Something I noticed while reading stories.

Dear Tourguide... While I agree with you that I have read some stories here that seem almost sickeningly hateful or violent, especially some of the snuff or cannibalistic pieces, and some that are just unrelievedly grim, I think that it would be a mistake to start censoring such material. If you don't like a story, or you feel that it is just plain hateful, then tell the author so in your review. No doubt if he gets a number of such messages, he might consider rethinking his approach. I can say for myself that in my fiction I deliberately strove to make it as extreme as possible, and made careful note in the preface that this was a work of fantasy and not a recommendation for actual behavior. In real life we need to excercise care and concern for others, especially those who trust us enough to become involved in bdsm-oriented relationships with us. But in fiction there's no reason why we can't just let loose. If people don't like what we have to say they can always just turn the page. Otherwise, what are you going to do... ban all non-consensual stories? Also, it should be noted that there is a fair amount of fem-dom material posted here, whether girl-on-girl or female/male/transgender. Personally, I don't think the whole sadomasochistic mindset has as much to do with hate or hostility as it does with issues of alienation and relatedness, if that's the correct psychological term... a way of establishing a powerful sexual and emotional connection that may be difficult to achieve in other ways. But that's a discussion for another thread...

Gee, teamster, you must really think I'm the big, evil Nazi to have read so much into this thread.

I didn't say anything about banning anything. I asked if perhaps some people were writing stories because they were angry and maybe writing helps them to have a therapeutic release.

And since this thread was started well over a year ago and nobody's started banning anything yet, I think it's safe to assume the practice won't be considered. So, take a step back, calm down and re-read the topic.

Unless a story filter is explicitly "what Tourguide (or whoever) likes", it's impossible to draw up criteria for what's not acceptable. No two people will agree exactly where the lines are.

I like non-con abuse, but only if the object is to break the victim to slavery (and it succeeds, but not too soon!) I like ingenious tortures and humiliations more than punch-and-kick violence. I can't stand situations that are too like real life, whether it's subordinates at work submitting to the boss to keep their jobs, or abused prisoners in Rwanda/Columbia/Iraq/wherever. But all these are just my tastes, and I couldn't claim they represented any kind of absolute principle.

The point of the story codes is to allow every style and subject on the Library, while letting people pick what they want to read. I can't think of a better system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leo9

Unless a story filter is explicitly "what Tourguide (or whoever) likes", it's impossible to draw up criteria for what's not acceptable. No two people will agree exactly where the lines are.

---

One exists. The advanced search feature. Anyone can turn off the story codes they don't want to see before they even get a list of stories.

There's all sorts of violence. A slap can express as many things as a kiss, maybe more. And no doubt there are a lot of men who call themselves doms who are basically sadists and misogynists.

Why is rage so close to passion? Why is anger and threat often so sexually exciting? I've got a lot of theories about BDSM. On the one hand there's the obvious one that says that BDSM is an exaggeration of the usual sexual stereotypes of the aggressive male and the passive female. It's almost as if people who are into D/s have a need to act out these roles in the extreme. The man wants to dominate and control, the woman wants to be taken and controlled.

I have another theories too. Theories are easy. Whether they're true or not is another matter.

---dr.M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

.

Why is rage so close to passion? Why is anger and threat often so sexually exciting? I've got a lot of theories about BDSM. On the one hand there's the obvious one that says that BDSM is an exaggeration of the usual sexual stereotypes of the aggressive male and the passive female. It's almost as if people who are into D/s have a need to act out these roles in the extreme. The man wants to dominate and control, the woman wants to be taken and controlled.---dr.M.

---

At a science fiction convention recently I sat in on a light-hearted panel on the question "Who is the most erotic character in sf/fantasy?"

The interesting and unexpected conclusion was that all the characters people named and discussed had one common characteristic - or rather, one or other side of one characteristic. They were either totally innocent and vulnerable, or they were powerful and/or manipulative.

Everyone agreed that one's imagination could play it either way, fantasising being in control or being controled. But the panel and the audience (at least half of whom, by my guess, identified as vanilla) agreed that, judging by results, what they all found erotic is extreme power exchange relationships.

<wry smile> Who knew?

Hi Friends,

I find consensual BDSM to be highly erotic. I invite you to check out my story called "Submission in Seattle" and you can judge for yourself.

