Anyone familiar with infractions and warnings on this forum might be aware of the numerical value of certain infractions.

An infraction for derailing adds 1 point to your current infraction count, while other transgressions such as trolling and harassment score you 3 points and an automatic temporary ban. Essentially, every rule violation had some set infraction value attributed to it. And these values were determined Moderation. Infraction points also lasted for about a month long, meaning they'd expire after a month and your current infraction count would decrease by whatever value the infraction value was worth.

Well Moderation has altered the infraction system once again, hopefully for the better. Rather than have each rule violation have a set infraction point value and expiration time, Moderation can now freely choose how many points an infraction is worth and for how long the infraction will last.

For example: Previously an infraction for derailing would only add 1 point towards a user's infraction count. Moderation can now choose to increase that value for repeat offenders, thus further discouraging the action. And this would apply for all other rules broken.

So for those members who've accumulated a nice, dense, and diverse history of infractions and warning had better watch what they post!

In terms of infraction point to ban values - They're still the same. This means collecting 5 points within whatever time we give you will score you a permanent ban from the forum.

And finally, if you do feel that a moderator was being too harsh on you, don't hesitate to contact the moderator argue why you don't deserve whatever punishment you receive. If you're really persuasive and are innocent, you might just get a complete reversal. Just be aware that responding with a PM such as

won't help your case and will only exacerbate your condition. Expect another infraction or a ban if you're going to do this. You can also use the contact us form at the bottom of the site to send an email to Kurtiss who will respond ASAP.

I don't think there is much else to say, as this is more of a moderator thing than a regular member thing. If you've never earned an infraction or been banned, this shouldn't be an issue for you. So thanks for reading, and happy posting!

I could be a good bot.

__________________
[お尻のゲームが強すぎる]

Sounds like fascism is finally here in full swing.
I look forward to receiving 18 points for posting a reaction image after someone else posts one and receives no warning.

So BASICALLY, the staff gave up on trying to put together a coherent scale of punishment and resorted to just BSing it through.

K.

I had a feeling you guys wouldn't like it. Perhaps it'd be best to follow the rules and we won't have any issues.

Also, infraction points are always monitored by all moderators and administrators. This includes myself.

Just going to modify the post a bit, Panini, to let users know they can use the contact form to send a message to my inbox if they think an infraction was unfair, users will get a faster response with that.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

We do follow the rules.
Your moderators have bad judgement in my opinion.

They were before too, and you all were able to see who was banned by whom.
It didn't stop abuse.

I used that form three times, and have yet to receive an acknowledgement.

That's my line. Except mine would be a response to you and Nollog lol.

But seriously this is a lot better. Now there isn't a standard infraction value on all offenses. Isn't that what people were *****ing about before, anyways?

I would take these more seriously if they actually had some truth in them.

I prefer the flexibility this system offers, so it has my full support.

No, we were *****ing because the values were not justified, not that they existed at all.

This is good maybe we can get the undesirables out.

I never complained about the infraction values being set.
All I ever wanted was each member to know in advance what posting something would do to their account.
This is the exact opposite.

I catch panini on a bad day, and I could be unfairly infracted.
I catch her on a good day, and I'll get a lesser punishment.

That's an example, I hope you can follow it as it's as simple as I can make it.

That's funny coming from someone returning from a week-long ban

Off topic post, please stay on topic.

FOR CONTENT: So this is pretty much the era of no **** posting am I correct? Since thats the only rule that needs to be in place.

Rouge mods don't have good or bad days. Just rouge days.

That's what I mean. There is no longer a standard; each infraction will have it's own value. I wasn't assuming the people that complained wanted them gone.

So now there shouldn't be any issues besides people now fearing that a mod will infract them depending on their mood. lolfear

This seems really open to mod bias. If a mod is the only one on, (s)he has no power limits. They can delete everything, claim the member was doing something really bad, give them a bunch of horrible infractions, and ban them. As a person who has been a victim of a mod going crazy before, we need more ways to make sure the mods act as one. This seems to make going rogue way too easy.

I have no problem against the idea of shifting values for infractions in principle though. Maybe you should have a standard set value for an infraction and require multiple mods to come on a consensus to increase it?

