[WishfulThinker66]

Before I disappear I just want to raise what I feel is a valid point.

Supportive criticism is not trolling or being mean. Neither is dissension. Rather they are an attempt to encourage what might be a more appropriate consideration and path.

Disagreement is an essential component to healthy dialogue. Just because someone doesn't agree with something does not constitute a a personal attack.

I see all too often people jumping onboard a bandwagon of agreement and feel-good pats on the back when what might really be more appropriate is a standing back to consider what actually might be fact or fiction. Even I am guilty of glossing and slanting something in my favour - as we all are. It behooves us then to read posts with a great deal of scrutiny. In my observation there exists a sizeable amount of content which defies belief and judgement. We owe it to ourselves - even others - to consider what might really be going on instead of rushing to jump upon that bandwagon of 'hugs'. Maybe validating a person's beliefs isn't the correct action to take.

When it sounds farcical it probably is. When it sounds ridiculous, maybe it is.

And when it sounds delusional we do no favour to encourage it.

Hence the importance of a solid and sound voice of dissent. It is needed. There needs to be scrutiny. There needs to be raised the possibility all is not as it would be portrayed.

It is frustrating to see such blindness.

It is also frustrating, that dissent - no matter how strong the attempt to be delicate - be assumed to be mean.

Thus should there be room for Supportive Criticism.

Blindy jumping to conclusions is neither helpful nor supportive. Playing into and encouraging a delusion is not being supportive. On the contrary, encouraging scrutiny and the making of perhaps a more logical and reasonable conclusion IS being supportive.

I feel the administrators have lost sight of purpose. Instead of being quick to judge the voice of dissent they could be judging the legitimacy of and direction of threads. Perhaps they ought better to be that voice of scrutiny that manages posts as threads are initiated using the litmus tests of - is this of value to the participants? Does this promote the recovery process, etc. Is this likely to be authentic? Valid? Truthful? Perhaps they ought to weigh-in on occasion in an effort to refocus a thread on a useful and appropriate direction.

The voice of decent has a valuable place. This should be recognised not beaten down.

I have never ever ever written a post with the intention of hurt rather interjected a thread with an alternate opinion and consideration of what else might really be at hand. The administrators have accused me of this not being the case, citing a specific recent post which (frustratingly) they saw fit to remove. My response is that doing so was not a hateful act. I said what needed to be said. It was a valid point; I simply did not believe for a moment what an OP had initiated. What I said was by no means hurtful. It was a necessary interjection. It was also a taking of the bull by the horns and giving a hell of a shake where it was so very needed.

There were other actions the administrators could and should have taken. For one, they should have stepped back and considered the authenticity of the original post. It is the OP who should have been addressed not I. They ignored an opportunity to suggest, offer, and provide help to the OP which was so obviously needed. The post was a cry for help and this was ignored.

I will lurk long enough to see how - and if - this plays out. Then folks it is off to the greener side of the fence.

[DocJohn]

Thank you for your feedback.

However, I can't help but wonder if you believe that everyone would offer "supportive criticism" in the exact same manner and with similar intentions as you? In our experience in running this and other online communities for over 25 years, I've found such distinctions to be hard to determine among members.

In short, if I don't know what context and with what intent you, personally, are offering such criticism, I can't just whether it is "supportive" or just inappropriate. And in order to do that -- understand each person's context and intent -- would mean I and every other community support team member would have to personally get to know each and every one of our 400,000+ members.

This is a wonderful goal. But as you can imagine, it is a bit of an unrealistic one as well, in that I don't think we could have such a one-on-one, personal relationship and understanding with each and every member (or even just the ones who post regularly, which still number in the thousands in any given month).

So in place of trying to gain such an understanding, we have to develop a set of guidelines that make it more likely a person might gain some support from our community, no matter where that person is in their own personal recovery journey. And that journey may be very different from person to person -- we have little way of knowing ahead of time, before feedback or "dissent" is offered.

Those are some of the reasons we err on the side of encouraging only supportive comments. Having said that, I know many members who have found ways to offer a different viewpoint (maybe even one that isn't popular), in a way that isn't just going along with some behavior they see as unhealthy.

