

Draken Runeblade wrote:

My main beef is, the holy "DM DISCUSSION BOARD", Why is it that no one gets to see it but the dms.

Simple: Kjetta posts dirty pictures in there. We would have to ban him if he did it in a public forum.

Nah, the real reason is simply that they don't want to have to give up there dirty conversations.

We know, we know.

Last edited by Yurell on Sat, May 23 2009, 11:36 AM, edited 1 time in total.

Guys, being sarcastic doesn't make someone whose annoyed problems go away. Denigration just makes things worse.

I am afraid my comment isn't that far from the truth.

Yurell wrote:

Guys, being sarcastic doesn't make someone whose annoyed problems go away. Denigration just makes things work.

So confused.

Denigration just makes things work?

Someone slander/defame me, i wanna know if my things will work!

Teaches me not to post while conversing on MSN ... 'worse', which you evidently identified judging by your humour.
Fixed.

Draken Runeblade wrote:

Simply say hey we dont want full demons or half demon, not we dont "FEEL" your willing to play it the way it needs to be played.

Simply say hey, Your fairy idea was dumb and we dont want a bunch of monk fairies running around. Don't fluff it and say its not the what where "LOOKING FOR".

That bit, I believe, falls under common courtesy. I'm not happy when I have to deliver news of a denied request. It honestly bums me to shoot down someone's hopes and ideas, no matter how bad they are. So I try to be nice about the denial. I think it's the decent and courteous thing to do.

Of course there are some people who would prefer blunt answers instead of discretion and politeness. I belive those people are a minority, though, and most of them just say they'd prefer that but would be just as bummed if the news were first delivered bluntly.

I guess I could start sending PMs such as "Your character request was stupid and gimmicky" or "You're just not good enough a role-player" or even "Are you kidding me, that's ridicilous!" because those often are the reasons for denial, at the core of it. I wager it's going to anger more players than the opposite method, though. By all means, if anyone of you wants the version that isn't "sugar-coated" in what I believe is just common courtesy and good manners, feel free to ask. But don't be pissed if we tell you your request was just completely retarded.

Hell, imagine how troublesome it would be to have temporary authorization to read the dm forum just because you made a request. The player would take the opportunity to peek into other topics and would discover things that would disturb the balance.

I honestly think that the only necessary thing when someone says a no to anyone is to explain why. If both prefer it not to be public, do this in a PM. I got a request approved and a request denied in a PM and I asked the DM with the bad news why and I understood the explanation. I don't need anything more than that.

IMO you don't really want to see the entire discussion on your request anyway, just the nutshell version. Being able to address two words in some paragraph somewhere will probably not help your request. The likelihood of your request being a success largely depends on what you as a person do or have done to back it up.

Wait theres dirty pictures?

Alright change of heart we all should be able to see the dm forums.

We got a full archive of porn bot material there, too.

From what I could gather, the OP's argument is that they want to see why their request will get rejected.

The simple answer is to just ask the DM(s) that rejected the request why.

You do not need a detailed account of what was said and by whom about a request.

I like to think of DM forums in the same manner as I would an IC faction.
I.e. Let them get on with their thing, the results will emerge eventually and you deal with them appropriately. Either by making minor/major adjustments or not bother.

But it's also true that in respond to the request, the DM should explain why it didn't get approved, and possibly give tips how to improve it.

Last edited by IronAngel on Sat, May 23 2009, 15:38 PM, edited 1 time in total.

I'm a bit hesitant to go into detail, because I'm frankly not eager to tell a player whom I know to be immature (hence the denial in the first place) that his RP and request both suck and he should go buy a new imagination. Or alternately, I don't want to hurt the feelings of a nice, mature player who tried his best but just didn't meet the standards.