Now that storm has said it, everyone can agree.
Thank you storm.

That's exactly how it was before haha. Unless that's sarcasm.

Foobrew is gone, so no more insanity. And I suggest all you conspiracy theorist wait this thing out or until you are unjustly banned, infracted, whatever to prove/disprove your point. It's not like you'll die for being unjustly whatever'd.

Really? Thought it was fixed values and they couldn't change it at all.

While insanity is far less likely, I'm still not comfortable allowing any single mod so much wiggle room.

I guess that's understandable, but I would take this as a waiting period. If things get poopy, I guess the bozos can scoop something else together.

I see your point. Moderators who do such a thing will have their position removed and possibly banned. Everything that is deleted (aside from "physically" removed posts) are archived with said infraction. Moderators and administrators will be able to discuss this infraction and come with a final conclusion. Now this brings us to your idea of a moderator abusing their powers. As of today, moderators and super moderators will no longer have the ability to physically delete posts/threads. If required, any threads or posts that require physical deletion will be done by the administrators (David, Baroque, and myself).

All infractions are moderated by the entire staff. I have also set the forum to automatically email me whenever a user is infracted so I can review them instantly.

Your final idea, we've been doing that, actually. Discussion about infractions will now be even more frequent with this in play.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

I would remind you that the last mod to do something ridiculous only got demoted to local mod. I hope that what you say is true from now on though.

Am I right in assuming that complete deletions will be viewed more critically in an infraction/ban case?

So why do you feel it's necessary to give this power to a single mod? What was unsatisfactory about having to come to a consensus to increase punishment?

I know, in my defence that was David's doing. He was demoted right before I was made admin, I believe. I agree that he should have had his powers removed in the first place.

Usually there is no reason for physical deletions. We usually physically remove posts if there's tons of "deleted post by..." messages everywhere because things tend to get a bit messy. This is, of course, done after said post has been dealt with appropriately.
I felt that we had to change our infraction system. We have some users with 15+ infractions but they're still not banned and they're bothersome users. We've also had issues where 2 users have done the same thing, but not as "bad" as the other user, if that makes sense.

With the current moderators in place I feel that I can trust them to be fair with their decisions. With this system, we could be more thorough when it comes to punishments. If 3 rules were broken within one post, we could create an infraction for all 3. When trolling isn't so harmful, we can create a lighter infraction. And when people are repeat offenders, we can create a harsh infraction. The point is that flexibility allows a more precise punishment.

This will probably be the final infraction system change unless there is a major issue with it.

(Sorry for taking a while to respond, I was at school when I wrote my earlier message and just got home.)

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

This is honestly working in your favor.
The reason we needed a more flexible system is that more than once recently we've wanted to give a member less points points for an infraction, but couldn't because of the set values.

If one mod really does go overboard, that's what the reverse function is for.

I'm all for this idea. Finally we can get around to some long overdue spring cleaning.

__________________
Loki'd

Why?
If they broke a rule they should get the same punishment as any other user.

I love how some certain people here complain all the time and then Storm comes in and just gets his way.

Go Storm.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Well lol, maybe you should've fixed the point value for the offense then. In all my ~7 years of interneting on forums, never once have I come across a forum that had a problem with point values to infractions. You're just doing it wrong.

I'm here for a few minutes

Let's look at this from another perspective.

"Hey guys, I have a history of censor bypassing. If you look at my infraction history, I accumulated over 17 infractions for censor bypassing, but I'm still here because the infraction is only worth one point and I can just wait a month for each one to expire, thus allowing me to censor bypass some more!"

You could argue that by this point I could just move for a ban, but when people repeat the same thing, do you honestly feel the same punishment is going to do any good?

We've actually adjusted the point values. Like three times. I think all were very subtle changes though. I don't think I've seen any complaints on them either except for trolling which we've stuck to since the beginning.

Honestly though, I don't think it's the infraction part that worries people so much. It's that permanent ban part. If you honestly feel like you're going to have your account permanently banned, then you're either just paranoid, or you're one of those constant offenders I keep using as an example in my posts.

