[LOCKED] 2019 AB Watch: Non-legal Views Only

Status
Not open for further replies.

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
Don't you mean "brother and sister"? She maintained that they had only a professional relationship. That's unlike any of my professional relationships.




Noted, but not all of those recordings are surreptitious.
Agreed. Just the last one with the Cheshire Cat grin seemed a bit like, I just fucked this girl and I’m filming it to show everyone. But at least she’s dressed, so maybe it’s just a security measure he takes against claims like this. Wouldn’t be the only person doing that.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
11,859
Agreed. Just the last one with the Cheshire Cat grin seemed a bit like, I just fucked this girl and I’m filming it to show everyone. But at least she’s dressed, so maybe it’s just a security measure he takes against claims like this. Wouldn’t be the only person doing that.
I’m an extremely paranoid person. In his shoes, I’d have every sexual encounter sign consent forms and record them signing the consent forms. Then fax those forms and send the recording to my lawyer.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
36,071
The videos in this thread absolutely could be platonic, "big brother" even...or not. We can't know really.
They sure could. But I bet if you polled 100 people and asked if those videos resembled:

A) FWB/relationship
B) Platonic friends
C) Siblings

I'm 99.9% sure I know what choice would get the fewest votes.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
9,248
Waltham, MA
They sure could. But I bet if you polled 100 people and asked if those videos resembled:

A) FWB/relationship
B) Platonic friends
C) Siblings

I'm 99.9% sure I know what choice would get the fewest votes.
I agree. They are great for his PR campaign and honestly make me feel a little better about keeping him until we know more. I'm talking purely from a factual standpoint.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
This doesn't really help though. Consent can be withdrawn at any point.
Exactly. Which is why the go to move is recording the whole thing. I’m not certain people who do that actually inform their partners, which is gross in and of itself. And if he’s sending the videos or parts of the videos around just for kicks, that’s not encouraging. But, yes, it does appear they had consensual sex or hooked up at least once. What that means for the rest of her accusations is unclear.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,591
Exactly. Which is why the go to move is recording the whole thing. I’m not certain people who do that actually inform their partners, which is gross in and of itself. And if he’s sending the videos or parts of the videos around just for kicks, that’s not encouraging. But, yes, it does appear they had consensual sex or hooked up at least once. What that means for the rest of her accusations is unclear.
I find it a lot more gross to publicize the videos than taking them in and of themselves. If all they do is gather dust somewhere on the offchance that someone sues you, it's not very high above "awkward" on the scale for me. Obviously, if you watch and beat off to them later, less so, or show them to friends, or if you're just some broke schmuck... but for rich and famous people in that position, sounds like it's pretty much just a cost of putting on your Business Socks these days, and I find it hard to criticize victimless defense measures like that, unless they turn around and use it to make a victim out of them.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,635
Exactly. Which is why the go to move is recording the whole thing. I’m not certain people who do that actually inform their partners, which is gross in and of itself. And if he’s sending the videos or parts of the videos around just for kicks, that’s not encouraging. But, yes, it does appear they had consensual sex or hooked up at least once. What that means for the rest of her accusations is unclear.
What evidence of consensual sex could do is debunk her claims that they had a strictly professional or "brother-sister" relationship. Once you can debunk a fairly important claim, then you call into question her other claims, while also giving support to his claim of extortion. I'm not saying these 3 second video snippets are sufficient by themselves, but I'm guessing there could be more video.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
I find it a lot more gross to publicize the videos than taking them in and of themselves. If all they do is gather dust somewhere on the offchance that someone sues you, it's not very high above "awkward" on the scale for me. Obviously, if you watch and beat off to them later, less so, or show them to friends, or if you're just some broke schmuck... but for rich and famous people in that position, sounds like it's pretty much just a cost of putting on your Business Socks these days, and I find it hard to criticize victimless defense measures like that, unless they turn around and use it to make a victim out of them.
No it’s pretty gross regardless of what you do with the videos, and comes from a place of assuming women make false claims wayyyy more often than they do. If you’re concerned someone you’re considering sleeping with might try to extort you, you can always just not have sex with them.

