Legal Question...

[parentastic]

You are just scenery here as the girlfriend of a man with a child. Sorry.

I find that remark incredibly offensive for the OP.
Parenting is a lot more than an egg and a sperm.
A person who is caring for a child, regardless of biology, is doing more in every second, minutes, hours and days with this child than biology has ever done.

Not to be used for minor quibbles.

Who are you to judge whether this "quibble" is minor?

This is between them.

This is between every adult involved in raising this child.
A family is a whole. If you are part of it, then you are part of all of it.
And biology is not what determines if you are or are not part of it.

They should work it out together, instead of pay attorneys to work it out for them.

It takes two willing people to "work it out". What do you do when one won't collaborate, even for the benefit of the child?

If you came into the picture while they were still married (and I'm not asking), you are unrealistic to expect that she is going to work with you at all, and it would be best if you remove yourself from the situation.

Another profoundly offensive remark for the OP. According to you, she should just gracefully leave, then? Even if her partner and her are in love and she love and care for these children?

 

[parentastic]

To the moderators: If I have crossed any lines here, I apologize. But I needed the person to see that they are in the wrong. While, sure every bit of advice is greatly appreciated, the above response was unwarranted. And not appreciated.

I would take Testing's writings with a grain of salt, considering his religious zeal, as we all learned on this thread. I don't think he even realizes the impact of what he writes.

 

[K_Stepmom2b]

I would take Testing's writings with a grain of salt, considering his religious zeal, as we all learned on this thread. I don't think he even realizes the impact of what he writes.

I edited a great deal of my true post in reply to Testing's response. In the heat of being so incredibly insulted and just couldn't fathom that anyone had the gull to say such words, I felt that if I did indeed say something that would be deemed out of line if I missed any of my edits.

Thank you for your other above post in reaction to his/her pathetic and horrid words.

 

[Testing]

Klear_Stepmom2b: IMHO, all of what you said can be just you wanting to hear yourself talk. None of it means anything and you have no idea what you are talking about, if you would have read any of this thread you would see that.

Wow, hostile much? I can understand her problem with you.

I was unaware that you were requesting supporting opinions only. Had you said so, I would have said nothing at all.

However....I do have a law degree, and yes, I'm the parent of two teens that we had together and we are married for life. I practiced in this incredibly depressing area very briefly 20 years ago, so take it for what it's worth, but I do recall a thing or two about how all this works.

The fact is, you have no standing in this case. This case is between the father and the mother of the child. You aren't anything yet. You are just a girlfriend of the father. So it isn't "we", it's "he". If he has any desire to hang onto his wallet, he will work something out with her like a mature adult and save his money. Or he could spend thousands fighting with her day and night, drag the child through the trauma, and not end up with a better result than two people who try to work together can have.

While I shouldn't have to respond, I feel the need to as you need a reality check. Are you even a parent? A step-parent? Anything?

Lol. Yeah, I have two teens. I don't just talk out of my butt to hear my voice/see my words on a page.

#1 - There was never any sort of marriage between the two. They dated, the father tried, the mother cheated on him, end of story, since then there's been conflict off and on.

Well, they had better get it together. When they fight, the child suffers. Period. Somebody had better be an adult here for the child. THIS is why God said "I hate divorce". Because Moms and Dads are supposed to be married to each other for life and raise their kids. No one is supposed to leave, be with someone else, not see his kid, etc etc. It's just really sad. Ok, aside over. You asked for opinions and I'm giving you the best free advice you are going to get. Tell your "fiance" to get it together and get along with this woman NO MATTER WHAT.

All things are possible to he who believes...

#2 - Scenery? I'm more than scenery. I am the fiance, meaning I will be the step-mother to this child in a few short months and love and care for the child even if the child is my own. Also meaning that I will also be in the child's life, and someone to help support my SD whenever she will need it. While I will just be a step-parent - I won't view it as so as I view it as I will be a parent, her and I have worked hard on our relationship, so I am earning the title AND WILL TAKE PRIDE IN IT!

That's all great, when and if it comes to pass. Then, you will have a voice in the matter. Right now, you have no legal standing. That is what I meant. You asked a legal question. You can rant on and on about how I don't understand your great relationship, blah blah....but you still have no legal standing in this matter whatsoever.