______________________________

Oh and Storm, there is a unifier to Moderation in the form of a somewhat fluid handbook. To elaborate, infraction point values aren't going to necessarily increase, but rather stay within the same range of values. This change in system allows us to make a punishment harsher when necessary.

You can trust us to not have a moderator intentionally hand out a 15 point infraction.

You obviously haven't read my threads then Blues.

Also, your example was a bit unrealistic. If someone has a history of censor bypassing and they've had 17 infractions with the scale of 1 infraction per month, that's a year and a half straight of just one infraction a month. That's not that bad at all... There's nothing seriously wrong with that.

I'm fairly certain your threads emphasized on the trolling part more than anything else.

More like 3 infractions a month, but you're not supposed to add those up and see if that was possible within this forum's lifespan. The point was that repeat offenders will receive harsher punishments. There are members on this forum who have accumulated a few pages worth of warnings and infractions, and continue doing so.

My threads emphasized on trolling because that was the most outlandish one, but I main an appoint to say that it could apply to other ones too.

And ok, that's still not that bad. Censor Evasion isn't a big deal and certainly isn't banworthy if they're only doing it a few times per month. And 3 infractions a month would give a 3-day ban, would it not? If yes, I have a suggestion:

For every ban, give the user a 1-point infraction that lasts for like 6 months. That way, repeat offenders won't be able to abuse the system because for each ban they get, they can afford to get one less infraction. Reach up to 3 and every infraction you get after will lead to a 1 week ban. Reach the 1 week ban and next one is permanent; end of story.

Why do they expire?
How about not allowing them to expire automatically, and have a moderator do the expiration manually.
It's how it's done at other forums.

This will be my last post for now because I'm going some place tonight.

Sure, but you do recall that virtually everything else, besides derailment, was set to one point. Your argument was that trolling would instantly get you banned, and you felt that was unfair and perhaps inconsistent. One point won't get you banned, but repeating it or breaking another rule can get you banned depending on severity.

Censor bypassing was only an example. Things could turn out very differently if people had a stockpile of Harassment infractions and warnings. And yes, you would only get a three day ban, but you're still limited to how many infractions you can receive in a month.

See here, with the current system, we can do this - And more. This is what I like about the new flexibility. We can make special cases for certain members and whatnot when necessary.

Actually I don't know why infractions had expiration dates at first, but it kinda makes sense now that there's a permanent ban value. We're not really seeking to rid the forum of its members, so the timer gives some leeway. We just don't want people taking advantage of this by waiting for their infractions to expire giving them a ban "immunity." And well this new system does allow us to set that time now - From hours to permanent.

Special changes are un-encouraging for members because that means they have no guarantee that they'll get a just punishment. If there's no consistency to anything, I want nothing to do with it quite frankly.

i doubt mods will give 2nd chances if a user even tries to persuaded him/her.

The ability to not set an expiration date if the moderator feels the user hasn't learned in the past would be a better move than this, in my opinion.

Ill look forward to having Panini bite my head off for nothing ... Like she always does.

Interesting, and where is your evidence for this? You have never had an infraction, you're generally a good user so I have no idea where this statement is coming from.

Panini has never given you an infraction... ever.

I guess it's cool to try disrespecting the staff now. If the staff was as bad as users are trying to make us look like, then many of you would be banned.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

See the difference between what you're reading and what people are posting is that we're not talking from experience here, we're talking about how opening the door to corruption usually leads to corruption.
You're, as always stuck on the whole "this hasn't happened here yet" thing.
Which should be obvious, since this is a new rule being put into practise now, it hasn't been in use as of yet here.

Here's the thing though, the moderation here is trustworthy. I trust these moderators enough to give them this power. I am certain that there will be no corruption at all.

If corruption rises then it will be dealt with. End of story. My reply to those 2 users is that they are attempting to insult the moderation, as many other users have tried, and I believe it's simply to look "better" than others.

To what Kikae said, moderators can and will (when necessary) give 2nd chances especially since infractions will be discussed among the moderators and confirmed by the administration, so why say there would be no 2nd chances?

Panini is probably the most mature moderator of the staff so how could one even try and say she will become corrupted? It's simple. These users are just trying to get "likes" from the community.

