Ever considered retiring?

[ref]

I’ve just about had it. With debunking the truthers that is. I’ve got nothing to say here anymore. It irritates me to see same old topics debated again and again. WTC 7, Steven Jones, Port Authority white paper claiming 600mph plane speed, etc.

I admit, I first believed in a 9/11 conspiracy. And I consider myself a pretty smart guy (as almost every person does, I know). I have a Master’s degree, high measured IQ, and I speak 4 languages more or less fluently. But those things don’t matter a thing. When I saw the “evidence” I was convinced. Why? Because I was new to this stuff. I thought people really had seen and heard bombs, I thought only explosives could be the cause of the squibs so far below the collapse zone, and so on. At that time I didn’t know the design of the towers, nor the correct accounts of the fire fighters and other people, who were repeatedly misquoted by the truthers. But then I started debating my views and found out, that the other side always had better arguments and evidence. Not a long time passed after that, and I switched sides. I had learnt more about the events and chose to go with the evidence, instead of defending and justifying my initial impression.

But people don’t always follow the evidence. If one comes to their conclusion for the wrong reasons (like me thinking people actually saw bombs, or thinking that squibs can only mean explosives), there is a great chance that one will start justifying the false beliefs to oneself, and after time passes, the possibilities that one would change the initial (and false) beliefs when confronted with contradicting evidence become smaller and smaller.

Smart people can be fooled too. Many really educated people believe strange things. They may have come to their conclusions for wrong reasons, but after they made their conclusion they are very skilled at defending their position, as well as convincing themselves that they are right. They might not even notice this themselves, as they quite possibly are unintentionally blinding themselves of any information that might make them question their beliefs. It’s only human. Unfortunately this topic is serious. It’s more serious than believing in UFO’s or Apollo landings being a hoax. It’s about blaming innocent people of murder.

When truthers are directly confronted by evidence that they are wrong, they do not change they views but justify them even more tenaciously. That’s self-justification. They are convincing themselves they are on the right side. And everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.

A good example of self-justification and the ways it can stretch the imagination:

CIT – They believe flight 77 flew over the Pentagon. They think their interviews prove they are right, so they find ways to justify all the other contradicting evidence. That’s why they claim 77 flew over, even when nobody witnessed anything like that. That’s why they claim the hole was made with explosives, the downed light poles were put there by people on the scene, DNA was faked, the debris was planted and most eyewitnesses are wrong. They always bring up their star eyewitnesses, no matter what the topic is, because that is the single tool they are using when justifying their believes to themselves. Take away their few witnesses, and they have no theory, no way to justify their beliefs, and no comfortable feeling of thinking they are correct

Those much more dedicated to their cause, like Gage, Griffin or Steven Jones, are even deeper in this. They have chosen their sides years ago, risking their professional careers, their educated reputation, everything. Enter dissonance theory and confirmation bias. They need to justify their decisions. It would be awful, if they realized they did it all for nothing. So instead, they take all the information that supports their views with great pleasure, and dismiss everything that doesn’t support them. When they are forced to look at discomforting evidence, they will find ways to criticize, distort and even dismiss it so that they can maintain and even strengthen their existing beliefs. This is why truthers neglect the NIST report, and why they will neglect the upcoming WTC 7 report. A prime example is David Ray Griffin. He thinks he has proven the NIST wrong. When criticized by Ryan Mackey he avoided the topic, and started writing another book instead. Griffin even had Kevin Ryan respond to Mackey instead of himself. Griffin knows Mackey has many great points that disprove his theories. But Griffin is so deep in self-justification, he cannot face the evidence. Of course, some truther leaders are in it for the money and fame. But that is not the only factor and its not that simple. Some honestly believe, what they have justified to themselves.

Therefore it will be very difficult for anyone to switch sides anymore. It has been such a long time, that most people who are interested in this topic already know all the details. They have justified their beliefs to themselves and made up their minds. It will be very difficult to switch sides after that, even when seeing massive amounts of contradicting evidence. A couple of years ago, when debunkers were still working on the facts, many people would switch sides simply because they found more information and based their decision on the increasing amount of knowledge. This is not the case anymore. Debunkers are pretty much finished, only repeating their earlier (good) work.

