| Saturday, July 26, 2008 - 06:39 pm |
Attaching Chat Log, Jozi Chat, 26th of July to IRC Chat with Jozi - 26th of July.
Session Time: Sat Jul 26 16:00:00 2008
[15:56] * Joins: Jozi (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[15:58] * Quits: Ambiorix (webclient@d54C55B7C.access.telenet.be) (Quit: see yall next week)
[15:58] Laguna: Better getting started then. :p
[15:58] * Retrieving #jozichat modes...
[15:58] * Laguna sets mode: +m
[15:58] Laguna: PM me if you want to be voiced (+v) and pose your question.
[15:59] Laguna: I ask you to make stick only to one topic and be quick about it, so others can have their turn.
[15:59] Laguna: I'll get started now then.
[16:00] Laguna: One of the issues raised in the thread announcing this meeting was Game Levels.
[16:00] Laguna: And the problem pointed out is taht its impossible to reach level 8 and beyond, because there's no Development Index.
[16:01] Laguna: Also, the difficulty to reach level 6 is tremendous and as far as I can see, reaching level 7, for all its criteria is impossible.
[16:01] Laguna: So, I ask you to fine tune the requirements for the Game Levels.
[16:01] Laguna: Done.
[16:03] * Laguna sets mode: +o Jozi
[16:03] Jozi: how do I copy past:
[16:03] Jozi: ?
[16:04] Laguna: Press the up arrows
[16:04] Jozi: True. we do not and these levels are not available yet. we should change the documentation until such levels become available.
[16:04] Jozi: I agree that some modifications to levels should be mnade indeed.
[16:04] Jozi: done
[16:05] Laguna: And when will that happen?
[16:06] Jozi: I will have a look into it. It is quite complex to find out what is or not possible. I will try to look into level 6 and 7 soon.
[16:06] Jozi: done
[16:06] Laguna: Okay. Thank you.
[16:06] * Laguna sets mode: +v Ameche
[16:07] Ameche: i have a question about IPO's...i want to know if you are going to offer a mass IPO's system, and if so is there a time line for such an addition?
[16:07] Ameche: done
[16:08] Jozi: we will implement it at the same time we plan to implement the removal of low value corporations from the stock market, making them private again or closing them.
[16:09] Ameche: thank you
[16:09] Jozi: mass IPO may bring large numbers of corporations to the market while many on the market should not be there at all.
[16:09] Jozi: we have several important feature we need to implement before but as this is not very large, I hope to implement it later this year.
[16:09] Jozi: done
[16:09] Ameche: understood, thank you
[16:10] * Laguna sets mode: -v Ameche
[16:10] * Laguna sets mode: +v Daconia
[16:10] Daconia: I understand that improved empire controls are in the future..in the interim would it be possible to include in the download section..your individual country information..such as products in stock and employment information...would make finding particular products you know you have and want to move around much simpler..a simple csv file with appropriate data would work accessable only by countries owner
[16:10] Jozi: is the issue of IPO "glitch" now resolved?
[16:10] Daconia: done
[16:11] Laguna: [16:10] Jozi: is the issue of IPO "glitch" now resolved? ---- NO
[16:11] Laguna: But that's another subject. We'll deal with it later. Now is Daconia's turn.
[16:12] Jozi: I would prefer to start the empire "control" pages with one that will show some aggregated data from all countries.
[16:12] Jozi: this should not be too difficult to do and can be extended in steps.
[16:12] Jozi: I will add to the short term plan. done
[16:13] Daconia: my issue is when someone asks me to send them 1000 drones...I know i have them..but searching through 20 countries to find them takes forever
[16:13] Jozi: I understand the issue. seems like a very good idea to add such pages. done
[16:14] Daconia: thank you
[16:14] * Laguna sets mode: -v Daconia
[16:14] * Laguna sets mode: +v KevinHenry
[16:15] KevinHenry: Thank you, Jozi, for holding these chats. My largest game frustration is the ammunition used for training purposes. I understand this is a very small amount of ammo, however it adds up. For those of us that can only log in once a day, or maybe not every day, buying replacement ammo becomes a constant use of our spending space. So my question is can we have the option to turn this feature off? Done.
[16:16] Jozi: the cost of the army that you see on the defense pages and financial page has several components. One is the salaries of the soldiers and officers,
[16:17] Jozi: one is gasoline or aircraft fuel, and military supplies. One of the major components is ammo.
