From my biggest fan, the lying Rose DesRochers (the bolded text in the indented sections below are her words, the non-bolded text in the same indented sections below are quotes of mine she is referencing):
Rose said: " Forgive me for going off on a rant here. James Landrith Editor & Publisher of the Multiracial Activis recently wrote a glorious review of me. Well truth is, he degraded me and at the same time made himself look like an unprofessional asshole. "
Actually, I responded to your angry instant messenger insults about what kind of man could I be since I didn't send you a submission within a week of being asked to join and write an article for Todays-Woman. You seem to have a hyper-inflated sense of entitlement. I don't owe you anything, least of all my own writing.
Rose said: " James claims that I flirted with him and anyone who is a member of Todays-Woman knows very well that I'm happily married and am quick to point that out to anyone who flirts with me."
Uh, no I didn't. You said I flirted with you. I then pointed out what you said and my response. Now you are presenting yet another version of this conversation. Get it straight and stop lying. It is unbecoming of an adult.
Rose said: " He states in his post that I asked him to write for Todays-Woman. I never did no such thing. I read one of James articles on an ezine. I contacted him to reprint his article but instead of posting it myself, I requested that he join and submit it and other reprint articles."
Wrong. I broke it all down in detail for those interested here.
Rose said: "We ask all Todays-Woman members to submit content within one week of joining, so there account is not removed by the system. He kept telling me that he would submit an article. When he didn't submit any articles, his account was removed.
No, I said I would try my best and apologized for not being able to pull it off in the time I had initially hoped. Also, I said I had school, a full-time job, internet publishing and family considerations to juggle as well. And if it is your publication, you can alter the database requirements to keep members longer than a week of inactivity. Also, I did make a posting that week. I commented on a poet's biography. That's just a fact, you wouldn't be interested in that sort of stuff.
Rose said: " He makes statements in his blog that ƒ€œInsulting someone holds no gain for me and it certainly does nothing to build goodwill in the industry.ƒ€
I was referencing insulting one's own pool of WRITERS, not insulting arrogant individuals who send you insulting instant messages while you are at work.
Rose said: "Well damn, he insulted me all over his blog."
In response to your angry and quite bizarre instant messages, as you already know.
Rose said: " In spite of all the typos and poor grammar that plague her website, I was still willing to contribute an occasional article or commentary. “ Oh my thank you for the honor. Just who the hell do you think you are? Please get over yourself James"
I think I am me, the person you asked to join and write for you. Does that narrow it down for you?
Rose said: "Rose attached a false urgency to the request. Unlike me, she doesn't publish issues on a set calendar.– He knows this how? "I am very successful. I've worked hard to get to where I am today, and nothing has been for free."
Who said anything about success? Who said anything about getting something for "free"? Try using logic when responding instead of adding nonsensical and irrelevant declarations of your own. My publications put out issues of specific commentaries bi-monthly. Your articles are posted daily as they come, in an entirely different format.
Rose said: " I tend to like my women with more visible melanin content. I'm not interested in an affair with you, nor are you "my type." – – Wait a moment you are married. Who said anything about an affair. Don't flatter yourself there James. "I'm a Goddess; you're a loser. Any questions?"
You still don't get it, yet you are the one who brought it up in this posting. I'm not interested in you. Re-read the part of my quote above that begins "I tend to like…" Only an idiot would have thought that meant I was interested in you. Go look in the mirror. Something is missing from that equation.
Rose said: " "Miss," in a manner common in some parts of the Southern United States.– Funny I thought it was Ms.
Funny, you would be wrong. No, "Ms." is for formal correspondence or formal speech. The use of "Miss" and a person's first name is quite popular in some parts of the Southern United States. Try actually reading what I wrote instead of making it up as you go along.
Rose said: " The woman clearly has issues – or as my wife would say, "subscriptions."- Funny I didnƒ€™t subscribe to your blog post about me but I got a full page. Thank you!"
I assume that's what passes for an example of your "wit."
Rose said: "I advise other poets and internet publishers to save themselves some time and unnecessary drama by steering clear of Rose DesRochers and todays-woman.net.– How nice of you. I'm sure that they will all take your advice because you are James Landrith. Your Puffed Sleeves are starting to over-inflate James."
No puffed sleeves here. I prefer polo shirts myself, especially given that until earlier this year I'd been wearing more formal business attire to my downtown DC job.
