Most of you are probably annoyed by the sudden focus on Eugine; why is Less Wrong focusing so much on one person? Isn’t that just giving him what he wants?
Well, to answer the first question, we’re not focusing on Eugine; I’m currently mostly poking him in my off-time using low-effort strategies with particular goals in mind. If I decided to wage war on Eugine, no-holds-barred, I’d start with an upvote brigade; any individual identified as being targeted by Eugine would be targeted far more effectively by my bots, with a 10:1 upvote ratio, and targeted downvotes at his sockpuppets. And I’d work to be sanctioned by the admins, meaning my brigade wouldn’t suffer attrition the way his sockpuppet army would.
Even that would be low-effort. It’d take about an hour of coding, and another hour to register all the accounts. (Somewhat longer would be getting administrator approval to break the rules.) If I really wanted to get him, I’d pull down the source code for Less Wrong and create tools to find his bots and disable them. It wouldn’t even be difficult.
As for the second question, of whether focusing on him is giving him what he wants: Some of you weren’t around for his first downvote campaign. Let’s not kid ourselves: Eugine won, and Less Wrong was left crippled; he already GOT what he wanted. Many people left as a result of his campaign, and Less Wrong entered something of a downward spiral from which it never fully recovered. The people who left were all people who disagreed with his views, and this has created a bias which has, through the slow weight of upvotes and downvotes, become acculturated here.
And he’s never stopped pushing Less Wrong in his favored direction. I’ve kicked the hornet’s nest, mostly because that’s what I do, and he’s more active at the moment—but make no mistake, he’s never stopped being active. As demonstrated by his recent campaign, he’s never actually given up the methods he used the first time around.
Less Wrong 2.0 won’t fix the problem, and as long as he’s playing this game, he’s deciding the direction Less Wrong leans—by pushing his finger down whenever the scale stops favoring him. Whatever rules are put in place, he’ll ignore or attempt to game. He’s waging war on those of you he disagrees with—he’s been waging war on you for years—but now it’s noticeable. I think most people have noticed now.
Nancy has done an excellent job of nuking his accounts as they’ve made themselves known, but the tools do not yet exist to truly finish him off.
So. Any other strategies? Do mind that what you write here, he’ll as likely as not read. I’m engaging him, but I can’t say what my strategies are. (Insofar as I specify my own strategies, I’m writing the strategy I want Eugine to read, and respond to. Yes, this includes this entire comment; I want Eugine to read this, and more, I want him to know that I know that he knows what I’m up to. Or at least, he thinks he does.)
This is rude to say, but I honestly believe that the technical support of LW does not give a fuck about Eugine, and their cooperation is lukewarm at best. Otherwise the problem would be already solved years ago.
Really, how difficult it would be create a script that would revert all Eugine’s votes? Let’s suppose it would take a week of work. So? More than hundred weeks have already passed, and nothing happened.
Without cooperation of the technical support, there is not much a moderator could do, other than playing whack-a-mole with the new accounts. Which, as we see, does not work, because Eugine just creates new accounts, and the downvotes made by the old ones stay there.
Call me when they at least revert Eugine’s votes from his known accounts. Or just tell me your probability estimate it will happen before the end of 2016. :(
I think you’re correct, but it may be more accurate to say that the technical support of LW doesn’t give a fuck about LW generally. My vague memory is that they are doing this for free, which is nice for them but doesn’t exactly give them a lot of motivation to keep things running well.
Suppose Eugine is destructive enough that everyone gives up on LW and they close it down. For LW tech support, that’s a successful outcome: they don’t have to bother with it any more.
he already GOT what he wanted. Many people left as a result of his campaign, and Less Wrong entered something of a downward spiral from which it never fully recovered.
I don’t think Eugine wanted to destroy LW at that point in time.
I take it OW meant not “Eugine wanted to destroy LW, and got what he wanted” but “Eugine wanted to make LW unpleasant for people with sociopolitical opinions very different from his and drive them away from LW, and got what he wanted—and that destroyed LW”.
I agree that Eugine surely didn’t want to destroy LW at that point. I have no idea what he wants to do to it now.
I imagine he might want it to become a “more right” forum (maybe he believes that after “weeding out” all wrongthinkers it would happen automatically), but that seems unlikely to happen.