But us debunkers are not immune to this either. We have justified to ourselves that we are on the right side and correct. When Russell Pickering challenged the Pentagon collapse time on JREF, some people criticized him (I was one of them), only to find out later, that Russell was actually the one who was correct. It taught me once again, that one should not judge the claims based on who delivers them. One should investigate them. But it’s not always easy. Human brains are tricky. But I try to keep an open mind to new claims, until convincing evidence proves one way or another.

We have also viewed critically the so called official reports. Ryan Mackey has identified problems with NIST, gumboot found a mistake in the Commission report, and so on. That’s more than the truther side has done. They only look for holes in the official reports. And claim those mistakes disprove the entire “official story”. They try to find ways to justify their beliefs every chance they get. Of course, the findings of Mackey and gumboot are only examples of critical approach by very 9/11-educated people, not evidence of an inside job.

The latest developments are ridiculous. The Steven Jones “I agree with NIST” paper in a “peer-reviewed” online publication. Gage filming a new DVDtelling the audience how to behave, what to wear and where to sit. Griffin writing another book. Truthers organizing to buy large amounts of a fictional 9/11 book, only to fail in putting the book to any top selling lists.

All this being said, I’ve grown out of this. During my debunking efforts I have spoken to great individuals, including chief Daniel Nigro and “Cheap Shot”, who were deeply involved in the events of 9/11. Speaking with them puts things in perspective. They were there and played a huge part. The truthers have nothing, never had. If they sometimes have something, I will take a look at it. Thus far though, nothing. I won’t debate the old points anymore. But I’m not saying goodbye either. I might still comment once in a while, if feeling so. Because THERE IS NOTHING MORE SATIFYING, THAN KNOWING I AM CORRECT.


These views are inspired by Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson book "Mistakes Were Made (but not by me)", and Michael Shermer book "Why People Believe Weird Things"

[theauthor]

[quote=ref;3703147] Because THERE IS NOTHING MORE SATIFYING, THAN KNOWING I AM CORRECT.


[quote]


iSN'T IT MORE SATISFYING TO LEARN FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS MORE?

[theauthor]

[quote=ref;3703147] Because THERE IS NOTHING MORE SATIFYING, THAN KNOWING I AM CORRECT.


[quote]


iSN'T IT MORE SATISFYING TO LEARN FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS MORE?

[boloboffin]

Hey, I'm reading Mistakes Were Made! Awesome book!

[Pardalis]

theauthor, you should learn how to use the quote function for starters.

[ref]

Originally Posted by theauthor

iSN'T IT MORE SATISFYING TO LEARN FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOWS MORE?

In case you missed it, that was sarcasm.

[Pardalis]

It does feel pointless to engage them anymore. I also don't post very often, because there's really nothing to debunk, all the information is readily available, and the twoofers who come here theses days are petulant adolescents who just want to pick a fight, and they end up looking like idiots.

Also, the threads that are relevant and that do engage in a topic that is important (all of them started by resident debunkers) are being totally ignored by the twoofers. They prefer to pick at any small discrepancy or seemingly anomalous details. This shows they simply aren't interested in their own cause, they don't even care to try to think of how a new investigation will look like, and what it implies. I'm still waiting for Sizzler to answer Myriad's suggestion.

[CurtC]

I've pretty much retired, I just pop in here some for the entertainment value. It's a lot more enjoyable when you don't get wound up about them and just laugh at them instead.

[Blender Head]

Quitter.

[CurtC]

I've pretty much retired, I just pop in here some for the entertainment value. It's a lot more enjoyable when you don't get wound up about them and just laugh at them instead.

[I Ratant]

45 years after JFK, there's 2 generations of the ignorant that bring up the same debunked scary things.
45 years, 450 years, after 9/11, it will be the same.
It does get tiresome.

[Miragememories]

Don't forget to close the door on your way out ref.

MM

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by CurtC

I've pretty much retired, I just pop in here some for the entertainment value. It's a lot more enjoyable when you don't get wound up about them and just laugh at them instead.

ditto

TAM

[mrbaracuda]

Good post. Appreciated. Also good is to see you'll still be around!