Rose said: " Rose chose to insult my manhood– I never insulted your manhood. Insulting your manhood would be telling you that I bet your wife fakes orgasms."
Wrong. You attacked me for not sending you a submission as fast as I had previously hoped. I explained it all in plain English here.
Rose said: "Then why did you agree to join my site and submit your reprint articles? "Don't take yourself so seriously. Nobody else does."
There you go – I AGREED to join – at your request. Finally, a snippet of truth escapes your mouth. Remember, you asked me to join and asked if would WRITE for you, not submit a prior article. It is not about taking myself seriously or not.
Rose said: "Anyway type jameslandrith into a google search. You might be shocked to see just who is linking to him. Thanks for coming out James and for the laugh."
Yes, Rose a lot of people link to me and my websites – civil liberties organizations, activists, journalists, everyday joes. Further, no porn sites link to me, contrary to your publicly posted lie. However, one website that discusses Christianity and sex in a fairly academic manner does link to my publication referencing a non-sex related topic. Of course, before she deleted her weblog entries about me, Rose claimed that teen porn sites linked to me extensively. A 10 second search via Google completely exposes Rose DesRochers to be a liar on this count. At my last check, no teen porn website linked to jameslandrith.com. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Rose's claim on this count is absolute libel and quite disgusting on her part.
Of course, there a lot of people who hate me – white supremacists and you. Oh wait, that's not a big list, but cheer up, you are in good company!
UPDATE: Apparently, Rose attempted (under false pretenses) to have my website deleted from Google's index on the basis that I, um, um, um, – get this – allow readers to comment on blog entries. I shit you not.
From her forum (http://www.todays-woman.net/ftopicp-37092.html):
James Landrith keeps the comments open on his blog, just to drive traffic to his website. Last month my name was searched 68 times. If you wish to increase traffic to your website, just use my name on your blog or webpage. I’ve reported James offending blog to Google in an attempt to have it removed from Google’s search results, but I doubt they will remove it.
Sorry to disappoint, but Google doesn't delete websites simply because Ms. Desrochers has ordered the website owner to close said websites to comments. Rose, you don't own my domain, nor do you have a case with Google for having me deleted, which is further indicated by total failure to have my website blacklisted. Further, I keep the comments open on all my blog entries – not just those dealing with your nasty, childish, slanderous with regard to me. This is the case, whether you, in arrogant defiance of the harm you've caused others, demand said comments be closed or not.
Wow… you really got ensnared in the wall o’ thorns. She’s more trouble than she’s worth. I’ve not had any direct dealings with her, thank goodness, but I’ve been subjected to her lunacy at other boards. Oh, and I don’t use my last name, mainly because I don’t want my husband’s website to suffer any malicious crap from the likes of Ugly Rose as a retaliation to posting here.
In the mean time, nice site you have put together. Lots of interesting links.
Karen
9/9/2005 8:12:00 PM
“Oh boy James, you got a doozie. Miss Karen is right. She is trouble with a capital “”T””.
You used to be able to google her and get all sorts of info about this lady, however, many forums
have moved on and deleted her posts so you don’t know you’ve lain in bed with a viper until it’s too late.
Hope it blows over.
I”
Hi James,
Just had an unpleasant (using mild language at this point), two months experience with the
rose with thorns. She is dishonest in every sense of the word. I pity those who are ensnared by her. I have documented my dealings with her, and I’m not surprised at all the negative information on the web, concerning her and her husband. More’s the pity to those who do not take heed.
I’m glad you have this documented here, best wishes,
mid
“But she’s cheap entertainment. You know, if she’s so successful (she’s not, by the way) why can’t she afford a book on grammar?? They must have them in a read-aloud version. At the very least should could make a crib note on the proper use of “”there,”” and “”their,”” and “”they’re”” – it’s nearly impossible to read her posts sometimes because she confuses these words.
She’s one horrible, nasty woman, I’ll say that much. I’ve had first-hand dealings with her and have never met another person so void of compassion or kindness. And I never said a word against the woman until she absolutely freaked out and began attacking me all over the internet. Apparently, she misunderstood something I wrote because she didn’t know the meaning of a simple word. Then again, this IS a woman who started an article “”I believe life begins as the moment of CONTRACEPTION”” and posted it all over the net, then INSULTED anyone who pointed out her mistake because she refused to open a dictionary (narcissists don’t make mistakes).
