Surreycouple, I have never been more outraged in all my life ffs!!!!!!!
Well that’s it I’m taking the plunge and flouncing out as well! We’ve discussed it and Mrs HC is in total agreement and fully believes it will enhance our relationship.
I know what you are thinking…… he wont be back, but its fecking true! Sorry to get a bit emotional but I really need to get my head together and prioritise my life.
You might think that this is a way of avoiding attention but I can assure you its not!
I am now a fully fledged, soon to be verified flouncer!!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Verification
I don't want verified.
I don't want to do any verifying.
Already in conversation, this has had to be explained and my reasons for it, i am finding i have to justify.
Why should i ?
Why should i have to justify anthing to anybody?
I am discrete.
I want discretion.
Thats it.
I will tolerate others. I will have respect for others.
Break discretion, tolleration or respect and you are leaving yourself wide open to others treating you in the same manner.
Okay so the system needs to have opinions involved. Wether that be from initial validation or from the disciplinary process. I don't know who you are, for me to allow you to have an opinion on my behalf.
Either do one of two things.
1. Make yourselves known, answer the questions which have been raised.
or
2. Scrap the system which IS going to bring a huge gulf becuase people are people wether verified, unverified, tollerant, respectful or discrete.
Lots of love, hugs and kisses
Little
XXX
I don't want to do any verifying.
Already in conversation, this has had to be explained and my reasons for it, i am finding i have to justify.
Why should i ?
Why should i have to justify anthing to anybody?
I am discrete.
I want discretion.
Thats it.
I will tolerate others. I will have respect for others.
Break discretion, tolleration or respect and you are leaving yourself wide open to others treating you in the same manner.
Okay so the system needs to have opinions involved. Wether that be from initial validation or from the disciplinary process. I don't know who you are, for me to allow you to have an opinion on my behalf.
Either do one of two things.
1. Make yourselves known, answer the questions which have been raised.
or
2. Scrap the system which IS going to bring a huge gulf becuase people are people wether verified, unverified, tollerant, respectful or discrete.
Lots of love, hugs and kisses
Little
XXX
Quote by Happy Cats
Surreycouple, I have never been more outraged in all my life ffs!!!!!!!
Well that’s it I’m taking the plunge and flouncing out as well! We’ve discussed it and Mrs HC is in total agreement and fully believes it will enhance our relationship.
I know what you are thinking…… he wont be back, but its fecking true! Sorry to get a bit emotional but I really need to get my head together and prioritise my life.
You might think that this is a way of avoiding attention but I can assure you its not!
I am now a fully fledged, soon to be verified flouncer!!
Oh your outraged are you????? Well your not as outraged as me.
And if your going to get verified for your flouncing then I'm going to get verified first and I intend to get more verified.
And for the record I have not come back (to this thread only) I have just put a post on here cos someone notified me that there was something in this thread (that I have left) that it might be worth me coming back (although I have not) to argue about (although its not an argument cos everyone is entitled to their own opinion - even if its wrong).
Ok
Dxx
Sex God
here we go again............ :roll:I will say it takes a blinking long time to get verified even after you ask! Or rather have someone else ask for you :roll:
I'm fed up with this thread now. A large proportion of people have disagreed with it and that is enough in my mind to maybe have a rethink about all this and possibly scrap it. We had this discussion in the forum a while back which lead to the "status phrases" being hidden unless you hover over the purple bar.
post counts, ranks and life on the forum
How long is it before the "verification of being an actual player" system is forced upon the forum users? It is the social side as much as anything that keeps us in the Cafe. With time you get to know who is up for what and through getting to know people. It is the same with the chatroom too.
900th posting, can't think of a better way to spend it than defending a site I have grown the like very much.
/flounces back in once again . . . . yes i bloody know ok! i'm just here cos i love a good old barney ok! well no that's not really true i don't really. well ok i might do. look i don't know do i cos i'm not here. :lol2:
i still can't see what the problem is that so needs to be fixed here by adopting verification,, but i can see a shedload of problems coming from this?
i'm just here cos i love a good old barney ok! well no that's not really true i don't really. well ok i might do. look i don't know do i cos i'm not here. :lol2:The + means (to paraphrase the rules) "this person is what they say they are, and they will turn up to a meet".
no it doesn't say that at all. it might say you are who you say you are yes. but that will be seen to say that the non-plussed might not be? so it makes them non-genuine? it doesn't guarantee anybody that you will turn up to a particular meet, just that you have done, or might have done, in the past, assuming it ain't just one of your +ed up mates or ex-lovers verifying you as a favour that is!