The majority of denials aren't for as blatant reasons as the former, of course, but it's an extreme example. Apparently I'm beating around the bush when I tell "Unfortunately, we feel your request isn't quite up to the standards we hold for special races and that the server wouldn't benefit from such a character. Thanks for the effort, though!" but I don't really want to be blunter than that. What else could I say? Usually, there aren't specific details that sink a request: if the problem is a mistake in lore, a misunderstanding of server rules or another similar, fixable aspect, it's pointed out to the requester. Most of the time when a request is turned down, there aren't such clear, specific reasons that can be pointed out. Well, apart from "It's lame and gimmicky" or "You're not a good role-player" and I have no right to tell that to anyone's face. It's outright rude.

I also don't want to give too much tips on how to make ridicilous requests tolerable so that we have to approve them. (Edit:) Of course we're not forced to approve them even then, but it would be quite unfair to point out the problems in a request and say it can't be approved until they're fixed, and then refuse to approve the request after all when the player's fixed those issues.

Last edited by xdrone561x on Sat, May 23 2009, 16:16 PM, edited 1 time in total.

tormak and the rest of the dms, i think you should be applauded. Seriously, you could have come forth and said in so many words to piss off and mind you business. However you didn't, i read through most of the dms posts(sorry players, most comments did come of as sarcasm) And i would say those answers if they do not help, should be re-read again. Thoughtful, concise, and polite, you guys should be commended.

IronAngel wrote:

<snip>

I agree, but the point was -if- there is a chance where you can give a player some constructive feedback and still be subtle, you should be arsed to do it. And you should just give tips how to make ridiculous requests less ridiculous and more bearable. Of course this is self-evident.

We try todo that, yeah. Well, I can't speak for others, but at least I do. But if someone wants to play a devil, I'm not going to give a step-by-step guide on how to get approval for something we really don't want to approve. Instead, I might brainstorm with the player and offer some alternatives. Obviously though, I can't do that with every request

This is largely a non-issue, I think. You dont get to see everything your government does (or the representatives thereof), and the DMs are certainly more autocratic than most governments, unless maybe you live in Myanmar or China.

If I would suggest any change in the way the DM forums are handled, it would be to leave requests in the public forums and simply provide a link to the OP from the discussion in the DM Request forums.

This way it would be possible for players to remember exactly what was requested and refer back to it in case of misunderstandings. Posts could be locked when linked to the DM forums and a final addendum added upon approval (or refusal), e.g "Approved, 10 DCs"

This way we'd have a reference base for future requests.

Oh, and make the DM porn accessible on proof of age of majority. :twisted:

Xaviera wrote:

Oh, and make the DM porn accessible on proof of age of majority. :twisted:

If you can't find your own, you're doing something wrong.

DMs have better porn because they're... like... DMs!

We got Harry Potter porn, yeah.

IronAngel wrote:

"You're not a good role-player"

I never really understood that.

Why would a DC request ever be denied, because the player isn't considered to be a good enough role-player?

Why would you give DCs to that player in the first place, if he's not a good role-player? Isn't that was DCs do? Reward good role-play?

OK OK this was just something i posted last night before bed, I wasn't meaning that my stuff gets turned down on personal bias, I was actually hoping to see what the other players had to say.

Granted someone did say, and i think its true allowing person by person basis is something completely doable in today's modern post boards.

However I do Agree with Nehcky about the fact that it may cause a whole lot of beef with those that don't accept criticism well. And I think it would be more beneficial, to have it occur in the manner to which was mentioned late about the dm's not necessarily every dm, gives a little back to the feedback to the player.

And whether or not people take criticism well if they ever want to have a character that does get approved I think that hearing that stuff will in effect make more complete and fulfilling characters.

Its been to many times i have read over other request, and someone said

Bill
Blue half dragon

done

I mean there is obviously a whole forum about it that people either ignore or just don't care to follow. And Telling somebody ... Your a moron read the forum just doesn't work.

I personally am just fine without seeing the discussion.

Sometimes you just dont want to know what they're saying.

lol.

>.<

Mr Mago wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

"You're not a good role-player"

I never really understood that.

Why would a DC request ever be denied, because the player isn't considered to be a good enough role-player?

