Venithar wrote: »

Soloeus wrote: »

Or if you look at the "troll posts" that are always unpunished from their members or that if someone disagrees with one and a dev sees the disagreement they delete it. I suspect ER as being pet account, and dev cousins or whatever other equally corrupt role you can envision.

Either way, it is clear they have an advantage nobody else does.

Let us not forget, that in the beginning of head start, someone else created the guild Entropy Rising and a GM locked their character until they deleted it so that Tamriel Foundry could have the guild name. I didn't know that we could reserve guild names and such, but this totally reminds me. If a guild master could prove they had that name before the current ER ever thought of it could he come here and whine and cry to the GMs until they give him his guild name? I mean it's only fair since he had it first.

I remember this and was part of the DC Entropy Rising guild. Our GM was locked in place by a game master until he deleted the guild.

What ever happened to first come first serve basis?

Mortosk wrote: »

alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »

cjmarsh725b14_ESO wrote: »

I have to say this kind of thing really does upset me. I can understand and even commiserate with the need to limit public official responses to issues involving future development plans about the game. But to then have discussions, on personal time or not, with other players about the fixes and changes we have all been asking about seems grossly unfair to me.

Either prohibit releasing the information to everyone or give everyone access to it. Talking with some players about it and confirming or denying details that the whole community has been clamoring for only serves to make the rest of us feel as though a select few players and guilds are the 'favorite few' and when that divide happens in a gaming community it is nothing but toxic for everyone.

honestly they could be sued over not giving fair treatment too all players, it would be equivalent of making us pay 14.99 a month and only giving access too half of the game but their are special people have full access for the same amount. This is about having the EAR of a dev.

I can totally picture the court room now, and the words "Case Dismissed! Next Case on the Docket!"

we are all paying for the same service but are only getting half of it, so despite your horrible troll.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Hi folks,

Wanted to pop in here and offer some clarification. The Community Team does indeed participate in regular voice chats with some of our most active guilds. The guilds we're currently in regular talks with are a good mix of PvP, PvE, and casual. In addition to reading the forums and fansites, this helps us to better understand what the main issues are and their severity, where the best opportunities for improvement are, and identify what everyone wants more details on. More often than not, we hear the same things over and over (such as Templars, weapons skills/stamina builds, and heavy armor needing improvements and in some case fixes, changes needed to make PvP more rewarding, etc.)

These talks do not replace or hold more value to us than what we read here on our official forums, and are often done in the late evening on our own time. It adds another layer of valuable insight, and gives us the opportunity to ask about things in-person that we need clarification or more details on.

All that said, we are doing what we can, when we can, to get in here and answer your questions more often.

That's a bit disapointing, you have a forum here and you don't even make a little poll to ask player to help " understand what the main issues are and their severity" and you "hear the same things over and over" and still doing nothing for it.

Phantorang wrote: »

amlewis292nub19_ESO wrote: »

Phantorang wrote: »

So ER getting confirmation about Ultimate`mechanics from a Dev, is false information?

Thats what I am basing my arguement on, what was given to us as information from the OP and the quotes he uses.

No where has anyone disputed those quotes, and claimed them to be false.

Nor has anyone taken the time to question said quote. Was it actually a Dev, or a PR representative? Does the OP have any credibility? Maybe this information was passed on in some official capacity, during a large-scale alpha test or routine discussion between the Devs and the alpha testers. Maybe he actually took the time to test the mechanic, submit a proper bug report, and received a reply from the Dev confirming his initial findings as true?

In any case, one cherry picked quote from one random guy who may not even have any affiliation with the groups of players in question isn't evidence of anything other than what it is - a cherry picked quote from a guy looking to stir up controversy directed towards a certain group of players.

One would think someone would take their time to question said quote if it wasnt true. Instead trying to discredit the OP and every poster with no access to a guild like yours like whiners and idiots, dont prove it to be wrong either, if anything it serves only to build up suspicion as to what other game mechanics only a few select know about.

Its been the truth for 5 pages in the forum, now after I bring it up its suddenly in question. And how are anyone to know if you arent here just to misinform and create confusion.

The quote seems authentic enough. Prove it wrong if it is. You dont dispute it even... Thats confirmation enough for many.

