I'm all for the Shadowrun future where CBS/Paramount hire me for extralegal enforcement. Because so many dollars there!
That said, the arbiter of contracts and application of law is the government, through the actions of the multiple court systems and the force of their findings. This is true for a variety of countries.
The only thing that really forces anyone to pay (aside from cyborg hitmen) is a court order - which carries the possible penalty of contempt/imprisonment. We are returning very quickly to a Dickensian society of debtors prisons. The for profit prisons need as many customers as they can find. So, yes, it is the government both deciding and enforcing copyrights.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Whatever the reason, after six Episodes Chris is out and now so is Vic. A loss for fans.
The other long running series, Star Trek: New Voyages has been around for just about twelve years and has had many guests from various Series, Gene Roddenberry Jr, D.C. Fontana, David Gerrold, Majel Barrett, and Marc Scott Zicree.
Yeah, even after CBS had no problem with them, allowed certain scripts, rejected another, they too are toast. Those people listed above should have known better and not gotten involved in something that would be not allowed at some future date. Good thing CBS doesn't have access to Temporal Agents who could go back and stop production.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
Chris and Vic for STO, Chris for a part in one of the new movies.
I did not read that, it is my take based upon the Rules just released. The shows also cannot be more than two fifteen minute segments. Continues is normally at least around 40-50.
Just watched a YouTube Interview with Vic and TrekZone filmed a few weeks before the new CBS Rules. To say he was p*ssed then about the shenanigans by Axanar would be an understatement. He did send them a follow-up letter after the Rules came out and stated he doesn't know how that would affect his productions, which is a labor of love. During the interview he did state that he has thrown in about $150k of his own savings into production.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Maybe CBS should sell Star Trek soft-canon franchises. You pay an affordable sum for a franchize, then you can produce works for profit. All of your stories need to fall within approved soft-canon guidelines, and have limits on distribution media, but then you get to produce web series, and CBS gets a cut of your profits.
Seems like a win win for larger scale productions like Continues, Renegades, New Voyages and Axanar.
The discussion begins about 20 minutes in. I'm still listening at the moment, but here are some highlights:
These are just GUIDELINES to avoid legal action.
These only apply to FAN FILMS, at least for now (audio dramas, fan fiction, fan art, podcasts are NOT mentioned).
You DO NOT HAVE TO ONLY BUY OFFICIALLY LICENSED ITEMS... you are free to make your own costumes and props.
If you DO purchase your costumes or props, they must be officially licensed.
Very interesting stuff, and there's a lot more in the discussion. They also mention that this week's ENGAGE podcast will have a Q&A about this with CBS.
CBS is full of generosity these days. I am sure the Q&A will make all the disgruntled fans disperse away and help make everyone realise how good these guidelines are for everyone, including Trek. Only moronic mad person would refuse.
Considering CBS/Paramount could have said: "No more Star Trek fan films...period."
And then could have issued blanket DCMAs to YouTube, Vimeo, etc. to get every current fan film posted removed; yes, they ARE indeed being generous with this.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
How is sexting got any relevance to this? lol...
Saying it's about revenge and resentment would of sufficed.
Nope, the scenario had to be outlined properly to appreciate the level of inapropriateness/betrayal...
Besides, posting the pic of Jean-Luc when Beverly started asking for child-support for Wesley, that's really irrelevant
You're comparing a IP property to sexting pictures of someone's spouse is relevant in what world?
The gif is from the episode 'The Drumhead'. And it has more relevance here than trying to create feelings of sympathy for CBS.
The fact you think I'm talking about the IP, is a pretty sad state of affairs... I was talking about Alec Peters behaviour with regards scamming donors by using their love for Star Trek, to fund his own for-profit business... The comparison to someone behaving inappropriately to someone else's spouse, is one of a lack of respect, impropriety, and betrayal... If you still claim to not get it, I'll have no choice but to consider your comments as deliberately disingenuous...
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
The fact that rules exist does not mean that rules will be followed or uniformly enforced.
Precisely. Vic said in the linked podcast, that CBS reserving all rights, meant they were reserving all rights, such as the right to allow one thing, but not to allow another... I suspect Star Trek Continues will, somehow, continue...
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
This doesn't happen except as part of a single class action. The sums are too small individually for anyone to pursue this fantasy.
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
This doesn't happen except as part of a single class action. The sums are too small individually for anyone to pursue this fantasy.
Really? I thought people were able to take people to the small claims court for costs upto $5000? Does it need to be a class action for anyone to get any money back? Also, what if KickStarter turns round and decides that he was deliberately scamming people? Someone mentioned them having rules about that upthread (although apparently not always enforced) so I'd think that at the very least, KickStarter could enforce refunds (PayPal like doing things like that, such as taking money directly out of a sellers account (even a bank account if it is verified) It wouldn't surprize me if somehow, folks get their donations back...