[Thunder]

Maybe...just maybe...if we all retire and give up on communicating with the 9-11 Denial Club, they will declare victory....and go away.

Is it possible?

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by CurtC

I've pretty much retired, I just pop in here some for the entertainment value. It's a lot more enjoyable when you don't get wound up about them and just laugh at them instead.

I was never a pro, but this is what keeps me keeps me coming back.

[DavidJames]

I stopped "debunking" quite a while ago. I was never as good as many here, but I tried. In the two or three years since then, I've come to realize 9/11 CTists fall mostly into four categories. Trolls, charlatans, the disenfranchised and those with, shall I say, limited mental capacity to understand logic and reason, be it through illness or willingly.

I no longer seriously debunk, I mostly take pot shots. Well, what about the lurkers? What about them? In the past few years I've seen a small (very small) handful, to small to even consider worthwhile. I think most of those, a huge majority, who will accept the 9/11 crap will fall into one of the categories above and are beyond hope and help, at least from external influences. Yes, some will "see the light, see reason and logic", but not until they're willing to take that step on their own. Like substance abuse (not that far off of an analogy), they need to accept the fact that they have a problem. It can't be forced upon them.

I contend for those that get "converted", they did so mostly because they opened up their minds, not because of some brilliant logic portrayed here or the other debunking sites (sorry). Sorry again, but I think arguing with the CTists on this board (it's not debating), is more self serving then providing a service. In fact it actually feeds the trolls, reinforces the feelings of those disenfranchised and has no affect what so ever on the charlatans or those with limited mental capacity. There are some brilliant people contributing to these threads and I don't mean to trivialize their efforts. It's great work and helps develop a wonderful "encyclopedia" of intelligence to counter the 9/11 CT Crap. I just don't think LC, DC, MM, TC, RedIbis and 99.9% of the others give a damn about it (even if they could understand it).

How many readers of JREF have been "converted" to reason and logic (as opposed to growing up on their own)? Does feeding the trolls and reinforcing those already disenfranchised make it worthwhile? Maybe. Maybe I'm just not seeing the great hordes of the converted.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by ref

....

I admit, I first believed in a 9/11 conspiracy. And I consider myself a pretty smart guy (as almost every person does, I know). I have a Master’s degree, high measured IQ, and I speak 4 languages more or less fluently. But those things don’t matter a thing. When I saw the “evidence” I was convinced. Why? Because I was new to this stuff. I thought people really had seen and heard bombs, I thought only explosives could be the cause of the squibs so far below the collapse zone, and so on. At that time I didn’t know the design of the towers, nor the correct accounts of the fire fighters and other people, who were repeatedly misquoted by the truthers. But then I started debating my views and found out, that the other side always had better arguments and evidence. Not a long time passed after that, and I switched sides. I had learnt more about the events and chose to go with the evidence, instead of defending and justifying my initial impression.

I was in exactly the same boat as a 'recovering' twoofer. It was proper evidence and counter-argument put to me on this very forum that began to set me straight. (though, I only speak 3 other languages, and pretty damn poorly at that )

I totally agree with your analysis, and I really don't know why I persevere in the debunking world. The returns are paltry and possibly even negative, considering the time and effort. A parallel - I used to be fairly obsessed with internet poker (in a small-stakes way) and thought I was a winning player, but eventually evidence taught me that I couldn't beat the card room's commission (rake). But I still play small games from time to time. It's hard to let an obsession go. Same with 9/11 debunking?

All the best,

Glenn

[theauthor]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Don't forget to close the door on your way out ref.

MM

Don't you just love these "announce and flounce" attention seeking threads?

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by theauthor

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

Boredom. Bring something new to the table to debunk. Until you idiots who are "just asking questions" ask some that haven't been answered a hundred times already the number of people who do anything more than point and laugh at you will continue to dwindle.

Face it, you're a non-entity. Even the legitimate movements whose rallies you crash are embarrassed to be on the same street as you. You lost. At this point you should just be grateful some of us get such a twisted pleasure out of kicking corpses.

