I started to type a reply to this comment and then realized that it illustrated some of the things I've been trying to deal with, so I might as well give it its own entry.

Yesterday, I received the following comment from user LSS_Fanatic regarding my blog about users trying to get banned:

To be honest, I think what you need to do is step back, take a look at where things are here at TV.COM, and ask yourself if you are happy with this situation. Remember when you were just a new person here and wanted to contribute to your favorite shows. Remember how it felt when or if you ever were reprimanded by some editor or moderator on a power trip. I think you do a great job - however, with all of these problems (people leaving, users getting moderated for absurd reasons, etc) you must realize that you are in a position of authority AND responsibility. Don't take either lightly. And don't play hide-away from users who do not have a rating here higher than 30. That is absurd. This is not a place of any significant importance. The moderators need to realize that this is simply a web site - nothing more, nothing less. This hierarchical structure here is nothing but laughable at best. Do what you think is right. Do a blog about something you enjoy, rather than something you feel obligated to do! HAVE FUN. ENJOY this website.

LSS_Fanatic - First of all, my sincerest condolences on your recent loss. I simply can't imagine what you must be going through right now.
That said, I still have to take issue with some of your points. In fact, three things in your comment point out exactly the sort of misunderstandings I've been trying to address:

1. Remember how it felt when or if you ever were reprimanded by some editor or moderator on a power trip.
2. (people leaving, users getting moderated for absurd reasons, etc)
3. The moderators need to realize that this is simply a web site - nothing more, nothing less.

I'll address them one by one.

1) Remember how it felt when or if you ever were reprimanded by some editor or moderator on a power trip.

This is something I hear all the time, and I think it arises from a fundamental misunderstanding about moderators (I am an editor as well, but since we have so many editors on the site, I can't generalize about them as well as I can about the moderators). When some people are moderated they seem to think that it is somehow personal. That a moderator is wringing his hands and giving an evil laugh as he deletes the user's post. The truth is that moderation is a job, like any other. We have a list of things that other users have complained about, we go through that list one by one and determine whether or not there is really a violation of the Terms Of Service. We look at the post in question, we usually call up the thread it was a part of, and we try to tell whether there is any sort of mitigating factor. We also look at the board as a whole and the user's history, to give the situation some context.

The vast majority of such reports are open-and-shut cases. Someone complains that a post contains offensive material, censor bypassing, or flaming, and it very obviously does. The job only gets difficult in two situations: when the case is borderline, or when the user is very close to being suspended or banned. For a borderline case, we will usually bring it up with the other moderators and/or staff, and try to get consensus on how it should be handled. For users who are close to penalties, we slow down and make sure that this and all previous moderations are appropriate. If so, then we suspend them or contact staff and recommend a ban. If not, then we once again bring the situation up with the other mods and/or staff. For example, we have had users who got moderations from other CNET sites which we decided not to count for our purposes.

Sometimes when we look at the rest of the thread or forum (or just when we are moving about the site), we see other problems that we must address. We deal with these in exactly the same fashion.

This system just doesn't have room for "power trips" or personal bias. If any moderator is handing out inappropriate moderations, then they will eventually be found out by the staff and/or the other mods and they will be dealt with. Period.

2) with all of these problems (people leaving, users getting moderated for absurd reasons, etc)

This is actually one of the main reasons I started doing these blogs. I keep hearing accusations that we are moderating people for absurd reasons, but it simly isn't true. Believe me, whenever I read that in a blog or forum post I check the user's moderation history. In virtually every case the user was moderated for a perfectly good reason and there is no way they could not realize it unless they are completely ignorant of the Terms Of Service (and the general rules of netiquette and polite behavior). But since the offending post/signature/picture has been deleted, they can say whatever they want and since we respect the privacy of users, we cannot jump in and refute any of it.

Every once in a while I do come across a moderation that was more borderline. In these cases it is possible that the user didn't realize that their behavior was a problem. That is why moderations are considered warnings rather than punishments. If the user gets the warning that what they were doing was wrong, and then stops doing that thing, then they'll have no problem. If that moderation comes on top of the dozen times they've been caught flaming, cursing, and making lewd posts, then it'll be a problem. But in that case, they are not being suspended or banned because of the borderline moderation, it is because of the entire history of refusing the follow the rules of behavior on the site.