It's not an anti-single male measure, it's an anti-misleading discription/timewaster measure.
]so we are incapable of making distictions ourselves, or picking up the phone and actually speaking to someone, or switching on a web cam, or just chatting for a good while? we want our hands held for us to establish that?! and if you are plussed, and arrange a meet, but have to cancel for real reasons, can another plussed user have your plus removed by calling you a timewaster, if that is their opinion?
If all the genuine single males in chat were verified:
1) It would be a very good thing for the small number of single males currently verified (myself now included) since it would remove the possiblity of us being accused of abusing our status.
yes i'm quite sure it would be good for you! we have no argument there! not sure on the remove the possibility etc etc thing. didn't understand what you meant?
2) It would be a very good thing for anyone in chat interested in single males (it does happen sometimes!) because they will know where a good supply of real ones can be found
so the other single males ain't real people now? just cos you can prove you've shagged someone on SH, you are real? i can only see that as making things even harder for other single m's who might well be perfectly genuine, and often have to work bloody hard to get any kind of recognition at all. can you see any way that this might advantage you to their disadvantage, and deny them the same opportunities you've had here?
3) It would be good for people not interested in single males, because the verfied ones would not want to risk their verified status by harassing peopel who are not interested.
if someone harrasses, well they get booted? the + serves no function there. you either abide by room rules, or you get binned. so you're saying the + is actually another sanction available to ops?
4) It would be good for everyone who is just there to chat, or to make up their own minds about swinging (and we do get a LOT of both these types in chat) because they would be able to tell who is a newbie and who is a regular.
all it takes is a few visits to the room to see who's reg? the regs know the regs cos they see them every single day. the newbies can see who's reg by becoming reg? not difficult for anybody?
4) It would be good for everyone who is just there to chat, or to make up their own minds about swinging (and we do get a LOT of both these types in chat) because they would be able to tell who is known to be 'a genuine person who is what they say they are' and wants this fact to be known and who is isn't, doesn't or doesn't want it to be known that they do.
well if i'm just there to chat, i can make that known by simply typing, i am just here to chat. if i'm just there to chat, then i won't arrange meets? if i'm just there to chat, then i really don't care who meets or who doesn't cos, i'm not there to meet?
i still can't see what the problem is that so needs to be fixed here by adopting verification,, but i can see a shedload of problems coming from this?
Oh your outraged are you????? Well your not as outraged as me.
And if your going to get verified for your flouncing then I'm going to get verified first and I intend to get more verified.
And for the record I have not come back (to this thread only) I have just put a post on here cos someone notified me that there was something in this thread (that I have left) that it might be worth me coming back (although I have not) to argue about (although its not an argument cos everyone is entitled to their own opinion - even if its wrong).
Ok
Dxx
Well I must say this so typical!
So some are more equal than others ,eh? How can you be more verified than me ffs? I quite legitametly flounced ,still am, (just popped in to pick a few things up.) and deserve your respect., understanding and sympathy
Now I happen to know who awards flouncing verifications and I’ll be buggered if I’m going to let you know who they are and I certainly wont be verifying you Surrey Couple.
I’m the only flouncer in this thread – I’m here (well I’m not) and I’m a flouncer, get used to it!
:wink: :wink: :wink:
Sex God
non·plus
tr.v. non·plused, also non·plussed non·plus·ing, non·plus·sing non·plus·es, non·plus·ses
To put at a loss as to what to think, say, or do; bewilder.
n.
A state of perplexity, confusion, or bewilderment.
Erm...
Quite.
I think there needs to be a multilevel verification system
Firstly, you need some indication that the person is human, say H
Then they should need to have their gender verified, M and F seems obvious here.
Then they need to have whether they are a couple or single verified. Use S and C
After that they should have their sexuality verified. s for straight, b for bi, c fur curious, l for straigt folk who will happily play with members of the opposite sex, w for people who only play with themselves, a for people with an unnatural interest in animals and t for those who have a tree fixation.
