Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/31/09 03:14 PM, Holonboy wrote: If they get more then 3 warnings per month, then ban them.

That sounds a little too loose. I'd say one warning, and then ban. Three warnings, that's just giving someone an excuse to piss off a mod.

User - "Hahaha"
Mod - "Stop that"
User - "Hahahaha"
Mod - "Stop that!"
User - "KEKEKEKE!"
Mod - "ARGH! BAN!!!"

At 5/31/09 03:02 PM, Rucklo wrote: yea, so we lock the thread and say "blog it instead" and then people start bitching about people not visiting their blogs instead. frankly, it's like that with many issues brought up in this thread.

WHAT WHAT WHAT MAKE UP YOUR MIND, NG BBS!

I think that is one of those largely unsolvable opinion-based issues - or alternatively, as Zerok brings up, a "you can't always get what you want" thing. For as far as my own opinions go, I actually think the right call is made a large part of the time. I just advise to users who prefer to go through this sort of posts, to just look around the main blog page for a bit, since then the person in question will at least have one visitor to his/her userpage! Yes, that is a all-too-simple happy-happy way of looking at it, but it's something I suppose.

Or is it about the post counts? That's a matter of opinion I suppose.

I've discussed it a dozen times before, but I do have my bones to pick with the blog option for user-created literature. I'm not going to discuss it here though for various reasons: I know various decisions have already been long made, and I'm not at all aware of the backroom discussion obviously; the upcoming literature portal; the necessity for strict regulation if the literature ban was ever seriously re-considered. Most of all, this is still obviously a Flash/Audio site, and the staff are always working towards what they see as most improtant, rightly so.

Going with Zerok's point again, that applies to the forums too. Anyway, we'll discuss what we can, hmm.

All that I can say has pretty much already been said.

Get rid of double standards and make sure mods set a good example for newer (and even regular) users

Make sure that everything that is against the rules is clearly written on the rules page (ie. clone posting).

Put links to threads like the official video thread, this thread, and other official threads in a section somewhere on the rules page as too remove blissful ignorance. I know a lot of people post video threads without any discussion behind it not because they're intentionally ignoring the rules, but because they aren't aware that the video thread exists. Because, really, that thread is hardly ever on the first page because no one actually posts in it.

Possibly create an official "Hi, I'm new" thread. This is one I just thought of on the spot when I was writing up my bit about official threads, so I haven't really weighed the pros and cons, but it's an idea.

As far as the "add mods from different time zones" concern goes, I know it would probably be a good idea to get mods that come on at those times, but I don't think it's that much of a concern. I come on sometimes at like 4, 5 in the morning when there's not many mods on but, coincidentally, there's not that many users on, either. I've never really noticed the forums being overwhelmed by spam at those times so much so that it pushes large numbers of good threads off the front page like it would if we didn't have enough mods on during our "prime times".

I don't really have much of a problem with the destroy function; I don't seem to be hindered that much by it anymore. I generally know what threads to post in and what threads not to post in. And, since not every deleted thread is a destroyed thread, I think that gives plenty enough mercy to the people that posted in it. And how did I learn not to post in certain threads? By being destroy banned. It's not like they're particularly brutal bans. I say keep that feature, but don't use it liberally.

I mean, I used to have a problem with it when I was a newer user because I used to get them a lot. But I don't anymore because I try to only post in threads that I *gasp* think are worth posting in. Generally, if a thread is worth getting destroyed, it's not worth my time and therefore, I don't have a reason to spend time on it.

Besides, the worst thing that happens is I don't have a reason to stay cooped up in front of my computer all day.

I think nonconstructive backseat modding posts should be deleted. There's no reason why anyone needs to post "put it in your blog" or anything of the like without something else in their post that is constructive to the thread unless what they're posting is actually helpful to the OP.

Like, if someone posts a "Hi, I'm new" thread and another user says hi and explains about the rules page, that's no so much of a problem because it's actually helping the OP. But, I keep seeing over and over again people pretending that they're doing a public service by whining at the OP without offering anything else constructive or anything that could contribute to the topic at hand. The only that does is derail the thread and piss off the OP.

For example, "Post it in your blog" does not help the OP. At all. Neither does "this thread is useless", "newgrounds isn't the place for this", etc.