Why would you give DCs to that player in the first place, if he's not a good role-player? Isn't that was DCs do? Reward good role-play?

"DC requests" is a catch-all term for stuff people request from DMs, other than plots and events. Special characters don't, for example, cost DCs unless you want custom skins.

Quote:

Granted someone did say, and i think its true allowing person by person basis is something completely doable in today's modern post boards.

However, not doable on our boards. What other forums can do doesn't help a lot here, we gotta work with what we got. We aren't planning on swapping the boards, given transferring four years worth of stuff over is not possible.

Mr Mago wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

"You're not a good role-player"

I never really understood that.

Why would a DC request ever be denied, because the player isn't considered to be a good enough role-player?

Why would you give DCs to that player in the first place, if he's not a good role-player? Isn't that was DCs do? Reward good role-play?

I think he was aiming that more at the requests for races and the sort, in which I can definitely see how people could be turned down for their role-playing skill, or lack thereof.

Some races require a lot of research to play correctly and the lore to be followed a little more strict than other races. Some easy examples:

Half-Devils/Half-Demons that have no knowledge of the Blood War or why they should hate one another.

Half-Dragons that cuddlefart with other dragonkin/races that their particular type shouldn't be.

Aasimar Blackguards and Tiefling Paladins make me cry a little inside, but I can live with them, I guess.

Actually, to address Mago's point:

Yes, being rewarded a race should warrant some measure of quality RP that contributes to the server. If you cannot see it that way, then let me spin you something to explain.

Two players make a request to play, say a Half-Dragon since that's a popular one. Both properly and efficiently complete their request for sake of arguement.

Player A is a regular RPer who albeit has rough moments like anyone else, has nonetheless made great efforts to provide interesting RP wherever they go and whatever they do. Though at times they have had conflicts ICly and OOCly, they have made efforts where they could to mitigate the effects of this.

Player B is someone who RPs but does not seem as interested in RPing as much as the aspect of being the Biggest, Strongest, Best *whatever*. Their RP has at times come off as abrasive and disruptive to other players. However, they have at times shown a capacity and potential for great, and pleasant RP which can be enjoyed.

It's fairly obvious, A is the more likely to get the request straight off. BUT , I imagine that if Player B did show potential as I implied in the end, the DMs may refuse initially, but if he/she/it's willing to listen to criticism, and mend their ways, then B can themselves have the request successfully as well.

Not everyone's open to giving oppritunities.. this is sad to me but I acknowledge it can happen and is the right of people to choose.

I will bet money some of the older players probably rolled their eyes when I came back, at least internally. I will bet it.

As for item DC requests, If I may pull back the Curtain from past experiences, I'll tell you what typically went through my mind if I was in a position to answer such a request:

1) The Feasibility of the Item: Both from a Server balance standpoint, and from a Scripting/NWN item making standpoint. Could it be done? Would it unbalance the Server?

2) The effort and RP spent into making the item possible: Both from what's already gone into the process, and what potential RP CAN stem from it if the Player is willing to accept the responsibility for entering into the needed efforts.

3) What kind of possible problems could arise from allowing such an item into the existance? Does this open the door and set a precedent for others to create similar items and if so, take all my thoughts into account for point 1 and re-work them to take into account what would happen if MORE of this item were to make their way in.

It's not a simple process, I know this for a fact. It's not easy for the DM's to make these decisions.

Either way, Tormak pointed out a valid point to leave off with: Yes, they are humans, they have flaws. I do know though that there is something within each DM or staff member on this server that also makes them valid for making these decisions: A passion for their works as DMs , as Fungineers (to coin Cobbit's wise words) , and as Storytellers.

Yep, DMs are human, and there can be players that certain DMs are biased against. But there are enough DMs on the team to balance us all out and keep us in check. Even if most of the team somehow manages to dislike a player, I would say most (if not all) of the team is level-headed enough to either not comment, or view the request from an objective point of view.

Players have always been free to send a PM to check on the status of their request, and add anything they think would help it get approved. There have been numerous instances of requests getting modified and improved through PM or MSN discussions.