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

I stopped "debunking" quite a while ago. I was never as good as many here, but I tried. In the two or three years since then, I've come to realize 9/11 CTists fall mostly into four categories. Trolls, charlatans, the disenfranchised and those with, shall I say, limited mental capacity to understand logic and reason, be it through illness or willingly.

I no longer seriously debunk, I mostly take pot shots. Well, what about the lurkers? What about them? In the past few years I've seen a small (very small) handful, to small to even consider worthwhile. I think most of those, a huge majority, who will accept the 9/11 crap will fall into one of the categories above and are beyond hope and help, at least from external influences. Yes, some will "see the light, see reason and logic", but not until they're willing to take that step on their own. Like substance abuse (not that far off of an analogy), they need to accept the fact that they have a problem. It can't be forced upon them.

I contend for those that get "converted", they did so mostly because they opened up their minds, not because of some brilliant logic portrayed here or the other debunking sites (sorry). Sorry again, but I think arguing with the CTists on this board (it's not debating), is more self serving then providing a service. In fact it actually feeds the trolls, reinforces the feelings of those disenfranchised and has no affect what so ever on the charlatans or those with limited mental capacity. There are some brilliant people contributing to these threads and I don't mean to trivialize their efforts. It's great work and helps develop a wonderful "encyclopedia" of intelligence to counter the 9/11 CT Crap. I just don't think LC, DC, MM, TC, RedIbis and 99.9% of the others give a damn about it (even if they could understand it).

How many readers of JREF have been "converted" to reason and logic (as opposed to growing up on their own)? Does feeding the trolls and reinforcing those already disenfranchised make it worthwhile? Maybe. Maybe I'm just not seeing the great hordes of the converted.

My thoughts exactly.

[Brainster]

I am going to wait until after the election, at least, and see if that has the devastating effect I anticipate on the traffic to Troofer websites. As I commented on the Rob Breakenridge show a couple of weeks ago, this year has already seen a dramatic drop. Traffic at 9-11 Blogger, which ran about 10,000 per day in March and April 2007, is down to about 6,300 per day this year.

I'm not doing much real debunking these days; there truly is very little new under the sun. Instead I've been focusing more on the personalities (and the police blotter). I love linking to the work of others, like Henry62, and the videos that Walter Ego has been churning out.

[mrbaracuda]

Originally Posted by theauthor

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

Well since you apparently can't read nor comprehend written texts, you might never know!

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

I... 9/11 CTists fall mostly into four categories. Trolls, charlatans, the disenfranchised and those with, shall I say, limited mental capacity to understand logic and reason, be it through illness or willingly.
...
..., some will "see the light, see reason and logic", but not until they're willing to take that step on their own. Like substance abuse (not that far off of an analogy), they need to accept the fact that they have a problem. It can't be forced upon them.

I contend for those that get "converted", they did so mostly because they opened up their minds, not because of some brilliant logic portrayed here or the other debunking sites ...
... It's great work and helps develop a wonderful "encyclopedia" of intelligence to counter the 9/11 CT Crap. I just don't think LC, DC, MM, TC, RedIbis and 99.9% of the others give a damn about it (even if they could understand it).

I agree, the 9/11 truth believers (showing how great they are at thinking for themselves by spewing 9/11 truth junk) have to make that step to maturity and understanding on their own, when they finally see they are not thinking for themselves as they claim.

9/11 truth is a like an illusion. When will those fooled by the illusion, wake up. A few will see the lies when they or their ideas become targets of fraud like 9/11 truth is.

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by theauthor

Don't you just love these "announce and flounce" attention seeking threads?

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

Maybe, because they aren't totally attached to a single belief, but they hate facing animosity from those whose company and opinions, they otherwise enjoy.

MM

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by beachnut

9/11 truth is a like an illusion. When will those fooled by the illusion, wake up. A few will see the lies when they or their ideal become targets of fraud like 9/11 truth is.

A work friend of mine (prone to obsessions, by his own admission) became a Jehovah's Witness. We used to have office debates about Noah, the Flood, evolution, the geological record and all that stuff. No logic or science would budge him.

He got concerned about the 'tithe' that his local church was expecting from his income, and eventually realised he was being taken for a ride, being manipulated. Good for him.

It doesn't always involve money, although some of the 9/11 shucksters are probably motivated that way. Gaining attention is also a big motivation for slimeballs.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Maybe, because they aren't totally attached to a single belief, but they hate facing animosity from those whose company and opinions, they otherwise enjoy.

MM

MM I'm having trouble deciphering your post. But on a related note - if the sceptics abandoned the 9/11 "Truth" boards, the boards would die for lack of traffic (plus infighting, of course) in a week.

Truth be told, if we sceptics wanted to see the "Truth" movement die, we'd all give up the good fight and just stop posting "over there". But I suspect it's too hard to organise such a group-abandonment.

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

Originally Posted by theauthor

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

I wonder why so many twoofers go on vacations paid for by the NWO.
seen lastchild lately? tell him i need my book back he borrowed from me!

[Alt+F4]

Originally Posted by ref

Therefore it will be very difficult for anyone to switch sides anymore. It has been such a long time, that most people who are interested in this topic already know all the details. They have justified their beliefs to themselves and made up their minds. It will be very difficult to switch sides after that, even when seeing massive amounts of contradicting evidence.

I agree that the current leaders and followers of the "truth" movement won't ever be convinced that their delusions are wrong. It's for the young, uninformed folks that debunking is still important. There are many more lurkers who read these posts than you might think and I know for a fact that at least several teenagers I know have been enlightened by what they have read here.

I do most of my debunking in real life and I'm never going to stop, and not just because it's the nature of my profession. The conspiracy liars want to take responsibility away from those who murdered so many, I can't stay silent on that.

[Par]

Originally Posted by theauthor

Don't you just love these "announce and flounce" attention seeking threads? i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

I thought you were banned yesterday?

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by theauthor

Don't you just love these "announce and flounce" attention seeking threads?

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

9/11 truth got us beat will all their "ample evidence". Funny stuff; 9/11 truth is like bigfoot, after you learn they have never found bigfoot scat or DNA, you have learned it all.

After looking into every single stupid 9/11 truth idea, they have all been found to be junk.

They have graduated, not quit. They have learned about 9/11 and seen 9/11 truth to be populated with people who lack knowledge and totally screw up conclusion based on just about any thing.

No one needs to give up, it is just a learning process. When will 9/11 truth believers gain knowledge and stop spewing false conclusion based on hearsay?

9/11 truth lost when they first showed up. Forfeit due to lack of knowledge. Those who understand 9/11 won 6 years ago after suffering a bitter defeat and death. 9/11 truth is replaying a game they can't get to come out the way they want; and they use faulty logic to mess up everything. They are not losers of a game, they are the peanut gallery at an event that ended over 6 years ago. They lost then, and now they are trying harder to loose again. They are stuck in the dark due to lack of knowledge and tripping over the tools needed to understand.

[gumboot]

For me it has never been about proving Conspiracy Theorists wrong. It's about understanding what happened on 9/11. As you point out, Ref, those who get sucked into the 9/11 CT typically fall for it because they're ignorant of what actually happened, and on the surface much of the 9/11 CT "evidence" is compelling.

I don't think it's pointless to keep educating people about 9/11 because the simple fact is that the vast majority of people are still ignorant of what happened. While Conspiracy Theorists are still actively engaging the ignorant, there will continue to be new converts to their theories.

Just last week we had a "truther" declare that they had changed their mind and rejected the 9/11 CTs - they cited some of my work as one of the factors, and that's a great feeling.

I will always be willing to offer knowledge to people willing to listen to it. When they won't listen, I'll stop wasting my time. It makes things a lot easier. People like Swing Dangler, A-Train, MirageMemories, LastChild - they've been here long enough. They've been shown the evidence. They don't want to learn. I don't waste my time on them.

But occasionally we get someone who does want to learn and is willing to learn, and there's always the odd new arrival.

[applecorped]

Originally Posted by theauthor

Don't you just love these "announce and flounce" attention seeking threads?

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

Because there is nothing to debunk. You lost years ago but never knew enough to leave the field.

[Confuseling]

Interesting post ref.

I do feel for you guys. I'm a latecomer to this debate, but slightly less so in real life - I have some friends who are truthers, and I've debated them for a few years.

But I guess my interest in this is very different to most of yours - I'm seeing this more in sociological and psychological terms than engineering, physics or military ones, and that really reflects on the fact that those questions have been long settled, in significant part by many of you.

I wonder whether this board, if it continues to exist, will undergo something of a changing of the guard. As time draws on, the character of the people drawn to (or entrenched in) the conspiracy theory changes, and it becomes more a question of post-modern epistemology than natural scientific enquiry. Perhaps that change will be reflected in the active debunkers. I suppose first we would need some significant opposition - and in all honesty, it doesn't look hopeful.

But it does raise the question: if the quality of debate here remains this low (which isn't to suggest there aren't interesting questions, it's just they're often overwhelmed by the fluff), what should be done? Should you declare victory, and shut the board to new posts, keeping it just as a reference archive? Should the moderators clamp down a little, and we accept that this place has served its purpose, and will slow to a comparative crawl?

[mrbaracuda]

Originally Posted by Confuseling

shut the board to new posts

This isn't called "the 9/11 twoofer board" as far as I know but "Conspiracy Theories".

[Björn Toulouse]

Originally Posted by theauthor

i wonder why so many debunkers are giving up?

Because the fight was over and won a long time ago and now it has become ridiculous for the vanquished to continue.

[ref]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Don't forget to close the door on your way out ref.

MM

As I said, I'm not going to be totally out.

Speaking of you, MM. Like CIT without their eyewitnesses, What happens to your theories without your favorite man Danny Jowenko? Would you have any? Imagine Jowenko never said anything. How would you rationalize your belief that WTC 7 was a demolition without having his, what you call professional speculation supporting you?

[The Doc]

I've considered retiring from it. I even wrote the thread up.

In the end though, there's no point ruling yourself out completely from jumping into a thread and debating someone. I've just really slowed down my posting.

[sts60]

I've largely confined my 9/11 posts to firefighting-related issues. But, as I mentioned before, I'm pretty much done creating any new posts, because there are simply no new claims from 9/11 conspiracists... just the same misunderstandings, tap-dancing attempts at casting FUD, and flat-out lies. I may provide links to some of my earlier posts as responses for any new conspiracists, or as an occasional reminder to the periodic recycling of claims by the regular conspiracists who act as if they had never been rebutted. (The latter is particularly annoying and particularly dishonest.) But that's about it.

On the other hand, if you give me a good moon landing hoax thread... but even those have largely faded away on apollohoax and Bad Astronomy.

Have no fear. I do have other things to occupy my time.

[DavidJames]

Originally Posted by Confuseling

But I guess my interest in this is very different to most of yours - I'm seeing this more in sociological and psychological terms than engineering, physics or military ones, and that really reflects on the fact that those questions have been long settled, in significant part by many of you.

That's why I continue to hang out. I'm not a professional in those fields but I am fascinated what makes humans think and act the way they do.

Originally Posted by Confuseling

I wonder whether this board, if it continues to exist, will undergo something of a changing of the guard. As time draws on, the character of the people drawn to (or entrenched in) the conspiracy theory changes, and it becomes more a question of post-modern epistemology than natural scientific enquiry. Perhaps that change will be reflected in the active debunkers. I suppose first we would need some significant opposition - and in all honesty, it doesn't look hopeful.

I don't think anything will change for a while. CT's have a very long shelf life. Remember, CT are based on peoples beliefs and not facts, consequently the proponents can never be proved wrong. Facts can be shown to be incorrect, beliefs, not so much.

Originally Posted by Confuseling

But it does raise the question: if the quality of debate here remains this low (which isn't to suggest there aren't interesting questions, it's just they're often overwhelmed by the fluff), what should be done? Should you declare victory, and shut the board to new posts, keeping it just as a reference archive? Should the moderators clamp down a little, and we accept that this place has served its purpose, and will slow to a comparative crawl?

There are a few, Greg Urich (sp?) comes to mind, who bring (what I believe to be) honest attempts at debate and honest analysis. He deserves honest debate and the good people here have provided it. I would like to see a lot more of that, but the fact is most of the CTists are are incapable (or in many cases, unwilling).