And let me repeat myself: if you honestly believe that you have been moderated unfairly, post a question in "Ask The Mods", send one of us a PM, PM a staff member, or send an email to support@tv.com if you are unable to use the site. You can even blog about it if you want, just don't flame the moderators, staff, or the people you think reported you (and users are almost always wrong about this too) and don't violate the rest of the TOS either (obviously). Despite rumors to the contrary, we will not moderate someone for saying that the don't like TV.com, the mods, the staff, or anything else. If we moderate such messages, it is because of how they say it, not what they say (see the first in this series of blogs for more about this).

3) The moderators need to realize that this is simply a web site - nothing more, nothing less.

The moderators and staff are very much aware of this. First of all, we are all users of the site first and foremost. We all edit our own guides and we all hang out with our friends in the forums and talk about our favorite shows. Second, we don't moderate users out of some misplaced sense of our own importance or the importance of this site. We moderate people because they violate the rules of the site. This is totally standard procedure for any website out there.

Going one step further, we might ask why the rules were devised in the first place. Well, the Terms of Service were mostly written when the site launched, and in fact are very similar to the rules from back in the days of TV Tome (only there were so few moderators then that the rules weren't enforced very well or very consistently, and then everyone complained about that). Some of the rules were changed to address the realities of this much larger site, some based on CNET's extensive experience with running such sites, and others in response to user complaints since the site opened. In every case, the rules are designed to protect other users from behavior that would make the site less pleasant for them. Being moderated because you called another user a bad name may not be very fun, but neither is the experience of having another user call you a bad name. Censor bypassing (partially hiding disallowed words, like "j*rk" if "jerk" were a curse word) may seem like no big deal to you, but many users (and the parents of many younger users) feel differently. "Spamming," talking off-topic, taking over threads and turning them into group conversations, all may seem like innocent fun to some, but to other users it means that they cannot find or participate in the conversations for which they came to the site in the first place.

In the end, all we are trying to do is to make the forums (and the site as a whole) more enjoyable for the majority of users. We don't think that this is some great work, we are just users of the site who volunteered at a time of need to help keep the forums fun and usable for everyone.

---

Finally, there are a couple things in this post that I don't think I quite understand.

"And don't play hide-away from users who do not have a rating here higher than 30. That is absurd."

I'm not sure what you mean by "hide-away" and I assume that by "rating" you mean "level." If I'm correct in this, I can at least assure you that we do not give preferential treatment to users based on their level. The first few levels are used to limit access to certain features (we want to be sure you're an actual user and not a salesman or a bot before we let you do things like use HTML in the forums or create your own topics). Otherwise, the levels are strictly for fun.

I'm also a little unclear on what you mean about the "hierarchical structure here". Is this also about levels?

Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I hope this became something informative for everyone.

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

This really goes beyond a simple misunderstanding, but I wanted to talk about it here for a minute. My fellow moderator Gislef has been posting some blog entries similar to these, and his latest one hits on a subject that has been bugging me for days now.

Misunderstanding #3: I'm going to protest all these bannings by making the mods ban me!

I've talked before about the moderation process, so you all should know that we don't ban people lightly and almost never without a fairly large number of moderations. But sometimes the friends of a banned user are convinced that they are totally innocent and that the mods are just drunk with power. For some reason, a few of these disgruntled users decide that the best revenge would be to get banned themselves. Sometimes an individual will demand that we ban them (in a blog or forum, often, rather than actually sending us a PM) and other times a large number of users will start flagrantly violating the TOS with protest threads (in show forums), threats against mods and staff, and other unruly behavior.

This, of course, means that we have to ban them too.

(NOTE: I should clarify that the moderators do not actually ban people, only staff can do that. All we can do is to tell staff whether or not we believe a user should be banned. I know I have mentioned this several times before, but it was pointed out to me that this phrasing may cause confusion.)

Once again, we honestly do not enjoy banning people. Heck, it would make our lives easier if we didn't have to (we're all users and editors and have plenty of other, more fun things that we would rather be doing) but in situations like this we really have no choice.

If someone demands that we ban them, and we ignore them, they are very likely to start spamming, posting obscenities, disrupting forums, and throwing other such tantrums until we notice them and ban them. So, we take these requests seriously. If someone wants to be banned, we try our best to oblige them.