At this moment, I guess the choices are merely: (a) LW will somehow fix things and get rid of Eugine; (b) LW will continue as usual, including the annoyment over Eugine’s games; or (c) a better debating forum will appear and people will move there.
small-group politics is as mindkilling as large-group politics. I’d like to hear a lot less about the topic (though I do support software changes to make bad actors less harmful, such as tracking votes to be able to undo banned-account voting, and soft-bans where the target doesn’t realize it’s banned—it can vote and post, but nobody else ever sees).
I don’t agree that he’s had all that much impact, I was around for the original harassment—it was annoying, but didn’t change the direction of movement—the diaspora had already started. It may have accelerated things a hair.
The difference now may be that LW has lost enough thought leaders and original posters for “finger on the scale” manipulation to actually have an effect. I’d argue that to the extent it’s true, we’re already dead.
You probably underestimate the number of new users—the ones who posted their first five or ten comments, received −1 karma on each, and left the website because they felt like the community dislikes them (while in reality their only “sin” was e.g. mentioning to be women in one of those comments) -- who in alternative reality could have produced useful content for the website.
I agree that downvoting crusades and lower quality of content are mostly two separate problems that need to be addressed separately. But on some scale, one bad thing contributes to another.
You’re likely correct—turning off a new user who decides to keep posting elsewhere rather than making LW more interesting is a serious harm. While I hope most users (new and old) pay more attention to comments and replies than votes, that’s not how some are wired.
That was actually done to Eugine at one point. He quickly noticed it, and freaked out.
As far as I know, it actually wasn’t done, it was just Eugine’s way to create more drama. He sometimes tries new strategies (such as reposting his old comments using new accounts), and this could be one of them. Or he was genuinely mistaken; it’s hard to tell with this kind of person.
Oh, really? That’s funny. I’m disappointed—for all Eugine’s faults, I’d thought he was generally honest and intelligent, but this seems like good evidence of serious failure on at least one of those.
I am almost sure that Nancy Lebovitz shadow-banned The_Lion at some point, as his comments showed up on his user page but not in their context (including my inbox).
Well, not sure how to explain that, but I still find Eugine’s hypothesis that he was shadowbanned and then at some moment Eliezer himself intervened and removed the shadowban quite unlikely.
My model of Eliezer’s approach to moderation assigns very low probability to this whole story. And if I believe that half of the story was made up, I have no reason to trust the other half.
There are two separate claims: (1) He was hell-banned; and (2) EY personally intervened to un-ban him.
Is there evidence that this didn’t happen? I am, too, more suspicious about EY intervening, but regarding the first claim nobody (in particular, Nancy) jumped up and said that Eugine is making shit up and no one actually hell-banned him.
Hell-banning does not work at all with people who use sockpuppets. So you may argue that it was justified, but it still wasn’t the appropriate tool for the job.
Yes, it does seem that Eugine had a paranoid episode or something and started to imagine things. Or it was a really bad attempt at getting public sympathy :-/
My impression is that it accelerated the departure of lefty and/or female LWers by more than a hair.
Any specifics?
One lefty female comes to mind, but I believe she left LW basically because she didn’t find NRx (and possibly HBD) pushback acceptable. It was more like she didn’t want to be in the same forum with people holding such views.
Such departures, IMHO, cannot and should not be helped.
Is there anyone who left LW specifically because of karma harassment?
And, over on Slate Star Codex (where there are no links to individual comments; sorry), go to this thread and search for “Because I got mod-bombed” you’ll find ialdabaoth saying that’s why they left LW; if you read other comments near that one you’ll find a bunch of other people saying they left and/or are considering leaving because they don’t like how it feels to get heavily downvoted; they aren’t (I think) talking about Euginification, but if (1) it’s common to be pushed away from places like LW because being heavily downvoted is unpleasant, and (2) there is someone around throwing heavy downvoting at people whose politics he doesn’t like, there’s an obvious conclusion to draw.
I don’t know the politics (or, in several cases, the gender) of the people I’m pointing at, so I am not going to claim them as examples of “lefty and/or female LWers” specifically; but, again, if we have evidence (1) that mass-downvoting encourages people to leave and (2) that mass-downvoting is preferentially targeted at those who are lefty and/or female, then there’s an obvious conclusion to draw.