[16:18] Jozi: this is in fact the cost of maintaining the army. if we stop using ammo, the cost will decrease which will be incorrect and
[16:18] Jozi: the ammo industry will diappear.
[16:18] Jozi: we had all this before and large part of the cost was in services, military services (larger quantities) and high tech services.
[16:19] Jozi: there was no ammo industry and we had many problems of delivery.
[16:19] KevinHenry: maybe i should rephase
[16:19] Jozi: I do not think we should turn it back to what it was. done
[16:19] KevinHenry: i'm not suggesting we get rid of ammo....
[16:19] KevinHenry: i'm referring to the monthly automatic use of ammo in our countries...maybe LG can help me out here
[16:20] Jozi: I fully understand what you mean.
[16:20] Jozi: each tank uses so many rounds each game month.
[16:20] Laguna: The amount of ammo each weapon consumes, whether active or inactive, reduces our stock quite a bit.
[16:20] Laguna: It isn't a question of cost.
[16:20] Laguna: But of amount.
[16:21] Jozi: by far, most ammo is used by non fighting armies for their training. They ordewr the ammo automatically on the market.
[16:21] KevinHenry: only if there stockpile is close to 0
[16:21] Laguna: If you wish for things to remain the same, then a nice little work around would be to reduce the amount of ammo used by the weapons in the attack arounds, and keep ammo training the same.
[16:21] Jozi: this is what the ammo corporations do for their survival and this is the cost of the army, you see on the defense pages.
[16:21] Laguna: We can't fight a war with 7000 int ammo now can we? : )
[16:22] Laguna: Like I said, the problem is not in cost, money, but in the amount needed to properly conduct a war.
[16:22] KevinHenry: okay, i understand jozi, how about if we could set a level where if our ammo sropped below it it would auto order?
[16:22] Laguna: Back to you, kevin. :P
[16:22] KevinHenry: okay, i understand jozi, how about if we could set a level where if our ammo sropped below it it would auto order?
[16:22] KevinHenry: *dropped
[16:23] Jozi: The number of weapons used in attack rounds can be reduced and the effect will be that your attacks will become less powerful.
[16:23] Laguna: NO! Not weapons, but ammo.
[16:24] Jozi: auto ordering is alway on unless removed by a player. We have promissed to add a feature that will allow you to set your own minimum levels and
[16:24] Laguna: Same effect per weapon, but with less ammo. Rather troubling to do, but... don't look at me.
[16:24] Jozi: force auto orders when your stock is 2,3,4 or whatever number of months.
[16:24] Laguna: That's good enough.
[16:24] KevinHenry: Jozi - the min level feature sounds good...any timeline?
[16:25] Jozi: quickly. I will push for it. We were consumed with the war engine and more small features and fixes will come faster now.
[16:25] Jozi: done
[16:25] KevinHenry: thank you, sorry for confusion, done
[16:25] Laguna: All is well, Kevin?
[16:25] Laguna: Okay then.
[16:25] * Laguna sets mode: -v KevinHenry
[16:26] Laguna: A request as left to me for I to ask you. :p
[16:26] Jozi: I hope that the cost of defense and the ammo use is not clear.
[16:26] Jozi: i mean now clear
[16:26] Laguna: Its clear and we understand it.
[16:27] Laguna: There has been a player and some others complaining about ammo missing weapons and ammo.
[16:27] Laguna: I do not know how exactly it happens, since it never occured to me.
[16:28] Laguna: I do know not if its a misunderstating or one huge huge.
[16:28] Laguna: I do know not if its a misunderstating or one huge bug.
[16:28] Laguna: However, he hasn't gotten any reply on the subject from your staff. Could you look into it and see what's the problem?
[16:29] Jozi: We had a mail from one player. I think it is very serious if it happened but I doubt it. I know for sure it was looked into
[16:29] Jozi: and it was discussed with me. The engineer mailed back.
[16:29] Laguna: There's a thread on the forum... https://www.simcountry.com/cgi-bin/discus/board-auth.cgi?file=/1/9645.html&lm=1216335914
[16:30] Laguna: And what was the conclusion?
[16:30] Jozi: we never had any evidense of such an event. We look at numbers of ammo dropping on the logs and we always see the reason.