So while in general, I agree that folks should be able to offer their opinion in a manner that may even disagree with an OP, it needs to be done in a way that values the OP's current experiences, coping resources, treatment resources, complex interpersonal relationships, personal history, and more. And that takes a lot of understanding, time, and thoughtfulness on the part of someone who wants to offer such "supportive criticism." It can be done -- has been done here -- and can continue to be done.

But it's a delicate thing and must be done tactfully. Unfortunately and all too often, some don't understand this important aspect of it.

Hope that helps give some perspective on where we're coming from with all of this, and I look forward to continuing the conversation about this topic.

[WishfulThinker66]

I wrote, "Sorry but I don't believe this."

How on earth is this mean? How on earth is this not tactful?

This was short, concise, and to the point conveying exactly what was meant. To have beaten around the bush to play nice-nice clearly wouldn't have been as effective.

My point was valid. It encouraged discussion. Removing it is tantamount to censorship.

[WishfulThinker66]

Censoring dissent is not the answer.

[WishfulThinker66]

A big thank you to all who have sent me your kind and well articulated words of support.

[healingme4me]

Perhaps it could have been timing and a very big context of whatever the heck was going on? I wasn't a full on participant.

Maybe give it another go around the forums? Maybe it wasn't as personal as you may have taken it. ?? Caught in the crossfire, perhaps?

You do raise a valid point about raising other viewpoints and not enabling delusions.

I think your post here is very well articulated and raises a valid point about support.

[seesaw]

I agree with you, WishfulThinker. In fact, I refrain from commenting on almost all posts at this point because it feels like we cannot even offer a differing viewpoint, even when it's not critical, without being accused of meanness, bullying, or some other negative, malicious intent. I do agree that we are all in need of validation here, so offering a different perspective while validating a person's emotions is a tough line to tread, but it should not mean that all disagreement should be censored, which is how it feels to me.

Thank you for bringing this to the forefront in such a thoughtful manner.

Seesaw

[Open Eyes]

Originally Posted by WishfulThinker66

I wrote, "Sorry but I don't believe this."

How on earth is this mean? How on earth is this not tactful?

This was short, concise, and to the point conveying exactly what was meant. To have beaten around the bush to play nice-nice clearly wouldn't have been as effective.

My point was valid. It encouraged discussion. Removing it is tantamount to censorship.

I remember seeing one of your simple posts and it might have been the one you are showing here in this post (can't remember the thread and content though tbh). What you may have been doing by just saying "I don't believe this" may have not actually been contributing but more of YOUR judgement call. It really depends on the challenge the OP is sharing. Truth is, you may be making this judgement call when what the OP is describing really did happen. I know for myself I have experienced things in my life that really shocked me, felt unbelievable YET it really did happen. In that case someone deciding to post "I don't believe that" won't help me, could even trigger me depending on what I am sharing that did happen that may have even traumatized me.

It's a challenge in that a lot of the members have been victims and genuinely struggle and may not have the skills to be able to accept the kind of constructive criticism you may consider reasonable. A member could have faced a great deal of criticism to the point where it was really unhealthy for them so that person may be very sensitive to any criticism constructive or otherwise. Also, a member may seem nice, even interacting ok and yet at the same time may actually be struggling with suicidal thoughts. I know that one because I am certain had I acted on my inpulses it would most likely have been a shock where people may have said OMG I had no idea she was struggling so badly.

It's always important to remember that members are all anonymous and we don't see them, what kind of living circumstances they are in and that can be an important part of how in other circumstances where we can "see" more we may react to someone very differently.

[DocJohn]

I'm sorry @WishfulThinker66 , I thought you wanted to have a policy discussion about a community guideline. Instead, by your reply, it looks like you're just upset by your own posting style to some posts.

If you don't understand how "Sorry but I don't believe this" can be seen as unsupportive, I'm not sure we can have much of a discussion. Imagine just spending 30 or 45 minutes writing out a 1,000 word personal story about tragic abuse you suffered as a child. And then that's one of the replies you receive to your thread.

We're not here to be private investigators. If you don't believe someone, then that's your prerogative and choice. But barring doing a personal investigation into each member's life (which we would never do or condone), you'll never know the "truth" of the matter. All we have is what a person chooses to bring to this forum. And telling someone that they're not believed is a very unsupportive thing to say.