But even if that isn't payed attention to, I definitely think users' backseat modding posts should be deleted when they're wrong. For example, when someone asks an art question like "what's a good anatomy guide?" or "is a this a good tablet?" and then some user goes and tells the OP to take it to the art forum. That post should be deleted because it's misleading. That's against the rules in the art forum and posting it there will get the person's thread locked. Things like that.

At 5/31/09 01:56 PM, Elios wrote: Eyelovepoozy, oh lol. in my opinion, he's an ok guy. Sure he can dish out a cruel joke, and a shovel full of bans, but the way i see it, he's doing the work of three mods at once. The regulars see it as "Abuse of power", and the new guys see it as "He's out to get me". Not that i'm saying people should stop posting when Poozy is online for the sake of a possible ban, but when bigger brother is watching, i watch what i say, carefully.

I'm a regular who's been using these forums for almost three years and in my opinion, the mod team has never been that bad. There's been a few rotten apples and there's been shit users, but the moderation apocalypse has not happened yet.

However, I do have problems with poozy. Now, I have never once been banned by poozy on these forums since he's been modded and I don't believe any of my threads have been locked by him (not that I make that many), so it's not as if I have a personal grudge against him.

The problem with poozy is that, like others have said, he sets a horrible example. I don't really have a problem with him acting like an ass because there's lots of asses around here, but I do have a problem with him acting asslike and having that asslike behavior being displayed as model behavior. Not only does he get away with his childish behavior, but the attention of users is drawn to his posts because he's a mod and therefore, that's the behavior that is highlighted.

Newer uses get set in place by the regulars and the mods. I know for sure that that was the case for me. I lurked and saw what the regulars were doing and learned to mimic that and when I didn't and when I stepped out of line, I got told off for it or banned. When you're starting out, you learn what's acceptable by watching and by consequence.

Now, when there's a highly respected user (ie. poozy) who's behavior is clearly against the rules (ie. flaming the OP, spamming, one liners, etc.), a newer user is going to see that and think that, "Hey, I guess this is okay because a mod is doing it."

That's why I have a problem with poozy.

Now, he's not the only mod I've seen doing this. I've seen several other mods doing things like this who haven't been reprimanded, but poozy is the mod that I see doing it regularly.

And the strangest part is that, when I went back and I looked at his earlier posts (I was bored.), he was a good user around when he got modded and he was a good mod to start out with (helpful, constructive, etc) so I can completely understand why he was elected to be a mod in the first place, but then, I guess, it just went to his head or something.

He's not that bad of a mod, but he is a bad example.

Sorry for the double post, but the post I'm replying to was posted while I was typing up my 7000 character first post.

At 5/31/09 03:15 PM, Zerok wrote: In my fantasies, I'll see a system that doesn't just punish bad BBS behaviour but overtly rewards good behaviour. Some sort of stat! It would run similarly to the whistle system (people can up-vote good posts) with all sort of intricate and clever hidden algorithms to prevent spam and refine the "scores" such that GOOD posters would have shiny profile credentials and people would aspire to achieve them.

That problem with that kind of stat system is, and I've seen this on other forums I've been to, that people will downvote and upvote users based on whether they like them or not, not based on how helpful or constructive the post is.

On one forum I was on, someone downvoted me because they thought my post was "gay" (that particular forum let users leave comments when they downvoted or upvoted. The comment left with that one was "that's gay"). I anticipate things like that happening.

Unless, of course, the ability to downvote and upvote posts would be left to the mods.

At 5/31/09 03:22 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: He's not that bad of a mod, but he is a bad example.

That actually makes sense. When you think about it, when we get new users here (young and old), they're very impressionable. And if what Poozy is saying appears to them as acceptable, then there's a problem.

At 5/31/09 03:23 PM, Scarab wrote: I've discussed it a dozen times before, but I do have my bones to pick with the blog option for user-created literature. I'm not going to discuss it here though for various reasons:

Well I don't know if you were around when the heat of it was at its worst... but it was bad. You had so many people who thought that a "story" was a paragraph or two. For those who put out maybe a 6/10 effort, the replies to such stories were dry and short and generally terrible. There were a few wordsmiths out there who wrote great BBS stories, kept an audience and generated great discussion.