While I am not involved directly in the F2F situations in the court proceedings - due to the fact the case is about the Child's well-being... the BM (and yes, I will call her that b/c thats what she is.. a BIRTH MOTHER its better than using initials or actually saying the name and its nicer than any of the other names that I privately call her) is having wild parties with a house full of alcohol (while yes, legal- but not a healthy environment for a child, otherwise bars would have different age limitations and YES drugs on a school night while the child is supposed to be in the house - I don't understand how one can see that as smart and a good environment for someone who is so easily influenced to everything and everyone around them And there is proof, there is a lot of proof.

Well, calling her names is not going to solve your problem and it really makes you look immature so don't do that in front of anyone, like the attorney or the judge. I understand you were just venting here. If the father has evidence, he needs to present it to his attorney. The attorney will handle it from there. Is the father attempting to gain custody or just maintain visitation. If the environment is that bad as you say and there is proof, then it seems that attempting to gain custody is in order.

Even though the case is about the BM and the father, MY FIANCE, my soon to be husband - the BM has brought me into the case, while that's expected of someone who has no case, someone who is reaching for whatever she can - I have become a part of the case whether I like it or not. So since my character has been attacked, I have every right to be apart of this, while I will not physically be in court, I am 100% involved as I care about my SD and I have her well-being in mind.

You are not a party to the case; you have simply been mentioned as one of the factors in the life of the father, from what you say. That makes you "scenery" insofar as legal standing goes. If you were part of the case, you would be in court as well. If you were really wise, you'd not live with the father as he is attempting to gain custody or you'd get married now to indicate the stability of your relationship to the court.

#3 The father is treated by the mother that he is seen by her as "childcare" thats the perception of the father due to the mothers behavior in the past and the present. If you would have actually read this thread you would have seen this explained better.

I did read it. I did not see it explained well. He is the father, period. A father that spends more or less time with his child, as it works out. As a father, I'd take all I could get and not bellyache about being "childcare". That gives a really bad impression from a legal viewpoint. Not saying he is doing this, but I wouldn't be spouting this if I were you.

#4 In reference to the legal question, its just a simple question. I was wondering if it was something that can be brought up in court as a judge of character. As our characters have been personally attacked. I would hope that the lack of work ethic that the BM shows does not rub off in the child in any way.

Oh come on. You are just angry that she has mentioned you, the live in (if you are, or just the girlfriend) as a negative factor and you are retaliating. This is not a legal matter at all. She has a job or doesn't have a job. The court will not get into the particulars, absent something special, like a massive amount of travel or something that would affect the child.

Sometimes people are on opposite ends of a spectrum where they cannot come to a conclusion without the help of an attorney.

Only when they are stupid and money is no object. Smart people work it out like mature adults before they go bankrupt.

If the child had equal time with the father as the mother- I think that would immensely help with them growing up.

I won't argue with you there. A child deserves two parents, preferably two parents together who love each other and the child. Notwithstanding, the father should make his role in her life so important that the mother can't imagine him not being involved. If what that takes is that he lives alone, sees the child alone without the fiancee, if that is what makes Mom more comfortable, that's what any dad would do, rather than have a fiancee voicing opinions to the Mom.

My best advice to you; stay out of it and keep your opinions to yourself or vent to your girlfriends. This will help your soon-to-be husband work it out with the mother of his child.

Somehow, I suspect you will not appreciate that advice, but it's good advice in this situation...

All in all, while in the courts this is between the father and the BM.

Of course it is. You have no standing in this issue. You play only a supporting role (not an adversarial one).

I will NOT remove myself from the situation as I am more than "SCENERY" I am apart of this family whether the BM likes it or not. I am apart of this child's life whether the BM likes it or not. I will not be going anywhere, and I will be here to stay as I have been. I would fight for this child to have an amazing upbringing and life if I was legally able to, I would put no limitations of what the future may hold for the child. I would never refuse rights of a parent, and I would fight for a parent to get equal rights if he/she so deserves.

All this is the father's job.

To the moderators: If I have crossed any lines here, I apologize. But I needed the person to see that they are in the wrong. While, sure every bit of advice is greatly appreciated, the above response was unwarranted. And not appreciated.

LOL. Next time make it clear that you only want handholding and not real advice. I've seen this play out over and over. Your best role is silent or even out of the picture until the custody issues are settled and hopefully the Mom willl have a relationship soon with someone worthy and won't care who the father is with anymore.