It also needs to be varified if the individual only seeks 1 to 1, 3somes (MMM, MMF, MFF, FFF) or moresomes. use 1, m3 m2f, mf2, f3, and m for anything.
Sexual preference also needs to be varified. Do you like kissing? Oral, giving, receiving, both? Anal? Giving, receiving, both? Regular Sex? Use k, og, or, ag, ar, rs. (limited list, needs expanding to include toys, TV, bondage, etc, will probably run out of letters in the alphabet...).
So, a straight single male, who likes 1 to 1, 3somes that involve women, and pretty much does anything, might have a varification code that looks like this:
H-M-S-l-1-m2f-mf2-m-k-og-or-ag-ar-rs
Human, male, single, liberated, seeks 1-1, MMF, MFF, groups, likes kissing, giving and receiving oral, likes to give anal, likes to receive anal, and likes regular sex.
Only a system like this, or an expanded version, can really show that each and every one of us is genuine in themselves and genuine with what they seeks.
this has been a terrible mockery production
Firstly, you need some indication that the person is human, say H
Then they should need to have their gender verified, M and F seems obvious here.
Then they need to have whether they are a couple or single verified. Use S and C
After that they should have their sexuality verified. s for straight, b for bi, c fur curious, l for straigt folk who will happily play with members of the opposite sex, w for people who only play with themselves, a for people with an unnatural interest in animals and t for those who have a tree fixation.
It also needs to be varified if the individual only seeks 1 to 1, 3somes (MMM, MMF, MFF, FFF) or moresomes. use 1, m3 m2f, mf2, f3, and m for anything.
Sexual preference also needs to be varified. Do you like kissing? Oral, giving, receiving, both? Anal? Giving, receiving, both? Regular Sex? Use k, og, or, ag, ar, rs. (limited list, needs expanding to include toys, TV, bondage, etc, will probably run out of letters in the alphabet...).
So, a straight single male, who likes 1 to 1, 3somes that involve women, and pretty much does anything, might have a varification code that looks like this:
H-M-S-l-1-m2f-mf2-m-k-og-or-ag-ar-rs
Human, male, single, liberated, seeks 1-1, MMF, MFF, groups, likes kissing, giving and receiving oral, likes to give anal, likes to receive anal, and likes regular sex.
Only a system like this, or an expanded version, can really show that each and every one of us is genuine in themselves and genuine with what they seeks.
this has been a terrible mockery production
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
The + means (to paraphrase the rules) "this person is what they say they are, and they will turn up to a meet".
no it doesn't say that at all. it might say you are who you say you are yes. but that will be seen to say that the non-plussed might not be? so it makes them non-genuine? !
No, that's you jumping to a conclusion. If I say "all haddock are fish", you can't assume that "all fish are haddock"!
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
It's not an anti-single male measure, it's an anti-misleading discription/timewaster measure.
]so we are incapable of making distictions ourselves, or picking up the phone and actually speaking to someone, or switching on a web cam, or just chatting for a good while? we want our hands held for us to establish that?!?
We don't, but newbies who are worried that the whole site might be a scam do!
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
If all the genuine single males in chat were verified:
1) It would be a very good thing for the small number of single males currently verified (myself now included) since it would remove the possiblity of us being accused of abusing our status.
yes i'm quite sure it would be good for you! we have no argument there! not sure on the remove the possibility etc etc thing. didn't understand what you meant?
You need to have read the whole thread to follow that one! Basically, blue was saying she could damage the scheme by verifying lots of single males, and I was pointing out that doing that would actually help the scheme.
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
2) It would be a very good thing for anyone in chat interested in single males (it does happen sometimes!) because they will know where a good supply of real ones can be found
so the other single males ain't real people now?
Whoa there! Jumping to conclusions again... I said "a good supply", not "the only supply".
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
3) It would be good for people not interested in single males, because the verfied ones would not want to risk their verified status by harassing peopel who are not interested.
if someone harrasses, well they get booted? the + serves no function there. you either abide by room rules, or you get binned. so you're saying the + is actually another sanction available to ops?
No, iIt's a sanction available to anyone mistreated by a + person.