I would never in a million years allow my children near her or her family. She makes no bones about the fact that she couldn’t care less about other people or their children or who she hurts because it’s all about “”her.”” Narcissism, thy name is Rose.
She spends every minute of every day fighting, abusing people and seeking revenge on people she believes have wronged her (most have not).
Mazie”
Her and her husband have been stalking me on a daily basis for over a year. They go to places I go ont he web and try to pick fights and go to places claiming that the software I write and sell is stolen. They even thing I am posting here, anonymously. They had left me alone for months, and then began thinking I was posting anonymously here. Nope, I never hide my identity. I also started advertising my board, because people have been dishing out crap on Rose and her jobless husband.
http://poetryscams.com
Since they want to start something with me again, I am simply giving you my experience with them.
They even pretend to be other users on their forums in order to make people think that they are unhappy customers of mine and what-not.
i am not sure what their beef is, but they need to chil out. I was doing nothing to them and they just started back up. I am sick of this shit. I might change my name, cold be a good idea.
I have recently had my own encounter with Rose. I simply wanted to put my writing out there in the world, and she accused me of knowing someone I have never heard of outside of her blog. She still refuses to let me join her site, and I?m very tempted to tell her that both the site and she are not worth the trouble this is causing. I think I’ll join a legit site for writers, and hopefully I don?t have the same trouble you did. Sorry that happened to you. Thank you for posting about it, it really opened up my eyes.
I must agree! She approached my Fighting Bigamy discussion group about doing an article on a National Marriage Database petition we have begun and asked for bigamy victims to write her, telling our story, which some of us did. She wrote the article and received several comments. Yesterday, she emailed me for a comment on a Perverted Justice article she had just written. I responded privately to her (did not comment on the actual article itself) saying I didn?t agree. She insulted my intelligence insinuating I did not read what she had written, and then removed her article about our group and the database.
It seems as if you have a different opinion than Rose, you?re in trouble.
I wish I had seen these comments and James? post before I told my members to write to her and give them their stories.
6/10/2006 8:06:00 AM
She recently made a post about Perverted-Justice that was WAY off base. When a group of us tried to reasonably write and tell her she was wrong – we were banned and flamed. This woman?s got problems – BIG ONES!
I am just wondering if anyone has considered a class action libel and harassment suit against this woman. It sure seems like she has dished out a lot of harm and harassed many innocent people. It seems that what she is doing is plain and simple cyberstalking. Of course her husband is unemployed and I doubt she is making very much with her ?writing?. Kind of hard to get blood from a Thorny Rose, but it is just the principle of the thing.
I know Rose and consider her a friend. I don?t know what issues you two have between you, but damn man? ease off. Slamming a person like this belittles you. Rose is a strong, outspoken woman and that bothers some people, men especially. Drop it and let it go.
Dear Eternal:
I?m not “slamming”, Rose. I responded point by point to her nasty slamming of me. She outright lied and when called on it, then falsely claimed my website is associated with child porn. She has since removed those slanderous and legally actionable statements from her website.
I have a right to defend myself and do not require anyone’s permission or approval to do so. I am not belittled by acting in my own defense.
Further, I have no problems her being an outspoken woman, but thanks for playing the ‘gender card.’ My wife is an outspoken woman as well. So what? So are my mother, aunts, grandmothers and most of the women I love and respect in this life. Again, so what?
It is irrelevant to the topic at hand and indicates a bias on your part to attempt to bring her gender into the equation. Further, I don?t need to ‘drop it and move on.’ Further, this entry was made several months ago – September 9, 2005.
Not quite yesterday. I’ve been pretty busy since then. Moving on is something I don’t need to actively pursue. There is no shortage of civil liberties work to be done, in addition to my full-time employment, studies and family life.
She since has apologized by email for her IM outburst. That is fine as far as that is concerned. However, I cannot forgive her retaliatory attempt to link me to child porn.
And it is completely unreasonable for anyone to expect me to do so.
Hello, Mr. Landrith. I?m here to post a comment that may or may not be well-received as I have nothing but good things to say about Rose. It is not my intention to stir dying embers and cause more flaming, I only wish to share my own personal experience.