What evidence of consensual sex could do is debunk her claims that they had a strictly professional or "brother-sister" relationship. Once you can debunk a fairly important claim, then you call into question her other claims, while also giving support to his claim of extortion. I'm not saying these 3 second video snippets are sufficient by themselves, but I'm guessing there could be more video.
That’s true, and maybe explains her decision not to pursue criminal charges. Absent physical evidence it’s very difficult to bring rape charges against someone you’re in a consensual sexual relationship with.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
26,598
AZ
What evidence of consensual sex could do is debunk her claims that they had a strictly professional or "brother-sister" relationship. Once you can debunk a fairly important claim, then you call into question her other claims, while also giving support to his claim of extortion. I'm not saying these 3 second video snippets are sufficient by themselves, but I'm guessing there could be more video.
Right. The complaint alleges: "Mrs. Taylor never dated or had any interest in a romantic relationship" with Antonio Brown. If this turns out to be untrue, it would be a severe problem for the case.

I also would be very uncomfortable for the lawyer. I tell my clients that I'm signing their pleadings and there better not be any problems.
 
Apr 24, 2019
233
This may just be my own stupid bias, but one of the things I always appreciate and periodically point to, about the Patriots is that they tend not to do what most teams do when it comes to situations like these. A small proud moment for me was the Aaron Hernandez situation. Unlike other franchises, Kraft, et al, didn’t wait around and hide behind process. They said, Ya know what? NO - FUCK. THIS. We’re out. I appreciated that, as a fan, as a human. And while I understand and acknowledge the differences - not the least of which is that that situation was criminal - and while I get that Chung is currently dealing with something that IS criminal, I just feel like this is an “abandon ship” moment.

If the accusation were being made against, well...LOTS OF PEOPLE (a McCourty, Matthew Slater, Gronk, Edelman, Dont’a, etc...), I’d probably be willing to give the benefit of the doubt and let it play out. But when it’s a guy with maturity, impulse and fucking batshit issues, I think it’s time to draw the line. He’s been on the team for approximately 12 seconds, he’s a pain in the ass, red flags everywhere you look, I mean...why is this worth it?

All these technical or even philosophical arguments we’re having, very much in good faith on all sides, seem to me a little bit beside the point. Whether he did or didn’t do it, or if it sets a precedent, WHATEVER, in my view as a football fan, it’s just a mess that isn’t going away, not by a long shot or in a short while. It’s a disaster with no easy way out, and just in terms of the PR hit for the team and the potential for team distraction, it’s not even in the ballpark of worth it.

Cut him soon. Cut him now.

Edit typos, always always.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
4,839
NJ
I see no reason to cut ties with him, when at this point, no one knows the real story except the people involved and possibly the Patriots and Rosenhaus.

I also see no legit way the NFL can place him or anyone on a commissioner's list for a civil case without major backlash from the NFLPA and rightfully so
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
10,101
A Lost Time
To continue on this line, the mantra of "believe all women" is, from what I can tell, largely in response to society reflexively choosing to "believe NO women" when these accusations surface. It doesn't take reading very many V&N threads on sexual assault stories to see the steady litany of "she's obviously lying" and "what a slut" and so on that comes, thankfully not from our fellow posters here, but definitely from general internet commentary and even media commentary. And it's a fact that, in the main, it is a very rare accusation that is made up.

However, those stats are for society at large. For accuseds who are non-famous, non-rich, and particularly where a prosecutor is bringing charges, I think society (not the legal system) ought to in general put the burden of proof on the accused from that point, and give accusers the benefit of the doubt. We ought to believe them, because far too many of them are disbelieved and then character-assassinated, and it's always the far easier path for them to just never pursue it or seek justice. In your Harvey Weinstein type cases, we've seen women voicing accusations publicly, but not filing suit to seek money (rather just to bring attention, and perhaps to testify in criminal proceedings), and I think they should probably start with the benefit of the doubt as well.