[EDITED to add:] I am pretty sure I remember other people saying things like “I got mass-downvoted and it makes me feel really negative about LW and I hardly post here any more”, but the above is all that a few minutes’ googling turned up and more research than that seems unwarranted. Also, while looking I found this study of the impact of voting on user behaviour, which doesn’t find that downvoting drives people away (but doesn’t, I think, look at all at the sort of mass-downvoting LW suffers from); I am linking it here (1) because cherry-picking is bad and (2) because it’s an interesting paper anyway.
I’m a conservative, so I might be biased, but the notion that Lesswrong is culturally unwelcome to lefties strikes me as not just wrong, but funny. In any given scan of the site, I’ll see 3-4 things that offend me.
Threads will contain, not as the point of the thread, but just as background noise, as assumptions with which the writer presumes everyone will agree, atheism, pro choice stuff, polyamory (usually with same sex stuff relationships in there), discussions of how cool it will be once we turn out bodies into robots, etc.
I recognize that it is possible that the site is somehow also offensive to progressives and I simply miss out on all of the conservative talking points because they are transparent to me (fish don’t see the water that they swim in, etc.), but I don’t think that’s the case.
I’m not claiming that LW is generally hostile to lefties, nor that there aren’t things that happen here that might annoy righties or push them away, nor that overall it’s worse for lefties than for righties. Only that one particular thing that happens here makes LW more unpleasant for lefties than it need be and drives some away.
(I would prefer LW to be a place where people with any political proclivities at all can feel welcome, unless those proclivities are severely and overtly anti-rational or so obnoxious as to render them unwelcome pretty much everywhere.)
I agree with this if you simply look at the site as it is, but the kind of movement that gjm is talking about has certainly happened, and Eugene’s downvoting may have contributed to that.
Some years ago, if you even mentioned religion or a culturally conservative practice without saying something negative about it, you would very likely be downvoted. I’m pretty sure that even happened to gjm on at least one occasion—he was downvoted and added, “I don’t see what’s wrong with this comment,” and I’m pretty sure it was downvoted just because he didn’t add something negative when he mentioned religion.
That is obviously not the case anymore with religion. And I just recently was giving some arguments favoring a policy of no sex before marriage, without that kind of result. Of course people still disagreed, but they didn’t object to the fact that someone was arguing that point.
So it seems to me true that there has been a substantial amount of movement, even if it is still true overall that LW is more leftwing than not.
Some people did. Some people left for other reasons. One of those reasons was disliking getting downvoted a lot. In one case, it was specifically disliking getting mass-downvoted by Eugine. Which happens to be what you asked for.
(I agree that most people who have left LW have left for reasons other than getting mass-downvoted by Eugine. I hadn’t thought that was under any sort of dispute.)
“Mod-bombed” is strange expression. I find it probable that at least some people left LW because of karma harassment. However my impression stands—what made LW barren is people leaving because it stopped being interesting. But judging by the volume of discussion about particular reasons for leaving, you’d never guess that :-/
And they left because they were done with their respective projects, and maybe because of negative comments.
Eliezer had said the things he was planning to say with the sequences and had found new research fellows to start working on AI again.
Yvain was a sock puppet that Scott used on a role playing forum he was active on and did some LW posts as backstopping. Then he continued posting here for a while but writing without politics and not under his own name felt too much like hard work. Now his entire blog is pseudonymous because writing about politics under your own name is not such a good idea, but it is still all about political conversations rather than the sciency stuff he did as Yvain.
But it was not about Eugine or downvotes because they always got much more upvotes than downvotes on damn near every comment and every post.
Most of you are probably annoyed by the sudden focus on Eugine; why is Less Wrong focusing so much on one person? Isn’t that just giving him what he wants?
Well, to answer the first question, we’re not focusing on Eugine; I’m currently mostly poking him in my off-time using low-effort strategies with particular goals in mind. If I decided to wage war on Eugine, no-holds-barred, I’d start with an upvote brigade; any individual identified as being targeted by Eugine would be targeted far more effectively by my bots, with a 10:1 upvote ratio, and targeted downvotes at his sockpuppets. And I’d work to be sanctioned by the admins, meaning my brigade wouldn’t suffer attrition the way his sockpuppet army would.
Even that would be low-effort. It’d take about an hour of coding, and another hour to register all the accounts. (Somewhat longer would be getting administrator approval to break the rules.) If I really wanted to get him, I’d pull down the source code for Less Wrong and create tools to find his bots and disable them. It wouldn’t even be difficult.