I hear your thoughts loud and clear, and I've said already that I'm prepared, if corruption does pursue.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

I don't trust you to follow up on your promise to demote and possibly ban moderators who abuse their power as in the past you have done nothing.

You're going to ask when, and I'm not going to give you an answer because it'd be stupid since they're still moderators and now have the power to ban me in one swoop.
I've emailed you and David many times with the information, check your inboxes for the information if you want to.

I'd like to add that the moderation isn't just one "hive mind" as some would like to believe.

We all have differing opinions. If a moderator thinks an infraction was too severe, we have a discussion to decide whether or not it should be reversed.

So if I think a moderator becomes "corrupted" and starts abusing their power, I'll call them out on it. And the same thing would happen to me if I started being heavy-handed with the infractions.

I trust my fellow mods/admins to not abuse their power and I have no reason to believe that they would ever become corrupt.

@Nollog: Foobrew was demoted from a moderator and subsequently permanently banned for his actions. You accusations that "Kurtiss has done nothing" in the past is entirely untrue. Also, I believe admins and super moderators have always had the power to ban ANY member at ANY time.

If I've not heard the full story on this, I believe foobrew was following the "family friendly" rule as David lay it down regarding Storm and his cosplay thread.
I'd class that as more rouge actions as the rest of you seemed to be okay with allowing Storm to break the rule (which was a terrible "rule" to begin with), rather than abuse.
But maybe there's a lot more to it than just that.

If your talking about me then GL with that because I'v got one infraction. (and it expired along time ago)

I think this update will ban me as soon as I brake a rule.

__________________
Unban Buramu and ban me.
Bring back Buramu!

http://3dsforums.com/feedback-7/why-...vorites-27907/
Here's a thread which illustrates why the moderators here shouldn't have free reign in anything, let alone something which would stop a user from being able to post here.

By the way, you can circumvent any rules or placeholders by having an good relationship with mods. Ask around.

So that time I was banned for harassment when the rule hadn't come into effect, and never told why until I asked other members to badger the staff about it I can now request a 500KB avatar?

Well, going purely by the now established principle, if something wrongfully happens to you, you deserve compensation in some fashion.

I'm pretty sure kikae is just joking, ahah. Otherwise I might have responded much earlier.

Riiiiiiiiight.

Contact Starless for clarification on this one, because you got it all wrong. That or you're just twisting it to make an argument for moderation bias and corruption.

I'm not gonna lie.

If I happen to like you, I'm very willing to do some extra work and cover for you. Of course, I'll still tell you to not repeat whatever misdeed you did and maybe slap a formal warning on you. Some people accidentally post an image that censor bypasses, and I just edit the image so that the profanity isn't seen.

Of course, there's a limit to how much I'm willing to do. At some point I am going to infract you or ban you. I'm not a tool to be used as insurance against the other moderators. If I sense any of that, say farewell to your profile and whatever "affection" I may have had for you because I'm not covering for anyone like that. Fortunately, everyone I do like (well except one >_>) has an easy time following the rules, so I'm not forced to punish them.

That's just me though. I highly doubt any of the other moderators would enjoy constantly covering for a constant offender, and serving as their tool against forum consequence.

The propaganda here is interesting to read and all, but anyone who can think would ask for some concrete examples of this.

Oh, and this thread isn't about staff corruption and bias by the way. I would like to keep it emphasized on the infraction values, so if you really want to argue that, bring it to Feedback.

Yes it is.
When you give a moderator the right to ban a user on the spot for doing anything at all, you open the door to discussing moderator bias.
The bias is why this new rule is rotten to the core.

I don't agree entirely.

Moderation corruption and bias is a whole other topic capable of "eating" this one whole. Essentially, you're opening a door to a new topic.

Super moderators could always ban anyone at any time. This isn't a new thing.

But it wasn't accepted as the normal thing.
The moderator had a script to follow for trolling (2/3 points), being funny (11 points), etc.
Now they can make anything up.

Permanently banning someone for being a constant bother has always been a part of our script. We just don't do that often.

I don't see what the problem is. If you think you were treated unfairly by a mod, then just contact an admin. If they think that you were treated unfairly then they will have the ban/infrac reversed. And I'm sure that if they notice a trend with that mod, and believe they may be abusing their powers, then they will be demoted(i.e. Foobrew). Also all of this can be avoided if you just stay outta trouble.

