Recently (if the last three or four years counts as recent) I've noticed there's a trend in moderation where janitors or moderators will delete new threads for a topic if a thread for that topic already exists.Could we not do this? There are a lot of cases in which I think it might be reasonable, for example, if the board is actually being overrun, or somebody is flooding and deliberately trying to start shit, or two copies of a general thread were made within one minute of each other and it was obviously a mistake, but outside of that I really don't think this is something that should be in the remit.
>>5613I agree for the most part.There's obvious exceptions, of course, but I think in general moderation shouldn't encourage general-like behaviour on boards that aren't general boards. Multiple parallel threads can be a good avenue for discussion and isn't something we should explicitly discourage unless it's a clear case of deliberate spam.
>>5615Oh definitely, that's why I didn't get into too much detail, either.Hopefully you can work with the higher-ups to get the issues on your particular board(s) resolved. :)
>>5613As >>5614 said, the way of handling the issue varies from board to board, as the reactions and abuses that can surface from posting duplicates are not the same between them.For example, boards like /mu/ have duplicate templates because posters try to advertise their music outside specific threads, or just ignore the current thread and post a new one hoping to have their name in the OP. This can get out of hand and the board ends up with 10+ similar threads, all mostly empty.There's also the catalog, which is never used enough. I janitor /wg/, and duplicate threads are common there, too. And while I rarely delete duplicates, its easy to see why having several threads of the same topic can be harmful: none of the threads last long, because the fans are scattered. This increases the speed at which these threads are created, affecting threads with less popular topics and decreasing the variety of the board as a whole.Being overzealous against duplicates can be harmful too, it angers the users and promotes the creation of generals (rarely a good thing).What's the specific situation you want to avoid OP? Which board?
On /jp/ we get people who keep making multiple threads about the same character, it gets a bit stupid to have 5 different threads about "Patchy's Feet" or whatever inane Sachiko topic bumped once a day for months.
There is a fine line between deleting a duplicate thread and enforcing a topic into a general.Looking at the times the thread was made, number of posts, how specific the OP subject is can help to determine if it is another thread or a duplicate thread.Often combining an actual duplicate thread early on will enliven the subject with its users not being split.
Having a thread dedicated to the board could prove useful, so here it is.Big issues, regular spam, talk about the generals or anything relevant to it.Recommendations/corrections about the way it's being janitored are also appreciated.
I've asked for a new BR for duplicate soundcloud/bandcamp threads. It'll just be a warning though. The problem isn't that people are posting their personal soundclouds; that's perfectly fine and it's good that people are sharing their own music. The problem is that everyone wants to make a brand new thread for their own music, which ends up in clutter and spam.So a warning with a reminder to use existing threads should be sufficient to get our point across.
>>4050> the OP asks about your favorite album(s) and 'x' thing about youI'd like to know what to do about these as well. Often there's no discussion to be found, just people trying to give the wackiest answer to garner some attention, which rarely happens.
>>5108I find this varies pretty heavily depending on the thread. If the OP is asking about the worst thing people have ever done, it is almost always just off-topic, while threads about which university people attend usually spawn discussion about local music scenes.As far as I see it, if the topic(s) of discussion aren't related to music at all, it is off-topic, even if people are posting album cover images or youtube links. If a thread is relatively new and the OP doesn't relate the question to music (ie 'worst thing you've seen someone do' as opposed to 'worst thing you've seen someone do at a concert'), I get rid of it. Likewise, if the thread has been up for a while and the discussion hasn't veered towards being music related, I think it is reasonable to delete it.
>>5108Here's the rule I follow: if music is just an excuse to discuss off-topic, either delete or BR for off-topic depending on how blatant it is.Examples:- Post your favourite album and your... ... favourite movie ... university you attend ... waifu- Post [shoes/selfie/pet] and people guess your favourite album.- tripfag circlejerks like qt threads.Threads like these can ramp up replies really fast and sometimes people don't report them, making things worse.Female artist threads have similar issues, but be careful not to immediately delete any thread with Grimes/St. Vincent/Alice Glass in the OP.
