Here Ye, Hear Me

[Firmus Piett]

You seem to have single handedly chased him off ASVS.org.

Brian left several months after the debate he had with 359 ended, not during it. It was a series of heated fallings out with SCVN which led to them both leaving if I recall, as well as family commitment. He's also a very slow typer apparently, which could perhaps be one of the reasons for preferring video responses to questions.

[Admiral Breetai]

wow...people are seriously up in arms because of Mikes harmless but hilariously patronizing post? Just how thin skinned is this Bryan dude.

Christ no wonder why Star Wars fans have such hatred for us comic/anime guys...any debate even mundane friendly arguments between friends involves invective and calling someone a retard when they say something dumb...raiding CBR must have been assisted suicide then...because really vs debating in its modern form is a million times more hostile and competitive...this guy'd be sobbing in a closet if he tried to post on the major forums of today.

There is nothing insulting there...tldr: thicker god damn skin

[Praeothmin]

Well, Breetai, some of the people here complained about the same type of expletitive arguments from the SW crowd, mainly over at SDN...

[Mike DiCenso]

Praeo, it isn't simply foul language that people get upset about, its the more extreme behavior that accompanies such things, such as shouting down someone or ignoring their arguments and evidence most of the time in favor of rhetoric, and then even more extreme behavior such as internet stalking, posting people's addresses, looking into their backgrounds, etc.
-Mike

[2046]

Hey, Lucky, where did you see that Mr. Young had blocked Mike DiCenso? I just checked the Cherry Pick video and Mr. Young's page as well, too. Not a sign.

He mentions it in the comments section of the Picking Cherries video.

And to be honest, I don't blame him

"And after I said all that stuff about you being good..."

Mike's comment is quite out-of-line in many ways.

"I think you are full of shit."

"By the way, you said"

For starters, the tone is completely demeaning

". That is a lie."

and the wording is insulting.

"Okay, let's assume [your idea], just to wank off."

I realize that Mike has mentioned that he was really irritated when he wrote it and he felt Brian was using the complaints about insults to dodge the issue, but that doesn't make it any less inappropriate.

"So, even wanking off to this ridiculous idea, it comes nowhere near anything you guys claim in this thread."

2) What about the SFJ wiki bothers Brian so much? Is it wiki's in general that he hates? If he wanted something changed then why not ask?

When Brian comes here he sees a lot of personal insults directed at him throughout several threads.

"You obviously have no interest in serious debate."

From that he decided that people over here only know to use venom.

"You may have testicles after all! "

And I tend to agree that several specific, and yet to be named, individuals over here have not been respecting Brian as a individual and person on a consistent basis.

"Well, it is quotes of your statements, after all. What did you expect, intelligence?"

There have been numerous bouts of insults to his intelligence, personality, and even his voice.

"You are a bumbling idiot." "And your reasoning, evidence, or statement that shows this completely illogical point is where?"

Just earlier in this thread there was this regarding a minor typo he made in one of the comments on his youtube video.:

Mike DiscohahahahahahHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Guy's talented after all. :P

And there have been many more instances spread across many threads, especially in this Other Websites section.

"This is totally made up."

Because of this I totally understand his decision to avoid Starfleet Jedi entirely. While it is an exaggeration that there are only trolls here who only know how to insult and provide no technical discussion, it has its basis in fact.

"your ignorance will be preserved for a very long time, for all to see."

And all of this is quite surprising to me, I never personally went through 'Ye ol' days' of the debate. But this is beginning to sound a bit to similar to what I have heard about some of its more negative aspects.
Additionally isn't the main rule of this board supposed to be

All discourse is to be reasonable, polite, and informative.

With more emphasis on the polite bit in this case. And more specifically

• No flaming. Insults, attacks, and rudeness all serve as obstacles to discourse; they will not be tolerated.

Yet this is exactly what has occurred on many occasions specifically involving Brian. Do comments about someone's voice sounding like "banjo twang" really have a place on a board that prides itself on providing an environment of reasonable discourse?

"What do you think I am, an endless ranter like you?" "But then again, I had to do some pretty serious posting before you became embarrassed enough to face me like a man."

Furthermore, something that keeps occurring here which Brian has mentioned bothers him is constantly associating him with people from the past such as Wong, Poe, etc... That's the past, now move forward.