I wasn't discrediting the OP, I was questioning his credibility. There's a huge difference there, and what I said still stands. I wasn't trying to prove anyone wrong or create confusion, I was simply pointing out that one quote doesn't tell the whole story, and the following could apply just as easily as not:

"Maybe this information was passed on in some official capacity, during a large-scale alpha test or routine discussion between the Devs and the alpha testers. Maybe he actually took the time to test the mechanic, submit a proper bug report, and received a reply from the Dev confirming his initial findings as true?"

I'm simply pointing out that you're refusing to acknowledge the whole picture here. Whether the quote is true or not is irrelevant, it was obviously cherry picked to make a statement and doesn't tell any truths in the context of the original post it was quoted from, or even in OPs first post. It's a statement about a game mechanic where the guy may or may not have asked a developer: "how does this work?"

Mystborn wrote: »

SwampRaider wrote: »

I remember this and was part of the DC Entropy Rising guild. Our GM was locked in place by a game master until he deleted the guild.

Well if your GM wasn't a *** that was trying to grief another guild then that wouldn't have happened now would it?

infraction2008b16_ESO wrote: »

Mystborn wrote: »

Phantorang wrote: »

The Time trials and the rankings in PvP are a joke, because some has had access to try the content and knows the mechanics. There will probably take years before any gamer that didnt have access to PTS, beta and wasnt in such a guild to come even close to top 10 of either list.

I didnt realize that before now, Im slow, but a joke is exactly what the trials and pvp rankings are. The playing field isnt even, the rest of us lag months behind.

To be fair, the #1 time for both Trials is held by a Guild that wasn't on the PTS.

They have claimed world first for both trials though

Well that's because they killed both trials first in the world... However my response was to:

"There will probably take years before any gamer that didnt have access to PTS, beta and wasnt in such a guild to come even close to top 10 of either list."

Which has already been proven to be incorrect.

alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »

Mortosk wrote: »

alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »

cjmarsh725b14_ESO wrote: »

I have to say this kind of thing really does upset me. I can understand and even commiserate with the need to limit public official responses to issues involving future development plans about the game. But to then have discussions, on personal time or not, with other players about the fixes and changes we have all been asking about seems grossly unfair to me.

Either prohibit releasing the information to everyone or give everyone access to it. Talking with some players about it and confirming or denying details that the whole community has been clamoring for only serves to make the rest of us feel as though a select few players and guilds are the 'favorite few' and when that divide happens in a gaming community it is nothing but toxic for everyone.

honestly they could be sued over not giving fair treatment too all players, it would be equivalent of making us pay 14.99 a month and only giving access too half of the game but their are special people have full access for the same amount. This is about having the EAR of a dev.

I can totally picture the court room now, and the words "Case Dismissed! Next Case on the Docket!"

we are all paying for the same service but are only getting half of it, so despite your horrible troll.

You get the service you pay for.

If you're so certain you have a case why don't you contact an attorney about organising a class action lawsuit?

first no proof second idc lol because i learn and brake stuff down as i go

Venithar wrote: »

Soloeus wrote: »

Or if you look at the "troll posts" that are always unpunished from their members or that if someone disagrees with one and a dev sees the disagreement they delete it. I suspect ER as being pet account, and dev cousins or whatever other equally corrupt role you can envision.

Either way, it is clear they have an advantage nobody else does.

Let us not forget, that in the beginning of head start, someone else created the guild Entropy Rising and a GM locked their character until they deleted it so that Tamriel Foundry could have the guild name. I didn't know that we could reserve guild names and such, but this totally reminds me. If a guild master could prove they had that name before the current ER ever thought of it could he come here and whine and cry to the GMs until they give him his guild name? I mean it's only fair since he had it first.

Huh. Never knew about that.

First, the guy who created that guild was probably a jerk and a troll.

Second, ya that was totally inappropriate for ZOS to intervene there. That's more of a display of favoritism than popping into their TS for a chat. Do other guilds get to reserve names? Pretty sure they don't. What if I'd wanted to make a "Death Knights" guild and had like a website and everything, then found that someone had already used the name. Could I petition ZOS to punish them?

Seems pretty inappropriate but I also don't care that much because, like I said, who ever did that was probably an intentional troll.

amlewis292nub19_ESO wrote: »

Phantorang wrote: »

amlewis292nub19_ESO wrote: »

Phantorang wrote: »

So ER getting confirmation about Ultimate`mechanics from a Dev, is false information?