Sonemic // rateyourmusic threadsI've been seeing issues in these threads for a while now, mainly /soc/ garbage and even occasional doxxing, mostly thanks to regular evaders (xusosis and others). While these threads have never been a shining example in /mu/, their quality has fallen drastically in the past months.So, how can we encourage good discussion? Apart from /soc/ off-topic, I've seen users spamming their names or samefagging in order to gain followers. At times the threads are so full of incoherent spam that they're impossible to salvage.Any suggestions?
I've been spending a bit of time hanging out in the /g/ subreddits, particularly /mkg/, /hpg/, /sqt/, and the Desktop Thread. I'm particularly annoyed at the last of those. (Arguments about the generals in /g/ is its own thing.)Things I've noticed:1) People rarely talk about ricing. Every fifty posts or so somebody asks for a config file or window manager advice.2) The posts in the thread are two things: desktop pictures and/or tripfags saying "good morning" and "good night" to each other.3) Most of the desktops posted are obviously intended just to show off the wallpaper or images on the desktop at the time.4) The thread is filled with tripfags, a number of them who ban evade frequently, and display a strong sense of entitlement whenever they are banned (especially for evading). Some are borderline avatarfagging with anime pictures.The conclusions I've made are: the discussions here are *barely* about technology to begin with, and beyond that it has become a haven for evaders. Combine this with the fact that /w/ already has their own Desktop Thread, which is a lot less cancerous and more productive, and I'm wondering what the point of the /g/ version is.I really think we should do something about the thread, whether it be find a way to ban the evaders better, or just get rid of the threads or move them to /w/.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>5242The real question comes at where are we going to draw the line at what is technology-related.Currently on /g/ (ordered roughly in the order I believe they are technology-related):/dpt/ - Daily Programming Thread/sqt/ - Stupid Questions/mkg/ - Mech. Keyboards/gcg/ - Graphics Cards/wt/ - Watch Thread/csg/ - Chink Shit/guts/ - Insides of Computers/bst/ - Battlesations> -------- where I think the line should be drawn (for now)/edc/ - Every Day Carry/hst/ - Smartphone Home ScreensComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>5245I totally agree with this, I would personally put /bst/ under the line too though, for pretty much the same reason desktop threads are. While we can probably pretty much eradicate /edc/ and /hst/ by just deleting the threads for a while, I think desktop threads and /ptg/ will prove difficult since they're practically subcommunities at this point, and will cause some problems, as you've said. We'd need to push them somewhere else. As previously stated desktop threads would be at home on /w/ but I can't really figure out where we'd send /ptg/ other than /g/.
>>5253Bumping this old thread to say /ptg/ could potentially go to /t/ I'm a /t/ janitor and I notice overlap. /ptg/ would be more than welcome. In fact, /ptg/ hosts a couple of threads on /t/ which they link to in every thread from their /g/ thread.If everyone is ok with it, I think it would be a breathe of fresh air for /t/.
>>5512I'd be all for this but I think a big reason that /ptg/ is on /g/ rather than /t/ is that they want it to be on a blue board. We could try moving but I don't think the regulars would agree.
>>5513Their threads are not really technology related. /ptg/ was about the same size as desktop threads, which got pushed off a blue board to /wg/ and /w/.
/3/http://fuuka.warosu.org/3//a/http://archive.foolz.us/a//adv/http://archive.foolzashit.com/adv//an/http://archive.heinessen.com/an//asp/http://archive.foolzashit.com/asp//b/http://www.fbi.gov/c/http://archive.thedarkcave.org/c/http://archive.nyafuu.org/c/Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>5007https://github.com/MayhemYDG/archives.json/blob/master/archives.json
>>5007https://4ch.be/ is archiving a ton of boards.
>>5025It's an archive by a ban evader. If you have to use it, please use scriptblocking extensions. See >>4390
http://archiveofsins.comNew archive started within the last day or so, apparently by ex-archive.moe admin. One to keep an eye on perhaps...Only /h/, /hc/, /hm/, /r/, /s/, /soc/ at the moment.
http://archived.moeYet another global FoolFuuka-based archive that will be dead in a couple of months.