Sadly, they were the minority. Hence we shut down the cancerous outburst of hack writers. The only way to control it would be to individually grant permissions to good writers, which would become a subjective call and potential for tons of drama.

Then blogs came and made for an easy pressure release, decision wise.

Now comes the Lit Portal, which will essentially solve everything (hopefully).

So if you can maintain your appreciated patience just a little while longer, that'd be swell. Enjoy the MWCs as well, they're a great way to regulate both the quality and abundance of fiction you read on the BBS as we wait for the LP.

At 5/31/09 03:29 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: That problem with that kind of stat system is, and I've seen this on other forums I've been to, that people will downvote and upvote users based on whether they like them or not, not based on how helpful or constructive the post is.

Exactly what I was gonna say. I mean, look at the review rating system. I think a large amount of people simply vote negative in reviews because they don't agree with the score, or they don't like the user. Look at Tom's reviews, I wouldn't exactly say some of them were helpful but people just plus them anyway for arse-kissing reasons no doubt.

Any system like this would be open to abuse on NG.

And was this thread made because of Willi?

I find it kind of odd that he leaves, users, mods and Wade post on his userpage about how it's sad to see him go and they are agreeing/disagreeing with his problems with the BBS and then this thread is made. Was this already in discussion and Willi was the last straw or am I just rambling?

At 5/31/09 03:29 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: That problem with that kind of stat system is, and I've seen this on other forums I've been to, that people will downvote and upvote users based on whether they like them or not, not based on how helpful or constructive the post is.

On one forum I was on, someone downvoted me because they thought my post was "gay" (that particular forum let users leave comments when they downvoted or upvoted. The comment left with that one was "that's gay"). I anticipate things like that happening.

Unless, of course, the ability to downvote and upvote posts would be left to the mods.

That's where my awesome algorithms would come in. There'd be "weighted" votes, much like how the Flash Portal works, but no one would really know what their "forum voting power" was, or if bans affected it, etc. Some people would have a power of exactly ZERO, but wouldn't know it. Fine tuned properly, the model would accurately correlate with quality posters receiving the proper recognition, in spite of system abusers.

You could even have a two tiered system, where non-mod users' votes didn't affect "scores" directly but rather investigatory attention from a panel of mods or specially appointed users/mods. Posts for consideration of either upping or... downing... could even be presented anonymously. Score change could be based partially or entirely on the discrepancies between the public and the panel.

Wow... This thread hasn't been up that long, and already the mods seem to be improving. This is how I think the BBS is supposed to run. If this becomes the norm, I'll be happy beyond words.

At 5/31/09 03:35 PM, Zerok wrote:

At 5/31/09 03:23 PM, Scarab wrote: I've discussed it a dozen times before, but I do have my bones to pick with the blog option for user-created literature. I'm not going to discuss it here though for various reasons:

Well I don't know if you were around when the heat of it was at its worst... but it was bad. You had so many people who thought that a "story" was a paragraph or two. For those who put out maybe a 6/10 effort, the replies to such stories were dry and short and generally terrible. There were a few wordsmiths out there who wrote great BBS stories, kept an audience and generated great discussion.

Really? I posted a story and it was generally well met. I didn't receive any flak from the mods about it at all.

Ban anyone who uses the "Go back to /b/"Meme.It's fucking stupid and it adds absolutely nothing to discussion.

Well, I have not been at Newgrounds for too long, but so far, the BBS is enjoyable. Mods are extremely strict though, but that's not a problem, only stupid people who post bullshit get banned.

So overall, BBS is chill, mods could be a little less strict, but I suppose it is their job.

I just want to throw this into discussion, is that I want to apologise to a couple of people who have PM'd me complaining about bans, and their (what I perceive to be) immature attitudes have grated on me and they've found themselves with bans extended by a factor of 5 or 6.

I want to apologise for this attitude I've been carrying around. I rarely ban people these days for things that aren't completely obvious, but suddenly when people PM me I get all high and mighty.

I'm not perfect, and I apologise to two people in particular who I've dished out ludicrous extensions because they've called me nasty words in private messages.

Sorry.

I've been noticing lately that a lot of Mods have serious attitude problems not naming anyone but some of them either need to get off their high horse and others need to stop letting their personal feelings about users conflict with how they act. I'm not getting banned often. But i find it just as rude for a moderator to treat another user with disrespect in a topic, as it is for a user to treat another user with disrespect. I'm not trying to be a hypocrite either. I am definately an asshole at times when i see a stupid topic. But i don't go around following a specific user, or repeatedly offending a certain user as i notice certain mods doing.