Kickstarter doesn't even shut down the obvious scams. I don't know where you're drawing the idea that an inobvious one would get policed.
Like I said, someone mentioned upthread that they have rules and policies... I wondered if KickStarter acting on that might have been a possibility aside from direct law suits...
I'm not a lawyer but I could actually see a court challenge to #5 at least as a violation of contract law. Strikes me that C/P are trying to impose new terms not just on the fan film crew but more specifically on former employees who are no longer under contract to them.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
I'm not a lawyer but I could actually see a court challenge to #5 at least as a violation of contract law. Strikes me that C/P are trying to impose new terms not just on the fan film crew but more specifically on former employees who are no longer under contract to them.
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
Slavery? Really?
In fact, as asinine as THAT statement is... you accidentally stumbled upon why that guideline likely exists: SAG compliance. Placing this guideline in helps keep production costs low (benefiting that $50,000 cap), since I'm sure SAG actors CAN'T work for free. The other unions are likely in the same boat. It helps avoid any number of legal pitfalls a fan production would not be able to handle, and allows for these unions to avoid involvement in such minor productions.
Don't be so ignorant as to assert that CBS is actually involved in a form of slavery.
How is sexting got any relevance to this? lol...
Saying it's about revenge and resentment would of sufficed.
Nope, the scenario had to be outlined properly to appreciate the level of inapropriateness/betrayal...
Besides, posting the pic of Jean-Luc when Beverly started asking for child-support for Wesley, that's really irrelevant
You're comparing a IP property to sexting pictures of someone's spouse is relevant in what world?
The gif is from the episode 'The Drumhead'. And it has more relevance here than trying to create feelings of sympathy for CBS.
The fact you think I'm talking about the IP, is a pretty sad state of affairs... I was talking about Alec Peters behaviour with regards scamming donors by using their love for Star Trek, to fund his own for-profit business... The comparison to someone behaving inappropriately to someone else's spouse, is one of a lack of respect, impropriety, and betrayal... If you still claim to not get it, I'll have no choice but to consider your comments as deliberately disingenuous...
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
The fact is it's a stupid comparison and should never have been made. It's was completely painfully obvious that you're trying to insinuate CBS loving spouse IP was being abused by Alec. The rest of the nonsensical rant is a attempt to rally hate in others to stir some trouble. If you want to sue, good luck to you.
There is nothing to get except you unsuccessfully getting people to agree with your odd point. And I am not sorry if you can't comprehend that. Take that how you will with any follow up reply. But I'll probably ignore it.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
The discussion begins about 20 minutes in. I'm still listening at the moment, but here are some highlights:
These are just GUIDELINES to avoid legal action.
These only apply to FAN FILMS, at least for now (audio dramas, fan fiction, fan art, podcasts are NOT mentioned).
You DO NOT HAVE TO ONLY BUY OFFICIALLY LICENSED ITEMS... you are free to make your own costumes and props.
If you DO purchase your costumes or props, they must be officially licensed.
Very interesting stuff, and there's a lot more in the discussion. They also mention that this week's ENGAGE podcast will have a Q&A about this with CBS.
CBS is full of generosity these days. I am sure the Q&A will make all the disgruntled fans disperse away and help make everyone realise how good these guidelines are for everyone, including Trek. Only moronic mad person would refuse.
Considering CBS/Paramount could have said: "No more Star Trek fan films...period."
And then could have issued blanket DCMAs to YouTube, Vimeo, etc. to get every current fan film posted removed; yes, they ARE indeed being generous with this.
You're mistaken. That's just business for them.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
Slavery? Really?
In fact, as asinine as THAT statement is... you accidentally stumbled upon why that guideline likely exists: SAG compliance. Placing this guideline in helps keep production costs low (benefiting that $50,000 cap), since I'm sure SAG actors CAN'T work for free. The other unions are likely in the same boat. It helps avoid any number of legal pitfalls a fan production would not be able to handle, and allows for these unions to avoid involvement in such minor productions.
Don't be so ignorant as to assert that CBS is actually involved in a form of slavery.
Ok, indentured servitude then. The point is, you can make any kind of ridiculous guidelines you want. For example I can say that all who post in this forum must pay me one dollar per post. I can't, however, enforce this. In a similar manner this guideline by cbs is completely unenforceable. Courts are very antagonistic towards these kinds of employment clauses (if indeed such clauses exist for the star trek actors - we don't know this - it may just be cbs pulling the guideline out of their TRIBBLE).
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
Slavery? Really?