I'd like there to be some further discussion about the enforcing of rules and policy on /his/. This isn't to gripe about the board. I've actually been pleasantly surprised at the amount of civil, informative discussion and content shared through the board. However, I think it can still improve. As new events occur, we can all be aware and stay on the same page.For now, I'd like to talk about the problems from people posting 'Religion' in /his/. Religion (as one of the humanities) is not against the rules to discuss, but I think religion in this context should be emphasized as something to be discussed in an 'academic' setting. What I have been seeing more and more often is extremely low-quality name-calling arguments and behavior. I don't think 'worship' threads or attempts at religious conversion would be considered on-topic, or any of the "peripherally religious-related" threads, which end up as 4chan users using religion as an excuse to shitpost and flame other users.Very frequently, I would almost say daily, the same few threads get posted on /his/: "Which religion is objectively correct" or "is X religion more degenerate than Y religion?" I have been getting rid of these threads, but because i haven't talked to any mods in depth about the bounds of the policy I'm not sure how far i should be going.More threads that seem to pop up every day, unrelated to /his/>STEM-major hate threads>threads dedicated to Atheism and science>threads dedicated to making fun of Atheists and science>was this country historically a black culture or a white culture?Another thing I would be interested in hearing clarified is the degree to which political ideologies should be discussed. One one hand, study of ideology in the past is undoubtedly a part of history, but on the other hand many, many posters prefer to use ideological labels as buzzwords and spout console-war-like gibberish about themComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Well I think one way to go about this is to update the sticky with your suggestions. /pol/'s sticky has the same basis, although the userbase may not necessarily care enough to report it in the first place even if it falls under the flag of low quality.>Red pill me on X. (with no extra content or input of your own)>Are X white?>Is X degeneracy?>How come X girls love Y guys so much?>If X is true, then how come Y? Checkmate Z.
>>5344I would say that the great majority of problems could be greatly improved by stepping up the quality of OPs. Getting rid of threads that are basically homework requests or bait or simply, poorly, and lazily made.
>>5345>>5343I think those are some great ideas, and personally I am in favor of the 25-year rule extending to the other humanities, but I started this thread hoping for moderator input. Any change in policy or in interpreting the rules or in updating the sticky is something done through them. Could a mod weigh in on this?
>>5350try bringing it directly to one or more in pm in IRC
>>5344Just deleting all of those crappy threads as a first step would already dramatically improve the quality of the board. They are right now pushing away quality threads due to how many of them are.
There is very frequent cross-board spam which affects most of the NWS boards. This spam advertises child pornography, although the images it attaches don't necessarily contain any. If you janitor a porn board, you probably know how to handle this, but any other janitors might see it in their queue due to it receiving three or more illegal reports.So I would like to stress to all janitors that if you see this spam, do NOT simply ban request it and forget about it. Instead, whenever you see it, you should notify a moderator in IRC immediately so they can wipe all the posts at once. They can do so either from an active thread, or from your existing ban request. Ping mods until you get a response.If you do submit a ban request, use the "Child Pornography (Request or Link)" template.The spam is easily recognizable and looks like what you see in the attached image. It is posted to /e/, /h/, /d/, /u/, /y/, /s/, /hc/, /hm/, and /t/. The posts always come from the same IP so it's easy for a moderator to get rid of them -- just don't BR and move on.
>>3899The domain changes constantly precisely because it is constantly being revoked. However, it's evidently very easy for the person responsible to just get a new one.
Just a heads up, I have been seeing a lot of these reoccurring lately.
>>4451Really? What boards did you see this in? I thought this guy switched to spamming The Fappening.
>>4452I see them in /b/ mostly. I think one popped up in a report on /y/ or /hc/ recently.
This spam continues to be posted on porn boards. Unlike when this thread was made, it should be ban requested with the explicit image template, and you should ping mods in the IRC channel whenever you see/ban request it.
Hi all, how are your admin duties coming along? I am the OP of >>5093 and posted my suggestions last month regarding janitoring/moderating improvements for the team. When no reply about changes were forthcoming, I decided to help extend the functionality of 4chan myself, simply because I couldn't stand trying to decipher the squabbling of users any longer from scattered reports.I have no idea if such an extension already existed, but I treated coding this as a beneficial exercise in learning web dev languages.
>>5228Now you can work while you shitpost! Or at least be alerted to reports while casually surfing 4chon
I'm not sure I understand you here. You've made an unofficial addon to the janitor extension that includes these new features, is that right?Was this with the intention of making these features available to us or just a way of suggesting changes to the official janitor extension through example?
>>5230Both. Some changes are better done on the server side.