Take Care,

Prodomguy (listed as author "MB")

I fantasize constantly about breaking into a girl's house, or grabbing her off the street, tying her up and doing lots of things she probably wouldn't like to her. I've actually concocted plans on how to do it. But the only thing I don't consider is whether or not I would actually do it, because under no circumstances would I ever go through with it. If I ever met a rapist, or someone of that nature, I would attack them without a hesitation, with intentions of severely injuring them. Since my mid-teens, I always thought of myself as a hypocrite, because I fantasized about these things but hated the people who actually did them. Then, I came around to realize that it's fine, as long as it's fantasy. I've written only a couple stories where the hanky-panky is consensual, and those were written long ago, when I was first experimenting with sexual stories back when I was 14-15. None of my stories on the library feature consensual sexual acts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neopadinski

I fantasize constantly about breaking into a girl's house, or grabbing her off the street, tying her up and doing lots of things she probably wouldn't like to her. I've actually concocted plans on how to do it. But the only thing I don't consider is whether or not I would actually do it, because under no circumstances would I ever go through with it.

---

Find the right girl, and you can do it as a shared fantasy. Last weekend I made arrangements with my new gf before I came to pick her up, and when she got into the car she acted like she was just getting a lift. I held a knife to her throat and told her to hold still and not fight, cuffed her hands behind her back with cuffs that were fastened to a chain behind the seat, then drove her to my place while she alternately begged to be let go and told me I'd never get away with this.

At the house I hung a cloak round her shoulders so I could lead her across the street to the door without anyone seeing her cuffed hands. I realised that if I'd prepared better, since there are so many Muslim women in this neighbourhood, I could have put robes and veil on her and she could have been completely roped and gagged underneath!

Once I had her in the house, I stripped her slowly by cutting her clothes off with the knife I had held her up with (thus settling any doubts she might have had about how sharp it was!) I'd arranged for her to wear stuff from the charity shop box which she could afford to lose; she said afterwards that having her clothes cut off her was the most exciting moment.

When I had inspected my prisoner enough, I tied her down to a chair with a nylon bottle brush under her crotch and let her squirm and beg me to let her off it while I explained that she was here to be broken as my slave, that I expected her to resist and I would enjoy it, but in the end she would belong utterly to me. I spent a long happy afternoon beating and torturing her into grovelling surrender and making her do things she had told me she'd never done and couldn't possibly do, and dropped her back at her place exhausted, bruised all over and glowing with happiness.

Like the old song says, "If you ain't got a dream, how you gonna have a dream come true?"

I'm thinking here, not sure where I'm going :confused: .

Thinking about sexual violence (for me) starts with Story of O. It was extremely violent for its time and the first bdsm story I read; I'm sure that's true for many here. Most commentary I've seen and heard of assumes that O was a victim, but she has always been a heroine to me because, like everyone who tries to understand pain and other dark subjects, she was a volunteer. She was an independent professional woman when they were vanishingly rare; her possible suicide never made sense to me. I think it was a sop thrown in to mollify shrinking violets and moralists. Don't let me get started :rolleyes: !

I think fictional violence and our reaction to it serves many purposes. Sometimes it's just a phantasy (Texas Chainsaw, Freddy Krueger, ... come to mind although I've never seen them), a Halloween spook. Sometimes there's something else going on (Dirty Harry), sometimes it's a cartoon (Terminator). Sometimes writers and readers use fictional violence to work on something that happened to them or that they're worried about.

We're a violent species that's tried for just over 200 years to convince ourselves that we love peace. That's 200 against millions of years. We are all capable of murder if the right (wrong?) circumstances occur.

Bottom line: Whether people who post here are as sane as anyone else or as whacko as Freddy Krueger, I'd rather have them writing and posting stories than acting out their dreams.

Excuse me, but what suicide? That's not in my edition. And she couldn't've appeared in the sequel (Return To The Chateau) if she'd died in the first one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curtis

Excuse me, but what suicide? That's not in my edition. And she couldn't've appeared in the sequel (Return To The Chateau) if she'd died in the first one.

---

There does exist an edition which ends with her killing herself because Sir Stephen leaves her.

While the edition is of questionable authenticity (and as you say, Reage implicitly disowned it by bringing O back for a sequel), the plot line isn't totally improbable from what I know of intense D/s relationships.

In the first place, the end of the relationship is hinted at in a line near the end, where O catches SS's eye at an unguarded moment and realises for the first time that he loves her. I know some old school Masters who got rid of a slave they fell in love with, on the basis that they couldn't be totally in control of her if they loved her.

And in the second place, I have myself had to counsel abandoned slaves - some of them strong, independent women just like O - who felt they had nothing left to live for without their Master. It happens.