 

[cybele]

Testing, come on, a lot of that is really unfair.

Klear is trying to support her fiance in his legal battle, and clearly wants to be a positive influence in his daughter's life, that is something to be praised for, not shut down as just being "scenery". A step-parent plays a role in raising a child, not just the biological parents.

Calling people going through legal battles 'stupid' is really uncalled for, sometimes things just dont work without a third party intervening, and this is the most logical third party.

Also, when did God say "I hate divorce"? And once again, why is religion being brought up in a topic spanning people of all backgrounds and beliefs?

Look, I think we all here respect your beliefs, but its naive to think that just because you beieve relationships work a certian way, that everyone else does. The quotation marks around the word fiance and the marrige is forever spiel are really rude.



And to be fair, "real advice" usually isnt calling people 'stupid' and undermining their relationships.

 

[Mom2all]

StepMom2b... please let me say that I hope you understand the people testing (pun intended) your patience are not of the majority. Most people here do not feel a need to put someone down to feel up themselves. Don't let a few negative things run you off!

Now.. what I haven't gotten into here is this. I have 3 children that grew in my womb under my heart, and 3 that grew in it. The latter 3 came with my darling.. and their Mom was a addict. She loved them, no doubt, but her addiction made it impossible to parent. She was vengeful of their Dad and started fights so often that the children suffered. Through me.. and only through me, we were able to set limits and talk to her. I took the children on her "clean" days and picked her up so we could spend time in the park or somewhere fun. I paid for everything they did. I was the one who talked to her because it was a screaming match with Dad. She overdosed a while back and unfortunately the kids are the ones left to suffer. I was one holding them when she died. I tuck them in, feed them dinner, sit through sports and chorus concerts. I pick out christmas presents and plan birthdays.


I told you all of that to tell you this.... your role, as another person loving and mothering a child......is as important or can be more important that the birth mother. If your heart is in the right place and you do what is in the child's best interest... you can never be wrong. <U>Never.</U>
I'll never replace their birth mother. BUT I will place the veil on Katherine's head one day, I will be there to hold Jonathan's newborn and see Sean walk across the stage. God willing. I'm not scenery.. and neither are you.

 

[bssage]

So far I don't think lines have been crossed by anyone yet. Testing could be a bit (quite a bit) more emphatic. Really I think much of his advice is on this thread is both sound and pertinent. Even though it is cold and borders on rude.

You really dont have legal standing and are secondary to the whole of the situation is likely, legally very true. I understand and admire the passion with which you speak about your upcoming roll as a step parent. Really being a step parent is a least <U>as</U> admirable as a bio parent <U>if not more</U>. Please dont devalue yourself.

To answer you OP. I dont think her attendance or even her work ethic would be value added to you case. The reason I say that is because a person can be a lousy employee and a good parent. And we all know plenty of people who are terrible parents and good employees. I understand the points you have made. And I have no reason to question them. I only believe that they are not applicable to the legal case.

In my opinion and it has been my experience, that its much better to build yourself up than tear others down. Even when they have it coming. And especially in front of a judge.

 

[K_Stepmom2b]

So far I don't think lines have been crossed by anyone yet. Testing could be a bit (quite a bit) more emphatic. Really I think much of his advice is on this thread is both sound and pertinent. Even though it is cold and borders on rude.

I disagree. I believe that the person has crossed the line. I think that ALL of the persons advice, if you want to call it that is far from anything that I would EVER say to someone. I'll reserve myself from saying how I really feel about this persons attack as well as say that I thought that this was a place where you can come to to seek advice, make friends with other parents and not feel like you are being attacked. While I am grateful for everyone else who has helped offer their advice on a question that I had, my levels of respect have dropped considerably. And to even condone his/her words is just outrageous and say its sound and pertinent.

I believe in the Guidelines Thread here on the forums it states the following:
<I>3. No trolling. No personal attacks.
Speak to people the way you would want to be spoken to.
Posting threads in a lame attempt to rile up the parents does not make you internet cool.</I>
- I cannot fathom that calling people "Scenery" and "Stupid" is how anyone would ever want to be spoken to. And of course, when I am attacked - I will defend myself. While I may tone it down to a PG-ish version- as per the guidelines - just know that what I'm thinking, what I'm saying - Is a different story!