Well fuck me, this works pretty great. Thanks a lot for this, it makes janitoring much easier.
>>5232No problem, glad to have helped!Btw I named the file fchangg2005sdf.7z so that random people won't try and dl it, if anyone was wondering.
We seem to have no /a/ thread, and I feel better when we have an /a/ thread. So /a/ thread, talk about /a/, ways to improve /a/ so on and so forth.
>>5032I think either LNs should just be allowed on /a/, either explicitly or by continuing the pattern where LN threads are quietly left alone with no fanfare (everybody "knows" /a/ is the LN board already anyway); or, the "no animated adaptation" rule in /jp/ should be quietly retired.The issue here is that nobody is going to take the idea that "/jp/ is the LN board" seriously when 99% of LN discussion occurs in /a/. The special /jp/ rule practically enforces that only monstrously obscure LNs go to /jp/, which is basically carving off 1% of LN discussion from the other 99% and leaving it to die in a board that does not care about it.Almost every LN anybody knows about gets an adaptation of some kind, often anime but also manga. Take a look at the top LN characters ranking - every single character in the top ten ranking for both genders has shown up in an animated adaptation with the single exception of Othinus from the Index novels. So the discussion of these anime characters (who are also light novel characters, but who most people on 4chan know from the anime) and all the associate requisite X-a-shit posting... belongs in /jp/? Users aren't going to figure that out and I don't blame them.
What's the policy on anime/manga-inspired Korean and Chinese animations and comics? People have been bandying around a mod post from a while back indicating that they're okay but I don't know what the current policy is, if any.
>>5156That policy still holds for now.
Stupid drama keeps filling up the drawfag threads. Is there any point actually trying to figure out what's going on and using discretion, or something else (like clearing / deleting / ban requesting it all)
>>5213It is drama like this (along with the SNK/Madoka threads) that drove me to >>5219I hope my script helps to make things more understandable, though probably no less bearable.
The "i'll be gone!" thread 404'd when I went to post in it, so i'm starting another one :)in other words... i'll be gone all this weekend. If someone could look after /hc/, it really seriously needs it due to a lot of spamming, etc. Thanks :D /s/ seems to be able to fend for itself, so i'm not as worried about it.
>>5202I passed, so I should be back on normal operation now. Thank you, kouhai, get well soon, desu.
>>5175going out of town again, keep an eye on cgl for me till tuesday. Probably will be doing that a lot for work now.
mostly /vg/ and some /v/ here, Just got a new much more strenuous job and I need to radically fix my sleep schedule. I'll be either completely ignoring or only lightly touching the /vg/ report queue for the next week or two.
/cgl/ here again, I'll be out of town from today until the 13th. After that, my janitor schedule should return to normal, finally.
/toy/ here. Gonna be out on a trip till about Friday.
Let's chat about /cgl/Right now we seem to have a proliferation of "feels" and green text threads, and they've been spiraling into constant off-topic posting. Most /cgl/ users tend not to report these things, so we have to go looking for them. As of today we have a "Feels" thread and a "Confession" thread which have been around for at least the past year and show no sign of changing (to stay on topic) without some form of consistent moderation; however, there have been quite a few more types of these threads as well. Sometimes, the cringe threads tend to also branch into offtopic shitposting.Thoughts?
I agree that those threads are definitely a problem. From what I've seen, more often than not these threads devolve into trolling, people posting things that belong more on /adv/ than /cgl/, people using /cgl/ like their personal blog, and/or general shitposting. I think that the problem lies in when there is more than one of this type of thread on the board at once. I really don't think it's necessary to have a feels thread, a vent thread, a confession thread, etc. all on the board at the same time. The same basic type of content is posted in all of those threads- you could post about things that upset you or confess something you've done (related to cosplay/lolita) in a feels thread with no issue, so I don't think it's necessary to have more than one of these threads on the board at once.Other than limiting the number of these types of threads that can be on the board at a given time, I'm not sure what else we can do. I don't think that banning these types of threads would necessarily be the answer, despite how hard they can be to handle without constant moderation. I guess the other option would be to be extremely stringent about deleting off-topic posts as soon as they pop up on these kinds of threads, which could also work as well if we all organized our janitoring enough. Either way, unfortunately I'm not sure that I have any good and practical suggestions about what to do with these threads, although I agree that they are a problem.