By the way, feel free to poke me and tell me to look at and comment more on the DC Request Forums. I'll admit that's an area I need to personally improve on, and I tend to get distracted and forget.

Mr Mago wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

"You're not a good role-player"

I never really understood that.

Why would a DC request ever be denied, because the player isn't considered to be a good enough role-player?

Why would you give DCs to that player in the first place, if he's not a good role-player? Isn't that was DCs do? Reward good role-play?

I can field this one, because it is an issue I wrestled with after becoming a DM. I asked myself the exact same question, and for quite a long time, never had an answer. The linger question with no answer made me feel awkward putting in my two cents on Requests because I kept thinking about it.

That's when I started concentrating on how I run things in the Client, versus how I think when I read a person's request. In the original post, Darak mentions that there may be DMs who say no to a DC request because they do not "like" a given player. "Like" is the wrong word. "Trust" is the proper term.

Let me give you the Truth about how this works.

Naturally, there are players DMs do not care for. And vice versa. Our team, in spite of our very casual manner of speaking with one another and sometimes the playerbase, is professional. Some of you may be surprised about how paranoid some of us are about DM abuse and watching to make sure personal feelings aren't becoming reckless and unnecessary. We simply do not say no to requests based upon whether we like or dislike a player...though sometimes, there is the, "I'm not sure I care for this request because I've had X issue with the player."

That's why I call this an issue of Trust. We do not deny requests because we do not like a person, but rather because that person has done something to make them untrustworthy in our eyes. Rulebreakers will inevitably have a harder time with DC requests, until you prove to us that you've overcome your naughty ways.

And to put a pin in Mago's question, the same one I had for so long - it is possible for someone to be an excellent roleplayer and thus earn DCs in the module, but to also be completely untrustworthy if given the reins of a particular DC request. For example, an excellent RP'er with a penchant for getting into PvP trouble...are we going to give them their DC request of Aweomeness +5 when we know that it is just going to give them an even greater advantage in totally wrecking the enjoyment of his/her fellow players?

As far as telling players why their request was denied, I believe that I always have done so the few times I've responded to someone who was denied. I do not personally believe it is fair to say, "The answer is no."

I do not believe that you are entitled to know a pull of the vote and which DM felt which way, but I think you need to know what's wrong. The hardest person I ever had to do this to was Gravemaskin, to my memory. And not only did he take it well, but he also took the criticism seriously and, IMO, became a better RP'er for it, and eventually did get exactly what he'd wanted when he satisfied the DM Team's concerns.

However, I do not usually mess around with DC requests. That's one of my failures as a DM and Tormak will rue my laziness and unwillingness to really be involved in the process forever, hehe. He and Ron and Robert and Iron and Kjetta all do a great job fielding them, anyway. To me, so many of you seem like you either feel you have a sense of entitlement to your DC Request and don't have to put in any genuine blood, sweat and tears, or you try to impress us with this ludicrous glut of obscure canon lore from some sourcebook or FR fiction novel, stuff that is almost entirely uninteresting to me because it displays a severe lack of one of my personal favorite qualities: original thought (the bane of most loremasters.)

There are a handful of requests that, to me, have that quality of original thought, and those are the ones I will usually make a post or several in. Otherwise, I'm largely disinterested. Doesn't mean I'll say "no", of course. Just means I might say nothing at all because I never read more than the original post. :wink:

Yossarin wrote:

<snip>

As far as telling players why their request was denied, I believe that I always have done so the few times I've responded to someone who was denied. I do not personally believe it is fair to say, "The answer is no."

<snip>

You know, I am going through a similar situation and I am still waiting a reply to those PMs. Or at least some of those. Or even one of those.

I believe you know what I mean, Yossi. [[EDIT: As do Gers and Robert, since I PMed them asking for a reply because none was coming.]]

Sarcasm was not intended, and I am sorry if it sounded like it.

But I am just, you know... waiting.

Why arent we aloud to see the "Discussion boards"

Who is online