And in the case of a forum gone mad, all we can do is to keep moderating the violations of the TOS until the users responsible are suspended or banned.

Please note that in both of these cases the original banned user is still banned (or whatever other perceived slight started the problem is still unresolved).

My advice:

1) Do not violate the TOS.

This is the most basic point. If you violate the TOS then we simply have to moderate you. Then you get suspended or banned and your friends start raising hell and the vicious circle goes on. Do not create protest threads in show forums because they are off topic and will be locked and/or deleted. Do not get threatening or abusive toward the mods, the staff, or anyone else. Do not spam your concerns across various threads and/or forums.

2) Use your blog to vent.

As I said above, do not flame anyone or post anything inflammatory (see the earlier blog about what you say vs. how you say it). This, however, is a good way to express your concerns in a place where other users can reply and start a conversation in comments, and no one can say that it is off-topic. If you're mad/upset about missing friends and want to talk with other friends about the situation, then this is a good option.

3) Make a suggestion in the TV.com Ideas board

If you think that a rule is unfair, or that a situation should be handled differently, then here is a place where you can make suggestions. Staff members read every thread in this forum, though they may not always be able to answer. If you can explain eloquently what you think should be changed, why it would be a good idea, and how the system should work instead, then you have a much better chance of staff acting on your idea than if you get yourself and your friends banned from the site.

Oh, and all the users who say "how dare they work on this new feature when they haven't even done what I want them to do yet?" Well, this is why. Ideas that are mentioned here and have a lot of support are often given higher priority when there is a choice to be made. I highly recommend using this board.

4) Leave us a message in the "Ask The Mods " forum.

If you think that your friend was moderated in error (or you were, for that matter) then you can come to this forum and leave us a message. One of the mods will answer every question.(NOTE: Remember that we cannot and will not discuss any other user's moderation history with you. This would be one way to tell us if you think a user was moderated unfairly and why. In the interests of privacy, though, it would be best to use the next method if you want to include any details.)

5) Send us a personal message.

As of this writing the moderators are angelandspike , GeorgeFergus , Gislef , Studog2961 , Villafan , and yours truly. If you forget, just click the "Forums" button at the top of the site and you'll go to a screen where you can link to any of us (and some staff folks) and send PMs, read our blogs, etc. If there is a way we can help, we will.

6) Talk to staff.

If you honestly feel that we can't help you, or have some grievance with the mods specifically, go to the Forums page and click any of the staff links there. And if you cannot reach anyone that way, try sending email to support@tv.com and explaining your situation.

---

You may notice that I'm repeating myself quite a bit in this series of blogs. Well, that's just because it's so easy to do things the right way here. There are a few basic rules to follow, and a few ways that things should be done. And there are plenty of people here to help if you're not sure on any detail. Just read the rules, familiarize yourself with the site, and there should be no reason to fear the mods.

That's it for now. Remember to let me know if there are any topics you would like me to cover.

With any luck, the next post will be a podcast episode. I so need to get one in the feed.

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

I'll try to add more of these as I get a chance, but I'll keep an eye on the older ones as well, so if you have a question or comment for something in a previous blog, go ahead and post it there. If you like, send me a PM and tell me that you left a comment. I'll do my best to answer any and all serious questions. I have to apologize that I won't always answer general comments of agreement, but I want you all to know that those are appreciated! But if you ask a question and you don't see an answer within a day or so, send me a message and make sure I've seen it.

Misunderstanding #2: I got moderated for just expressing my opinion! or But it wasn't flaming, I just told the truth!

First of all, most of the people who write a blog saying that they got moderated for just expressing their opinion are either sorely mistaken or (probably more likely) deliberately obfuscating. The problem is that the post/review/blog in question has been deleted, so their friends can only take their word that this is an unfair moderation.

The next time you see that, ask your friend to post a copy of the review or post (censored as appropriate) in their blog, or to send it to you. Then, if your friend is honest and shows you the unedited original post, you may see why the post was moderated and/or deleted.

---

The important thing to remember is that what you say is almost less important than how you say it. For example, the following review of the latest episode of Wealthy Teen Angst would be acceptable.