__________________
Last night I cut the light off in my bedroom, hit the switch was in the bed before the room was dark.

I'll take your word on that, Mr. rule-breaking avatar.

As always you guys be missin' the point.
You'll see what Storm, GWJumpman, and myself mean eventually here, don't worry about that.

What point would that be? As I've said if a mod is abusing their power, I'm sure they will be dealt with. It's not like the ban/infrac can't be reversed.

__________________
Last night I cut the light off in my bedroom, hit the switch was in the bed before the room was dark.

You're using past tense for a possible future tense problem.

So you're just assuming that we're all going to go mad with power because we can now give custom infractions?

I'm warning of it.
You're assuming I'm bringing this up for the sake of bringing it up.
You're assuming I'm bringing this up because of things which have happened in the past, to me personally.

Look back. My problem is why is kurtiss thinking of what he will do if this new rule is abused, rather than thinking of a better way to get rid of the users he and other moderators personally dislike?

It's better this way, you could easily stop people from trolling, spaming, etc. etc. You should keep it up, and maybe trouble makers will stop being so troublesome.

__________________
This is what the truth feels like

this girl knows me well. kurtiss took it waay to serious. i don't think mods are in the bad side. they just don't like people that are on level (dumb users that like to be ban)

I kind of like the custom point values i mean nothings really different its not the mods are going to give you a 20 point infraction it makes the system more flexible

__________________
Drink up me hearties, yo ho!

This is something that is bothering me. There are some people on here that have never had an infraction that worry about these rules, like me. I am not worried my account will be banned, but I do worry about the possible unfair banning of someone else.

That and some of us that don't break rules have seen things happen that have seemed less than fair to other members before. Just because someone has never gotten in trouble on this forum doesn't mean that they can't have concern for these new policies.

It's not just your post, it's a few others thought this thread that seem to imply that people shouldn't care if they have never even had an infraction. I like a fair system for all. While this system could work well for a while, things could easily be abused in this and cause unfair punishment. I'd hate to see that even if I still go on to never have an infraction the entire time I am somewhat active on this forum.

Though I'll say that I do like the effort you guys are putting to try to make things better.

True, but I think you're looking at this change in system the wrong way.

I posted earlier in this thread that this mostly affects existing members who have accumulated an unhealthy number of warnings and infraction, and still continue to break the same rules. The idea behind this change isn't to simply increase specific infraction values, but to provide flexibility in how we issue infractions and warnings.

Trust me when I say that none of us are going to intentionally be issuing 5 point infractions. Even 4 point infractions are going to be a rare occurrence. I think the misconception here is that infraction values will rise, but the reality is that they're still within the same range of values.

Off-topic, but this part is odd mostly because I don't often see members bring it up. At most, I've probably seen four threads pointing out some unjust punishment brought upon a member by Moderation. Personally, if I see no valid complaint, then I'm going to assume that everything is fine. If you feel a member is being treated unfairly, then bring it up. It doesn't have to be through Feedback, a private message or an email are appropriate mediums to convey your opinions too.

Nope, if you're saying you're going to give more infractions to repeat offenders, then you're saying they will rise.
You're also saying you changed the system to encourage abuse of moderation when you already could abuse the system to give infractions to users as much as you like.

I, personally have an infraction for trolling, and was explained to me it was for harrassment.
You banned me for a day by error, and infracted me for the two-point "trolling" because you noticed the error a full day after you admitted the error took place.
This story shows you could infract however many points you want, and give whatever reason you want months ago.
There's no need for a change, you could get rid of the people you don't like easily before, it just wasn't as clean-cut.
This system will make it easier is all.
So:
1. don't get the point
2. seems it's just to get rid of people
3. opens to far less hassle in abuse
4. New members now have no idea what offense gives them how many points, and how many times they can do it without them getting banned.
[inb4 you say they shouldn't be breaking the rules regardless] [some people just like to know what they are allowed to do and not, it's not about actually doing it]

Shocking! People not making public posts to the people in charge about the people in charge abusing their power!