>>5176>>5195The same thing happens on almost every other board that has a specific topic.They want to talk about stuff on their board because "my friends are here".Rather than actually go somewhere where its on topic, they want to blog and talk about other things with people who specifically share their general interest even though its not about that general interest. /v/ gets this pretty bad.
>>5195>I don't think it's necessary to have more than one of these threads on the board at once.This is probably true, but actually implementing this might result in people complaining "why was this thread deleted but not that thread," or possibly spawning an permanent and incredibly shitty fixture that people end up feeling entitled to have around all the time. I'd be careful about that.I'm not a big fan of canning threads that move between on and off-topic unless they become spawning grounds for stupidity but it often ends up that way. Something that people used to do in some boards (I actually don't know very much about /cgl/) is tacitly permit these kinds of threads until they start showing up too often, in which case people complain that "we had this shitty thread yesterday fuck off" and the thread mysteriously poofs out of existence.
>>5199cgl is fairly slow, and the lolita + cosplay community is surprisingly closeknit, so most anons feel like cgl is their community, like >>5197 said, "my friends are here".Anyhow, the threads have been nonstop for what I can remember, at least three years now, and they've always been riding the lines of 50/50 off and on topic, What I personally do is go through the thread and delete/BR the posts; however, I'm only online at specific periods of the day and it's difficult to keep an eye on them. I don't think they should be removed either, but I'm not sure what options we have, right now what I can think of is:A) More vigilant moderation of the threadsB) Amending the sticky to include something more specific in regards to these threads (but then I worry if people would even notice it)
>>5195/cgl/ here. I'm all for deleting feels threads because they tend to have tons of bait and go off-topic a lot. I feel (ha) that posts in those threads could be posted to an existing, on-topic one. Otherwise, they tend to derail into posters getting upset at the trolls that post about having sugar daddys or whatever heated argument they have that goes on for 200 posts.
There are a lot of times where I'll see a thread which is a legitimate thread, but is simply on the wrong board. I propose an option to allow moderators and administrators to move a thread to a different board and with such have a warning explaining the action to the OP. Janitors could also have this option, but should the admins want to have more oversight it could have to be approved by a janitor of the board it would be going to or a mod/admin. This would allow people who seek specific information whom are too used to a particular board to branch out to others and as well to realize that board culture isn't an excuse to post whatever you like.This combined with a board specific ban system would glorious, as it would allow us to condemn the shitposters to /b/.
>>5173Mods can already do that. It's magic.
What is the intended purpose of the QA board?
Who is this thread directed towards? There are probably more direct ways to address Hiroyuki./qa/, from what I see, is simply 4chan meta discussion without the input of the staff. That's not necessarily a bad thing, even if it somehow results in conspiracy theories towards our competence or lack thereof. Does the board serve a purpose? I suppose perhaps no more so than any other board; I wasn't actually aware boards had to justify their existence in the first place. It seems to me that taking issue with a board because things you don't like are said there runs rather contrary to 4chan as a whole. /qa/ doesn't have to serve a function that's immediately useful to us -it doesn't need to be some sort of substitute for the feedback form (which I'm sure is bombarded 24/7 by so many submissions that simply reading them all must be a full-time task). I think it's important to have some perspective here: /qa/ isn't about us, even when it is. It's about the website we volunteer to serve and whether the discussion there is relevant to us, constructive towards our goals as volunteers, or outright hostile to us has no bearing on whether or not it has a right to exist or the purpose it serves.Nevertheless, this discussion is as frivolous as /qa/ itself. We don't make decisions on which boards exist and we shouldn't have the power to do so.>>5124>Hiro himself has asked users to talk on their respective boards when he's seen an issueDo you have a source for this. If you could dredge up the post in question from the archives it would actually be rather useful.
>>5126SON YOU BETTER STOP RATTLING OFF RIGHT NOW BEFORE I SHOOT THAT DAMN FEDORA RIGHT OFF THAT BIG HEAD OF YOURS.
>>5126https://desustorage.org/qa/thread/3.html10926/#311793 here he asks to have meta in the affected boardhttps://desustorage.org/qa/thread/3.html14830/#322303here againIt seems to me like you weren't around for /q/ when it happened. Feedback was a direct result of /q/'s end state. Less complaining wars and more action with staff response posted and saved whenever taken.