Thats what I am basing my arguement on, what was given to us as information from the OP and the quotes he uses.

No where has anyone disputed those quotes, and claimed them to be false.

Nor has anyone taken the time to question said quote. Was it actually a Dev, or a PR representative? Does the OP have any credibility? Maybe this information was passed on in some official capacity, during a large-scale alpha test or routine discussion between the Devs and the alpha testers. Maybe he actually took the time to test the mechanic, submit a proper bug report, and received a reply from the Dev confirming his initial findings as true?

In any case, one cherry picked quote from one random guy who may not even have any affiliation with the groups of players in question isn't evidence of anything other than what it is - a cherry picked quote from a guy looking to stir up controversy directed towards a certain group of players.

One would think someone would take their time to question said quote if it wasnt true. Instead trying to discredit the OP and every poster with no access to a guild like yours like whiners and idiots, dont prove it to be wrong either, if anything it serves only to build up suspicion as to what other game mechanics only a few select know about.

Its been the truth for 5 pages in the forum, now after I bring it up its suddenly in question. And how are anyone to know if you arent here just to misinform and create confusion.

The quote seems authentic enough. Prove it wrong if it is. You dont dispute it even... Thats confirmation enough for many.

I wasn't discrediting the OP, I was questioning his credibility. There's a huge difference there, and what I said still stands. I wasn't trying to prove anyone wrong or create confusion, I was simply pointing out that one quote doesn't tell the whole story, and the following could apply just as easily as not:

"Maybe this information was passed on in some official capacity, during a large-scale alpha test or routine discussion between the Devs and the alpha testers. Maybe he actually took the time to test the mechanic, submit a proper bug report, and received a reply from the Dev confirming his initial findings as true?"

I'm simply pointing out that you're refusing to acknowledge the whole picture here. Whether the quote is true or not is irrelevant, it was obviously cherry picked to make a statement and doesn't tell any truths in the context of the original post it was quoted from, or even in OPs first post. It's a statement about a game mechanic where the guy may or may not have asked a developer: "how does this work?"

Judging by the information we are presented in this thread, its very likely that this information was presented only to a select few, not the community as a whole, which is the issue at hand, acquiring advantages in the game by having access to info about game mechanics the rest of us typical gamers dont.

We are now presented even more evidence of game mechanics presented only to a few, not to speak of a GM demanding a Guild Leader to delete his guild, because its name was Entropy Raising... Just makes it even more likely that the communication between the devs/pr people and a select few are actually brining great advantages.

Still you try to create uncertainty of this being the truth or not, when its blatantly obvious the devs/PRreps clearly demonstrates favoritism towards your guild.

If the game mechanics is presented by a dev or a pr dude, doesnt matter, the issue is that the players and guilds in the recieving end of this information gets a great advantage vs the rest of the players.

If the devs feel they get alot of help from some players, its not unlikely they feel favoritism back towards them, infact its very likely. Trying to deny this is just wrong.

Snit wrote: »

AinGeal wrote: »

shameful could be one way of putting it. Although a bit of an exaggeration. Improper would best describe it.

You're expressing unjustified entitlement, evidently thinking that ZOS communicating privately with some customers violates some sense of "fair play." The objective isn't to make sure everyone feels equally loved, but to improve the game.

I'd rather ZOS got feedback from good players who understand the mechanics than here, in the forums. Most of the game mechanics posts here boil down to "It's too hard," "Something I don't understand is clearly overpowered" or "I wanted a game with a fundamentally different core design." While those perceptions have value, they're quite a different proposition from discussions with more knowledgeable customers.

so who decides who the good players are? who's definition of "good" are we using?

and does it always go hand in hand that "good" players (whatever that might be) are the best to judge whats best for everyone?

i,m not saying your wrong i,m simply saying that in any scenario taking too much influence from a very small sample of people (be they good bad or average) and using that to define a product for a huge amount of folk is potentially misguided.

if it was me i would go with analysis of as much data and feedback i can get. not ignore (or seem to ignore) the largest source of data (these forums) and focus on a very small number of players. even if they are good.