"If you refer to my association with some of your debating foes, it has nothing to do with that." "My association with Mike, Wayne, etc. goes back many years. Probably to mid-1997." "But that is no reason to treat you the way I have witnessed.

I am almost embarrassed to say that this is one reason I offered to meet you. I have a bit of a star status among SciFi tech fans, and I thought you would feel better by meeting me. ::blushes:: "

So getting to the crux of things, is this place just becoming another SDN*, or are we ready to stop being childish and get back to this silly, pointless, and above all else: fun debate. :)

"This is a good model on which to base an essay on how not to debate."

"My response to this message was "Welcome to the hatemail page, "idiot."
:)"
By the way, Sean's e-mail address is londoau@[REDACTED].com.au "

Oh, and regarding the wiki, the wording could do with being changed I think that could be a simple misunderstanding between 'answer to' (as in crimes) and 'answer questions about'

"Who do you think you are fooling with this doubletalk?"

*Didn't really want to include a comparison to another party as if they were inherently negative, but I think it'll help get the point across.

"I wasn't patting myself on the back. I was insulting you for being a coward."

[2046]

Sorry, 359, I wasn't picking on you. As you know, I respect you and your work very much, and it alarms me greatly to see you fall into the trap being set here.

Also, the "Mike Disco" thing wasn't a typo . . . Brian acknowledged it as intentional in the Q&A named after Mike. He mentions having an iPad so I assumed it might've been an auto-correct thing, too, but it turned out it wasn't. So, he made fun of Mike's name. Aren't we supposed to be above that sort of thing?

In any case, my last message was composed entirely of quotes of Brian Young, many from his BabTech-onthe.Net Hatemail page (which, I believe, dated from circa 2002), one from feedback he left and associated e-mails (posting permission: "If you wish"), and also some from StarDestroyer.Net at the 2010/2011 border, just to give you a sense of the continuity of the behavior.

Don't get me wrong . . . I'm certain someone could 'cherry pick' quotes of me in similar fashion, and probably find much worse far more easily (hint: I just re-read the SWST debate), much as Brian chose to 'cherry pick' a couple of my pages to attack in his recent videos (all while completely fabricating the idea that I used them in a debate to counter "all the other examples" or words to that effect, which didn't happen).

And I'm not trying to damn Brian here . . . we all get frustrated with our opponents. We're human beings, and beyond that we've all been hanging out amongst this subculture of nonsense where ill-mannered people reside, many if not most for a decade or more. Certainly I have openly shown frustration with people here friend and foe, and from time to time I've had to eat crow. It's delicious. But to try to claim that StarfleetJedi is a hive of scum and villainy while hanging out at SDN is just so counterfactual as to be flagrant about it, kind of like that odd claim that we dissed Brian's appearance that Tyralak made on Page 4 of the original thread about Brian's new website. (I can't find any reference to that in the posts prior to that one.)

But put simply, Brian Young's history of behavior is basically similar to that of Mike Wong . . . he just F-bombed less, and hasn't incited his sycophants to board raids, home visit planning, et cetera.

Nowadays, Brian has accused me of poisoning the well for posting a review of his site in response to another person's review . . . all I said was that I didn't think his arguments stand up to scrutiny. And, in the interests of fair play, I've been watching and listening to some of his videos lately, and I stand by that statement and intend to demonstrate it further in the coming days.

Now, if Brian Young wants to acknowledge the past and turn over a new leaf, that's fine . . . but just as I would not expect to be welcomed with open arms at SDN given the history of mutual loathing (though, for the record, I even let Mike Wong join my forum, if warily (and rightly so)), Brian Young shouldn't have expected in 2012 to be able to pop back in to the community acting less caustic and have people immediately forget his past behavior and give him hugs and kisses, especially if he's now going to mischaracterize this place as badly as he's done. As Brian might've said back in the day, it seems as if the "guy snipes at {us} from the safety of" his site and is "refusing to contact me directly by e-mail and face me like a man", and all that nonsense.

Personally, I don't care if he does, doesn't, did, or didn't want to come here. After all, we should be "small potatoes to me, and certainly don't qualify as anything frightening" as he once told someone who didn't have his "star status". But that's no excuse to try to poison the well by declaring that there's not a gentleman amongst this group.