[16:30] Jozi: we looked in the code into all places where ammo numbers change and we could not find any problem.
[16:31] Laguna: Very well. I really cannot say more about this.
[16:31] Jozi: this was one case and we suspect that he assumed large numbers, never looked into it and these numbers were eaten up by thousands of weapons each month.
[16:31] Jozi: done
[16:32] * Laguna sets mode: +v WildEyes
[16:32] WildEyes: I would like to know what W3C was doing in terms of promoting SimCountry to new players, and as a follow up, if there were any plans (or the possibility) to re-establish a free-to-play world with limited features (like lower pop, no nukes, obviously no cashout) to encourage new players to learn the game and then invest in full membership
[16:33] Jozi: we are working on it in a different way. We know how many new players come in every day and we can increase their numbers many times over if we increase the advertizing. however,
[16:34] Jozi: we also see many people leaving us in the first hour, day or two days because they find it hard to do.
[16:34] Laguna: becareful were you advertise! No more n00bs for God's sake!
[16:34] WildEyes: Yeah, I found out about SC via an ad on another site, and I'm only asking about a free world because trial mode isn't really long enough to learn the game. I did well because I had to abandon my first account
[16:34] Jozi: making it free will not help. Making it much easier will.
[16:34] WildEyes: this account has done well because I sought the help of seasoned players
[16:35] Jozi: we are now starting to work on "web casts" that will explin game features visually and with audio. These will be short "videos"
[16:35] Jozi: of up to 2 or 3 minutes and will guide players through some features.
[16:35] Laguna: They'll be lost after 30 secs if you don't add sexual content. :p
[16:35] WildEyes: that sounds very neat
[16:36] Jozi: we hope that it will make it easier and the number of people who stay and play will increase.
[16:36] Jozi: The numbers are not so small even now but percentage wise, it can easily grow by a factor of 3 to 6.
[16:36] Jozi: I will nor read what you said and answer.
[16:37] Laguna: I'm curious about that girl on the simcountry tour tho... /winks at Jozi
[16:37] Jozi: laguna. maybe you want to help us and add some sexual content?
[16:37] Laguna: No thank you. :p
[16:37] WildEyes: LOL. Oh dear :S
[16:37] Jozi: nice girl hah?
[16:37] Laguna: Ah! Jozi has taste! :P
[16:38] Jozi: we will be happy if people want to make such webcasts and are willing to pay for them. we want to do it fast.
[16:38] Jozi: you did not see the full picture.
[16:39] WildEyes: Thank you, Jozi When SimCountry does well, its players have more fun. It's been something I've wondered about (promoting the game) for a while, since some companies are ravenous about ads
[16:39] * WildEyes is done and happy
[16:39] Laguna: Yes, but we are just fine with out small train community. Chooo chooo!
[16:40] * Joins: Veritas (David@cpe-71-72-65-194.columbus.res.rr.com)
[16:41] * Laguna sets mode: +v Veritas
[16:41] Jozi: any opinions on webcasts? does it help?
[16:41] Laguna: Yes
[16:41] Laguna: There will be nudity, right?
[16:41] * Veritas prays
[16:42] WildEyes: The webcasts would be a nice touch
[16:42] Jozi: yes
[16:42] WildEyes: i've been critical about navigation and accessability
[16:42] Jozi: naked screens
[16:42] Laguna: LOL
[16:42] WildEyes: even though W3 provides TONS of information for players willing to search for it
[16:42] Veritas: Anyhow, hello Jozi. I have a few preguntas y advisas for you
[16:42] * Laguna sets mode: -v WildEyes
[16:42] Jozi: wild eyes: we will get back to that later?
[16:43] Laguna: Sure.
[16:43] * Laguna kicks Jozi into Veritas's direction
[16:43] Veritas: This has been brought up before, but I'd like to reiterate it, since it is a great idea for the share market - direct sales to certain players. Many of us would like to sell shares to people within our own federations, instead of random investment funds or opponents.
[16:44] Jozi: I am here and waiting
[16:44] * Joins: Valkyrie (email@example.com)
[16:44] Jozi: we have thought about it as it was brought up in the last chat.
[16:45] * Valkyrie is now known as Wild_Eyes[wireless]
[16:45] Veritas: As I said, I would like to reiterate this one. I believe it is quite a valuable addition.