This episode was another in a downward trend for this series. The pacing has really degraded to the point where I had a hard time staying awake and paying attention. Also, none of the endless conversations between Chad and Kelly served to advance the plot at all. We already knew that their relationship was over, and this just seemed like it was beating a dead horse. And speaking of horses, how could Tanya have been competing in that riding competition? It was established last season that she was allergic to horse hair! And the ending really bothered me too. From what we can tell, Biff never had the car out of his sight for even a moment, so how could Brad have possibly managed to cut the brake line? I'm afraid that the writing just seemed sloppy here, and I don't think I can keep watching this series if they keep making such obvious mistakes.

On the other hand, this review of the same episode would NOT be acceptable and would almost certainly be moderated:

This show suxxxx!!! what kind of idiots watch this crap???!! Kelly is so dumb, I wish they would throw her off a cliff! The writers should be shot! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail! epic fail!

These two reviewers may have had exactly the same complaints, but the way they wrote their reviews makes all the difference. The first review says "I don't like this episode for the following reasons..." the second one just rants about the episode being stupid without explaining why, and proceeds to threaten the cast and crew (even in jest, this is not acceptable) and to insult the viewers (who are also the other users of the site). And, of course, using repeated words to pad your review to the minimum character count is going to get your review deleted no matter what.

So whether you are writing a review, a post in one of the forums, a PM, or a comment to a news story, just be polite and as articulate as possible and you should have no problem. This is probably a no-brainer to most of the people reading this, but you'd be amazed how often I see this sort of behavior on the site (and then have these same folks yell about power-hungry mods when I delete their post or review). The above is actually pretty mild compared to some of what I see on a daily basis.

Here are a few other examples:

Acceptable: Sorry, but I cannot agree with your point. If you recall back in season two they specifically say that....

Unacceptable:

• What are you, an idiot?
• :rolleyes:
• A real fan would know that in season two...
• I am so sick of all these noobs creating new threads to ask the same questions...
• That idea is so stupid! [NOTE: Saying that the idea is stupid is no different from saying that the person is stupid and is still considered flaming.]

All of these responses basically mean the same thing (namely: "I disagree") but are stated such that it becomes flaming, trolling, off-topic, or even disruptive posting (responding to any post with just an emoticon is considered "disruptive posting" because you are not adding to the discussion, and because too many people who do this are just trying to spam the boards and raise their post count). Again, just be polite and talk to people as you would if you were face-to-face and you should be fine. Note: if you are frequently punched in the face and/or threatened with bodily harm in your day-to-day life, then please ignore the advice about talking to people online as you would if you were face-to-face. Apparently you have some work to do in that area as well.

So, basically, it doesn't matter if you were telling the absolute truth when you said that a particular actor, writer, producer, or site member was a slime-sucking, inbred, toffee-nosed, lily-livered, vacuous, obtuse, boring, unimaginative, malodorous, pervert who couldn't put a coherent sentence together to save his life. It is far better to say "I do not care for that writer's work", "his latest films have left me flat", or simply to avoid saying anything at all.

It's also important to realize the difference between discussion of the person and discussion of their work. Saying that you don't like Buffy the Vampire Slayer is, of course, insane (j/k) but acceptable. Saying you don't like Joss Whedon (creator of the series) may be more borderline.There is a big difference between "I don't like Joss Whedon's work" and "I don't like Joss." This, of course, depends on whether you personally know Joss Whedon. Even then, though, it's more polite to say that Joss owes you money, never chips in for beer, and keeps forgetting to use a coaster on the table your Great Aunt left you in her will. There is less chance that it will be considered flaming, and besides... it makes a better story. :)

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

I've noticed lately a sharp increase in the number of moderations that we have to hand out to people who honestly seem to misunderstand the situation. There are a few resources that every user should check out, and I'll list some of them at the end of this blog post, but I thought I'd try to help by taking the time every once in a while to highlight one specific problem or situation.

Now, remember that I cannot discuss anyone's moderation history directly, so I'll talk about this in only the most general terms and any examples are fictitious.

Misunderstanding #1: Some troll is invading our board and reporting everybody!

This is almost never the case. There is no way for a user to know who reported them, and neither mods nor staff will tell you who reported your post. Therefore, anyone saying that they know for sure who is reporting everyone in a particular forum is just wrong.