If you don't believe someone, then how are you helping their recovery by telling them so publicly? I'm not clear on how you believe a person is going to benefit from our groups with people who act as judges and arbiters of other people's personal experiences and stories.

When I check my judgment at the door, I tend to find it easier to respond to others and their situations. And if I don't believe someone's situation, I'll just not comment on that since I can never know for certain. As the old saying goes, if you can't say something nice (or in our case, supportive), then maybe say nothing at all.

[Open Eyes]

WishfulThinker,

I wrote, "Sorry but I don't believe this."

How on earth is this mean? How on earth is this not tactful?

What this statement is really saying is that you have not invested any of your time in learning about mental illness and what it's like to suffer from abuse and different kinds of Mental Illnesses. Instead you have decided that it should be ok for you to enter someone elses effort to share what to them can be a genuine challenge and judge them based on how YOU see things. It means that you are not interested in looking at another person's personal challenge in how they see and feel things looking to find someone else that might be able to relate and offer supportive advice. Instead what you prefer to do is say to that person that you don't consider their challenge as being believable or important therefore, it's not important.

Do you realize that is how ABUSERS behave?

This was short, concise, and to the point conveying exactly what was meant

Do you understand that often victims of abuse have experienced how their abuser often "What I think matters" and then stomps off or slams a door or clearly states to their victim how it doesn't matter what the victim feels or how things are affecting them, instead ALL that matters is what the abuser thinks and they typically don't spend any time what so ever listening or even caring about what their victim needs, thinks, and feels?

People tend to respond with "you need help, go see a therapist" and for a long time I just could not respond that way because in all honesty even when it came to that what I experienced myself was sitting in a very traumatized state of mind trying to wrap my mind around experiencing a major loss to something I spent a great deal of time creating and the therapist determined without any actual first hand knowledge about what I worked so hard for, that what I had been traumatized about simply did not deserve to be valued. Why? Because it was NEVER anything that psychiatrist or therapist considered important or valueable.

You know what? It's not easy to be supportive to another person who is struggling. It requires the ability to sit and LISTEN to something that is important to someone else and they are trying to explain it and are genuinely struggling. You have to be willing and develope the skills to put your own values and personal opinions about things aside and LISTEN to that other person explain their personal challenge. Unfortunately a lot of people can't do that and they need to only interact with people who share their same views on things. However, the ones who are the greatest of all can actually sit and listen and take a genuine interest in how that other person is struggling and come up with ways to help that person instead of punish and criticize them.

"I don't believe you" was said to my child when a teacher insisted she read the morning message he had written out on a chalk board for all his little first grade students to do. My daughter looked at it and said "I can't do that" and went and sat down in her seat. This teacher decided she was misbehaving and the next day he told her once again, "Katie, you HAVE TO READ MY MORNING MESSAGE", "I don't believe you can't do it". And my daughter replied again, "I can't do that" and again went and sat down in her seat. Now this teacher "did not believe her" and once again got angry with her and decided to call me about how my daughter insisted she not read HIS message. Oh, I could have not believed her either and PUNISHED her. BUT, I didn't and instead I decided to believe her because she is not or never was a BAD CHILD.

Luckily for me and Katie there were people that felt just like I did and believed children like my Katie. These people decided to LISTEN and STUDY what children like my Katie experience that is different. They devised tests to give my Katie so they could see just where my Katie struggled. Because of that I learned that my Katie actually had a very high IQ, actually off the charts for her age too. Then I learned how my Katie's brain was a little different and that for her to read and understand words was much more of a challenge than for others because that area of her brain is weak and different and my Katie had what was labelled Dyslexia. While he teacher responded with "I don't believe you", my Katie was lucky that not only her mommy did listen and believe but SO DID OTHERS. Because of that my Katie was able to get special help so she could learn how to read that morning message working around her personal challenge to do so. My Katie also became one of the many children this study group kept track of and they did that right up through her college years.

Then one day when my Katie was finished with college and had her first job, she saw a documentary about this very study she had been a part of. She got to see the other children that were followed and studied too, and as she sat there listening to these different individuals share how hard it was for them "emotionally and psychologically" to be different, to have to work so much harder, to accept that even when you do, you are never going to be at the top or Valdictorian or the other labels given to those who are praised for doing oh so well. One of Katies wishes from when she was very young was to someday go to Harvard. I don't know where that came from or how she knew that name either, but it was something she would often say was something she wanted.