That said, when as here we're dealing with a rich and famous accused, and civil charges, I think the odds of a false (or exaggerated for extortionary purposes) accusation go way up. That's a very small fraction of cases, though an outsized fraction of public attention. I have no more information than anyone else in this thread, but I think it's entirely reasonable, and not anti-woman, to not reflexively believe her in this situation until the balance of publicly-available evidence tilts towards her interpretation of events. "We'll have to see" / "leave it up to the system" is not a knee-jerk response, and neither is a conclusion that he's an asshole.

But likewise, knee-jerk responses of "the Pats should cut him!" and "he's not worth it!" also seem misplaced to me. If he was worth the drama yesterday, I'd say he's worth it today - I don't think much has changed as a result of this filing. I'll take the opinion of the litigators here that it's by no means a slam-dunk filing, and don't see any reason his professional life should be affected while that process plays out.
The believe the women trope is well-meaning but deeply misguided. It only applies in a particular social setting in a specific point in time and those who espouse it do not understand the effects of the widespread adoption of their dictum would have. In other words, I can accept that in an environment of misogyny or disbelief towards women, a woman coming forward against a man is very likely to be performing a courageous act and telling the truth.

The problem is that if "the believe the women" mantra becomes successful and widely adopted then the incentives the accusers will have will thoroughly change. In an environment in which everyone reflexively believes women, the women coming forward will need no courage to do so. In actual fact, the most cynical and amoral will have no disincentive to lie and extort.... because everyone will take their word for it! In other words, a well meaning mantra would have the unintended consequence of not righting wrongs, but creating new wrongs of a different shade, of not eliminating structural disadvantages women face, but creating structural disadvantages for men.

A thing we ought to remember - that many social justice warriors forget- is that if all humans are the same, then the failings they find on white men aren't inherently failings of white men. They are failings of humans. It just happens that white men tend to have a lot of structural advantages and their failings tend to affect more people. Should women or people of color obtain similar structural advantages as white men today, some are bound to misuse and abuse them: That's what humans do. So the answer isn't in trying to intentionally or unintentionally confer a structural advantage to this or that group, but trying to find solutions that provide just outcomes. And btw, the answer isn't to be found in demonizing white men as some sort of unique monsters, because that's as racist and sexist as the racism and sexism you are supposed to be fighting against.

More to the point, shifting the onus from a presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt would be a radical shift to legal traditions that go back centuries. Assuming guilt from the accused is something I would expect from the Chinese or the North Korean legal system not the American one. SOSH has more than its fair share of lawyers and they can wax far more eloquently than me about the wisdom of presuming innocence rather than guilt, so I will let them do so.

I will point out however that there is a lot of overlap between the people who spew the "believe the women" mantra and those who are against the death penalty. Yet, one of the strongest arguments against the death penalty is that it leads to the execution of innocent people. Murder is an even more evil act than rape yet it's horrifying to think that a person would lose his life because he was wrongfully convicted. If we adopt the "believe the women" mantra and start assuming that all of the accused are guilty, even if the number of false positives doesn't rise - which they will- it's horrifying that we will be imposing social death on a good deal of undeserving people. And btw, there's something deeply wrong about imposing social death to the accused, but that's what we do, because thanks to social media, we have found new and creative ways to unleash our mob instincts.

I don't have any particular sympathy towards Antonio Brown. God knows, he's behaved like a colossal asshole over the past month. I don't follow the Pats that closely to feel that I have any strong biases that affect my judgement of the situation. He may very well be guilty. I wouldn't be surprised if that proves to be the case.