Hi there,

I am new here but want to say something about the original question of this thread: Why so much nc and M/f?

I think it is biologically and psychological induced.
First of all sex is stimulated by certain hormones which also have a major part when aggressive (e.g. adrenaline).
Second the role-model of the man, mainly thru education but induced by nature, comes closer to the dominant side in stead of submissive side.
The female by her role loves to be conquered, play the submissive. In reality they sometimes feel frustrated about this behavior (feminist).
The idea to defend herself against aggression stimulates her hormone-production as well.
The man on the other side is celebrated for his conquest and feels good about it when successful and is by nature stimulated more eager to have sex.
So in my opinion aggression/violence can enhance sexual stimulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curtis

Excuse me, but what suicide? That's not in my edition. And she couldn't've appeared in the sequel (Return To The Chateau) if she'd died in the first one.

---

My copy (Grove Press, purchased about 1970, now yellowed and fallen apart) ends on page 199. Page 201 (if it were numbered) offers two possible continuations. The text on that page is in italics, suggesting to me that an editor added it:

" In a final chapter, which has been suppressed, O returned to Roissy, where she was abandoned by Sir Stephen.

" There exists a second ending to the story of O, according to which O, seeing that Sir Stephen was about to leave her, said she would prefer to die. Sir Stephen gave her his consent."

I think the first paragraph points to "Return to the Chateau" and, eventually, New O. The second suggests suicide and also provides a hook for a nicely done recent story on this site; unfortunately I do not have its title or author at hand.

I doubt that Reage/Aury authorized the suicide suggestion, making it an editorial sop to romantics and moralists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

I noticed that many stories appearing in the library seem geared more toward wanton violence, mostly toward women, and non-consensual sex. I was wondering a little about this and some of the ramifications of this.

Are some of these stories being written by people that are genuinely angry with women? Or perhaps with a specific woman? Are the stories written by people that have lived these fantasies out and look to do so again? Perhaps they are written to satiate the primal sexual desire before they actually act the fantasy out. Perhaps I am reading way too much into things, but I'm tired and it seemed like a good line of thought at the time.

---

Are men Angry towards women? Humm- BDSM_Tourguide posted a very good question about the psychology of men, and picked up on a very important detail about a great many of the stories that I have read on this (among other) forums. Snuff stories is another extension of this trend to “dominate” women in the storyline. I posed the question to myself while pondering this and found myself saying, “I want to believe there is a woman that secretly desires this to happen to her- and WANTS this to befall her." My thinking it is ok to be abusive under a certain context makes a role play of my own life’s flawed and seemingly unloved and shunned behavior. Then it occurs to me that this is not just a fantasy but an extension of my need to be accepted as whole, no matter my flaws. *snaps back into reality* I have only to exaggerate this into a fantasy environment and the ensuing rape of a young woman becomes a highly erotic ballet of my inner yearnings for love. Wheh, I need a step ladder to get out of this hole!

-RIP

There's violence and then there's violence. I think there's a definite difference between the symbolic violence practiced in BDSM and actual physical violence against women. For instance, a whipping or spanking can be arousing, but if you get off on hitting women in the face or punching them in the stomach, then I've got to think there's something wrong with you.

Certainly there's pain involved in BDSM, but it's rarely administered in anger. In fact, all the whips and chains and costumes seem to be designed to blunt any signs of anger and keep the violence within certain acceptable bounds. The classic Dom is more or less cold and calculating. He's not a guy who flies into violent rages.

That's not to say that there aren't quite a few hardcore misogynists and even psychopaths who hide behind the BDSM label, but you don't have to be a sadist to enjoy the symbolic passion of BDSM. You don;t even have to be into violence.

---dr.M.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr_mabeuse

...You don't even have to be into violence.

---dr.M.

---

Or pain for that matter.

Yet based on the number of stories with snuff / extreme / heavy and nc story codes, there are certainly a number of folks who enjoy writing and reading about it. I find that many of the stories here can be easily classified as horror.

I asked if perhaps some people were writing stories because they were angry and maybe writing helps them to have a therapeutic release. - TJ

To answer your question - for me, yes. I began writing BDSM vampire themed novels a few years ago when I was having a very tough time with a verbally abusive client. Instead of writing a journal, I used my time to write stories about characters I'd like to see and wicked characters that should be punished. Punishing the wicked can be great fun.