I?ve known Rose for almost seven months now and have been witness to a wonderful person who is caring, friendly, and completely devoted to providing a unique place for writers to come together to learn, share their work, and gain feedback from their peers. Rose has my complete respect and gratitude for all that she does for us every day.
Thank you for allowing me to share my viewpoint. My regards to you; I admire your mention of the love and respect you have for the strong women in your life.
James as I explained to you by email, my blog post about you was done in anger and a reaction to your post about me. Realizing how unprofessional it looked, I removed it two days after I wrote it. Despite the fact several people have flamed me in your blog, I?ve not replied until now.
James, I feel the need to clarify something. I think you misunderstood. I never attempted to link you to teen porn. I would never ever do something like that. I said upon doing a search for your name jameslandrith, I found your name on a teen porn site, gay porn site and other unpleasant sites.
As I showed you today by email. In no way did I mean that you were associated with that kind of stuff. I truly am sorry.
Like, I explained to you and you showed me in your most recent email to me, it is not uncommon for our links or articles for that matter to show up on unpleasant websites, especially if we submit to ezines. I?ve had it happen to me. I apologize if you misunderstood me.
However, you are correct in saying, this all happened several months ago and you do not even use your wordpress blog anymore from what I understand. However, a number of anonymous individuals can now use it as a tool to discredit me.
I wish you the best and once again I do apologize for any problems between us.
Rose has politely asked that I close the comments on the blog entries that mention our dispute. I am seriously considering the request, but just so everyone is clear, I am not under any obligation to do so. If I close the comments, that will be solely at my discretion and based on the behaviour of certain individuals.
Further, the porn link Rose mentions above is not quite as matter of fact as she recalls it. She said in her now deleted blog entry, ?type jameslandrith into a google search. You might be shocked to see just who is linking to him.? She also made it clear in the second posting that she was talking about teen porn links. There was absolutely no need for such a mention if not to smear me and give the appearance that I was linked to teen porn. I understand Rose asserts that the mention in her blog posting was innocent. I respectfully disagree.
She also admits she was angry at the time and regrets her actions, which is influencing my decision-making process with regard to closing the comments. I accept that she was angry and later deleted the blog postings, however the porn mention was not quite so matter of fact.
To elaborate, the porn sites at question do not link to my website and have never linked directly to my website. They are, instead, practitioners of ?cloaking? which involves loading up a page with all kinds of keywords and snippets from other webpages that contain such keywords. Then those keyword pages are indexed by search engine spiders and show up in search listings. For instance, my website discusses interracial families, like my own. Porn websites also use the term ?interracial? for other purposes.
An unsuspecting surfer can unfortunately click on a link based on the cloaked data indexed by the search engine – only to be surprised that the page they?ve reached does not contain the data shown in the search engine listings and is completely off-topic. This happens to thousands upon thousands of websites across the internet. Google has done a decent job of policing and eliminating such websites from their index in recent months, but certain other search engines are not so adept at this task.
These are the types of pages that Rose was talking about when she let her readers know they would be ?shocked.? As she mentions, she posted those entries in anger. I accept that explanation and I thank her for acknowledging such and for having deleted the postings a few days later. This admission will weigh in her favor as I consider her request to close the comments.
Further, as I have mentioned on this weblog, I have migrated the content from this WordPress installation to my Mambo CMS (at the home page of this website). I am still reformatting the imported content and will be deleting the entire WordPress installation. This posting is located in the Mambo installation at: https://jameslandrith.com/content/view/2774/79/ for those with bookmarks or links to this url.
If we are the ones supposedly stalking Mr.Paris then perhaps he could explained his behavior of purchasing the following domains rose-desrochers.com & todays-woman-sucks.net
Furthermore, he knows that my husband is unemployed how? My husband is self-employed as Mr.Paris himself supposedly is.
As for Mazie, seeing how I do not know anyone by that name, I?ll assume that it is one of the others who have posted here, posting as Mazie.
I strongly resent the comment that I do not care for children. You know it?s funny. Why is it the people who don?t know you well always have so much to say?
Indago, Mid, and Miss Karen are all friends of Mr.Paris?s wife. Therefore in my eyes, their comments carry little weight. Yes Mid was a member of my community, until a falling out and she asked for her account to be removed, but Indago and Miss Karen have never been a member of my community.