[16:45] Jozi: we have nothing against direct sale (except for the week work it will cost to one of the guys here)
[16:45] Veritas: Hehe. Hopefully you won't have to pay him overtime
[16:46] * Quits: WildEyes (firstname.lastname@example.org) (Connection reset by peer)
[16:46] Jozi: we just do not want the shares to be sold within the account. if you want to sell the shares to yourself it is a problem.
[16:46] * Quits: Ameche (email@example.com) (Quit: )
[16:46] Jozi: done
[16:46] Veritas: Next, I just got done with a round of IPOs. I would like to see the ability for the majority shareholder to sell greater than 15% of the total shares - many times, I want to get rid of 25% or more of my shares, and it takes twice as long, since I can only do 15% at a time
[16:47] Veritas: For example, when I want to get rid of a public corp in my country, and someone else wishes to control it... I'd like to be able to transfer all of my shares to this other person (much like a buyout or merger in real life) right away, instead of 15% at a time
[16:47] Jozi: you can set a target ownership. It will take some time and all the shares will be sold.
[16:48] Veritas: I'm aware of the target ownership, however sometimes it makes sense to dump all the shares at once, instead of over time. See my example above
[16:48] Jozi: selling a public corporation is a good idea and we will make sure it will be possible. it means that all shares will be sold to one entity.
[16:49] Veritas: Great!
[16:49] Jozi: selling all the shares on the market at the same time is not a very good policy as the price may drop. I do not think any real company will do that and even 15% is high.
[16:50] Laguna: Yes, but this isn't the real world. : )
[16:50] Veritas: Well, not so much on the market, but moreso in whatever future direct sale feature you guys wind up adding
[16:50] Laguna: I gotta get a sign and a moto... and strat spreading the word.
[16:50] Jozi: selling a public corporation will make it into a private corporation and all the shareholders will be compensated.
[16:50] Veritas: ^^ this I like
[16:51] Veritas: I always was a bit miffed by "purchasing" a public corp and never getting all of the shares
[16:51] Jozi: concluding:
[16:51] Veritas: It seems a purchase should be aiming to control all shares
[16:51] Jozi: we want to be able to direct sell shares but not to ourselves. (you may not agree...)
[16:51] Veritas: Well, I agree and I disagree
[16:52] Jozi: we want to be able to sell or offer to purchase a public corporation, meaning you offer to purchase all 100% of the shares from all the share holders.
[16:52] Veritas: I agree in that "public" corps should be truly public - and not someone's personal playground of profitability
[16:53] Jozi: same thing. as long as you do not sell yourself. we see the possibility for indirect deals and will think about it.
[16:53] Veritas: On the other hand, I don't see a problem with someone buying shares of a corp with both his CEOs - perhaps a % limit on the total number of shares a player can own across his empire/CEOs?
[16:54] Laguna: Chat is to make a point, not offer extensive solutions. :p
[16:55] Veritas: Well, then let me be sharper :-P
[16:55] Jozi: we need some new ideas here. we think about the land property where the corporation is located. why not sell the land too which gives some rights to the owner of the land.
[16:56] Veritas: Well, if you want new ideas instead of fixes - why stop at merely controlling the "land"? Why not open all sorts of features, like expanding Corps to larger sizes (instead of the standard worker numbers)? Or open an avenue where a CEO can buy up the land of the country and turn it into an enterprise-run country?
[16:57] Veritas: History is ripe with examples of private citizens/corporations controlling city-states and small nations
[16:57] * Wild_Eyes[wireless] is now known as WildEyes|afk
[16:57] Jozi: both ideas are in the "books". extending corporation sizes is an old plan. to much work here and we did not get ti it.
[16:58] Jozi: the land is now divided to properties. This is already done when we started with the war engine as you occupy land properties.
[16:58] Laguna: Again, this is not the real world, Jozi. What's it called in english? Economies of scale?
[16:59] Jozi: we want to allow the sale of land on the cahs market. setting up a private corporation on such land you own etc.
[16:59] Veritas: I like that, Jozi
[16:59] Jozi: you could use the land to start a business.
[16:59] Veritas: And Laguna, it's not bad to contemplate realism in SC, at least I don't think
[16:59] Laguna: Seems like something that will a tad hard to implement. "Oh lets increase production." "But how, Sir?..." "Who the hell would I know! Just do it!"
[16:59] Laguna: Realism sucks the fun out of this game. Always did.