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
4) It would be good for everyone who is just there to chat, or to make up their own minds about swinging (and we do get a LOT of both these types in chat) because they would be able to tell who is a newbie and who is a regular.
all it takes is a few visits to the room to see who's reg? the regs know the regs cos they see them every single day. the newbies can see who's reg by becoming reg? not difficult for anybody?
The large majority of newbies don't make enough visits to do that. First impressions count, and this whle thing is about improving new people's first impressions.
Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
4) It would be good for everyone who is just there to chat, or to make up their own minds about swinging (and we do get a LOT of both these types in chat) because they would be able to tell who is known to be 'a genuine person who is what they say they are' and wants this fact to be known and who is isn't, doesn't or doesn't want it to be known that they do.
well if i'm just there to chat, i can make that known by simply typing, i am just here to chat. if i'm just there to chat, then i won't arrange meets? if i'm just there to chat, then i really don't care who meets or who doesn't cos, i'm not there to meet?
Then you don't need to be verified. However, if you are new, and in that position, the verification system will help you because it will point you in the direction of some of the people you probably want to chat to, and away from a lot of the people you probably don't want to chat to. As you get to know the chatroom better, you'll naturally take off the 'trainig wheels' of looking for + people to chat to and chat to people you've met before too, just like all the other regulars will be doing.
Sex God
Call me a cynic, but are the self-appointed elite not getting enough sex? Have they cooked up this scheme as an easy way to shag newbies? "Fuck me and I'll let you join my club."?
I ask merely for information.
I ask merely for information.
Sex God
Quote by zootle
Call me a cynic
I'm here to please:
You're a cynic.
I thank you most humbly.
I am enjoying reading this thread, and it would appear that there are a lot of people both for and against the +,,,,,, if the + is here to stay no matter what then why not just except it, or if people are that unhappy about it, vote with your feet??????.
We are very new to this site, and if permitted will stay even though because of the verification criteria, we will never get a +. We are a genuine couple, and like lots of others may never become verified. Are we, or other couple’s/singles bad people as a result? No.
So lets enjoy the facility being so wonderfully provided, and give the site owners, and channel Opps a break.
Just my humble views
Alex
Ps life is a sexually transmitted disease
We are very new to this site, and if permitted will stay even though because of the verification criteria, we will never get a +. We are a genuine couple, and like lots of others may never become verified. Are we, or other couple’s/singles bad people as a result? No.
So lets enjoy the facility being so wonderfully provided, and give the site owners, and channel Opps a break.
Just my humble views
Alex
Ps life is a sexually transmitted disease
Quote by Ice Pie
Call me a cynic, but are the self-appointed elite not getting enough sex? Have they cooked up this scheme as an easy way to shag newbies? "Fuck me and I'll let you join my club."?
I ask merely for information.
By "the self-appointed elite " I take it you mean the room Chatroom Ops? - if you do then you are sadly mistaken, Ops cannot submit any verification requests for 3 months to avoid such accusations. Your claim falls on dead ground.
Quote by steve-shireen
Am in the chatroom now and to be honest...
cant see any difference
Exactly - all the noise about the verification is here (in the forum), not in the chatroom where the system is actually working. The influx of forum users into the room has been noted - probably hoping see the chatroom falling apart? - Sadly, if that is the case, I'm afraid the chatroom is not falling apart - far from it.
Sex God
Quote by Ice Pie
I ask merely for information.
Quote by Jon_TJ
Your claim falls on dead ground.
I made no claim. If you want to respond to me, respond to what I said, not what you hoped I would say.
It seems that some people still do not fully understand the dynamic in the chatroom. As a public service, I will now explain it.
There are four types of person in the chatroom:
The Ops are all-powerful demi-gods who impose order on the chatroom, striking down with thunderbolts of furious vengence upon any who dare challenge the rules.
Genuine People can always be detected by the presence of a vagina. Genuine People make up only a tiny proportion of the chatroom population, but are the most sought-after of chatters.
The Few are empowered by Swinging Heaven to roam the country bringing pleasure to Genuine People. They are all certified first-class lovers and hung like Champion the Wonder-Horse.
The Many hold their cock in one hand and their mouse in the other. You don't even want what they use to type on their keyboard... Some of The Many will try to pass themselves off as Genuine People, but their deceptions are always uncovered after time.