They should be setting an example. And if they see someone doing something that doesn't abide by the rules they should send a warning PM. Personally i would really love a warning PM. Otherwise how do any of us know what we are doing wrong? it took me years to realize i should just be VERY VERY careful as to what i post. But sometimes it would help a lot more if a mod would just give me a warning instead of banning me instantly. I find it offensive that users who generally don't cause trouble on the BBS aren't given a chance to stop whatever they may be doing and instead having to receive a ban.

At 5/31/09 03:35 PM, Zerok wrote: Well I don't know if you were around when the heat of it was at its worst... but it was bad. You had so many people who thought that a "story" was a paragraph or two. For those who put out maybe a 6/10 effort, the replies to such stories were dry and short and generally terrible. There were a few wordsmiths out there who wrote great BBS stories, kept an audience and generated great discussion.

I do remember what was there, and I remember VeryProudOfYa's thread announcing the ban as official (I'm aware that was a collective decision, rather than just VPOY's). I was frustrated with it at the time, but it was the right decision, I know now. It's for this reason I brought up the notion in my last post that, say if literature was un-banned here, that it would need to be regulated constantly. That has its own drawbacks of course, potentially stifling a writer's creativity for instance, and it would be as subjective as always.

As you say, I'll look forward to the Literature Portal patiently, and keep getting involved with what's here. I'm personally not a fan of the blog system for a few reasons, but I'll tolerate it, because it's good for practical reasons with the BBS, as you mentioned.

At 5/31/09 03:41 PM, Zerok wrote: That's where my awesome algorithms would come in. There'd be "weighted" votes, much like how the Flash Portal works, but no one would really know what their "forum voting power" was, or if bans affected it, etc. Some people would have a power of exactly ZERO, but wouldn't know it. Fine tuned properly, the model would accurately correlate with quality posters receiving the proper recognition, in spite of system abusers.

I'd support a system like that, put I don't think tom, and the admins will go with it due tho them planning on deleting the forums anyway. :( But it can turn around if you word stuff correctly.

The more power spread around the better, "The lust for absolute power is the natural disease of monarchy" - Thomas Paine, Common sense.

At 5/31/09 11:00 AM, Jonas wrote: What can moderators be doing better? Is there something that annoys you about how things happen, or is there something you would like to see happen?

for me bring back the asm would get me back full time but thats not gonna happen so on to more commonsense style jargin
the mods need to lighten up in general
The bbs when i first came had less then a handfull and it took a hell of a lot to get baned back then. but at the same time i rememer logging in and my name being the only one in the bbs sometimes...and now theres what a good 100+ on at any given time so the need for more mods was unavoidable. But theres no room for a joke to be built any more. Think what would have happened to the hawtstanzaboys if they had not come along till now as opposed to several years back when the bbs was more like the wild west...where a mod didnt ban unless you REALLY fucked up or they jsut didnt like you.

delete the BBS

I'm noticing that some users aren't enjoying the BBS, or worse leaving, and that's not best thing to see.

I dont enjoy the bbs anymore cause its not fun anymore
ill post in a serious topic seldom and a alsmot funny one even less cause there arnt any that are LOL funny any more. Hell i used to be able to get drunk and come on and laugh the night away while listening to radiogrounds and using Ng chat on irc. now ill skim the general page once a day if even.

I actually just cleared several bans and sent apologies out solely because I made a mistake, and should have sent a warning to the users instead of banning them, and I want your guys opinion.

thats nice of you and pretty big to put it out there

If you make a shitty post, I'll delete it, but realistically, let's chat and talk about how we can make the BBS a solid fun place again. It's cool if you don't see anything wrong with the BBS, and it's better if you can help me figure out what the users think.

you were a user once...what do you think...you cant make the bbs fun again by yourself...it takes a buch of good hearted(or really evil) people quasi spamming a silly thread to make a good time really happen.

What can be improved on the BBS?