You have to earn a tabula rasa, and if the truth is that he can dish it out but really and truly can't take it . . . well, then maybe his videos after May 2012 shouldn't include references to fanatics, intellectual dishonesty, "No True Scotsman" fallacies, and so on regarding those who might disagree with his assertions . . . and here I have yet to even mention the latest exchanges against "Mike Disco".

I think I really hit the nail on the head on page five of the original thread about Young's then-new site in 2012.

Now, is there room for improvement in our tone and demeanor? I'm sure that could always be said to be true of anyone and at anytime. Certainly I wouldn't mind having time to do a second version of the old "Battle of Britain" that involved fewer repetitions of "stupid Ossus", though having that sort of stress relief did help keep me awake while I was doing it. And as noted, the same room for improvement could be said of Brian in his videos. But to put it simply, unless there was a forum that was actually populated by Vulcans, there is almost no site in the world where such a polarized topic could possibly be discussed as (relatively) calmly. Even professional scientists can't help themselves sometimes, and haven't been able to as far back as the 1860 Oxford debate on evolution where one debater asked the other which side of his family the monkey was on.

I mean, goodness . . . my posts relating to the banjo twang were simply for comedy, and if Brian weren't trying to act all thin-skinned all of the sudden he'd have probably said 'touche' and chuckled. It isn't like he doesn't counsel people to ignore Wong's vitriol, after all. But hey, at least he has a great lawsuit pending where he can sue the creators of Swamp People and Duck Commander for emotional distress.

That's why I just can't buy into the whole "y'all are so mean" schtick. I find it hard to accept that someone who has been such a "star" in the jackass side of the subculture could possibly get depressed and stay in bed all weekend because folks here were less than impressed and found traces of "likely dishonest" "cherry-picking" and whatnot, especially given that the exact same thing had been said on SDN at the same time (though he was more than content to go hang out over there), and given he'd said worse of his *allies* 18 months beforehand on that same board, the board of a friend of his for a decade-and-a-half for whom being a total mocking jackass is the very trademark and mission statement.

Also, in 2000, he said the following regarding his Babylon 5 foes:

November 21: This website will close within weeks. I grow tired of all
the flames and insults. I am so hated by the fan community that I have
received death threats from at least two people in as many days. One
idiot even defended these people. I am a Christian man, but I have been
driven to the point of cursing and swearing at these detractors. I
cannot allow this to happen. I have lost a lot of faith in humanity over
this, but especially Babylon 5 fans. I have really worked hard on this
project, and all I get in return is poachers of my files, insults, death
threats, and miscellaneous headaches. My beautiful fiance', Valerie, is
frightened over this recent episode. I am very protective of her, and
will not allow anything to have such an effect on her. She openly cried
this evening. I am driven to the point that I don't enjoy Babylon 5
anymore. I will not renew my next year's account with Dreamhost.

As he later described one of the death threats to me, someone posted a map of his area with a nuclear weapon effect overlay on it and said that 'Brian gets what's coming to him' or something.

So let's acknowledge the realities, here. Brian Young didn't appreciate the banjo ribbing in 2012 for which I apologized at the time and, having forgotten doing so, apologized again just recently at NerdCulture. He also didn't appreciate the negative reviews of his work which featured assorted debate-related insults relating to the honesty of his arguments and so on.

That's fine and dandy, but you know what I'd have called a day like that where foes were commenting on my work and that's as harsh as it got? Do you know what I'd have called a day where someone posted a nuke map of my house, and little more?

A pretty fucking good Thursday, that's what.

So, with apologies to Brian, once a denier of his opponent's testicles, I do sincerely hope he will man up and actually respond to Mike's points rather than leave that Q&A gloss job as the only reply. He could use the practice, because more is coming.

[2046]

While I assume most interested comment-readers at NerdCulture will make their way here (and given the slender text area and a-chronological posting method in use I would hardly want to crosspost from here), I did just post the following over there, which sort of summarizes all of the above:

Indeed, David, I would like, first, to apologize for trying to be rather overly diplomatic with the answer regarding which fanbase is more crazily vitriolic. As I’ve been re-reading some old stuff lately (including stuff of Brian Young’s from 2002-2011) I’ve been quite reminded of just how bad the bad behavior has commonly been among some of the old crowd. We all openly show human frustration with our most intractable foes from time to time, and while Brian suffered from that affliction just as much as I have (and oh yes, I have), it is true that he didn’t try to incite home visits and other nonsense like his allies.