Well, when I saw her watching that documentary and listening to how much the others like her struggled, how it embarrassed them and how they were often treated badly by their piers too, I watched my Katie cry, because someone else KNEW her private and very personal pain. Yet, one thing my Katie also got to see is how all these others kept trying and worked so very hard at learning and achieving and became successful. They became prominent lawyers and surgeons and CEO's and very successful entrepeneurs. I learned from my Katie that she wanted to go to Harvard but she had to learn to accept that she would not be the creme of the crop that gets to go to Harvard. However, she did work at learning extremely hard and managed to stay on the honor role. What made me sad is that her self esteem did suffer from somehow "not being good enough". I would see my child get angry and have meltdowns but her anger was often directed at herself. Truth is part of this is how we all decide how to calculate "intelligence" and our need to praise those and put them on pedestals when they get better grades in school.

I ask you this, who is more intelligent the one who's brain is set up where they can achieve and be that star pupil, or the one who's brain is different and finds a way to work around that challenge and does well? If you got seriously ill and needed life saving surgery, and a man performed that surgery and saved your life, would it matter to you if that man could read and spell like some valadictorian, or would you respect that man who saved your life for struggling to spell and read and yet had a brain that was intelligent in other ways where he could save YOUR LIFE? You could say to me "I don't believe that' to any of what I have just shared. Yet, all that shows me is you may very well only be one of the ones that can't see a genuine challenge and can only see things the way you see them. Well, I shall forever be grateful to those who "listened" and looked for ways to help my Katie and all those like her.

There are a lot of times this simple "I don't believe you" can hurt.

[saidso]

I enjoyed your post about hobbies Wishful Thinking, and you seem to have been around a fair bit longer than me. I'm a newbie here but I find that there is... a difference of opinion between people who simply say "I'm sorry this is happening to you" and people who are more edgy, ironic, or simply - in my case - want to say "you consider yourself to be a victim but perhaps also look at the other person's experience". In my perception this is a gap between the therapy world - which is centred on the client - and the outside world which has all manner of agendas - money, survival, good and bad. If I am looking for a job, I look at what I expect myself if I employ someone and I ask questions which may not come up with answers that are sympathetic to my situation. If I am dealing with another person, unless that person is violent/ dangerous to me then I look at them like I look at myself - with compassion/ irony/ belief/ disbelief/ attempted empathy and understanding.

Due to low income, I don't live in the therapy world... so my comments are not so gentle, empathetic as they were when I believed that there were people out there wanting to... help me, when I believed that if there were not people out there to help then other survivors would fight alongside me. I do value gentleness, but I've also come to value edginess and life experience. Someone at my back has been more desperately needed than sympathy. But it takes all energies to make a healthy world..

People's experiences are different. I've found a few people's replies, posts etc to be disturbing.. but that's an education in the number of different takes and different personalities.

So long as someone isn't out to hurt me, then I would give them credit.

I agree that a person managing and owning a mental health forum has the right to make decisions just because they invest the time and energy to put the forum up on the web in the first place. Before I joined this site, I read about people being banned and I thought, "well I will try, I will learn what there is to learn, I will move on if it doesn't work out for me".

I hope that it works out for you Wishful Thinker!!! I agree that people need to be free to make mistakes in order to be creative - that's what you posted with your paintings on the hobbies thread. I'm a survivor of extreme violence. I was on a website for 15 years (it crashed a few months ago) where there were fights and people/ I was left to stick up for myself and to resolve my own battles. Tough, but good practice.

I suppose that I did once need to be named a "victim", or at least "a survivor"... and I would have been angry if people didn't believe me. But to be honest most of the therapeutic establishment here didn't care about anyone with an income that wasn't above average. "We were not meant to survive".

There are contradictions anywhere that human beings interact. Once again, I wish you very well.

Saidso

[saidso]

I suppose that my position is that I draw boundaries about how guests behave in my house. Not just because I've invested a huge amount of energy in maintaining a home, but because I know how far I can stretch myself and no further. I see Dr John drawing boundaries about this forum in the same way, just because there has to be a line to keep the house safe.

Some of my limits are objective - guests have to lock the door - and some are subjective - not based on anything except my personal limits at that point in time.