NordJitsu wrote: »

Venithar wrote: »

Soloeus wrote: »

Or if you look at the "troll posts" that are always unpunished from their members or that if someone disagrees with one and a dev sees the disagreement they delete it. I suspect ER as being pet account, and dev cousins or whatever other equally corrupt role you can envision.

Either way, it is clear they have an advantage nobody else does.

Let us not forget, that in the beginning of head start, someone else created the guild Entropy Rising and a GM locked their character until they deleted it so that Tamriel Foundry could have the guild name. I didn't know that we could reserve guild names and such, but this totally reminds me. If a guild master could prove they had that name before the current ER ever thought of it could he come here and whine and cry to the GMs until they give him his guild name? I mean it's only fair since he had it first.

Huh. Never knew about that.

First, the guy who created that guild was probably a jerk and a troll.

Second, ya that was totally inappropriate for ZOS to intervene there. That's more of a display of favoritism than popping into their TS for a chat. Do other guilds get to reserve names? Pretty sure they don't. What if I'd wanted to make a "Death Knights" guild and had like a website and everything, then found that someone had already used the name. Could I petition ZOS to punish them?

Seems pretty inappropriate but I also don't care that much because, like I said, who ever did that was probably an intentional troll.

it was the most popular guild on DC side the first 2 hours of pre launch. had 300 members. lol.

SwampRaider wrote: »

NordJitsu wrote: »

Venithar wrote: »

Soloeus wrote: »

Or if you look at the "troll posts" that are always unpunished from their members or that if someone disagrees with one and a dev sees the disagreement they delete it. I suspect ER as being pet account, and dev cousins or whatever other equally corrupt role you can envision.

Either way, it is clear they have an advantage nobody else does.

Let us not forget, that in the beginning of head start, someone else created the guild Entropy Rising and a GM locked their character until they deleted it so that Tamriel Foundry could have the guild name. I didn't know that we could reserve guild names and such, but this totally reminds me. If a guild master could prove they had that name before the current ER ever thought of it could he come here and whine and cry to the GMs until they give him his guild name? I mean it's only fair since he had it first.

Huh. Never knew about that.

First, the guy who created that guild was probably a jerk and a troll.

Second, ya that was totally inappropriate for ZOS to intervene there. That's more of a display of favoritism than popping into their TS for a chat. Do other guilds get to reserve names? Pretty sure they don't. What if I'd wanted to make a "Death Knights" guild and had like a website and everything, then found that someone had already used the name. Could I petition ZOS to punish them?

Seems pretty inappropriate but I also don't care that much because, like I said, who ever did that was probably an intentional troll.

it was the most popular guild on DC side the first 2 hours of pre launch. had 300 members. lol.

This is enfuriating really. Even if the guy was trolling which is an assumption being made here. There is nothing in the TOS that states your guild name can be revoked in this manner. If this story is true that raises a pretty big flag to me and further validates what the OP has been saying.

woodsro wrote: »

IMO, this is the wrong way to go about. Asking certain guilds and groups about changes/balance issues/bugs, etc is a poor way to go about shaping the game. Are we still living in the 1990's?

The "proper way" to do this so ZOS gets into the 21st century is:

1. Contract with a Social Media Mining company, and mine data from Twitter, Facebook, etc looking for certain keywords and topics and correlating that data, ranking it, and organizing it in an efficient manner. Then using this data after review by a panel of statistical experts inside the company to grade these bugs, fixes, features, etc in order of importance based on mathematical relevance....this being just part of the overall scoring system.

2. Hiring a company, or building their own "in-house" Web Bot", a robot that scours the web for them much like Google bot pulling in data, discussions, etc concerning the game, and writing an algorithm based program to sort though that data removing the useless junk, and keeping the useful worthwhile information, and then using this data in conjunction with the Social Media collaboration scores to rate fixes, feature requests, etc in a logical organized manner and fill them in order of priorty.

3. They should send out monthly survey emails to subscribers asking them to fillout a quick 10 question survey about current game issues based on the data collected and use it as the 3rd scoring scale.

Using the Social Media Data + Web Bot Crawling + Survey Data to scale and score the important issues and fix, modify based on a weighted scoring system of importance and priority.

what I just described to you is 90% of EXACTLY what Google does in order to improves its products and services to meet end users needs...this is 21st century...not the 1990's...they should not be relying on a "small subset" of players who are hardcore min-maxers to determine the direction of the game, that direction should be determined by advanced algorithms and statistical data analysis....and we wonder why this game is in the shape its in right now.