Part of my answer was based on the fact that I had, shortly before the interview, rediscovered the fact that I’d ceased communication in 2002 with that guy from the Section 31 project we discussed, after he’d expressed frustration with Wong and his allies in a very inappropriate manner, suggesting his own home visit of the sort fomented at StarDestroyer.Net.

Now, I realize that Brian chose not to distance himself from those who engaged in a wide array of similarly inappropriate behavior against myself and others back in the day, despite acknowledging knowing about it at the time (and having received similar from Babylon 5 fans regarding his website years before), but I do nevertheless applaud him for trying to strike a somewhat more professional tone now, even if he did choose to make fun of “Mike Disco” immediately after talking about how ill-mannered he felt the StarfleetJedi guys were.

There will be a further reply on my site/blog/wherever regarding his rather unfortunate mentions of my site during his Picking Cherries video, along with further commentary on the arguments he presents in his videos. Since he has suggested in the recent videos that the new Brian is, alas, somewhat less capable of dealing with less-than-constructive criticism than the old Brian was at dishing it out, I promise to be as kind as I can . . . but, no matter the tales about one’s youth, I do still intend to call it as I see it.

Also, my compliments to Brian for opening his heart, as he put it . . . I could tell stories of my life and times, too, but I don’t, because my adversaries . . . his old allies . . . were the sort to use that sort of thing against me, as they proved when I told the tale about a crazy stalker (hence the websites with my personal information as a one-stop shop for anyone who might wish to do me harm). That’s why I didn’t accept a guest spot on a TV show once and won’t be responding via video now . . . because I didn’t and don’t want my most psychotic foes knowing what I look like. However, I’m glad that his prior relationship with those same people largely shields him from having to worry about such things.

Maybe sometime Brian and I could really go into detail about the Talifan behavior we’ve seen and see if we can ally against it wherever it may be found. But, as long as the relationship retains its current flavor, I somehow have the sense there wouldn’t be any interest.

Thanks again,

Robert of ST-v-SW.Net

[359]

Sorry, 359, I wasn't picking on you. As you know, I respect you and your work very much, and it alarms me greatly to see you fall into the trap being set here.

I wasn't quite sure what to make of it at first...

And for it being a trap, maybe, but most of my complaints were pre-existing just not voiced. It's odd from my perspective as I am not normally one to respond pathos arguments, really at all. But with some distance I can see I did overreact a bit. However I do maintain that I was made uncomfortable with several things being said at various points in time. That being said I was not around for the bad parts of the debate, having only started watching it back in 2011, so I probably see online insults in the debates on a slightly different scale when compared to many others.

And while I strongly disagree with the tone of Mike's comment, I do agree with the content. Even though I sympathize with Brian in this situation, this does not affect how I will comment on the material and arguments he puts forward. He, as a person, has my sympathies for he clearly feels upset (justified or not) however his arguments do not.

[2046]

Sorry, 359, I wasn't picking on you. As you know, I respect you and your work very much, and it alarms me greatly to see you fall into the trap being set here.

I wasn't quite sure what to make of it at first...

And for it being a trap, maybe, but most of my complaints were pre-existing just not voiced. It's odd from my perspective as I am not normally one to respond pathos arguments, really at all. But with some distance I can see I did overreact a bit. However I do maintain that I was made uncomfortable with several things being said at various points in time. That being said I was not around for the bad parts of the debate, having only started watching it back in 2011, so I probably see online insults in the debates on a slightly different scale when compared to many others.

And your perspective is certainly valid. I feel certain that we have, ourselves, slipped a bit in this "culture war", as re-reading older threads seems to suggest. But we are far from "I have met the enemy and he is us" levels… we simply stared into the abyss and let it stare into us a touch.

It is harder to maintain immaculate manners than it is to dispense with them, but it takes effort to really cross ethical lines such as posting personal information.

We all have room for improvement, even Brian, but I'll be damned if I am going to fail to argue against bad claims because of a guy's own "pro hominem"… to do so would be just as bad as cowering from someone's ad hominem.

It is the arguments, not the man, But in this case, the argument is the man, seemingly by his own choice, which is why this whole thing is silly.