You really dont have legal standing and are secondary to the whole of the situation is likely, legally very true.

I simply asked a question. A question asking if something can be brought up in a court case. I never said I was going to court and fighting personally. Whether you people who disagree with what I've asked; like it or not - I am about as involved as possibly can in this legal issue, even if its behind the scenes... I'm about as involved as the father is. Am I going to the court and sitting on the stand? No. Am I being attacked in the court case, in the court papers, in the court room? Yes. Heavily, but I am still not attending court because this is a battle that is between the mother and father in regards to the welfare of the child. It shouldn't be about me, but that does not mean that I cannot ask a simple question. No one has any right to say what happens in this is not something that I, nor anyone is apart of. I am going to be co-parenting and the child will be under my care, living under my roof. I'm not asking if I can represent the child in court. But I will stand by and represent her when changes happen, when all hell hits the fan and at home. And I will continue to stand by my fiance and support him, and help him with whatever possible.

To answer you OP. I dont think her attendance or even her work ethic would be value added to you case. The reason I say that is because a person can be a lousy employee and a good parent. And we all know plenty of people who are terrible parents and good employees. I understand the points you have made. And I have no reason to question them. I only believe that they are not applicable to the legal case.

Thats all I was requesting. Someone to offer up their opinion whether or not work attendance and lack thereof can be brought up for character. The fathers character has been attacked as well as his relationship with me, and well as me who has been attacked. We never brought anything up about the mothers recreational use around the child previously, we never brought up "home life" we brought up endless violations against a previous court agreement and once the mother brought in "home life" and what she thought happens - we went full force. Its survival of the fittest at this point.

 

[K_Stepmom2b]

I told you all of that to tell you this.... your role, as another person loving and mothering a child......is as important or can be more important that the birth mother. If your heart is in the right place and you do what is in the child's best interest... you can never be wrong. <U>Never.</U>
I'll never replace their birth mother. BUT I will place the veil on Katherine's head one day, I will be there to hold Jonathan's newborn and see Sean walk across the stage. God willing. I'm not scenery.. and neither are you.

Thank you.
I agree. I don't wish to replace the birth mother by any means, do I respect her is another question. But that's never something that my SD will see.
I will continue to love, provide for, and be a stable loving person in my SD life and will never limit the possibilities that her future can hold. Because I am merely more than scenery. I am another parent!

 

[Xero]

Testing, why is it so difficult for you to attempt to be pleasant while giving out advice? I wont deny that some of what you have said is relevent and even correct, but it was said in a very negative and snarky manner that is totally uneccessary. We are all adults, and we know how to act civil to each other.

You need to remember that most people on these forums have the best intentions at heart whether they are right or wrong, and advice should be given with that fact in mind. I certainly hope, in the case of you having a difficult question during a difficult time in your life, that you would be treated with a gentle and understanding attitude, instead of the snippy, irritated, judgemental attitude that you give others who are looking for honest advice on their situations. You can disagree without hurting someone's feelings or being rude. It's very possible.

Also, I find it somewhat offensive that you site religion in every response you give, basically assuming that everyone you are speaking to believes in the same things you do, and values religious-based advice the way you expect them to. You need to take into consideration that there are people on this forum from all over the world, and from all walks of life, practicing many different beliefs. This needs to be respected. If you wish to continue basing around your religion, it might help to say something like "I believe that..." followed by said religious item, rather than stating it as fact. Personally, I don't need the prospect of God to tell me that divorce is bad. Everybody hates divorce, not just God, believe it or not. That is common sense.

Moving on, however, I do wish to see more respect being displayed in this thread and particularly Testing's responses, or further action will be taken. We will delete posts if we feel they are too inappropriate, we will close threads that get out of hand, continuous offenders will receive infactions on their profiles, and if necessary (though we do not want to, and it is absolute last resort) we will ban people. Please review the rules and guidelines, particularly the part about personal attacks. This is my only warning. Thank you.

 

[bssage]

k thats fine if you disagree.

This is the last I will add. Then I will let xero handle.

This

Only when they are stupid and money is no object. Smart people work it out like mature adults before they go bankrupt.

seems to be a reference to people who use the courts to resolve differences that Testing perceives as Resolvable outside the courts. And I think he is specifically referring to the cost. I did not interpret this as him saying You are stupid. Could I be wrong? Yes that is just the way I understood what I read.