This system would be largely automated (Much like Google's) and Devs would easily have the top issues that needed fixed right in front of their faces with no need to listen to a small subset of the gaming community that does not reflect the 85% of this community that is casual gamers.

Yes Social Media data is that easy to get, your privacy settings mean very little...Facebook sells your likes, dislikes, trends, and behaviors to 3rd party marketers...its how they make their money...if you read their TOS it tells you this...Zenimax could buy and use this data to improve their product much Like Google uses Google + and Google Accounts along with search and other technical analytical data of its user base to improve its products and services.

With the system above things would get fixed faster, there would be no need to run a PTS server(and thus the extra cost) associated with it, Fixes could merely be tested in house by developers before being shipped since the whole process would be much better streamlined and would reflect the changes the community actually wants without having to ask them too much or invest too many people into working the forums to try and figure it out...all the customer has to do is post their issue, or say something about it on social media, and it would automatically be put into the system, scaled, correlated, ranked, give priority scale, and pushed to the devs.

By god I like to be efficient, and I have read up on some very interesting algorithms these companies are using to keep their products and services good, and this stuff is mainstream now, and there is no reason Zenimax should not be using it....Most of your major online web presence sites, online stores, even brick and mortar stores are using these types of systems to improve their services...Zenimax should be too, it would be much more efficient, and give much better results then relying on a small group of min-maxers that don't reflect the bread and butter of the game(casuals) that make up the majority of the user base.

FYI I consider myself more in the hardcore player base, and even I say the hardcore min-maxers shouldn't be deciding the direction of the game....just my 2 cents.

This is a perfect example of the argument happening in this thread. Why is everyone assuming that ZOS isn't doing the things you listed?

Somehow, a few people in this thread have run with the idea that ZOS is only talking to a few guilds to get all of their information and ignoring everything else.

It is quite obvious that the community managers are active on twitter, facebook, reddit, and numerous forums, including this forum.

I'm curious what suggestions people have that are against ZOS talking to certain guilds. Do you think they should call every subscriber individually to ask your opinion?

If you want your opinion heard, than submit /feedback or post constructive information on multiple forums.

One of Lotros ideas that split the community into two was the introduction of a players council.

I hated the idea and got banned from their forums for raising my issues with it.

As far as I feel, if they wanted to know peoples opinions, send out surveys to active players.


The trouble is, a few players whether 10 or 1000, do not represent what I think one tiny bit. They are saying what they want and what they like, and what they think needs changing and that could be completely different from what you and me think.

When it's done to a few guilds, chances are each guild had its own style of playing, and its own list of what is working as they like it, and what isn't. And again the guilds Zenimax speak to, might have completely different opinions to the vast majority of other guilds.

For me personally, I don't like it at all. Why should just a few guilds get to chat regularly.

If Zenimax feel this is the right way, then the only way it would appease me would be

1)They picked a random active guild each time (or a few guilds), never having the same guild twice in a year

2) They post a list in this forum of any suggestions from such guilds that Zenimax are thinking of acting on, and gets the community responce before they do. Can have a subscribers only bit on the forum for this.

or better yet, email a survey to all subscribers with check boxes so its easy to automate, telling us whats been suggested and do we like it.

When we're all paying the same money to play, giving one group preferential treatment just looks plain bad, even if they were the most sensible, balansed varied guild of players on the planet, it simply gives a very very bad impression to many others and whether that guild likes it or not, common sense says they will end up being despised by many and blamed for the games problems by many others.

I am adding @ZOS_JessicaFolsom
to this post since I DO represent a part of the ESO playerbase who are playing ESO and understood what type of game it is.

Sadly I think the reason why the DEVS looks elsewhere then these forums for feedback is that "we" very seldom neither supply accurate nor ESO game feedback.

What you find as complaints on ESO forums are whiners that wants to make ESO into WoW or another personal favorite game of the user, who has only suggestions about making characters or skills more powerful. Total fantasies about "how ESO should be".

NOTHNG like "Good work on balancing"
"We can see the improvements, but what about this X?"

And this community sadly isn't worth mentioning how few actually are PLAYING the game. Some have rushed to highest level, missed the whole game and whines, then hopefully quits.