[Lucky]

I wasn't quite sure what to make of it at first...

And for it being a trap, maybe, but most of my complaints were pre-existing just not voiced. It's odd from my perspective as I am not normally one to respond pathos arguments, really at all. But with some distance I can see I did overreact a bit. However I do maintain that I was made uncomfortable with several things being said at various points in time. That being said I was not around for the bad parts of the debate, having only started watching it back in 2011, so I probably see online insults in the debates on a slightly different scale when compared to many others.

And while I strongly disagree with the tone of Mike's comment, I do agree with the content. Even though I sympathize with Brian in this situation, this does not affect how I will comment on the material and arguments he puts forward. He, as a person, has my sympathies for he clearly feels upset (justified or not) however his arguments do not.

The "tone" of Mike's comment? While Brian took ofense from the first line, I fail to see a clearly definable tone in the post itself. It could be taken as Mike joking around or Mike frustrated with Brian's behavior.

+++++

I haven't seen anything from Brian that says his sob stories are anything other then stories in a lame attempt to get sympathy so that his critics will stop being critical of his videos. All my life I've seen it over and over again, the big bad bully who picks on the little guy meets someone who pushes back, and so the big bad bully runs to mommy for help with fake tears in their eyes and a mouth full of lies.

I've seen far too much of this sort of tug at your heart strings B.S. to be moved by. You shouldn't fall for such obvious psychological tactics.

[Lucky]

wow...people are seriously up in arms because of Mikes harmless but hilariously patronizing post? Just how thin skinned is this Bryan dude.

Christ no wonder why Star Wars fans have such hatred for us comic/anime guys...any debate even mundane friendly arguments between friends involves invective and calling someone a retard when they say something dumb...raiding CBR must have been assisted suicide then...because really vs debating in its modern form is a million times more hostile and competitive...this guy'd be sobbing in a closet if he tried to post on the major forums of today.

There is nothing insulting there...tldr: thicker god damn skin

We aren't up in arms over what Mike said really. It is more that this site has rules of conduct that often get fudged, and that Mike's purposes would have been better served had he ;left off the first sentence of his comment on the Youtube page.

We try not to be internet bullies.

+++++

Given Brian considers this page an attack on his "integrity"

Brian Young is a semi-active researcher of science fiction technology, and though once a long time versus debater, he is no longer openly active. He is the author of the BabTech on the Net and Turbolaser Commentaries websites, but no longer maintains or updates either site, the latter is maintained as part of the StarDestroyer.Net website run by Michael Wong. The Turblaser Commentaries site was often cited by many pro-Wars versus debators since Young's conclusions often favored fairly high-end turbolaser and starfighter blaster firepower estimates.

Behind the scenes, Brian Young was among several versus debators who were consulted by Dr.Curtis Saxton for the AOTC and ROTS ICS books. In particular, Young and Saxton, along a number of well-known versus debators participated in a controversal email group hosted on Wayne Poe's now defunct USVSD website.

Despite having allowed the Babtech and Turbolaser Commentaries to languish and ceased debating in newsgroups or online forums, Young in April 2012 started a new website called SciFights.net, which uses webcamera recorded video commentaries on various aspects of science fiction technology and "what if" crossover Versus debate scenarios.

Due to the intense controversy some of his video comments created, he has since gone to Tyralak's ASVS forum to try and answer to some of them.

Here is Brian debating some of his videos/claims:
http://forums.asvs.org/index.php?/topic ... s-derived/

This sort of thing is why I'm not all that sympathetic to Brian when it comes to his complaints about other people's behavior. He didn't really care about being nice or polite to people who disagreed with him in the past, and went out of his way to do nasty things like post personal information seemingly out of spite.
http://web.archive.org/web/200710011906 ... email.html

[Lucky]

Brian left several months after the debate he had with 359 ended, not during it. It was a series of heated fallings out with SCVN which led to them both leaving if I recall, as well as family commitment. He's also a very slow typer apparently, which could perhaps be one of the reasons for preferring video responses to questions.

I wasn't being serious when i said that

Again, sorry if that sounds short. It took 30 minutes to type that. Another reason to do video.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... ent=safari

Brian is rather impatient and possibly lazy if he thinks taking 30 minutes to type a post is a long time. If you're going to do something, do it right.