James, I respectfully request that you close comments on this as its being abused and used as a tool by Katie Fairchild to discredit me.
Rose DesRochers
[URL=http://www.todays-woman.net/poetry-scams-51.html]Cyber-Harassment- My Story[/URL]
James, I was not trying to give the appearance that you were linked to teen porn, I was commenting that they were linked to you as I?ve already tried to explain to you and you?ve explained to me that they are cloaking, which I didn?t know.
I do not wish to spend my time debating this. I can?t change your mind sir. If you believe that, then I?m sorry and there is nothing I can do to change that.
Like already explained I was angry and hurt by your reply and when we are angry we don?t always think rationally or do what is best.
I?m not perfect. I never pretended to be. I make mistakes and my one mistake was what happened between you & I. If I could take it all back, I would. I believe in giving people a second chance. I hope you?ll give me that chance.
If you decide to close comments on the wordpress one or delete it, I hope that you wil;l close the comments on the mambo one too.
I see Rose and Merriam are drinking the same kool-aid.
“I want to thank Rose for being such a wonderful Administrator on Todays Woman. You have behaved with the utmost decorum and caring for those who have chosen Todays Woman for their writing community. In the time I have been at Todays Woman, I have learned that Rose has the greatest of integrity and honesty. I did my own Internet search and saw those who were making charges against you and felt them to be unfounded and cruel. I found Todays Woman and Rose, as the administrator, is a safe haven for those who are serious about writing. At first I was an unsure writer of poetry and to date, have become self-assured and my poetry writing has improved vastly.
The others who have chosen Todays Woman are a very close-knit bunch of wonderful friends and we not only write, give input on writings submitting, but we are a community who enjoy each other as friends and confidants.
I don?t see the badly written material others claim they have seen on Todays Woman or in Rose?s writings. As someone who has known Rose for quite some time now, I find her to be a warm and caring person. So thank you very much Rose, for being the person you are and for making available the best writing community on the Internet for so many of us to enjoy.
So please don?t feel sorry that I am part of the Todays Woman writing community, because I love and enjoy it there.
Lots of love to you Rose,
Merriam
”
Anne, you are who?
It would different if it was just one voice out there complaining about Rose Desrochers but the truth is there are many.
My being friends with the Paris’ have only a tiny bit to do with why I commented here. I was a member of two forums she tried to burn down with her flaming and I did not appreciate having to logon to 100 posts of nothing but whining and insults every day that she was there.
Katie Fairchild has nothing to do with them comments here either. That’s just a smoke screen that Rose is trying to throw up (or trying to fool herself) to make it seem like this is a vendetta against her. It is not. She really has pissed off a lot of people and not once has she ever apologized to anyone regarding her behavior. I guess that’s a little too much to ask of a troll.
Rose is a menace to the internet and everyone should be warned about dealing with her.
Indago I have more important things to do then sit here and get in a debate with you. Please feel free to continue with your crusade of exposing me for whatever you all feel you need to expose me for.
[URL=http://rosedesrochers.todays-woman.net]Rose DesRocher[/URL]
I saw this same exact stunt pulled on Heidi over at Virushead. Someone posted a nasty little diatribe defending Rose and insulting Heidi in the process which, sure as rain is wet, caused Heidi to jump in and defend herself. Afterward Rose conveniently shows up to defend herself and con Heidi into closing her comments.
It really would be one thing if this was a one time situation but Rose has been flaming and harrassing people online the entire time she?s been online. This scenario is repeated over and over and over again across the internet.
I hope that you do not close the comments as people really need to know about this particular troll.
Indago black then perhaps you should take the flame wars to Katie?s blog.
I think I was allowed to stay on for an entire week! In that time I critiqued stories before posting one of my own, just like the rules stated. But I was banned for breaking the rules. I?m still not sure what rules I broke, as it was never made clear.
She had issues with my sig line, and deleted it. I thought it was a glitch so I put it back on. Maybe that was the unspoken rule I broke because that?s when my account was closed.
All I can say is, thank goodness.
Rose if you do not like what I and others have to say about how you have treated then I suggest:
1- Stop treating people like crap and maybe they will have nice things to say about you. or
2-Close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and yell ?La, la, la? as loud as you can. If you can?t hear it or read it, it must not be true right? or
3-Go back to and stay at your own blog where your many worshippers will be more than happy to validate your bad behavior.