Obviously the "scenery" comment is perceived as offensive. But (again I could be wrong) I interpreted this as a "big picture" "little picture" thing. Not a "just sit there and look pretty" type of insult. I believe this was trying to support his original position that boiled down to his opposition of the question in the OP. Which is to say, No using work ethic or attendances will not bolster your case.

thats just my opinion

Now I do believe that testing is baiting you and other posters with words that can be interpreted differently within his post. And that should stop. It needs to stop.

Klear. I hope I have not offended you. That is not my intention. And it is not my intention to take testings side. I understand you deep need to defend yourself in court against that attack to your character. I absolutely would feel the same. I just believe it may be a disservice to your case.

 

[Xero]

I forgot to give my opinion on the question haha. Personally, I do not think that it would be productive to bring up her work ethics in court. It almost seems like a petty pointing of fingers I guess, and while your and my opinion of her is lower due to that type of irresponsible behavior in life, it is not relevent to a judge who's only job is to determine the welfare and happiness of the child. He isn't looking to hire her as an employee, KWIM? Plus every work situation is different. Some places don't mind if you take that kind of time off, and some will fire you after a specific amount of days missed. Some people only work some months out of the year, and have the rest of the year off. There is no specific guidelines that a stranger (the Judge) can just go off of, as far as that goes. If in fact she is treating her employers badly, well then that's their problem if they continue to allow it. It really doesn't affect the child. However, I WOULD bring up to the judge that she goes out of her way to take certain times off of work to keep him from having extra time with the child. That makes sense to me, but that's as much as I would say.

bssage I see what you mean that Testing may not have said a DIRECT personal attack, but I personally am not too keen on someone going out of their way to tiptoe around saying things directly, so that they can get away with saying equally hurtful things indirectly. Basically wording things in a certain way just so that they can get away with insulting someone. In my eyes, that's no better than just coming right out and saying it directly.

 

[Testing]

bssage:

Me: Only when they are stupid and money is no object. Smart people work it out like mature adults before they go bankrupt.

This seems to be a reference to people who use the courts to resolve differences that Testing perceives as Resolvable outside the courts. And I think he is specifically referring to the cost. I did not interpret this as him saying You are stupid. Could I be wrong? Yes that is just the way I understood what I read.

Thank God that someone here can read and interpret English. I know I speak and write it. You are absolutely correct.

No offense was intended at all. Just a precautionary warning to think about going all out on non-issues, such as the issue she brought up about what kind of employee the mother was (mother, not BM, which also has another offensive connotation, by the way...talk about your snarky comments).

I think I misunderstand the entire point of these forums. When people ask for advice on an issue, I presume they really want advice pertinent to the issue they bring from qualified people. For example, I wouldn't respond to the OP asking about some issue relevant to being a stepparent or how to handle the schedules of 6 teen girls all in dance. I'm not qualified to respond there; I have no experience on that.

However, when someone asks the relevance of a matter in a legal issue in an area in which I practiced long ago, I do feel a bit qualified to respond and did so, obviously, while lacking the requisite pat-on-the-back approach to a poster who is obviously quite riled and handling things in an emotionally reactive way - just the opposite of what you need to do in legal matters.

Obviously the "scenery" comment is perceived as offensive. But (again I could be wrong) I interpreted this as a "big picture" "little picture" thing. Not a "just sit there and look pretty" type of insult. I believe this was trying to support his original position that boiled down to his opposition of the question in the OP. Which is to say, No using work ethic or attendances will not bolster your case.

thats just my opinion.

It's your opinion, but it is also a rational reading of what I actually said, which I appreciate. I'm just "scenery" when it comes to some issues, meaning that I don't have a voice in the matter as it excludes me; I'm on the outside looking in. That's just the way it is.

Now I do believe that testing is baiting you and other posters with words that can be interpreted differently within his post. And that should stop. It needs to stop.

I don't bother to bait people. My time is too valuable to spend in crafting intentionally ambiguous responses in order to get some certain response. She asked. I answered, along with others. If she dislikes my answer, she is free to ignore it. If she chooses to respond differently, then don't be surprised if it is long and contentious and costs a LOT of money. That's what I know about legal matters. They will go on as long as you have money to spend. Alternatively, you can find other ways to work things out that reserves more money for the family instead of the attorneys. Each makes his own choice.