For one thing, it is virtually never one person doing all the reporting. Often there are a series of reports from various people, or sometimes the moderators just happen to stumble across a board that has a lot of TOS violations. In either case, we'll probably search through the board and/or alert other mods and staff to do the same.

It is true that the mods cannot patrol every board on a regular basis, but we see almost every board eventually.

The most important thing to remember, though, is just the fact that we do not "rubber stamp" TOS moderations. Whether someone reports it, another mod tells us about it, or we find it for ourselves, we always take our time to be sure that there is really a violation of the Terms of Service before issuing an moderation.

If there is some doubt about a given situation, then the mods will discuss it amongst ourselves and if we cannot reach an agreement then we'll even bring the staff in to help. Some of these discussions have gone on for hundreds of posts, and we never take any of these decisions lightly.

The end result is that no matter who reports you, you will not get a moderation unless you have violated the Terms of Service. So getting mad about an imaginary troll or troublemaker who is causing problems for your forum will do absolutely no good. Concentrate, instead, on why you and your friends are getting moderations and try to avoid making such mistakes in the future.

---

What is the TOS? Simply put, they are the rules you agreed to abide by when you signed up for the site. Go to this thread to read a description of the forum rules, and if you don't understand any of them, please contact me or any other moderator.

If you believe that you have been moderated incorrectly, you can discuss your moderation in the Ask The Mods forum. Remember that the threads are closed once a question has been answered. If you feel that a question has not been answered sufficiently, you may PM a moderator directly. If you feel that the moderators have been unable to help you, you may contact a staff member directly or through the email address support@tv.com

Check back soon, and I'll try to cover another common misunderstanding.

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

I have grown accustomed to the fact that celebrities I know and love will simply not be around forever. In fact the more times I ride this planet around the sun, the faster I seem to lose my childhood idols. But the news today that George Carlin passed away last night due to heart failure (he would be the first to point out that all deaths are from "heart failure") has really hit me hard.

I grew up listening to comedians like Bill Cosby, Steve Martin, and The Smothers Brothers. When I was deemed old enough (or, more likely, when my friend Sam and I snuck into my dad's private stash of LPs) the comedy of George Carlin was an absolute revelation. Sometimes his stuff was funny just because it was so obscene. It's hysterical to hear someone say words that make you uncomfortable, especially when you're ten years old. But even then I could tell that there was an intelligence and a larger purpose behind those routines. For example, this (heavily edited) section from his "Seven Words" monologue:

And, of course, the word ****. ... I think the word **** is a very imprortant word. It is the beginning of life, yet it is a word we use to hurt one another quite often. People much wiser than I am said, "I'd rather have my son watch a film with two people making love than two people trying to kill one another." I, of course, can agree. It is a great sentence. I wish I knew who said it first. I agree with that but I like to take it a step further. I'd like to substitute the word "****" for the word "kill" in all of those movie cliches we grew up with. "Okay, Sherrif, we're gonna **** ya now. But we're gonna **** ya slow."

George made me really stop and think about language, logic, and culture, all while I'm giggling over the naughty word he just said. Plenty of other comedians tried to imitate Carlin's success by adding a four-letter word to every sentence they uttered, but other than the very best of this crowd, they all just fell flat. They didn't understand that saying a "bad word" will make someone giggle once. What made us play Carlin's albums so often that we wore out the vinyl, was the fact that he made us think. He was never satisfied to let sloppy language stand unchallenged. To this day I can't get on a plane ("**** you, I'm getting in the plane!"), talk about post traumatic stress disorder, or pass a highway sign for "Gas Food" without thinking of George Carlin.

If you have never heard or seen George Carlin's comedy, I strongly urge you to do so. And if you're offended by foul language... well, then maybe you should listen to it more than once. One of Carlin's messages was that words do not possess the ability to hurt us. It is only the way that they are used that can do that. So use your words well, and think about what you are actually saying. And if you find that you (and/or everyone around you) are saying something that is totally ridiculous if you actually think about what it means... well, just don't forget to laugh about it.

Farewell, George. You will be missed.