There are four types of person in the chatroom:
The Ops are all-powerful demi-gods who impose order on the chatroom, striking down with thunderbolts of furious vengence upon any who dare challenge the rules.
Genuine People can always be detected by the presence of a vagina. Genuine People make up only a tiny proportion of the chatroom population, but are the most sought-after of chatters.
The Few are empowered by Swinging Heaven to roam the country bringing pleasure to Genuine People. They are all certified first-class lovers and hung like Champion the Wonder-Horse.
The Many hold their cock in one hand and their mouse in the other. You don't even want what they use to type on their keyboard... Some of The Many will try to pass themselves off as Genuine People, but their deceptions are always uncovered after time.
Sex God
Quote by Jon_TJ
By "the self-appointed elite " I take it you mean the room Chatroom Ops? - if you do then you are sadly mistaken
I mean those who presumed to define their mates as genuine and anyone they haven't shagged as timewasters. Are you trying to tell me the ops didn't make that list? OK then, who did?
Quote by Jon_TJ
The influx of forum users into the room has been noted - probably hoping see the chatroom falling apart?
I hope you're not looking at me when you say that. I spent a day in the chatroom earlier in the week because I now have a second monitor, allowing me to chat in one window and work in another; the timing is just coincidence.
FWIW, I hadn't been in the chatroom for four or five months beforehand, but it didn't seem to have changed much. Still lots of people yelling their A/S/L every few minutes, and little in the way of chat I felt I could contribute to.
mr_d, think it's apparent i have actually read the entire thread? you don't wriggle out that easy mate! can't be bothered with the multiple quotes again . . . .
i don't follow the haddock=fish logic? if + denotes genuine, lack of a + denotes what? either it makes a distiction, or it doesn't. if it doesn't, what's the point? if it does, why do you feel the need to be distinguished from other users?
it's a free and open site that anyone over 18 can access. where might the scam be lurking? we we're once newbies clever enough to look round the site and join in with it and make our minds up for ourselves. new newbies however somehow aren't and so need to be told who's who?
thanks for at least agreeing that it *is* a sanction. well i deny you the right to sanction me! now what? as 2 equal members abiding by the site AUP, you have the power to sanction me, cos you're plussed, i have no say in that whatsoever, and just accept your power over me? well sorry but no i don't!
you chose to edit out the quote on the bit where i asked if you can see any way that this system might adavantage you to the disadvantage of other users, so i'll ask it again?
if this system is of benefit to those who accept it, those who don't accept it can't or won't benefit from it, and so they are denied a benefit you have! that is fair how? kind of the entire point is that it splits the site and elevates certain users!
jon? if the room is still exactly the same as it always was, then the point of verification, or the need for it, is what?
neil x x x ;)
i don't follow the haddock=fish logic? if + denotes genuine, lack of a + denotes what? either it makes a distiction, or it doesn't. if it doesn't, what's the point? if it does, why do you feel the need to be distinguished from other users?
it's a free and open site that anyone over 18 can access. where might the scam be lurking? we we're once newbies clever enough to look round the site and join in with it and make our minds up for ourselves. new newbies however somehow aren't and so need to be told who's who?
thanks for at least agreeing that it *is* a sanction. well i deny you the right to sanction me! now what? as 2 equal members abiding by the site AUP, you have the power to sanction me, cos you're plussed, i have no say in that whatsoever, and just accept your power over me? well sorry but no i don't!
you chose to edit out the quote on the bit where i asked if you can see any way that this system might adavantage you to the disadvantage of other users, so i'll ask it again?
if this system is of benefit to those who accept it, those who don't accept it can't or won't benefit from it, and so they are denied a benefit you have! that is fair how? kind of the entire point is that it splits the site and elevates certain users!
jon? if the room is still exactly the same as it always was, then the point of verification, or the need for it, is what?
neil x x x ;)
Sex God
Quote by Jon_TJ
Call me a cynic, but are the self-appointed elite not getting enough sex? Have they cooked up this scheme as an easy way to shag newbies? "Fuck me and I'll let you join my club."?
Did you see the question mark?
Shall I explain to you what a question mark signifies?
It signifies that I am asking a question.