The rest makes up complaint after complaint about things Zenimax never said anything about being in game. Simply put, most forum users on these ESO forums have their own little idea what eso "should" be, instead of understanding what TYPE of MMO it is.

Of course the DEVS can not take us seriously if we complain that for example EVE online should stop making ships and play on a planet instead........totally different game!

I am sorry, but ESO was built years before any of you here even started to dream up complaint after complaint. You do not have a leg to stand on if you claim ESO needs this and that feature from YOUR personal view, to make everything easy to survive. NO THEY DONT!

EVEN when the mods communicates so well, which I've never seen in any MMO before, "we" answer with more nagging. ESO provides a complete list of WHAT TO COME IN A FUTURE PATCH. Every MMO releases the patch when its done, not before.

Zenimax is giving us loads of information, and how do we respond?
"what numbers are there...to little info...why isn't my skill buffed, why cant you take away all the classes. You nerfed one vastly overpowered skill so I quit!"

Complete and utter useless information for Zenimax to even start to base improvements on.

And please compare Zenimax to most other MMOs when it comes to show what the short - medium and long term plan is.

NOT even the giant WoW does that. They release SOME info about the next upcoming expansion, which in EVERY case has changed one way or the other.

STILL, Zenimax is here, monitoring ours forums and scans for actual helpful feedback, which is someone who got through the flamers who love to post negative thing, and outright took the information, acted on it and BOM, Fix/effect. There already are several examples where Zenimax have taken our feedback and improved both the forums and the game with it.

It probebly takes 10 more people to get any useful feedback from us here, then communicating with guilds or other sites that states their feedback in a way where Zenimax can decide if this is needed and add it to their work.

If you would talk about ANY favoritism, then its the users on these forums, where 90% never really have any interest in playing ESO, but want a skyrim with WoW, or some RP FPS game?!?!?!

I am glad that Zenimax seeks information whereever they can get it, so they work on the "right" path.

For the few of you who have logged into ESO this week, and are not blind, then you have noticed an vast increase in players, all over Tamriel, EXCEPT in Graglorn, because the players who do enjoy ESO, PLAYS the game.....they dont grind it, half-cheat by following google maps and get to high level IN A WEEK!!!!

Of course the first end game isn't fully done already. It will be under the coming month when more and more REAL ESO players reaching higher levels.

When we as ESO community on ESOs own forums starts to act like players who do feedback bugs/suggestions etc, and dont get a sudden memory loss about ALL the good work Zenimax have done with the game already. THEN we will get more attention......

Zenimax have shown us a plan, they sticking to it, ONLY to change priority if a major problem occurs. Like Cyrodiil lag, which they are working on.

If we do a search among the most common word on these forums among the same 50 or so users, it will come up with 2 words. Unsub and FTP.

I hope Zenimax keeps this very good communication to us players who wants a working game and who wants to help. Most of us have sent in several bug reports and reported ever single Bot/goldfarmer spam there was.

Which BTW, are almost gone from ESO. How can that be.....the game is active with players? The battle Zenimax doing against goldsellers and the fact that the ESO TYPE of player is NOT a goldbuyer. We LIKE to earn things in game. We ENJOY playing the game and finding that skyshard. No way we would pay someone else for that??!?!

IF you have any interest in improving ESO as the game it IS, then stop the constant bickering among eachother, come up with what is not working....NOT WHAT YOU THINK SHOULD NOT BE OR BE IN THE GAME.

ESO have a great potential to become a long term, very enjoyable MMO, but as Zenimax have stated themselves, they need us to help them on the right path.

My own list what needs to work:
- Cyrodiil lag problem
- Connection problem for players
- Education in what ESO is and that its NOT dangerous to ask someone to group up!
- Keep to their plan, with flexible time when to add what.
- Fixes of bugs - never ends for any MMO
- Balancing - Never ends for ANY MMO with some sort of PvP in it.

Most important, GIVE THEM A BREAK AND LET THEM WORK!

Best regards
Cogo - Kurnn Hatemachine of the guild Nephilim in service of the Ebonheart Pact

Mablung wrote: »

Cogo wrote: »

snip for running out of breath

Might I suggest breaking it down. That is as bad as a wall of text.

that might be possibly the biggest wall of text anyones posted so far.... i,ll make a point of reading it perhaps when i have a free weekend