[17:00] Veritas: For some people.
[17:00] Laguna: For all. Fun is in interaction, not in the game itself.
[17:00] Laguna: The game is a platform for the interaction, an excuse.
[17:00] Veritas: I don't care if it is bound by real world restrictions, but if it at least is realistically plausible, why not approach it?
[17:01] Laguna: Because there are limits to what one can do in an amount of time.
[17:01] Veritas: Well, yes. The Politics of the game is largely more interesting than the actually gameplay itself, if only because interaction is so great a motivator.
[17:02] Veritas: Sure, I'm not saying implement the entire process for the magnetic stabilization of cold fusion reactors, but bits and pieces here and there will see benefits over time
[17:02] Veritas: The players W3C wants to keep aren't ones that will stick around for only a few months, but rather ones like you and me who are hopelessly addicted to their brand of opium
[17:02] Jozi: I agree. we should add features that interact and increase the possibility to do things that were not planned or invisioned, realistic or not.
[17:02] Laguna: Bits and pieces cannot be add without a clear line of reason.
[17:03] Laguna: Each must be complementary with the next.
[17:03] Veritas: Right. But one has to start somewhere, no?
[17:03] Veritas: Lest it never be considered at all
[17:03] Laguna: And starting it by a somewhat advanced topis of economics isn't the best of all.
[17:03] Laguna: Something all can grasp sounds much better.
[17:04] Veritas: Things like direct sales of shares, an expanded security council, economic treaties and cartels, etc. will increase realism and interaction
[17:04] Veritas: Do you mean something that all can grasp right off the bat, day one? Or something that all can grasp over months of playing?
[17:05] Laguna: Something all have some knowledge of it, from experience, but that aren't completly aware of it.
[17:05] Laguna: That they can relate to. : )
[17:05] Laguna: So yes, they would have to know something about or even listen about it since day one.
[17:06] Laguna: Even a misconception will do nicely.
[17:06] Veritas: So then, what do you believe is a proposed feature beyond the grasp of a number of players?
[17:07] Laguna: No. And where did I say that? : )
[17:07] Veritas: 07member:identifier:laguna
[17:07] Veritas: :
[17:07] Veritas: And starting it by a somewhat advanced topis of economics isn't the best of all.
[17:07] Veritas: I may have misread that, feel free to correct me
[17:08] Laguna: And how old were you when you earned about "economias de escala" (economies of scale?).
[17:08] Laguna: heared
[17:09] Veritas: 14 or so, but I'm a nerd
[17:09] Laguna: : )
[17:09] Laguna: What was this about? Realism?
[17:10] Veritas: But, I must preface all I say with the admission that I'd rather see this game have features that some players can't grasp
[17:10] Laguna: There's no way to turn the topic around. This cannot be reality, technical issues won't allow it.
[17:10] Veritas: I'd like there to be some reward for intelligence - much like the real world. Your smart politicians tend to win.
[17:10] Laguna: And the game cannot expand to all ends, for the player is limited on what he can do with his time and knowledge.
[17:10] Veritas: I understand full realism is impossible
[17:11] Veritas: I don't want full realism
[17:11] Veritas: But moving more towards realism can't hurt and surely can only improve
[17:11] Laguna: It can't?
[17:11] Veritas: There has to be a balance, of course
[17:11] Laguna: What direction has been doing in the last years and what has been said about it?
[17:11] Veritas: Not if it is implemented with the right intentions.
[17:12] Jozi: I thik that features should be simple to understand, which does not mean that everyone will understand them anyway. Today, many features are made difficult because we try to prvent misuse. some economic principles must be understood and you should know what a stock market is. we will never have anything close to realism but we do not want it to decline to the level of "wonders" worlds.
[17:12] Veritas: As many people who disagree as there are, there are just as many, if not more, who agree
[17:12] Laguna: If we haven't been approaching reality at the expenses of some simple fun, then what has been going on?
[17:12] Veritas: Right, Jozi
[17:12] Veritas: Here, maybe I need to rephrase
[17:13] Veritas: The game needs to have a foundation upon realism, or it's just a fantasy world
[17:13] Veritas: Past that, the features need to be aimed at having fun, interacting, etc.
[17:13] Laguna: Pricesily. It smost start on reality, but it must move away from it.
[17:13] Laguna: And it must move away from it to provide us with what we want: entertaiment.