Sex God
Bloody hell, I go off and do some verfiying of single males and this is what I come back to.... another three pages! :shock:
Anyway.....
I didn't actually say that I could damage the system.... the particular scenario I used - the verifying of guys that I have never spoken to, but shagged, as opposed to not being allowed to verify very very genuine people just cos they're not playing at the mo shows the system to be less than useful for newbies wanting info about who's genuine and who isn't..... it all comes down to what you term genuine of course......
And around and around the circle we go again.......
Well...... so.... I said I was going to be the champion of single guys and that I am...... Today I invited 4 guys round to my house (plus one other that I knew - but as I don't name names cos that is not the done thing in my world, I won't say who it was
).They all responded to my photo ad and joined my group. None of them use the forum and none use the chat room. They all turned up on time, did exactly what they said on the tin (ie all were polite, genuine bi guys) and we all got down to some good old cum fun. I did not need a verification system to feel comfortable enough to invite them to my house..... I worked that out myself from their polite emails..... doesn't take a genius does it...... therefore, if those 4 guys wish to use the chat room in future..... that's 4 extra verified members...... did I do well?????
8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
Anyway.....
Quote by Mister_Discreet
You need to have read the whole thread to follow that one! Basically, blue was saying she could damage the scheme by verifying lots of single males, and I was pointing out that doing that would actually help the scheme.
I didn't actually say that I could damage the system.... the particular scenario I used - the verifying of guys that I have never spoken to, but shagged, as opposed to not being allowed to verify very very genuine people just cos they're not playing at the mo shows the system to be less than useful for newbies wanting info about who's genuine and who isn't..... it all comes down to what you term genuine of course......
And around and around the circle we go again.......
Well...... so.... I said I was going to be the champion of single guys and that I am...... Today I invited 4 guys round to my house (plus one other that I knew - but as I don't name names cos that is not the done thing in my world, I won't say who it was
).They all responded to my photo ad and joined my group. None of them use the forum and none use the chat room. They all turned up on time, did exactly what they said on the tin (ie all were polite, genuine bi guys) and we all got down to some good old cum fun. I did not need a verification system to feel comfortable enough to invite them to my house..... I worked that out myself from their polite emails..... doesn't take a genius does it...... therefore, if those 4 guys wish to use the chat room in future..... that's 4 extra verified members...... did I do well????? 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) Quote by YouAintSeenMeRite
jon? if the room is still exactly the same as it always was, then the point of verification, or the need for it, is what?
neil x x x ;)
Not my baby Neil, so if it gets a shitty nappy, I don't have to deal with it
I just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up' - if you have in the first instance and didn't want to be (and have contacted the Admin of the system to say so), then those people have been removed from the list. The mistake is by the person who asked for you to be verified without your permission, not the system, and to be honest would have been done in good faith - not maliciously.
You know yourself Neil at how often the question of "how do I tell someone is genuine" crops up in chat. The genuine means many things in the question - are they really a single bi-fem (As rare as hens teeth :shock: ) or a bloke masquerading as, never mind whether they shag, turn up for meets or whatever.
As a chatroom Op I am not in a position to offer an 'official' voice on the system, the system is not run by the ops, nor do we get any information regarding who has been 'verified' other than a request from the list admin to add them as a '+V' - there is no list of verifiers and verify'ees - so no 'nasty little list' of who shagged who' that we get to see.
The system is actually working in the chatroom, and this thread has blown the entire thing out of proportion. There are more people asking where their '+' is than any other comment, and the odd "what is the + next to peoples names" query. Those people are given the link to the pages, where within reasonable limits (and not having been drafted by a specialist legal team) all is explained.
I can't really say more than that, other than it was introduced as a trail, and would have been puled if it failed, which in honesty it does not appear as if it has, contrary to all the posts made here.
A lot of assumption has been made by people about who will now not talk to whom, again - go take a look in the chatroom, cos it ain't like that. It does actually appear to be working....................
Sex God
Quote by Jon_TJ
I just cannot understand why so much fuss? Nobody is 'forced' to be 'plussed up'
Not true. The people placed on the original list were NOT consulted, and one of the room ops has indicated IN THIS THREAD that non-players and players who don't wish to be branded as such should not be allowed in the chat room!!! In other words, it is COMPULSORY :shock:
