Is Photography Conservation. Is Conservation Politics?

I have now been censored several times for making a "political" comment on threads that allege to be photography. Postings to alert viewers to conservation issues especially seem to come in for a hard time from the moderators. Rob Ashton (see below where comments have been banned), Writepic, Elliott Neep, to name a few have made the assumption that photography is linked to conservation.

I agree this should be so.

So why do the moderators not agree?

The American Site is crammed full of political comment concerning nature and conservation so why not this one?

Is wildlife photography one-dimensional attracting only "artistes", or can the subject of photography include the views of those that are passionate about saving the planet and its wildlife?

Is Wildlife Photography Conservation. Is Conservation Politics?

Without the wildlife this Forum could not exist.

Dave
Forest of Dean, UK

Dave,

So why do the moderators not agree?

Speaking for myself, and I am not unaccustomed to politics maskerading as conservation, nor lawyers.

The moderators have chosen the current "little or no politics" operational model as we don't have the time to remove, check, and be general umpire between two/three/four opposing views - usually littered with contentious and half truth statements.

For example, in the reply to the previous post by Elliot about WPOTY you included, in my opinion, some potentially problematic comments - putting them here could potentially be seen as publically publishing them? Now I am not saying that the deleted content was either right or wrong - but what I am saying is I (personally) have a concern, that concern is that don't want to be potentially center stage in a possible libel action against me/'this forum' for allowing them to be published; I ain't taking that risk - this site doesn't have Private Eye's fiscal resources.

This forum, after all, is a hobby and I, as a moderator, will not be potentially held hostage to anybodies viewpoint (as I currently understand the law would have me be) no more so than anybody would want to be held hostage to my viewpoint. That said, if you want to pay for the lawyers to give me a definitive answer on my concern, stated above, please send a big cheque to me in the post

To provide an example of my concern the following is paragraphs written previously about a major power company [xxxx], one that a mod removed - but blanking out all names of course ( the bold emphasis is mine).

Here are a few facts about XXXXXXX that these people want you to know about....

XXXXX are also guilty of price fixing, creating cartels with other oil giants (ZZZZZ?), fictitious trading, helped to fund the Vietnam War, and famously attempted to sink some of its oil platform in the [place]. no reference given

No mod would allow this. It also has little, if anything, to do with directly with day to day photography.

If you feel so strongly about your politics, please publish them on your website. I will gladly, if required, point the appropiate corporate lawyers to that content and observe the outcome at a distance, for I would love the law to make a judgement on potentially libelous web content! I just don't want to be the UK guinea pig!
So, in short, YOUR politics, well, publish them on YOUR site and YOU can carry any potential consequences .


This website has a policy of no politics, just, simply, a nice friendly site dealing with photography critique, location information with the odd bit about kit.
Instead of trying to turn it into a forum whose remit is different to that which each member signed up to, try posting a few photographs and joining in with the ethos of the forum instead of trying to make it what you want.

To recap, the purpose of this website is as stated in the welcome message and that is what we mods adhere to.

Alternatively, as you have pointed out, the main forum has a hot topics site for political discussion - post your thoughts there .

What do other members think?

No politics, just, simply, a nice friendly site dealing with photography critique, location information with the odd bit about kit.

I think this just about sums it up.It's always been that way, and is probably a main contributing factor to why this site is the successful and friendly place it is today.

Be nice to keep it that way,IMHO.

Hello Dave and Tom

I know you both very well and have enjoyed your company on many occaisions, of course politics plays a part in photography and sometimes the images photographers take can make a difference. Dave I admire some of your views and your stance on a lot of things but from knowing Tom well I know he and other Mods have a difficult job to do and that Job is to keep the forum free from politics and also free from advertising are own workshops/ventures. This can seem as censorship but its not because I feel there are other avenues where this can be explored. Regarding the thread started by Rob this is not a photography issue but an issue we are all interested in, the thread has not been removed but leaving a comment has so the issue is still being raised but not on the forum. The people that look at or comment on this site do so to view wildlife photography and to get tips of how to do it, be it technique, field craft or locations. Politics in conservation is a complicated topic and I am sure we all have many thoughts on different subjects. I don't want to sit on the fence about my views but feel this forum is not the place to air them

Cheers

Danny

Hmm i'm not a hugely political person. And i dont see photography as being in anyway political. The resulting image can give a plotical view however if used in the right context.

Is photography conservation? Not not in and of its self.

Can photography be used to aid conservation? Yes it can as the revinue from people that do this type of photography is used to aid conservation. For example i'm a member of the RSPB and wildlife trust.

Tom, thanks for your feedback.

Viewpoints is what this forum is ALL about. How can it be libellous to have a viewpoint? Will you censor someone saying that a sigma lens is naff. Sigma may prosecute! What about allowing photos that obviously require Schedule 1's? A criminal act may have been perpetrated here, do you check?

Section 230 of the US federal Communications Decency Act of 1996 should protect moderators from third parties. UK law (EU Law!), is much more vague I admit. Shall we all shut up just in case? Shall we go on thinking photography is just an innocent friendly hobby causing no-one or no animal harm? Better stop all those baiting debates just in case you condone something ilegal.
.
Nevertheless, if what you say is true then why do you believe the hot topics site is immune from your (personal?) fears?

Where's the consistency here?

PS My rundown of "beep" were derived from Court proceedings and Wikipedia I don't care how major they are or what Wildlife Photography Competition they support.

Dave

Dave,

I live in the UK, I am governed by English not US law - as you have said UK (EU) law is much tooo vague. - its my risk and I ain't taking it.

A viewpoint is not libellous, publishing it may be- this uncertainty is what courts and lawyers make a living at, so not here please... use your website.

RE Hot Topics. The consistency is that the mods associated with this are in the US. I am not responsible for moderating it, its nothing to do with me, honest guv. Is it immune? I don't know! That is somebody elses worry.

You may want to set the world on fire, but that is NOT why this forum exists so please respect the other members and ethos of this forum. Find another soap box for I would suggest that most members here aren't that interested in this.
That said, if you truely beleive that they are and in what you are saying, there is nothing to stop you starting your own political nature forum on your website. Those members here that are interested can post politics all day on your website and you can be responsible for the content of it. Surely any costs of doing so must be worth it in your eyes.

Again Politics is NOT the purpose nor policy of UKNP's existance. Please respect this.

T

I'm with Justin...get enough stress at work!!

Im with me birds, that way I get no stress

Oh oh, the phones ringing here we go, its a human

That's Right Tom, Keep the Politics out of the Forum let 'em publish them on their own websites, Please Keep this Forum as it is, its a pleasure to visit your Forum, leave the politics where they belong.

Charles R.

I agree that we should all be concerned about the conservation issues that face our subjects, and I don't think there's any reason to stop threads drawing attention to conservation causes. However, when these threads and posts in them can cause offence to other members of the forum, they should be banned.

Robams post seems a good way forward - highlght the issue, but allow no replies. You can alway pm the author if you feel you have some invaluable information to help the cause!

The aim of this site (and it does it so well) is to give and receive high quality photo critique - lets keep it that way!

Hi to all,
I'm with Tom on this one , I didn't join this forum to discuss politics or the ethics of wildlife conservation , don't get me wrong , conservation is a very important issue in this day and age , but the politics that inevatibly come with conservation don't belong on this forum.

But to those who insist on airing their political views on this forum , don't waste your time , because as a NPN Member I'm not interested , I paid my membership fee so I could enjoy everything this forum has to offer , everything except politics that is , but if you insist on trying , at least have the decency to pay the membership fee , it's only $49 , a small contribution to make !!!

Regards
Andy...

I think most of us are concerned about the plight of nature and conservation. We express this through our images (at least I try to in my own way). I come on to this forum to learn to take better images and to test whether I am progressing in that and not to engage in political debate since I find that politics adds nothing to conservation but that is just my lowly opinion.

I realise that there is a deep need for a place where anyone can discuss these things and would be interested in participating in it but it is not here. This place does what it does supremely well as far as I am concerned. Lets not spoil it by trying to impose something that the members feel uncomfortable with.

Again this is just my opinion. Please feel free to disagree if you want.

Adrian

I'm with Justin - no politics just good honest friendly critique. I have been guilty is past of starting a thread that got a little political and personal - it made my head hurt reading it!

David

Hi All,

I agree this forum is an excellent place to post our work and get good honest critique back, that is why I use it and that's how it should stay.

Pete, "Robams post seems a good way forward - highlght the issue, but allow no replies."

Don't know what you mean

Regards

Rob

Hello Guys
Just a couple of points from me.
1. As ever, the mods speak with one voice on this and I totally agree with Tom.
2. It is also hugely evident from the replies that the majority of members agree with us.
3. Robam, I think Pete was referring to Rob's post.
As ever, best wishes
Phil

I too have been guilty is past of starting a political thread or two that became horribly personal and I let the trust put in me by the mods down and I will forever feel quilty for doing that politics just messes thing up, stresses people out and makes enemies and as Dave said makes ones head hurt...

I joined NPN to show off my work and seek advice about how to put right the things that I had done wrong (usually most things!!)
I'm just after good honest friendly critique on my images and hope that I can learn from that critique and better myself as a photographer and a person (taking advice from those who know better is character building). I also hope that I can offer friendly advice and assistance to other fellow npn'rs, lets keep the politics out of it and just enjoy the fabulous pictures, and learn from one another....

David,

Help, help! I'm being repressed! (Monty Python & the Holy Grail)
You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes... (Monty Python & the Holy Grail)

What's wrong with a good bit of censorship...Stalin used it to great effect, so did the British Board of Film Classification

I'm sorry if you feel you have been censored - if that where indeed the case, then this discussion would not be taking place now, we'd simply have removed your post. NPN and UKNP are forums whose prime reason is that of critique of nature photography - not of political debate, nor of mud flinging, nor activism.

So to answer your question Is Wildlife Photography Conservation. Is Conservation Politics?. No and No to both counts.

You will note that many topics pointing people in the direction of good causes etc are left on the forum - the ones that are removed are those that have not kept within the forum and site guidelines and in which someone has decided to get on their soap-box and start banging away, or where someone has starting flinging accusations and names around. We will accept reasoned discussions on things (in the appropriate forum) - not hysterical rhetoric or attempts at brainwashing. NPN/UKNP is not here to air dirty laundry in public!

NPN and UKNP are not Political parties, we have no political agenda, nor do we lobby politicians. If you wish to do so, then I suggest that you find the routes that will get your voice heard and listened to - take a leaf out of Niall Benvie's book and use your photography to lobby your MP and councillors to show what is happening, what needs doing and to educate them.

We have pointed you in the direction of the 'Hot Topics' forum before, that is the correct place to foster any heated discussions, not this forum - please use it! You may find that a few people actually engage you in the discussion there! As you can see from the other responses above, our contributors are, in general, not interested in participating in debate here, they may well do so elsewhere.

You also make many assumptions about people and their photography - chill out! Not everyone who photographs a Schedule 1 bird needs a license, some do obtain the requisite licenses but many photographers travel abroad to photograph such species. Those that openly flout the laws will realise that they close more doors than they open - there are many watchers in the sidelines.

Also you seem to approach everything as if there is always some sleight-of-hand or intent to decieve on the part of the image poster. Please treat forum members with respect, and you will in return gain their respect . - Not everyone clones out jesses on raptors (because they don't have to - the bird is wild), and not everyone spends hours on each photo in photoshop.

Would it be a good idea to delete this thread, it's depressing

Or we could ignore it Vince? I keep coming back to it though!

Of course, I've been worrying about the response this thread was going to get.

Obviously, the "few" (not the majority Nick) who have chosen to respond want this forum to ONLY concern matters directly related to wildlife photography (i.e technique, kit, locations). That is great, no problem. I'm happy. At least this has been aired and I'm tough enough to be proved wrong.

I just thought that there is a silent few who do see photography as more than just a pretty image, and it would be nice to open up some discussion / education on various conservation issues that DO affect wildlife photography (predators, rainforest destruction, climate change even). Mark Hamblin and Pete Cairns use their politically oriented Tooth and Claw website very affectively, and combine this with their photography. Those who don't want to join in don't have to. It will still be friendly I'm sure. I had a simple thought to maybe help encourage more interesting debates, that's all.

To end with, on this peace and love day, I will urge people to re-read my original post and then follow how it is that I have come under personal attack, libellous perhaps (to paraphrase Tom: I am a political agitator determined to set the world on fire (destroy the world?). Nick also makes assumptins about me that has nothing to do with the original post. Some hypocrisy here. No bad feelings guys, but photography can get us all passionate over seemingly little things.

It's never easy being an individual in a world of Collectivists.

Dave

Dave,

To quote you from elsewhere on NPN..

'Wildlife photography and eco-politics isn't obviously welcome in the UK simply because the right wing vocal minority always end up in positions such as forum moderator or some other self-appointed police position. '

You make a lot of asssumptions about other people too. Fine...we have broad backs. You are welcome to your views David - as am I and the others who inhabit the forum.

I never mentioned the 'majority' Dave - I simply mentioned the 'contributors'. You say it would be nice to open up lines of discussion on conservation issues - great, do it, we have no issue if you do want to 'set the world on fire'...but do it in the right place - not here. Respect the NPN community. NPN has provided an area for 'Hot Topics' and 'environmental photojournalism' - that way those of us who are interested in those areas can contribute and debate as much as we want - without getting up the noses of those who don't want to.

Pete, Mark, Niall and others look at how they can do their campaigning effectively and be heard. You are obviously very passionate about things you believe in - get smart, do the same as Pete & Co., that way you might get to make a real difference .

As an 'individual' life on the edge is always bumpy, but more fun

Dave,

Since you don't know me please don't call me a "collectivist"

Adrian

Dave

To clarify your misunderstanding, I did not use the words 'Political Agitator' and beleive me you are far, far, far from that in my mind.

You started a topic, a topic that you knew would be contentious. A topic where you solicited a response from the Mods. You got that response so please accept ours and others viewpoints.

The outcome is simple that the members, and mods, of this forum do not want this forum to to discuss politics.

That said, as previously stated but not commented upon, if you feel strongly enough about anything "political" you don't have to wait a change in policy, or moderatorship, here on UKNP. You, yes you, the individual, can post your thoughts on YOUR website, afterall you shouldn't need NPN to carry you; Pete and Co don't need UKNP and they are very effective.
I look forward to reading your individual attempts, to emulate Pete and Co, on DJS photography.

Again and finally, politics is NOT the purpose nor policy of UKNP's existance. Please respect this.

N.B. Politics will continue to receive the same tolerance levels from 'the mods' as it currently gets - so, save your fingers as it takes your fingers hundreds of movements to type a post, and takes a mod one movement to remove it

David, man..... what an individual you are! Can't speak for everyone else so I must be an individual, but why not just respect a group of individual's wishes and post your hot topics in the hot topics forums? That's where I'd look. Don't see what the problem is

I am not an "artiste", I am a fully fledged paid up conservationist but also passionate about my nature photography, so I feel reasonably qualified to poke my head above the parapet here (not that I am normally shy in that respect in any case....)

Is photography conservation - definately not, does photography assist with conservation, possibly. Without wildlife this forum would not exist - I totally agree. Is conservation political, yes BUT

There are countless vociferous eco activists and professional conservationists already berating government. All the talking in the world does not put back what has been taken away. Action speaks louder than words, but I mean using bowsaw, billhook, mell, slasher, mattock and monkey strainers, not spray paint and wire cutters.

Britain has lost too much wildlife habitat, especially in the South and there are few people that are prepared to volunteer and roll up there sleeves and get stuck in at weekends to do something about reversing the loss. In my book, unless you have spent all of a Monday morning picking bramble splinters out of your fingers, had an earful from the missus about the mud splattered state of your clothes and have muscles aching until Wednesday, you have not been involved in any meaningful conservation activity that supports wildlife.

The many Berkshire gravel pits I helped work on were taken from bare sterile workings to areas that now hold one of the densist populations of breeding nightingale in Britain, we regulalrly have 4 or 5 wintering Bittern in the reed beds planted at gravel pit sites at Wokingham and Theale and several encouraging sightings of bearded tit. Reed and Sedge warbler abound and now Cettis are starting to breed. The various Berkshire heathlands I helped clear of birch and pine scrub now hold increasing nightjar, dartford warbler and wood lark populations. The downland ragwort pulling sessions over many years help support stone curlew and duke of burgandy fratillaries by allowing farmers not to use herbicides. I have built sand martin and kingfisher nesting banks, countless tern nesting rafts, helped maintain one of the largest inland common tern breeding colonies. I have been involved in local Barn Owl monitoring teams maintaining nesting boxes, ie for over 25 years I have undertaken weekend practical conservation volunteer work in and around Berkshire and happily mix this with photography on the local reserves I help support or work on.

Is photography mono dimensional, well that depends entirely upon you. For me it is the occasional harvest of the long hours creating and preserving habitat.

Do I feel a need to discuss conservation issues on this forum - certainly not, it is the wrong audience. The majority of people here are converts with an interest in conservation and wildlife already. In the words of the Ronseal advert, this forum does what is says on the tin - it is a forum for nature photography by photographers based in the UK and Europe. The moderators quite rightly and vigouressly enforce this and should be applauded for doing so as others have stated their actions have created a site where people can learn and share their photographic experiences.

If you want to bang the conservation drum write articles for your local newspaper help your local wildlife trust with youth projects to educate the next generation but mainly get your hands dirty and help save or create some habitat.

My two penneth....

I agree this forum is generally NOT the place for conservation/political discussions.

There are lots of other places to do that, your own webspace, other forums and chat rooms, MySpace, etc.

I am as keen as everyone else is on this forum about conservation and environmental issues, but I don't think here is the best place to discuss them. Lets stick to photography here.

cheers

Sean

Well said MikeSmith. However.... Ragwort. I must leap to its defence. To quote from 'Buglife
- Ragwort Fact File' see http:www.buglife.org.uk/html/project_ragwort_fact_file.htm
'At least 77 insect species have been recorded eating Ragwort leaves...More importantly 30 species of invertebrate are confined to Ragwort as a food plant.' Please read the FF to make up your mind about its importance to the natural world and its importance to a balanced ecosystem.
This forum should indeed concentrate on wildlife photography but it does no harm to remind photographers that their efforts to obtain that perfect shot may have involved
travelling many miles using fossil fuel powered modes of transport and the consequent effects on Global Warming etc. We have to change our ways, if not for our sakes, then for posterity.

Cinnabar moth caterpillar on Ragwort photo

By Guy Tal concluding a similar thread to this one in the Hot Topics forum (thanks Nick for highlighting, albeit out of context, a small contribution of mine to this hot topics thread some time ago - see, I do already go there folks! It has me falling over laughing sometimes).

"Where an artist dwells in the emotional and the spiritual, the activist’s realm is politics and strategy. Each discipline requires its own unique talents and rarely does one individual excel at both. Is my (admittedly un-PC at times) activism hurting my credibility as an artist? Should I stick to what I do best rather than risk tainting one calling with another?"

It may be that one of the worst things an artist can do for himself is to become involved in the political and internal struggles of the organizations involved.
- Ansel Adams

Thanks to Dave T above, and to Mike - yes Mike I do get my hands dirty and am about to do so in Sulawesi again soon, hopefully. I also donate a lot of photos to conservation charities. For those who haven't yet twigged, I do indeed get political on my website, and despite being watched by MI5 and special branch, I have yet to be carted off to court Tom. Sorry.

Hi Mike I do not really agree with this statement.

( there are few people that are prepared to volunteer and roll up there sleeves and get stuck in at weekends to do something about reversing the loss. In my book, unless you have spent all of a Monday morning picking bramble splinters out of your fingers, had an earful from the missus about the mud splattered state of your clothes and have muscles aching until Wednesday, you have not been involved in any meaningful conservation activity that supports wildlife. )

There are people like me and my friends (and countless others) who raise thousands of pounds to buy this land so that you can go down and do your conservation work we spend countless hours a year in our spare time fighting local bureaucracy, private and commercial development and countless other problems associated with being able to get the land necessary.

Phillip.

Dave,

and despite being watched by MI5 and special branch, I have yet to be carted off to court Tom. Sorry. "

LOL, I see we all still have a sense of humour.

Since we have done this topic to death and ended on a laugh, I would suggest we all now move on.

Have a nice day.

I have read this with great interest and for once in a very long time I can completely appreciate both sides of the argument. For what its worth, here are my two cents. Please remember these are just one persons opinions so please forgive me if I annoy anoyone here. It is not my intention...:

I have always seen UKNP as a forum for Image Critique. That's what it says on the tin and I think it’s fair to say that it is one of the best for this. However among the patrons of UKNP is a broad spectrum of photographers with varying degrees of ability, tastes and, most importantly here, motivations.

This spectrum ranges from photographers like me (and I think I can include David J) here who: 1. Get very involved with conservation issues; 2. Are very emotional about the state of the planet; 3. Seek to inform and increase the awareness of other photographers and wildlife watchers. This motivational spectrum goes right through pros, semi-pros, enthusiasts, eager-beaver learners, and the armchair photographer who wishes for nothing more than to snap a passerine on a nice perch and have it admired and critiqued. All are welcome here.

I may be wrong, but in my mind, if I post a conservation issue, I am acting no differently from those that seek to keep us aware of every latest technological development. Bless you, techno-geeks... It’s good to have people that make others aware of things and I’m sure I would have missed out on essential firmware updates, software, and hardware recommendations. Occasionally we step out of the UKNP remit, but is that such a bad thing? IMO, only when (as stated in immense detail above) it borders on the offensive, derogatory, libellous, etc.

As I see it, 'Moderators' moderate. 'Obvious!' you say, but what does that entail? After speaking with Tom, I can tell you it involves more than you would believe! I certainly wouldn’t want the job!

IMO (and I could be wrong) the moderator’s task is to apply the UKNP mission to the lowest common denominator which is 'pure wildlife photography critique'. It’s the main reason we are all here and the vast majority of posts reflect this. You can imagine it as a histogram... The majority of posts represent the nice midtone peak in the middle. The other subjects and the contentious stuff reside in the deep shadows and burning highlights. The further these areas go from the acceptable middle, the more likely they are to be clipped.

For example, I understand why my post about the SWPTY vandalism was chopped. The first post by me raised awareness, but subsequent posts bordered on the threatening, abusive to a third party, and potentially libellous. Fair enough.

However, I do feel that there is room to allow single posts that are informative and fact based, such as links to online news articles. If we are wildlife photographers, then we must have an interest in, or are passionate about wildlife? However, personal views and opinions must be reserved for our own web blogs and the Hot Topics forum. I accept this, whole-heartedly.

Elliott said;

As I see it, 'Moderators' moderate. 'Obvious!' you say, but what does that entail? After speaking with Tom, I can tell you it involves more than you would believe!

Absolutely! And serving as a moderator is mostly a thankless job.

FWIW, the Hot Topics forum was created specifically for the discussion of subjects that can be a bit too political/heated/controversial for posting in the regular forums. Remember, NPN as a whole is dedicated to the art and technique of nature photography. We may rightfully conclude that conservation issues are part of nature photography, but the discussion/debate of such issues is not the intended focus of this site.

At the same time, NPN supports nature/wildlife conservation through the raising of money for such organizations with our donor membership program. This allows members to discretely contribute to their favorite cause - with NPN kicking in a matching amount.

Yes, it really is true that most people participate on NPN for enjoyment purposes and truly appreciate the fact we try to keep it that way. My hat is off the Tom, Nick and Phil for the great job they do!

My hat is off the Tom, Nick and Phil for the great job they do!

Hear hear!

I agree - leave the forum as it is, if someone wants to rant at us all then as has been said many times already there are appropriate places set aside for that. Its good to hear other people's viewpoints & opinions, but I don't come here to have them rammed down my throat.

Also to echo Adrian I do not take kindly to being labelled a 'collectivist' David - there's really no place for insults between strangers on this forum and it does you no credit.

Keep up the good work guys

Mark

And I don't like being accused of ranting or ramming things at people when I've done no such thing. I don't believe that conservation education is about ranting anyway. There was ranting on the deleted SWPOTY thread which I tried to moderate with some information. The ranting was allowed until the information (quoted above) got in the way..

If only people (oops sorry, some people) kept to subject of the initial posting rather than with with the collective mobbing....

Hope this thread has all been entertaining and would like it now to stop. Do I get a prize for most hits and comments?

Farewell,

Dave.

Hello Dave

You certainly have got alot of hits, I think most of it has been in good nature but one or two comments dissappointed as it did turn a bit personal towards yourself which was a shame because they don't know you like I do and you are a decent bloke with very good intentions and do a lot of work for conservation and looking at the amount of posts and hits conversation as well . I hope to see you posting some images as I know you will

Danny

Thread closed.

If you have any complaints with the way any NPN forum is managed, please contact me directly using the email link below. Whether you are offering compliments, suggestions or complaints, I will be happy to listen and discuss the issue(s) with you off line.

Thanks to all for your understanding!