+++++

That thread is assuming in a sad way. The idea that turbolasers draw power from the ships main reactor hasn't been true since episode 4 was first released. You'd think Brian and Saxton would know that?

[Mr. Oragahn]

I wasn't quite sure what to make of it at first...

And for it being a trap, maybe, but most of my complaints were pre-existing just not voiced. It's odd from my perspective as I am not normally one to respond pathos arguments, really at all. But with some distance I can see I did overreact a bit. However I do maintain that I was made uncomfortable with several things being said at various points in time. That being said I was not around for the bad parts of the debate, having only started watching it back in 2011, so I probably see online insults in the debates on a slightly different scale when compared to many others.

And while I strongly disagree with the tone of Mike's comment, I do agree with the content. Even though I sympathize with Brian in this situation, this does not affect how I will comment on the material and arguments he puts forward. He, as a person, has my sympathies for he clearly feels upset (justified or not) however his arguments do not.

The "tone" of Mike's comment? While Brian took ofense from the first line, I fail to see a clearly definable tone in the post itself. It could be taken as Mike joking around or Mike frustrated with Brian's behavior.

+++++

I haven't seen anything from Brian that says his sob stories are anything other then stories in a lame attempt to get sympathy so that his critics will stop being critical of his videos. All my life I've seen it over and over again, the big bad bully who picks on the little guy meets someone who pushes back, and so the big bad bully runs to mommy for help with fake tears in their eyes and a mouth full of lies.

I've seen far too much of this sort of tug at your heart strings B.S. to be moved by. You shouldn't fall for such obvious psychological tactics.

[Teal'c impression]

"Indeed. Those are only the words of a man. I believe true absolution requires meaningful action."

[/Teal'c impression]

[Mr. Oragahn]

Given Brian considers this page an attack on his "integrity"

Brian Young is a semi-active researcher of science fiction technology, and though once a long time versus debater, he is no longer openly active. He is the author of the BabTech on the Net and Turbolaser Commentaries websites, but no longer maintains or updates either site, the latter is maintained as part of the StarDestroyer.Net website run by Michael Wong. The Turblaser Commentaries site was often cited by many pro-Wars versus debators since Young's conclusions often favored fairly high-end turbolaser and starfighter blaster firepower estimates.

Behind the scenes, Brian Young was among several versus debators who were consulted by Dr.Curtis Saxton for the AOTC and ROTS ICS books. In particular, Young and Saxton, along a number of well-known versus debators participated in a controversal email group hosted on Wayne Poe's now defunct USVSD website.

Despite having allowed the Babtech and Turbolaser Commentaries to languish and ceased debating in newsgroups or online forums, Young in April 2012 started a new website called SciFights.net, which uses webcamera recorded video commentaries on various aspects of science fiction technology and "what if" crossover Versus debate scenarios.

Due to the intense controversy some of his video comments created, he has since gone to Tyralak's ASVS forum to try and answer to some of them.

THIS SO CALLED SUMMARY OF HIS ACTIVITY IS TOTALLY UNFAIR AND UTTERLY BIASED.
EVERY SINGLE WORD OF THIS WIKI ARTICLE IS A THINLY VEILED INSULT AND PART OF A CABAL AIMED AT MY CLIENT, BRIAN YOUNG.
YOU HAVE EXACTLY TWO DAYS TO REMOVE THE MATERIAL IN QUESTION OR WE WILL BE FORCED TO TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES TO PUT DOWN THE ENTIRETY OF THIS WEBSITE.







Or maybe those are just objective facts?

[Lucky]

I see where you're coming from, and maybe you should've said something at the time. BTW, which insults are you talking about? I know Mr. Oragahn said things like "perhaps he's just been pulled out of the cryotube. Someone tell him we're in 2013 for crying out loud, not '93!." in regards to how out of date Mr. Young's Death Star Semantics argument was. But is that a real insult? I don't think anyone has called Mr. Young "stupid" or "unintelligent" outright that I can find. I do recall Lucky saying Mr. Young's voice reminded him of a used car salesman. Is that what you meant?

I was comparing Brian's mannerisms to real world used car salesmen I've had to deal with. It was never fun dealing with them even when I wanted the car. They would talk fast in order to make it hard to keep track of everything.