In fact, as asinine as THAT statement is... you accidentally stumbled upon why that guideline likely exists: SAG compliance. Placing this guideline in helps keep production costs low (benefiting that $50,000 cap), since I'm sure SAG actors CAN'T work for free. The other unions are likely in the same boat. It helps avoid any number of legal pitfalls a fan production would not be able to handle, and allows for these unions to avoid involvement in such minor productions.
Don't be so ignorant as to assert that CBS is actually involved in a form of slavery.
QFT
How important was that for you to type QFT? Did that make you important today?
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Well according to CBS Rule #5, anyone who worked on a regular Star Trek Episode or Movie, or on an officially licensed product (STO) cannot work on Fan Films.
.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
Slavery? Really?
In fact, as asinine as THAT statement is... you accidentally stumbled upon why that guideline likely exists: SAG compliance. Placing this guideline in helps keep production costs low (benefiting that $50,000 cap), since I'm sure SAG actors CAN'T work for free. The other unions are likely in the same boat. It helps avoid any number of legal pitfalls a fan production would not be able to handle, and allows for these unions to avoid involvement in such minor productions.
Don't be so ignorant as to assert that CBS is actually involved in a form of slavery.
Ok, indentured servitude then. The point is, you can make any kind of ridiculous guidelines you want. For example I can say that all who post in this forum must pay me one dollar per post. I can't, however, enforce this. In a similar manner this guideline by cbs is completely unenforceable. Courts are very antagonistic towards these kinds of employment clauses (if indeed such clauses exist for the star trek actors - we don't know this - it may just be cbs pulling the guideline out of their ****).
Uh, I got news for you... CBS isn't claiming these are LAWS. Black helicopters won't come and take you away, if you "violate" these guidelines.
Do you want a safe way to make a fan film, and NEVER have to worry about CBS serving you with an infringement suit? Follow these guidelines. Don't like them? Then don't make a film, or don't follow the guidelines... however, if you choose the latter, you're opening yourself up to legal action.
THAT. IS. ALL. THIS. IS.
I'm sorry CBS took a dump in your Cheerios by adding the Abrams movies to STO... but, go roll up your Jump To Conclusions Mat and read up on what slavery really means, especially in the world today (yes, it still exists, and it's appalling). Maybe once you understand that, you won't throw the term around so cavalierly, simply because an entertainment company isn't making the entertainment you want.
How is sexting got any relevance to this? lol...
Saying it's about revenge and resentment would of sufficed.
Nope, the scenario had to be outlined properly to appreciate the level of inapropriateness/betrayal...
Besides, posting the pic of Jean-Luc when Beverly started asking for child-support for Wesley, that's really irrelevant
You're comparing a IP property to sexting pictures of someone's spouse is relevant in what world?
The gif is from the episode 'The Drumhead'. And it has more relevance here than trying to create feelings of sympathy for CBS.
The fact you think I'm talking about the IP, is a pretty sad state of affairs... I was talking about Alec Peters behaviour with regards scamming donors by using their love for Star Trek, to fund his own for-profit business... The comparison to someone behaving inappropriately to someone else's spouse, is one of a lack of respect, impropriety, and betrayal... If you still claim to not get it, I'll have no choice but to consider your comments as deliberately disingenuous...
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
The fact is it's a stupid comparison and should never have been made. It's was completely painfully obvious that you're trying to insinuate CBS loving spouse IP was being abused by Alec. The rest of the nonsensical rant is a attempt to rally hate in others to stir some trouble. If you want to sue, good luck to you.
There is nothing to get except you unsuccessfully getting people to agree with your odd point. And I am not sorry if you can't comprehend that. Take that how you will with any follow up reply. But I'll probably ignore it.
Oh, another wannabe moderator trying to tell someone what they can and can't say...
So you didn't like the example I used... Boo-TRIBBLE-hoo... I wasn't talking to you, so really couldn't care less if you agree with/like/dislike the example... And no, that is NOT what I was trying to suggest, so don't put words into my mouth. I clearly explained above that it was THE TRUST AND GOODWILL OF THE FANS which was being abused... Don't accuse me of 'rallying anything', because I did nothing of the sort... I don't need to sue Alec, I never donated, but I do feel that those who donated, deserve to be able to get refunds, by whatever channels are available... Feel free to ignore... In fact, feel free to ignore anything I ever post again
Comments
That said, the arbiter of contracts and application of law is the government, through the actions of the multiple court systems and the force of their findings. This is true for a variety of countries.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Whatever the reason, after six Episodes Chris is out and now so is Vic. A loss for fans.
The other long running series, Star Trek: New Voyages has been around for just about twelve years and has had many guests from various Series, Gene Roddenberry Jr, D.C. Fontana, David Gerrold, Majel Barrett, and Marc Scott Zicree.
Yeah, even after CBS had no problem with them, allowed certain scripts, rejected another, they too are toast. Those people listed above should have known better and not gotten involved in something that would be not allowed at some future date. Good thing CBS doesn't have access to Temporal Agents who could go back and stop production.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
No! Where did you read that?
Last I read, Episode 7 was still set for release in September.
My character Tsin'xing
Chris and Vic for STO, Chris for a part in one of the new movies.
I did not read that, it is my take based upon the Rules just released. The shows also cannot be more than two fifteen minute segments. Continues is normally at least around 40-50.
Just watched a YouTube Interview with Vic and TrekZone filmed a few weeks before the new CBS Rules. To say he was p*ssed then about the shenanigans by Axanar would be an understatement. He did send them a follow-up letter after the Rules came out and stated he doesn't know how that would affect his productions, which is a labor of love. During the interview he did state that he has thrown in about $150k of his own savings into production.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Seems like a win win for larger scale productions like Continues, Renegades, New Voyages and Axanar.
Considering CBS/Paramount could have said: "No more Star Trek fan films...period."
And then could have issued blanket DCMAs to YouTube, Vimeo, etc. to get every current fan film posted removed; yes, they ARE indeed being generous with this.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Nowhere was I trying to create feeling of sympathy for CBS, but to illustrate why donating fans would have been angry enough to try and sue Alec Peters for their money back... I'm sorry you did not understand that...
This doesn't happen except as part of a single class action. The sums are too small individually for anyone to pursue this fantasy.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Welcome to six pages ago.
I guarantee you this is illegal. It amounts to slavery. I assume the only legal leg they are standing on is some sort of non-competition clause in their contracts. However, a court would not allow something like that to exist in perpetuity and I don't believe the SAG would enjoy it. They could restrict the use of the characters but the actors playing a different role - No way.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Slavery? Really?
In fact, as asinine as THAT statement is... you accidentally stumbled upon why that guideline likely exists: SAG compliance. Placing this guideline in helps keep production costs low (benefiting that $50,000 cap), since I'm sure SAG actors CAN'T work for free. The other unions are likely in the same boat. It helps avoid any number of legal pitfalls a fan production would not be able to handle, and allows for these unions to avoid involvement in such minor productions.
Don't be so ignorant as to assert that CBS is actually involved in a form of slavery.
The fact is it's a stupid comparison and should never have been made. It's was completely painfully obvious that you're trying to insinuate CBS loving spouse IP was being abused by Alec. The rest of the nonsensical rant is a attempt to rally hate in others to stir some trouble. If you want to sue, good luck to you.
There is nothing to get except you unsuccessfully getting people to agree with your odd point. And I am not sorry if you can't comprehend that. Take that how you will with any follow up reply. But I'll probably ignore it.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
You're mistaken. That's just business for them.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Ok, indentured servitude then. The point is, you can make any kind of ridiculous guidelines you want. For example I can say that all who post in this forum must pay me one dollar per post. I can't, however, enforce this. In a similar manner this guideline by cbs is completely unenforceable. Courts are very antagonistic towards these kinds of employment clauses (if indeed such clauses exist for the star trek actors - we don't know this - it may just be cbs pulling the guideline out of their TRIBBLE).
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
How important was that for you to type QFT? Did that make you important today?
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Uh, I got news for you... CBS isn't claiming these are LAWS. Black helicopters won't come and take you away, if you "violate" these guidelines.
Do you want a safe way to make a fan film, and NEVER have to worry about CBS serving you with an infringement suit? Follow these guidelines. Don't like them? Then don't make a film, or don't follow the guidelines... however, if you choose the latter, you're opening yourself up to legal action.
THAT. IS. ALL. THIS. IS.
I'm sorry CBS took a dump in your Cheerios by adding the Abrams movies to STO... but, go roll up your Jump To Conclusions Mat and read up on what slavery really means, especially in the world today (yes, it still exists, and it's appalling). Maybe once you understand that, you won't throw the term around so cavalierly, simply because an entertainment company isn't making the entertainment you want.
So you didn't like the example I used... Boo-TRIBBLE-hoo... I wasn't talking to you, so really couldn't care less if you agree with/like/dislike the example... And no, that is NOT what I was trying to suggest, so don't put words into my mouth. I clearly explained above that it was THE TRUST AND GOODWILL OF THE FANS which was being abused... Don't accuse me of 'rallying anything', because I did nothing of the sort... I don't need to sue Alec, I never donated, but I do feel that those who donated, deserve to be able to get refunds, by whatever channels are available... Feel free to ignore... In fact, feel free to ignore anything I ever post again