Klear. I hope I have not offended you. That is not my intention. And it is not my intention to take testings side. I understand you deep need to defend yourself in court against that attack to your character. I absolutely would feel the same. I just believe it may be a disservice to your case.

Yes.

Bowing out now.

 

[singledad]

WTF? How did this thread go from a simple question - "Is this worth mentioning / would it make a difference", to whether or not the OP has any legal standing (I didn't see where she claimed that she had ) or whether she has any right to be involved?

I think I misunderstand the entire point of these forums. When people ask for advice on an issue, I presume they really want advice pertinent to the issue they bring from qualified people.

I believe you are right. People want advice <U>pertinent to the issue they bring up.</U> Whether or not Klear has any legal standing was NOT part of the question, and NOT pertinent to the issue she brought up. (In fact, she mentioned that she was not directly involved in the court case) She asked a simple question, that could have been answered with a simple reply, without planting any barbs. Could your religion-inspired prejudice against divorce and step-parents in general perhaps be behind the abrupt, and borderline-rude way in which you responded?

What is needed is not a pat-on-the-back a tiny bit of empathy, or even just simple civility, would suffice.

 

[bssage]

I agree SD. But I think the additional stuff was there to provide support for his opinion on the OP. Its pertinence may be subjective. But that is what I <U>think</U> it is there for.

Stuff like this

Thank God that someone here can read and interpret English. I know I speak and write it. You are absolutely correct.

Is clearly unnecessary. Whether or not it was intended that way. Will be perceived as a insult. At least that is how I see it.

But should be taken in context. A religious lawyer. Which likely is a perpetual merry go round of offense and absolution.

Hehe I am not even sure if that last bit was a insult or not. I just outsmarted myself.

Can we change gears on this thread??

 

[mom2many]

I agree SD. But I think the additional stuff was there to provide support for his opinion on the OP. Its pertinence may be subjective. But that is what I <U>think</U> it is there for.

Stuff like this



Is clearly unnecessary. Whether or not it was intended that way. Will be perceived as a insult. At least that is how I see it.

But should be taken in context. A religious lawyer. Which likely is a perpetual merry go round of offense and absolution.

Hehe I am not even sure if that last bit was a insult or not. I just outsmarted myself.

Can we change gears on this thread??

I agree that one line is where people get their feathers ruffled. It is insulting. Testing you do have valuable information to give, but sometimes your people skills are...harsh Sometimes, you advice get's lost in your harshness. Both Bssage and I agree that your legal information was spot on. Maybe though try to remember that the people behind these questions are often hurting, angry or upset. Sometimes the best way to have an impact is by being understanding...not just stating the fact. Both can be done in a way that isn't offensive.

Another thing I agree with is keeping this thread in line with the OP's original question. If anyone feels the need to continue on with the side debate in the thread feel free to PM any Mod.

 

[K_Stepmom2b]

WTF? How did this thread go from a simple question - "Is this worth mentioning / would it make a difference", to whether or not the OP has any legal standing (I didn't see where she claimed that she had ) or whether she has any right to be involved?

I appreciate those who stayed in line with the actual question of the thread. Those of who helped clarify whether or not something would be beneficial on the case that WE are heading into. And I say "we", because as the OP - I am impacted in this as well. It is my family we're talking about here.

Also, I did not appreciate any of the religious ramblings, and I did find it <U>very</U> offensive due my religious beliefs. And would hope that in the future religion stays out of the threads - unless asked, as it was said before in this very thread- not everyone's beliefs are the same.

Not all relationships are perfect. Sometimes there is a child(children) involved in very complicated relationships. Sometimes parents do not stay together, sometimes people have children out of wedlock. Whatever the case may be, do not knock simply tell someone, who is another parent - whether it is by birth or just marriage - that they need to step aside and perhaps even leave. Sometimes not all parties act like adults and sometimes people are not good parents. Sometimes people cannot come to a conclusion and could be at totally opposite ends of an argument, in that case - money would need to be spent on lawyers- I personally think that would be money well spent especially if it helps with the future of a child who deserves nothing but the best.

This will be my last post on this thread. Again, thank you to everyone who stayed with the original question that I was inquiring to.
Your advice was helpful, well - everyones advice except one person. And we'll leave it like that. :wink:

Stay Classy.

 

[cybele]

Very well said