I just believe it's common sense to say that we don't need to issue a verdict today, or ostracize him or take away his livelihood, because of the hellishly fast media cycles we made for ourselves demand answers right now. It's alright to wait. It's alright to wait for the facts to come to the fore. It's alright to maintain some distance, to not be swayed by the emotions of the moment. Not just for Antonio Brown. For everyone.

But most of all, spare me of the well-intentioned but deeply misguided mantras like believe the women.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
The believe the women trope is well-meaning but deeply misguided. It only applies in a particular social setting in a specific point in time and those who espouse it do not understand the effects of the widespread adoption of their dictum would have. In other words, I can accept that in an environment of misogyny or disbelief towards women, a woman coming forward against a man is very likely to be performing a courageous act and telling the truth.

The problem is that if "the believe the women" mantra becomes successful and widely adopted then the incentives the accusers will have will thoroughly change. In an environment in which everyone reflexively believes women, the women coming forward will need no courage to do so. In actual fact, the most cynical and amoral will have no disincentive to lie and extort.... because everyone will take their word for it! In other words, a well meaning mantra would have the unintended consequence of not righting wrongs, but creating new wrongs of a different shade, of not eliminating structural disadvantages women face, but creating structural disadvantages for men.

A thing we ought to remember - that many social justice warriors forget- is that if all humans are the same, then the failings they find on white men aren't inherently failings of white men. They are failings of humans. It just happens that white men tend to have a lot of structural advantages and their failings tend to affect more people. Should women or people of color obtain similar structural advantages as white men today, some are bound to misuse and abuse them: That's what humans do. So the answer isn't in trying to intentionally or unintentionally confer a structural advantage to this or that group, but trying to find solutions that provide just outcomes. And btw, the answer isn't to be found in demonizing white men as some sort of unique monsters, because that's as racist and sexist as the racism and sexism you are supposed to be fighting against.

More to the point, shifting the onus from a presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt would be a radical shift to legal traditions that go back centuries. Assuming guilt from the accused is something I would expect from the Chinese or the North Korean legal system not the American one. SOSH has more than its fair share of lawyers and they can wax far more eloquently than me about the wisdom of presuming innocence rather than guilt, so I will let them do so.

I will point out however that there is a lot of overlap between the people who spew the "believe the women" mantra and those who are against the death penalty. Yet, one of the strongest arguments against the death penalty is that it leads to the execution of innocent people. Murder is an even more evil act than rape yet it's horrifying to think that a person would lose his life because he was wrongfully convicted. If we adopt the "believe the women" mantra and start assuming that all of the accused are guilty, even if the number of false positives doesn't rise - which they will- it's horrifying that we will be imposing social death on a good deal of undeserving people. And btw, there's something deeply wrong about imposing social death to the accused, but that's what we do, because thanks to social media, we have found new and creative ways to unleash our mob instincts.

I don't have any particular sympathy towards Antonio Brown. God knows, he's behaved like a colossal asshole over the past month. I don't follow the Pats that closely to feel that I have any strong biases that affect my judgement of the situation. He may very well be guilty. I wouldn't be surprised if that proves to be the case.

I just believe it's common sense to say that we don't need to issue a verdict today, or ostracize him or take away his livelihood, because of the hellishly fast media cycles we made for ourselves demand answers right now. It's alright to wait. It's alright to wait for the facts to come to the fore. It's alright to maintain some distance, to not be swayed by the emotions of the moment. Not just for Antonio Brown. For everyone.

But most of all, spare me of the well-intentioned but deeply misguided mantras like believe the women.
At least one quibble - the “social justice warriors” would say that even if all people are fundamentally the same, the privileges white men have always enjoyed make them less attuned to the needs and wants and experiences of others and therefore more likely to act selfishly or amorally.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
11,859
At least one quibble - the “social justice warriors” would say that even if all people are fundamentally the same, the privileges white men have always enjoyed make them less attuned to the needs and wants and experiences of others and therefore more likely to act selfishly or amorally.
Also, can we not do the whole SJW bashing thing here? I like to think we’re better than that.
 