DISCLAIMER - Your opinion may be ignored if you're stupid.

lol its newgrounds thats a pretty bold statment there buddy
I dont know part of it is the lack of some older users...not cause they new how to tell a joke but because they taught the new guys how to tell a joke before they moved on in life and became lurkers themselves. Now most of said people wont even lurk any more. but theres still hope. just start giving threads a fewpages to liven up. way back when there were topics that didnt pick up untill the 3rd or 4th page sometimes simply cause some people who had the ability to make it worth posting hadnt had the chance to see it yet untill someone else revived it for no real reason.
new inside jokes would be nice too
and someold ones wouldnt hurt if we could pull em off right.
but most of all jsut start having fun again...casue if the mods keep looking at their modship as an unpaid over worked job then thats all its gonna be...but in reality you guys are supposed to be the cream of the comedy crop

At 5/31/09 03:38 PM, Twilight wrote: And was this thread made because of Willi?

Maybe it was inspired. Either way, history predicts he'll be back, unless his IRL life (IRLL, that's right) changes drastically. Maybe not for a few months... but those who have heard General's siren song often have a hard time cleansing themselves of it.

At 5/31/09 03:42 PM, WeHaveFreshCookies wrote: Really? I posted a story and it was generally well met. I didn't receive any flak from the mods about it at all.

Good example of the fact that there's bound to be exceptions to every rule, or infractions missed. Had I caught that when you posted it, I'd've locked it and redirected it to your blog. It's not a personal thing, but rather because I was behind the motion to ban fiction and still am, for reasons detailed in my response to Scarab. Now since it's grown I'd have to investigate the quality of the responses before making an administrative decision.

But I won't in this case just because I'm aware it'd be a bit of dick move to break down the process of your volunteered example and then mush it in your face if I deem it lockworthy. But you know, if it gets bumped in a month after being dead by a spammer, noob, or pointlessly by you then I'd have to reconsider it.

At 5/31/09 03:42 PM, WeHaveFreshCookies wrote: Really? I posted a story and it was generally well met. I didn't receive any flak from the mods about it at all.

But you know, if it gets bumped in a month after being dead by a spammer, noob, or pointlessly by you then I'd have to reconsider it.

I see. I'd understand a lock in that case, but I actually wasn't aware that story threads were against the rules until now. That explains why I only see them in blogs nowadays.

Changing the system, while ideally is the best idea, it's impractical. I don't see why moderators can't take banning users more seriously, right now a ban is just a thing that happens, they should be taken more seriously. I won't deny it, I avoid bans and I've always done it. I got a 30 day ban on my original account and I waited the entire 30 days without posting on any accounts, then I got another and avoided it, absolutely nothing bad happened to me so I've just ended up doing it.

Why can't moderators see bans as a serious thing? if someone posts a spam topic, why should I be banned for posting in it? Every ban I've ever had has done nothing but make me go do something else for a few days, it hasn't made me think "oh gee, I should really start posting better!" because bans aren't something that are taken seriously, they're handed out willy nilly and have absolutely no value or consequences.

I like the idea of a warning system, but it's overly complicated and pretty erroneous, why can't it be a matter of a moderator checking the users most recent posts, if they're okay and it was a one off then just delete the post, if they're clearly a repeat offended then you ban them for 10 days or so, one or two day bans are ridiculously unnecessary, especially when getting them just at the end of the day, what does a 5 hour ban do? Nothing.

If moderators stopped handing out bans so often, took into consideration a users post count, post history and standing within the community it'd be perfectly fine, if ZAAL posts in a spam thread, someone who clearly is a regular here and posts well, why should he be banned? It's not even extra work for the moderators, hell, it'd reduce the load because you'd have less people bitching over bans that they don't understand.

TL;DR: System doesn't need remaking, moderators just need to be more considerate when banning.

At 5/31/09 03:48 PM, HellboundNinja wrote: for me bring back the asm would get me back full time but thats not gonna happen so on to more commonsense style jargin

This is killing me. I can not for the life of me remember what ASM means.

At 5/31/09 03:52 PM, yhar wrote: because bans aren't something that are taken seriously, they're handed out willy nilly and have absolutely no value or consequences.

That's not entirely true... bans have been particularly effective at stomping out memes or banned words in General. I'd assume they'd be just as useful in other forums.