Maybe (just maybe) those who worry about being unjustly judged should make sure they don't take risks so that they aren't judged at all? I just get the impression that some are complaining about being punished wrong for breaking rules, when they could just make sure they don't break them at all. Really I think it's tough stuff if you don't think you were infracted right, you shouldn't of broken the rules at all.

__________________
:>

Read three posts above yours.

People who aren't affected can voice their opinions on something that doesn't necessarily relate to them, sure. My point was that people shouldn't extensively complain about how they were punished for breaking rules, since they said they agreed to them before joining. If you have been infracted, it's you who took the risk to post something that could be viewed as against the rules. Remember that you have to type to communicate here, so it's easy enough to look at your text before posting to decide whether it doesn't break the rules.

__________________
:>

Yes, but if there's no clear definition of what's acceptable, and what punishment posting something unacceptable gets you, then how are you to adequately judge what you're posting?

Also, I don't see anyone in this thread complaining about how they were treated, except for Storm and he only mentioned it like once.

I think the rules are pretty clear on what's acceptable, and like I said before you shouldn't post something against the rules regardless of how punished you think you could get. Just don't take any risks.

Oh and before I meant people being worried about being punished incorrectly in the future, when they shouldn't be taking risks that could get them punished in any way at all.

__________________
:>

So your mindset is never take risks.
Others have other ways of thinking.

I meant within the forums, if you were implying differently. The rules are their and we can view them whenever we want, if you think they're too strict, if you think you won't be able to comply with them, you probably shouldn't of joined considering you had to agree to them before joining.

__________________
:>

you guys know if you dont break the rules (what? blasphemy!) then even if a mod does unfairly infract you, there is a record and can be reversed? there is only 1 unfair infraction ive ever received, and immediatly after telling the mod it was reversed, no big deal, if you think one mod is out to get you talk to another mod about them, and what they did, and no problems, this is just a way for mods to fairly punish people based on what they did, not on who they dislike, if you follow the rules this wont affect you at all, so i dont see why so many are upset

This was already stated by Kurtiss. The point is that it still opens up an opportunity for a moderator to abuse his/her powers. However I believe that the moderators here are level headed enough not to hand out stupid infractions, but I'm still not exactly thrilled that the opportunity to do so is present.

Moderators could always abuse their powers even before this change. They could easily infract you an infinite amount of times, or just go into their mod panel and perm ban you instantly, lol.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 50 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

~ Dream Address for AC: 4000-2145-2570 ~

This is accurate.
Hell, the Mod PC is a faster means to do it, too.

That's not what he's getting at really. He's saying they can abuse their powers and it wouldn't be as obvious as it would be prior to the change. Before, you could easily complain about it. Now since it's all subjective, there's not much room for discussion.

member: hi, you gave me 3 points for posting an image in a thread.
mod: oh yeah, that's because you've done it twice before and we haven't infracted you before because we didn't see it as a problem but the third time was just too much.
member: so it's worth 3 points to post an image?
mod: it's worth whatever I want it to be because I can bend reality using my words and what I say is trusted more since I am a moderator and you are just a member.

The preceding was a dramatisation.

Well that, I doubt it is true.

__________________
This is what the truth feels like

Of course it isn't true, it was a dramatisation.
It hasn't happened.

I sure would hate it if one of them went power crazy...

__________________
This is what the truth feels like

Generally, when you can't stand your boss any longer, you quit.
Generally when you can't stand the leadership on a forum for young people, you leave.

Stop nitpicking. You're not really accomplishing anything.

__________________
Loki'd

Are you talking to Nollog or me?

__________________
This is what the truth feels like

That's not the appropriate solution to the problem. Try again.

Yeah, when things get tough you better quit.
George Washington, Abe Lincoln, Obama, they all thought like that.
That's why the USA is still under the control of the British and your taxes are so high.

inb4 you say "internet, lol".
I'm just using these names to show how ill thought out your point is.

Thing is, I get your point, but internet lol. Stop making a mountain out of a molehill. Things really aren't that bad around here.

__________________
Loki'd

I know they're not bad.
I'm just sayin' why make things worse?

why repair what's not broken huh?

Who's that in regards to?

I believe he was following from my line of thought.