Preacher

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
1,712
Vicenza, Italy
That’s true, and maybe explains her decision not to pursue criminal charges. Absent physical evidence it’s very difficult to bring rape charges against someone you’re in a consensual sexual relationship with.
We do it all the time. Very few sexual assault cases I've worked had physical evidence. Many involved prior consensual sexual encounters or even subsequent consensual sexual encounters. Many involved significantly delayed reporting or other counter-intuitive behaviors. But, for the most part, if the victim is believable and willing to participate in the process, we'll take it trial. Maybe that's why we have pretty high acquittal rates, but that's another discussion.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
35,227
He’s been on the team for approximately 12 seconds, he’s a pain in the ass, red flags everywhere you look, I mean...why is this worth it?
Because it’s one of the best receivers in football, and if he isn’t guilty then it would be dumb to drop him.

But then I am someone who looks back at the Hernandez years fondly because of how ungodly talented he was, so maybe I’m the wrong person to comment.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
We do it all the time. Very few sexual assault cases I've worked had physical evidence. Many involved prior consensual sexual encounters or even subsequent consensual sexual encounters. Many involved significantly delayed reporting or other counter-intuitive behaviors. But, for the most part, if the victim is believable and willing to participate in the process, we'll take it trial. Maybe that's why we have pretty high acquittal rates, but that's another discussion.
To be fair, the discussion I was having was about the high acquittal rates. Yes, she can still bring charges and still might see AB convicted, but with the consensual aspect of the relationship making that more difficult, why not go the civil route?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
27,886
Because it’s one of the best receivers in football, and if he isn’t guilty then it would be dumb to drop him.

But then I am someone who looks back at the Hernandez years fondly because of how ungodly talented he was, so maybe I’m the wrong person to comment.
And because people are assuming a stability in this receiving corps that may well not prove out. Apart from injury, it is reasonable to assume that for their own reasons, one or both of AB and Gordon do not make it thru a full season. My baseline is if we get a full year, through playoffs, out of both of them together, we’re probably on the mark. Each is insurance for the other.

If he got suspended for 4 to 6 games, I’d still keep him and ask him to master the playbook.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
17,336
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
Can I just say how much I love having MATTHEW Slater as part of this team? He gets it. He gave the answer I wish everyone else gave some version of.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,591
A thing we ought to remember - that many social justice warriors forget- is that if all humans are the same, ...
Even though I suspect we agree on the current subject, and might have an interesting discussion along the lines you started down, this is where I stopped reading. Because anyone choosing to throw that term around to preemptively label those taking another view clearly isn't interested in a serious conversation.

And I mean, who the hell wants social justice, amirite bros?! What a silly thing to want.

Edit: yeah, what BornToRun said, too.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
3,281
New York City
If the accusation were being made against, well...LOTS OF PEOPLE (a McCourty, Matthew Slater, Gronk, Edelman, Dont’a, etc...), I’d probably be willing to give the benefit of the doubt and let it play out. But when it’s a guy with maturity, impulse and fucking batshit issues, I think it’s time to draw the line. He’s been on the team for approximately 12 seconds, he’s a pain in the ass, red flags everywhere you look, I mean...why is this worth it?
The Patriots made that decision when they signed him. They may not have known about this particular incident/these allegations, but, as you say, his issues were already well known so there was a high chance SOMETHING would happen. If they already made the cost-benefit decision that his talent is worth the drama he inevitably brings, I don't really see why the current lawsuit would change that analysis much. Obviously, something more serious like criminal charges, or even if more facts come out in the current lawsuit, could change that calculation.
 

lambeau

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2010
1,124
Connecticut
Wonderful WaPo column by Sally Jenkins on AB's disgusting texts, referencing her reverence for athletes'
"exquisite physical precision and ephemeral beauty...but I've never reconciled myself to the clumsy, casual 'all my bitches' way some of them talk."
It's a lot easier to root for class acts like DMac, Slater, Mayo, etc.