Oh and anyone who may be reading this should know that despite what Rose tries to intimate, Katie does not have flame wars on her blog. You should know Rose, you visit there enough.
Anyway, since I?ve wasted enough good writing time on you I?m going to say bye bye. Ring me when you have something of interest to say.
Does the name Sarah James ring a bell? When I told my neighbor about what happened, she laughed and said, ‘big surprise.’
But I guess this post is superfluous, since you won’t be commenting here any more. Yeah, riiiight.
I?m the staff administrator for Today’s Woman and I don’t recall anyone by the name of Sarah James. What was your username? Also, our term of service does not allow links in signatures, but we’ve never removed anyone for a link in a signature, with the exception of adult sites.
Also if you were banned from our site, you would have been given a reason why.
I?m also the one who pm’s users about their signatures.
Since my last comment Rose and I have patched up our differances, and she has invited me onto her site again.
She may be more outspoken than most people are comfortable with, but well behaived women seldem make history.
I respect Rose because she has owned up to any mistakes she?s made.
I look forward to experiencing this writing community.
Deirdre
I would like to thank those of you who were able to listen to a different point a view about Rose and not slamming me for it. However, Anne, I don’t understand the sarcastic remark about the Kool-Aid. Not once in my response did I put any one down or stoop to lower my dignity by saying something impolite to anyone else with differing comments.
What I do see here is, like I saw when I was deciding which writing community I wanted to join. To me it seems like bees to the queen. One person starts commenting about Rose and people move to that site, to put all they can about Rose because there is another opportunity to do so. There were some familiar people whom I have seen before commenting on other sites.
I have never seen this side of Rose; therefore I felt the need to defend someone I have known as a caring person. Her site tells its own story, because it is the best and biggest writing community online. It grows by the day with knew poets and writers joining. There are always people who don’t like another person, which is part of being human. However I would like to see the gloves come off and I would like to see all of you go to your neutral corners and stop all of this. I know what the response will be. Rose did this and Rose did that, so she needs to be brought up short. I say to that is there is much more to life for all concerned, to be spending so much time in anger, bitterness and hatred towards one person. There is much more joy in life, than all of this. It takes a person who is willing to be the hero and back away from this issue and stop. I wonder, Rose has apologized, are there any other takers out there?
It is my hope that all of these remarks be removed. At least Rose is a big enough person to apologize, which I haven’t seen from any of you who commented to the negative about Rose. That is the Rose I know. She has also been through so much because of sites and comments just like this. So how about it? Can this nonsense stop here and now and all of us can get back to the important things in life? It is my wish and prayer that it can be so.
Sincerely,
Merriam
S.J, you are who? How about posting under the name that you were apparently a member of the community under?
Indago in all honesty I could care less what you or Katie have to say about me. It?s rubbish. I?m only here, to clear up any misunderstandings between James and myself. As I told James, I will not be commenting anymore on this.
“For the record on this, Indigo Black, I was in no way “conned” into closing comments on my post.
Anyone who is curious can read the whole story at
Drama at the Poetry Forum.
Rose admitted to me that I was in fact correct in my initial objection to the legal terms at her site. She also said that she was sorry for the way she handled the whole situation. When people admit they are wrong and say they are sorry, I tend to try to forgive them (unless they repeat the behavior).
I was also not pleased about becoming a meeting-place for all of these interests, whether aggressive or defensive. Many of these issues might better have been handled by email (or, as the tone escalated, by email blocking).
I didn\’t delete the post or any of the comments. I simply closed down further uninteresting and unproductive discussion.”
Hi Heidi,
I wanted to publicly apologize if I offended you. I realize how unflattering my comment is to you. I felt I recognized a pattern that needed to be pointed out. By no means was I bashing you for closing your comments.
I did send you an email explaining a little more but I wanted to also apologize here.
“Indigo Black – I posted because your description was inaccurate. No offense taken.
However, thank you for looking back at the comment with different eyes. I think it was William James who said that a great many people believe that they are thinking when they are \””merely rearranging their prejudices.” You looked, and you reassessed. You thought about it from a different perspective, a different frame, and suddenly it read differently.
As someone who is interested in discourse analysis as well as contextual ethics, that’s the kind of thing that makes me very happy to see.
No worries.”