I like the idea of a warning system, but it's overly complicated and pretty erroneous, why can't it be a matter of a moderator checking the users most recent posts,

An automated warning system would be cool though. A button on every post that you can send a warning and warning message with.

especially when getting them just at the end of the day, what does a 5 hour ban do? Nothing.

If I ban you for a day at 11:59pm I'm pretty sure it wont expire in one minute. Or does it? I have never known it work on a midnight/server backup expiry.

If moderators stopped handing out bans so often, took into consideration a users post count, post history and standing within the community it'd be perfectly fine,

Yeah but that requires every mod to adhere to the same standards. Which brings us back to square one.

You can't force a group of volunteers to do that without any initiative. That sort of thing would need to lead by the admins or a dedicated group of mods with no IRL commitments.

At 5/31/09 03:57 PM, Jonas wrote: This is killing me. I can not for the life of me remember what ASM means.

Amateur Sig Makers? Maybe? I think.

At 5/31/09 03:57 PM, Jonas wrote: This is killing me. I can not for the life of me remember what ASM means.

Awesome?

At 5/31/09 03:15 PM, Zerok wrote:



In my fantasies, I'll see a system that doesn't just punish bad BBS behaviour but overtly rewards good behaviour. Some sort of stat! It would run similarly to the whistle system (people can up-vote good posts) with all sort of intricate and clever hidden algorithms to prevent spam and refine the "scores" such that GOOD posters would have shiny profile credentials and people would aspire to achieve them.

Eh, I don't really see the point of that. So the users are treated like little children who get a cookie for remembering to wash their hands after using the restroom? I don't think little stats should be deserved for using common sense and half-way intelligent posting.

BUT.

That kind of shit would take a long ass time for our staff to whip up and test. Like I said, is there really a need to put so much effort into such a thing? For what? To appease a few hundred folks who aren't REALLY being that inconvenienced?

Those 'few hundred folks' are probably the users who like to visit this forum on a daily basis, it's just a much better way of creating an understanding between regular users and the moderators, imo.

Creates less hostility, less complaints and less headaches. I mean yeah, it's the internet and bans really aren't that big of a deal. But putting in that extra effort can go a long way, and in this case, less problems for you guys to handle.

They could rather be working on something major and awesome (*cough* Art Portal *cough* Lit Portal) that affects tons of people everywhere positively.

Possibly, but I'm thinking those forums will just sprout up even more problems and complaints. My suggestion is to fix the current problem before creating a new one.

I'm glad to hear an open moderator like this. For one, just delete those +1 replies, such as:

Thread: What should I make with this?
Reply: A glowing dildo.

Thread: I got this bump on my hand. What should I do?
Reply: Piss on it.

Thread: Guess what I found?
Reply: An amputated dick.

etc, etc. I'm seriously sick of it. That's the biggest reason I don't post as much.

Wow, I'm already seeing changes.

Much respect to the mods.

At 5/31/09 03:57 PM, Jonas wrote:

At 5/31/09 03:48 PM, HellboundNinja wrote: for me bring back the asm would get me back full time but thats not gonna happen so on to more commonsense style jargin

This is killing me. I can not for the life of me remember what ASM means.

Awesome Sig Makers? (I remember the sinister sigmakers as well)

And you can blame me and Life and for pushing for that...

HellboundNinja, If you can come up with a good opening post though and solid way of running it and dealing with the drama (as in reducing it), I don't have a problem with it being remade. The NGSM is supposed to be for everyone, but I have no problems with a few really skilled people getting together and using the NGSM as a training ground. I just would prefer not to see the in fighting and back and forths with people wanting sigs that happened before.

I still seriously believe that a large problem stems from the people who are chosen to keep this place going.

I'm not going to point fingers and anyone specific because that'll result in everyone feeling hurt or whatever because of what I said, but some Moderators are just assholes. But because these assholes have power over us, some people have begun siding with them in an attempt to, I guess, gain influence or protection. We really just need to stop idolizing assholes who have managed to get some type of sway.

At 5/31/09 04:01 PM, X-TERRORIST-X wrote: Wow, I'm already seeing changes.

Pfft. I don't see shit,

If mods were just a little less Nazi like, but still strict or even stricter than they are now.
If a mod doesn't like a topic, they shouldn't delete/lock it unless the majority of people don't like it too.
Also some of the other forums need more mod activity in them, Like the VG forum, you hardly get mods coming in there throughout the day.