 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
26,598
AZ
Wonderful WaPo column by Sally Jenkins on AB's disgusting texts, referencing her reverence for athletes'
"exquisite physical precision and ephemeral beauty...but I've never reconciled myself to the clumsy, casual 'all my bitches' way some of them talk."
It's a lot easier to root for class acts like DMac, Slater, Mayo, etc.

She's fantastic.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
36,538
I agree with her sentiments, but the language is part of a larger conversation. When I stop listening to music with lyrics that mirror AB’s emails, then I’ll feel more comfortable condemning his words further.

And, no I’m not condoning any of what he said or anything in pop/rap lyrics. But I also am a consumer, so I think my house is kinda glassy.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,591
I agree with her sentiments, but the language is part of a larger conversation. When I stop listening to music with lyrics that mirror AB’s emails, then I’ll feel more comfortable condemning his words further.

And, no I’m not condoning any of what he said or anything in pop/rap lyrics. But I also am a consumer, so I think my house is kinda glassy.
We're also talking about what is, at its root, class differences. The NFL, quarterbacks aside, draws disproportionately from lower class people with lower-class upbringing and values. That comes with certain common attitudes and ways of speaking, too. I imagine Sally Jenkins and I have far, far more in common when it comes to "hidden rules" guiding our behaviors and communication, than we do to someone of Antonio Brown's upbringing (his dad Eddie had money from his arena football days, but his own upbringing was poor).

I don't like the way he talks in those emails either, but I also understand that he pretty much lives in a different world than I do, and that judging it harshly does nobody any good.

Are we really victim shaming the accuser based on videos that unfairly portray her as “promiscuous”? Twitter is vile.
Could you maybe point to a post where "we" are doing this, and take issue with that post and poster, rather than some unreferenced one-liner that drags everybody here?

On substance, the videos don't serve to portray her as "promiscuous", they portray her as having had a closer relationship with Brown than her court pleading suggests. Which seems, ya know, both fair and relevant.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
36,071
Are we really victim shaming the accuser based on videos that unfairly portray her as “promiscuous”? Twitter is vile.
No. We're not. You're the first one here to say "promiscuous". We've simply said that it doesn't appear to be a strictly professional relationship, which is how she described her relationship.

I award you ZERO white knight points.
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
26,894
the district
That's the one that stands out most prominently in my mind. But I also have texts from many moons ago of girls I know talking about their exploits with Red Sox players and what not - hookups that didn't make the news. Of course, this was before Snapface and whatnot.
Holy hell, thanks for bringing back some memories from 2005 and 2006 for me. I knew wayyyy too much of what was going on at Fenway...
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,635
He nailed it. Referenced the seriousness of it without revealing anything that the team wouldnt have wanted to. A much better tone, IMO, than Belichick or Brady.
Let's face it: neither Brady nor Belichick are PR folks, nor are they politicians. They are required to do these interviews by the team (and maybe the league as well), and we should no expectation that they would be comfortable talking about anything else other than football. The golden rule is that if you don't know what to say, don't say anything. And some people can say nothing better than others.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
11,859
Let's face it: neither Brady nor Belichick are PR folks, nor are they politicians. They are required to do these interviews by the team (and maybe the league as well), and we should no expectation that they would be comfortable talking about anything else other than football. The golden rule is that if you don't know what to say, don't say anything. And some people can say nothing better than others.
And, really, what are they supposed to say? Good on Slater for having such an eloquent response but how many of us would want to or know how to talk to the press about a coworker possibly being a rapist?
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
17,336
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
And, really, what are they supposed to say? Good on Slater for having such an eloquent response but how many of us would want to or know how to talk to the press about a coworker possibly being a rapist?
I wasnt necessarily being critical of the others. Just saying Slater nailed it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.