As for the second question, of whether focusing on him is giving him what he wants: Some of you weren’t around for his first downvote campaign. Let’s not kid ourselves: Eugine won, and Less Wrong was left crippled; he already GOT what he wanted. Many people left as a result of his campaign, and Less Wrong entered something of a downward spiral from which it never fully recovered. The people who left were all people who disagreed with his views, and this has created a bias which has, through the slow weight of upvotes and downvotes, become acculturated here.
And he’s never stopped pushing Less Wrong in his favored direction. I’ve kicked the hornet’s nest, mostly because that’s what I do, and he’s more active at the moment—but make no mistake, he’s never stopped being active. As demonstrated by his recent campaign, he’s never actually given up the methods he used the first time around.
Less Wrong 2.0 won’t fix the problem, and as long as he’s playing this game, he’s deciding the direction Less Wrong leans—by pushing his finger down whenever the scale stops favoring him. Whatever rules are put in place, he’ll ignore or attempt to game. He’s waging war on those of you he disagrees with—he’s been waging war on you for years—but now it’s noticeable. I think most people have noticed now.
Nancy has done an excellent job of nuking his accounts as they’ve made themselves known, but the tools do not yet exist to truly finish him off.
So. Any other strategies? Do mind that what you write here, he’ll as likely as not read. I’m engaging him, but I can’t say what my strategies are. (Insofar as I specify my own strategies, I’m writing the strategy I want Eugine to read, and respond to. Yes, this includes this entire comment; I want Eugine to read this, and more, I want him to know that I know that he knows what I’m up to. Or at least, he thinks he does.)
This is rude to say, but I honestly believe that the technical support of LW does not give a fuck about Eugine, and their cooperation is lukewarm at best. Otherwise the problem would be already solved years ago.
Really, how difficult it would be create a script that would revert all Eugine’s votes? Let’s suppose it would take a week of work. So? More than hundred weeks have already passed, and nothing happened.
Without cooperation of the technical support, there is not much a moderator could do, other than playing whack-a-mole with the new accounts. Which, as we see, does not work, because Eugine just creates new accounts, and the downvotes made by the old ones stay there.
For what it’s worth, I think tech support cares somewhat, but not enough for a gung ho effort.
Call me when they at least revert Eugine’s votes from his known accounts. Or just tell me your probability estimate it will happen before the end of 2016. :(
I think you’re correct, but it may be more accurate to say that the technical support of LW doesn’t give a fuck about LW generally. My vague memory is that they are doing this for free, which is nice for them but doesn’t exactly give them a lot of motivation to keep things running well.
Suppose Eugine is destructive enough that everyone gives up on LW and they close it down. For LW tech support, that’s a successful outcome: they don’t have to bother with it any more.
I think that’s nastier than necessary—tech support has been giving some help. The problem is that they aren’t willing to develop new tools.
If other people make the necessary tools, are they willing to deploy them?
I’ve asked tech about this.
I don’t think Eugine wanted to destroy LW at that point in time.
I take it OW meant not “Eugine wanted to destroy LW, and got what he wanted” but “Eugine wanted to make LW unpleasant for people with sociopolitical opinions very different from his and drive them away from LW, and got what he wanted—and that destroyed LW”.
I agree that Eugine surely didn’t want to destroy LW at that point. I have no idea what he wants to do to it now.
I imagine he might want it to become a “more right” forum (maybe he believes that after “weeding out” all wrongthinkers it would happen automatically), but that seems unlikely to happen.
At this moment, I guess the choices are merely: (a) LW will somehow fix things and get rid of Eugine; (b) LW will continue as usual, including the annoyment over Eugine’s games; or (c) a better debating forum will appear and people will move there.
small-group politics is as mindkilling as large-group politics. I’d like to hear a lot less about the topic (though I do support software changes to make bad actors less harmful, such as tracking votes to be able to undo banned-account voting, and soft-bans where the target doesn’t realize it’s banned—it can vote and post, but nobody else ever sees).
I don’t agree that he’s had all that much impact, I was around for the original harassment—it was annoying, but didn’t change the direction of movement—the diaspora had already started. It may have accelerated things a hair.