(You can find the actual podcast file here at grailwolf.com )

This episode we discuss the TV upfronts. All the shows we discuss can be found here at TV.com. I'll provide individual links as the list trims down and/or more info becomes available.
We also talk about Balticon and all the wonderful folks we hung out with there. We'll be highlighting one or more person in most episodes from here out, and though we mention Paul Fischer, Martha Holloway, and Mur Lafferty, our spotlight for this episode shines on Doug Rapson from the Geek Acres podcast.

Hope you enjoy the discussion!
Hurdy gur,
-Marc

PS: We also mention, briefly, the Serenity screenings being held as a part of the Can't Stop the Serenity event. Please visit their site and support this worthy event.

-------------

And almost immediately after, I finally posted the second part of the Iron Man geekout:

(and, of course, you can get the file at Grailwolf.com )

At long last, it is part two of the mega-geekout with Tee Morris. Here we discuss the upcoming movies that we saw previewed before Iron Man. Enjoy, and hope this gets you excited for the summer of fun we have before us!

Hurdy gur,
-Marc

(As always, you can download or listen to the actual podcast at grailwolf.com)

Another uber-long geekout at Imagine That Studios with Tee Morris. This time we're discussing the first big movie of the summer... Iron Man. We start with my spoiler-free review, and then go into spoilers aplenty, so be warned. We go on to talk about the trailers we saw and the movies that will be coming this summer, but that will be the next episode of the GGL. For now, I hope you have as much fun listening to this as we had recording it.

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

(As always, you can get the podcast audio file at grailwolf.com .)

In this episode I discuss sick days, TV news, and an important birthday.

Too many shows mentioned for me to list them all, but we should be back to the usual shownotes next time.

Or... maybe the time after that.

Hurdy gur,
-Marc

Got two episodes up this week, but the Internetz is totally flaking on me, so I only have a few minutes at a time to get online. Therefore, I only offer links to the episodes and their related blogs. I'd be happy to get feedback here, though!

Sorry if I'm not around that much, the repairs should be done in a few days.

Meanwhile, here are the links:

GGL024 - New Amsterdam and the Format War

and

GGL025 - Tee Morris and the Great Galactica Geekout

Hope you enjoy!

Hurdy gur,

-Marc

Okay, I must admit that I'm a little disappointed to finally reach level 50 and find that they've removed the Airwolf pilot helmet in favor of a generic "50" emblem. That said, I'm tickled that they at least kept the name.

See, a group of acquaintances of mine (including the amazingly talented Mur Lafferty and her friend Jason Adams) had a conversation a couple years ago about cool old TV shows. After going through a lot of them, they decided that Airwolf was easily the coolest of the lot. You may find people who didn't like the show, but even most of them will admit that it is pretty cool, at least. This became a frequent reference with them, as they started using the word "Airwolf" as a synonym for the word "cool". And when Mur and Jason discussed this on their podcasts (the now defunct Geek Fu Action Grip and the not-quite-as-defunct Random Signal respectively) it spread to the entire Podosphere.

So it goes without saying that I've been wanting to become "Airwolf" for a long time. Unfortunately, moderation duties, editing, family, and other RL emergencies kept my points gain to a very modest pace, so it took years to get here. And now, of course, I've suddenly been finding pages that are in desperate need of attention. As a result, I am already 60% through the level and it looks like I'll be on to the next thing pretty soon.

Now, don't get me wrong. I really look forward to some of the other levels as well (especially the Buffy, Firefly, and Twin Peaks themed levels) but I'll still be sad to see Airwolf go.

Actually, it makes me wish that the levels were more like the badges in the massively multiplayer online game City of Heroes. In that game, once you earn a new badge you don't need to switch to it. You just add it to your collection. Every level you get a new badge, and you also get them for accomplishing certain tasks, exploring certain areas of the game, etc. But at any time you can choose to "wear" any of the badges that you've ever earned. Theoretically, you can be a level 50 character (the highest level in the game, I believe) and still be wearing the badge you get for clearing 100 bad guys from the tutorial level.

And that's what I'd like to be able to do here. Certain level just don't appeal to me all that much, so it would be nice to keep my old level titles. Maybe I could be a level 53 "Bewitched" at Halloween (or Beltane, or whatever).

That's way too much work, however, for way too frivolous a wish, so I'll just keep myself happy looking forward to the shiny new levels.

Even if most of them aren't nearly as Airwolf as this one.

Hurdy gur,

-Marc