>>5132>Less complaining wars and more action with staff response posted and saved whenever taken.There are ten staff responses in the whole of this last year and they're all clarifications; not a single one is a "staff action."I'm sure the mods are taking action based on the feedback but all that action is taking place behind the curtain, unless there's a public response being made somewhere I don't know about.
>>5133I don't think super many feedback inputs actually require a public response."yup spamming is still against the rules.""no we're not deleting all the boards""no we're not banning tripfags"ad infinitum
/gif/ & /wsg/ janitor here. Thought I would make a posting to keep stuff related in.One thing I would like to clarify, are YLYL threads allowed on /gif/, and if not could we perhaps get a warn template made for this? I'm seeing an increasing number of people report the YLYL threads on /gif/ and then comment on the thread telling them to go to /wsg/. Mods, could we look into this? Thoughts?
>Thoughts?I think that YLYL threads should be allowed on both boards, so long as the pics are NWS on /gif/ and WS on /wsg/.
The split between /gif/ and /wsg/ provides a place for porn, and a place for YLYL threads. /gif/ isn't starved for content and doesn't need SFW YLYL threads, so please delete them if you see them. In the absence of a warn template, mods can give a custom warning if you think one person is repeatedly remaking a thread.>>5086This is fine, but most YLYL threads created on /gif/ are not porn-focused and should be deleted.
/wsg/ janitor, there are a number of standard YLYL images that try to get posted over in /wsg/ that are not worksafe due to gore as well as nipples and dicks. Often though, in the stretch for content posters will just dump their webm folders which are mostly worksafe funny pictures.
Have you finished that report queue?
>>5000That's numberwang!
>>5006Your daddy gave you good advice. Btw - check 'em
>tfw I'll never gets dubs on /j/
>>5022Wew lad
>>5000You and I both know you aren't genuinely sorry for those numbers, however.
With moot finally giving hiro the keys to the kingdom and /qa/ back up for now, everyone is talking about how all possible boards should be created, deleted, split and merged at once. And one or two other site suggestions too.So I figured now would be the best time to start up a discussion of how our moderation practices and policies could be improved. I don't know what ideas the mods and other higher-ups have or haven't discussed amongst themselves, so if they've got some input that they can let slip, or if an idea presented here isn't feasible for reasons us janis don't know, that'd be helpful to hear about.imho, the biggest problem I see is the lack of communication with the community. Rules inevitably leave a lot of room for interpretation, and even when we're trying to enforce them in an unbiased manner, it leaves a lot of questions for the users about why this is allowed or that isn't, why was I banned, why wasn't that other anon. And if nobody else is filling in those blanks for them, they'll fill them in themselves with their own made up reasons and repeat them until they're accepted as fact. To some degree this is inevitable because of the nature of the 4chan community, but I think to a large degree it's preventable if we would just clarify why we took the actions we did.Obviously, the implication here would be to make more mod/admin posts or stickies when they're necessary to address ongoing issues on the boards as they crop up. Janitors who're more familiar with the board at hand could inform the mods of the general situation and ask the mods if they'd publicly put in a word of clarification. The two arguments against this that I can think of are 1) that it's just too much work for the mod team, which is understandable but I can't know if that'd be the case, and 2) that mod posts are too disruptive to threads. To that I say, mod posts are usually needed in threads that are already facing disruption, and wouldn't be frequent enough to make a (cont)
>>4987>that feel when you don't have a designated special buddy to discuss your board with
>>5004It's not a matter of lacking consensus. There simply isn't an established policy for every odd thing you might ask a mod about. For things that do have established policies, can you give some concrete examples of this occurring?
>>5004What the other guy said. If we're giving different answers, tell us - we're not looking for a power struggle.>>5013You'll find your responsabilibuddy one day, anon.
I'd think if people understood important reporting is to the moderation, it'd make our jobs easier even with all the garbage reports. A PSA would be nice.
>>5016I have to echo this, and I've heard other janitors expressing the same as well. I often come across posts suggesting that we janitors/mods aren't doing our jobs, only to see an empty report queue. As far as I know I'm the lone janitor for my board, so there's no way I'm going to catch every rule violation, especially those left unreported.On the other hand I sympathize with those janitors who frequently deal with 100+ reports at a time and don't want more.