The difference now may be that LW has lost enough thought leaders and original posters for “finger on the scale” manipulation to actually have an effect. I’d argue that to the extent it’s true, we’re already dead.
You probably underestimate the number of new users—the ones who posted their first five or ten comments, received −1 karma on each, and left the website because they felt like the community dislikes them (while in reality their only “sin” was e.g. mentioning to be women in one of those comments) -- who in alternative reality could have produced useful content for the website.
I agree that downvoting crusades and lower quality of content are mostly two separate problems that need to be addressed separately. But on some scale, one bad thing contributes to another.
You’re likely correct—turning off a new user who decides to keep posting elsewhere rather than making LW more interesting is a serious harm. While I hope most users (new and old) pay more attention to comments and replies than votes, that’s not how some are wired.
My impression is that it accelerated the departure of lefty and/or female LWers by more than a hair.
There really isn’t that much on LW about this—if it seems like a lot, I think it’s more because there’s so little other content on LW.
That was actually done to Eugine at one point. He quickly noticed it, and freaked out.
As far as I know, it actually wasn’t done, it was just Eugine’s way to create more drama. He sometimes tries new strategies (such as reposting his old comments using new accounts), and this could be one of them. Or he was genuinely mistaken; it’s hard to tell with this kind of person.
Oh, really? That’s funny. I’m disappointed—for all Eugine’s faults, I’d thought he was generally honest and intelligent, but this seems like good evidence of serious failure on at least one of those.
I am almost sure that Nancy Lebovitz shadow-banned The_Lion at some point, as his comments showed up on his user page but not in their context (including my inbox).
No, I didn’t. I’ve got a comment somewhere that I didn’t think shadow-banning would work on anyone who was paying attention.
Also, I don’t have the tools needed for shadow-banning.
Well, not sure how to explain that, but I still find Eugine’s hypothesis that he was shadowbanned and then at some moment Eliezer himself intervened and removed the shadowban quite unlikely.
My model of Eliezer’s approach to moderation assigns very low probability to this whole story. And if I believe that half of the story was made up, I have no reason to trust the other half.
There are two separate claims: (1) He was hell-banned; and (2) EY personally intervened to un-ban him.
Is there evidence that this didn’t happen? I am, too, more suspicious about EY intervening, but regarding the first claim nobody (in particular, Nancy) jumped up and said that Eugine is making shit up and no one actually hell-banned him.
...I honestly don’t understand why it matters.
He was banned. Hell-banning seems appropriate, given that he continued to try to skirt the ban.
Hell-banning does not work at all with people who use sockpuppets. So you may argue that it was justified, but it still wasn’t the appropriate tool for the job.
Granted. I guess I’m puzzled as to why its use or non-use ultimately matters?
Well, she said it now.
(Linking here because the whole debate is downvoted, so it’s easy to miss new comments.)
Yes, it does seem that Eugine had a paranoid episode or something and started to imagine things. Or it was a really bad attempt at getting public sympathy :-/
Any specifics?
One lefty female comes to mind, but I believe she left LW basically because she didn’t find NRx (and possibly HBD) pushback acceptable. It was more like she didn’t want to be in the same forum with people holding such views.
Such departures, IMHO, cannot and should not be helped.
Is there anyone who left LW specifically because of karma harassment?
It’s hard to tell; people don’t usually bother saying why they’re going. But I can offer someone saying they almost left because of a single incident of mass-downvoting. And daenerys (who has since left LW) saying that mass-downvoting is discouraging her from participating much, though at that point she evidently had no plans to leave altogether.
And, over on Slate Star Codex (where there are no links to individual comments; sorry), go to this thread and search for “Because I got mod-bombed” you’ll find ialdabaoth saying that’s why they left LW; if you read other comments near that one you’ll find a bunch of other people saying they left and/or are considering leaving because they don’t like how it feels to get heavily downvoted; they aren’t (I think) talking about Euginification, but if (1) it’s common to be pushed away from places like LW because being heavily downvoted is unpleasant, and (2) there is someone around throwing heavy downvoting at people whose politics he doesn’t like, there’s an obvious conclusion to draw.
I don’t know the politics (or, in several cases, the gender) of the people I’m pointing at, so I am not going to claim them as examples of “lefty and/or female LWers” specifically; but, again, if we have evidence (1) that mass-downvoting encourages people to leave and (2) that mass-downvoting is preferentially targeted at those who are lefty and/or female, then there’s an obvious conclusion to draw.