[17:14] Veritas: Right. But there's nothing that should prevent the addition of realism to that foundation - but by all means leave the interaction geared toward enjoyment
[17:14] Laguna: We are on the same page then.
[17:14] Jozi: we could implement a feature where you hit someone on the head and gold coins are roling out. we prefer the game to be based on "realistic" terminology and follow the general logic of a real world.
[17:14] * Joins: Man_of_Peace (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[17:14] Veritas: yes we are
[17:14] Jozi: this doe not make it realistic.
[17:14] Laguna: But the direction is to get AWAY from reality, not getting CLOSER to it.
[17:14] Veritas: haha
[17:14] Veritas: Jozi, implement socks full of quarters. I want to whack a few imaginary simpeople
[17:14] * Laguna glares at Jozi
[17:15] Laguna: Realism: Earthquakes.
[17:15] Veritas: It's a balance, Laguna. You need to add realism to move away from it.
[17:15] Laguna: Care to tell whatever good we got from it?
[17:15] Jozi: we are very far from reality. we transfer millions of people from one country to another and arbitrarily change the profession of many thousands of people each month
[17:15] Laguna: None? Right. Remove it then.
[17:16] Laguna: And why? Because its necessary for the game to work on our end.
[17:16] Veritas: I agree, Loire
[17:16] Veritas: Some features are meaningless, if not annoying
[17:16] Laguna: This game is supposed to be founded on realism and guided by reason.
[17:16] Veritas: Others to be added would provide a bonus to entertainment, I am sre
[17:16] Veritas: sure*
[17:16] Laguna: Indeed.
[17:16] Veritas: That's the best way I could have put it
[17:17] Veritas: ^^ Nicely worded
[17:17] Laguna: lol Thanks. :P
[17:17] Laguna: So, Jozi... what did you get from this?
[17:18] Laguna: It was basically two men saying the same thing in diferent words.
[17:18] Veritas: Better than two men saying different things in the same words.
[17:18] Laguna: LOL
[17:19] Jozi: this is excellent. I was re-reading it but you will place it on the forum right? such discussions help a lot in taking several steps back and look at the forrest instead of being stuckbetween the rees.
[17:19] Jozi: stuck between the trees I mean.
[17:19] Veritas: Laguna should have a log of the chat
[17:19] Laguna: That sounds like a dutch saying. :p
[17:19] Laguna: Yes, it will be posted on the forum.
[17:20] Laguna: Along with the comments about the Simcountry Tour girl... can we meet her?
[17:20] Jozi: the saying is: is you are stuck between the trees, you do not see the forrest. helicopter view is another way of saying the same.
[17:20] Veritas: Is she dutch? If she is, give her my contact info
[17:20] Jozi: 617-878-3561
[17:20] Laguna: Alright!
[17:21] Veritas: :D
[17:21] * Veritas frantically looks up country code for NL
[17:21] * Laguna sets mode: -v Veritas
[17:21] * Joins: Zetetic_Elench (email@example.com)
[17:21] Laguna: Now for three short bugs to end this:
[17:22] Laguna: The depots you create in enemy countries cannot be clicked on the map to airlift your units.
[17:22] Laguna: You can, however, select them from the list.
[17:23] Laguna: 2. You can't dismantle several SFs and RDUs units (Landing Units) at once. The options are there, but the clickable boxes aren't.
[17:23] Jozi: I will have it checked. It worked for sure. I used it. We will fix if broken.
[17:23] Laguna: 3. Countries with a large country name can't be selected for some reason... Gives me a "you aren't logged in" error.
[17:23] Laguna: I was able to land my units, but it wasn't through clicking on the map.
[17:24] * Joins: nutegunray (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[17:24] Jozi: I will take care of all this ASAP. thanks.
[17:25] Laguna: I don't have nothing else to add besides... chooo! choooo!!
[17:25] * Laguna sets mode: -m
[17:26] Laguna: What? No one thanks the man!
[17:26] Laguna: You evil fiends!
[17:26] Daconia: thanks Jozi
[17:26] KevinHenry: THANK YOU, JOZI!
[17:26] Veritas: gracias
[17:27] Daconia: I appreciate your time
[17:27] Jozi: Thank. see you next time.
[17:27] Zetetic_Elench: Missed most, but thanks. Will catch up when the log is posted on the forum