If I pretend that my subjective limits are hard and fast rules about healthy human behaviour and that people "should" agree with me, then I am controlling other people for my own peace of mind. It's a tyranny, whether or not I am also a survivor. I just try to say: I'm sorry but I'm not a big enough person to tolerate this at this point in time.

There needs to be some open discussion between what are actually rules to promote safety and what is a subjective battle. In certain contexts you win by characterising yourself as a victim, in other contexts you win by owning your power, in other contexts you win by dominating and silencing. Each behaviour works in a different context, and can conceal a different one.

It's not an objective truth that Wishful Thinker isonly an inconsiderate, hurtful person who is dangerous to the community, is it? It might be possible simply to ask him not to "disbelieve" that individual in the future?

It's damaging to represent someone as dangerous to a healing community because in one instance he upset people???

All the question marks because everyone's opinion is valid and their own!

[Open Eyes]

It's damaging to represent someone as dangerous to a healing community because in one instance he upset people???

No one is labelling the OP as someone dangerous. What CAN be dangerous is telling him it's ok to enter a thread and say "I don't believe you" if saying that is not supportive but instead comes across as criticism. This site has moderators that donate their time reading different threads and the posts those threads receive and they also check out complaints about someone's posting that are felt inappropriate and unsupportive. When investing a lot of time on a support site like this a good moderator can spot certain posts that can upset or trigger a member who is asking for help and support. Often the moderator will remove the post so that it doesn't cause some kind of upset for the member who started a thread or others that are trying to post to the member in a supportive manner. (if you spent time having to do this yourself you would have a much better understanding of what I am trying to convey)

The other site you interacted in that you thought was a support site did not sound as "safe" as this site is. When people have to battle with each other the way you described, that's not really a "safe" support site, not for individuals who are struggling with different MI's and disabilities. If you spend time on this site I am sure you will notice the difference too.

[saidso]

I instinctively disagree OpenEyes. I usually feel dominated by your voice on threads - not sure it that's just written style or you really do believe there is only one way to go. There doesn't seem to be much space for difference or give and take.

That's my impression. I don't actually know you in all your real life dimensions! I might get to know you better as times goes by! That has happened to me with people who I found difficult. But you "can't be sure" that I will agree with you, ever! It is actually unlikely. I need breathing space, not a unilateral certainty.

If I was a mod I would have an understanding of moderating - that's true. But how can I give you an understanding of how your loud unilatralism affects me??? It's always loud, and doesn't seem to leave space for what I understand as being human.

But I can ignore you, until I get to see other sides of who you are. That's what peeps could do with WishfulThinking. Ignoring someone just means that they trigger a difficult emotion, much less judgemental.

I'm not challenging the mods as such. Mods enforce rules. I was supporting WishfulThinking as he/she moves forward in this, which is different.

[sarahsweets]

I feel like I am missing something or a thread so I do not know if what I say will count. I am guilty of being blunt. I try really hard to state in my response that I do not mean to be harsh or disrespectful so that a person will know I am just trying to look at the facts shared as I see them. I belong to one other forum that I love and this is only my second one but I have not experienced negative issues with mods or admin-yet and I hope I do not. Most people have been fairly welcoming and honest. I realize that sometimes I fly off at the mouth and I always try to apologize but i cant overapologize either. Do I understand you properly that you are leaving the forum because of this? I encourage you to pm a mod and continue this dialogue where the mods might be more at liberty to reference your specific posts and shed some light on it. Publically I think they are being matter-of-fact for your protection and their protection.

[Open Eyes]

I instinctively disagree OpenEyes. I usually feel dominated by your voice on threads - not sure it that's just written style or you really do believe there is only one way to go. There doesn't seem to be much space for difference or give and take.

Hmm, I wish you have pointed that out to me tbh saidso. You can PM me anytime too. I try to listen and focus on the person who is struggling. However, one thing I have learned from that is how sometimes I can identify deeply with that struggling individual in that I have experienced too many dysfunctional narcissistic individuals in my own life path that really cannot see anyone's opinions and values but their own. I do remember seeing that post in a thread, however, the fact that I could not remember the content of the thread may have been more to do with my struggling to "believe" as well and yet my thought also was that of how that poster was not specific about what he did not believe, which could have been any of the responses in that thread too. I don't remember posting anything in that thread myself either which could be contributing to why I can't remember the overall content.

[BonsaiGuy]

Originally Posted by WishfulThinker66

A big thank you to all who have sent me your kind and well articulated words of support.

I support this post very much and have thought a lot about the exact same thing lately. I personally love it when someone disagrees with me and offers an opposing or other viewpoint that is simply different than my own. I recognize that we are taking to and about individuals here. Everyone has their own journey and their own path, but I do think that having as many differentiated responses as possible can be incredibly beneficial to the OP and the audience at large.
Personally, I am not here only for the hugs or for any delusion I have to be re-enforced (god forbid) under the guise of unrelenting kindness. I am here to recovery by any means necessary. Especially if that pushes me outside of my comfort bubble. Thank you for such an extensively thought out and well considered post!

I think Yeats has something helpful to offer here:

The Cloths of Heaven

Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light;
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

W. B. Yeats

Sometimes when people share on PC...their truth...pain...scars...hopes...fears...it is almost like they are spreading their dreams under our feet. So it is wise to tread softly.

[DocJohn]

Originally Posted by BonsaiGuy

I personally love it when someone disagrees with me and offers an opposing or other viewpoint that is simply different than my own.

And I think if the OP makes clear in their thread that they welcome dissenting opinions and viewpoints, we have zero problem with that.

But the default behavior we ask of members is that they assume they are being told the truth of the story (at least the truth as the OP sees it in their own subjective world), and offer their opinion or advice in the context of a supportive environment. Rather than Socrates, we're asking folks to act more like a caring, supportive friend.

But if the OP specifically says, "You can be brutally honest with your opinions or advice to me" or something to that effect, then we would be happy to allow that thread to stand on its own, since the OP specifically asked for "the truth" (whatever that is).

[saidso]

Hello DocJohn, pleased to meet you!
just for discussion
I'm sorry but I'm not sure that I understand. Are you saying that all responses have to be in the vein of "how terrible for you, I'm so sorry and I hope you soon feel better".

Surely what people find "supportive" and the friendship behaviour that they value varies from one personality to another. You - I say this respectfully just for clarity - might want your friends to agree with you. I might want my friends to have more plural responses. Different personalities.

I was.... horrifying though this now seems.... mostly responding to threads spontaneously in the tone of "hmm, I'm pondering, this is how it seems to me, if you don't agree feel free to know that I may be wrong". People thanked me or moved their focus on more relevant comments: I noticed and adapted accordingly.

I do get that when I feel sad, then I don't want people to trample over me and to robustly give their opinions. If an OP asked for my post to be removed from their thread, or for me to stay off their thread that would be fine.

But what I find is that when people don't behave according to my needs in real life (which happens often!!!) then I learn something valuable about persuasion.

It horrifies me that there might be just one prescribed way to respond and the Good Guys get it, while the Bad Guys don't. Some people get a big kick out of enforcing, and that sucks if for some unaccountable reason you/ I/ he/ she don't fit into their system. Perhaps sometimes... I am pondering here, I've seen victims victimising other victims by controlling in this fashion.

Persuasiveness doesn't demand intimate knowledge of 400,000 forum members or the wisdom of Socrates (who?!), but in my experience it's the most valuable quality of good moderation! Respect.

I don't expect you to write an essay, or justify, or anything like that. But I am uncomfortable with the dynamic that everyone has to be constrained by the exact same style of responding, or explicitly justify otherwise. It's evident that a majority of people do just want to vent and be empathised with. No judgement on that, but I'm not being willing to be a "parrot" of some prescribed behaviour which actually has no personal meaning for me.

I want to learn about difference. I want to stretch my comfort zone. I need to learn ways of dealing with discomfort. Learning requires working at being connected to who I am, and learning mutual respect, not parroting.

Perhaps my misunderstanding is partly because I am a trauma survivor and have only limited experiences of what is labelled as mental illness. The more I learn, the more open-minded I become. But I think - perhaps, because I'm no expert in relationships - that this is also a human thing.

Thanks for keeping this site on the web - not so that I can be "caringly supported" but so that I can learn about difference!

Don't worry. If I can't post as prescribed in public then I will just communicate with "consenting adults" in pm.

THANK YOU.
Saidso