[EDITED to add:] I am pretty sure I remember other people saying things like “I got mass-downvoted and it makes me feel really negative about LW and I hardly post here any more”, but the above is all that a few minutes’ googling turned up and more research than that seems unwarranted. Also, while looking I found this study of the impact of voting on user behaviour, which doesn’t find that downvoting drives people away (but doesn’t, I think, look at all at the sort of mass-downvoting LW suffers from); I am linking it here (1) because cherry-picking is bad and (2) because it’s an interesting paper anyway.
I’m a conservative, so I might be biased, but the notion that Lesswrong is culturally unwelcome to lefties strikes me as not just wrong, but funny. In any given scan of the site, I’ll see 3-4 things that offend me.
Threads will contain, not as the point of the thread, but just as background noise, as assumptions with which the writer presumes everyone will agree, atheism, pro choice stuff, polyamory (usually with same sex stuff relationships in there), discussions of how cool it will be once we turn out bodies into robots, etc.
I recognize that it is possible that the site is somehow also offensive to progressives and I simply miss out on all of the conservative talking points because they are transparent to me (fish don’t see the water that they swim in, etc.), but I don’t think that’s the case.
I’m not claiming that LW is generally hostile to lefties, nor that there aren’t things that happen here that might annoy righties or push them away, nor that overall it’s worse for lefties than for righties. Only that one particular thing that happens here makes LW more unpleasant for lefties than it need be and drives some away.
(I would prefer LW to be a place where people with any political proclivities at all can feel welcome, unless those proclivities are severely and overtly anti-rational or so obnoxious as to render them unwelcome pretty much everywhere.)
I agree with this if you simply look at the site as it is, but the kind of movement that gjm is talking about has certainly happened, and Eugene’s downvoting may have contributed to that.
Some years ago, if you even mentioned religion or a culturally conservative practice without saying something negative about it, you would very likely be downvoted. I’m pretty sure that even happened to gjm on at least one occasion—he was downvoted and added, “I don’t see what’s wrong with this comment,” and I’m pretty sure it was downvoted just because he didn’t add something negative when he mentioned religion.
That is obviously not the case anymore with religion. And I just recently was giving some arguments favoring a policy of no sex before marriage, without that kind of result. Of course people still disagreed, but they didn’t object to the fact that someone was arguing that point.
So it seems to me true that there has been a substantial amount of movement, even if it is still true overall that LW is more leftwing than not.
A comment’s date and time is a permalink to that comment. Here’s Ialdabaoth’s “mod-bombed” comment.
D’oh! Thanks.
(I have a feeling I’ve made the same mistake before and had it pointed out before. Perhaps I’ll remember next time.)
An interesting thread. My overwhelming impression from it is that people left LW because it stopped being interesting.
Some people did. Some people left for other reasons. One of those reasons was disliking getting downvoted a lot. In one case, it was specifically disliking getting mass-downvoted by Eugine. Which happens to be what you asked for.
(I agree that most people who have left LW have left for reasons other than getting mass-downvoted by Eugine. I hadn’t thought that was under any sort of dispute.)
“Mod-bombed” is strange expression. I find it probable that at least some people left LW because of karma harassment. However my impression stands—what made LW barren is people leaving because it stopped being interesting. But judging by the volume of discussion about particular reasons for leaving, you’d never guess that :-/
And vice versa.
LW would probably still be interesting if certain people (e.g. Eliezer and Yvain) still regularly posted here.
And they left because they were done with their respective projects, and maybe because of negative comments.
Eliezer had said the things he was planning to say with the sequences and had found new research fellows to start working on AI again.
Yvain was a sock puppet that Scott used on a role playing forum he was active on and did some LW posts as backstopping. Then he continued posting here for a while but writing without politics and not under his own name felt too much like hard work. Now his entire blog is pseudonymous because writing about politics under your own name is not such a good idea, but it is still all about political conversations rather than the sciency stuff he did as Yvain.
But it was not about Eugine or downvotes because they always got much more upvotes than downvotes on damn near every comment and every post.
Yep. It’s a negative feedback loop, there’s a reason it’s known as the death spiral.
I know one such person offline. Could be the only one, could be more of them. We don’t know.