Am I angry? Not anymore. Was I? You bet.
Writing is a great way to explore my own emotions as I experience life through the eyes of my characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

[Are some of these stories being written by people that are genuinely angry with women? Or perhaps with a specific woman?.[/COLOR]

---

I read around ten stories, then submited four of my own, I think. One where the woman is violent towards a male. One where women hold a male captive and two rather comic stories. I read some more stories posted on the site and thought yipes! I need less story and more sex and violence, especially towards women so I went and wrote a sex and violence one. I had to admit it I found the experience rather cathartic, though the writing not as good or the plot very imaginative. Was it against a specific woman? Hmm At this point in my life I have several who would gladly cut my balls off. I'm betting if I get a review I bet it will be on that one when it is posted.

REVELATION! I have just realised that most of my stories have strong, if not dominant female characters in them! Perhaps that's telling me something! Jesus I hope not as I have been climbing the wrong ladder all my life!

I write to let off steam.
Basically, I have issues left from my childhood and adolescence (and even further still) that I'm only just now realizing affects practically everything I do. So a lot of my writing (fanfic, mostly) tends to deal with some of those issues, as if by writing out what happened in a fictional setting helps me come to grips with what happened to me.Some of my readers have noticed a continuing theme of abuse and non-consensual rape in my stories; that's because those things happened, and writing about those events and the aftermath of them, helps me work out some of my own unresolved issues. By having a fictional character deal witht he aftermath of such events, i can find my own closure with what happened to me. It's an odd sort of therapy for me.
And it desn't hurt that my writing style seems to be popular with a lot of people, and the sympathy they feel towards my character(s) feels like it transfers to me. So I get the support and care that I didn't get when I was going through my own ordeals, and it helps. So yes, writing for me is therapy of a sort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSMTOURGUIDE

Are some of these stories being written by people that are genuinely angry with women? Or perhaps with a specific woman?

---

Maybe, maybe not.

Certainly some people do write for release and/or therapy - that’s why many people like to keep private diaries.

I feel that ‘angry authors’ might be more likely to use their emotion as tool, rather than harbour it as motivation.

Amatuer writers of fiction, particularly, have their egos to feed. We crave attention, for our efforts – it’s just human nature. And, we write because we believe our fantasies are something others will enjoy.

I think, too, in an odd kind of way it gives us a certain feeling of immortality. We hope that long after we are gone, our words will remain, and for a few lucky and talented ones, they actually do.

:)

I've just posted a story titled 'Karmals' slavery part 1'. I wrote this story specifically at the request of a woman named Karmal. It seems terribly violent to me but she seemed to like it. I'm not sure what to make of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDSM_Tourguide

I noticed that many stories appearing in the library seem geared more toward wanton violence, mostly toward women, and non-consensual sex. I was wondering a little about this and some of the ramifications of this.

Are some of these stories being written by people that are genuinely angry with women? Or perhaps with a specific woman? Are the stories written by people that have lived these fantasies out and look to do so again? Perhaps they are written to satiate the primal sexual desire before they actually act the fantasy out. Perhaps I am reading way too much into things, but I'm tired and it seemed like a good line of thought at the time.

I consider myself to be very tolerant of others. In fact, I am more tolerant of individuals than I am of cultures. Therefore, I understand that these stories are just stories. Fantasies and musings from minds possibly as twisted and corrupt as my own. So, i refuse to pass judgement on what a person writes. It is, after all, the actiions that speak louder than words.

At any rate, it was a passing musing that I had noticed. I thought, perhaps, that there would be more educational articles and stories than the presence of pure violence.

And don't get me wrong, please. Occasionally, I get in just the right mood for some good, old-fashioned violence. Just not all the time. So, I ask the good people here if they could please try to keep the perspective of the website in mind when contributing their material.

Thanks.

---

i can only respond to this point on a personal level, a submissive female one.

i personally believe that we need to consider intention. There is a difference between receiving violence and receiving pain. Violence is never pleasant to receive, pain can be under certain circumstances. There is also a difference between a Dominant and a sadist, a difference between wanting to be taken and controlled and wanting to be tortured.

If we are looking at ‘power exchange relationships’ then the last word needs attention too. There is undoubtedly a relationship between torturer and victim, but if it is non-consensual violence then it is a very limited relationship.

If the intention of the Dominant is to use pain to increase pleasure or arousal in the submissive then the pain is being used positively for both parties. If the intention is for pleasure or arousal to be gained by only one party i fail to see it as anything other than selfish behaviour lacking in sensitivity. Yes, the best Dominants are sensitive.

There is also the question of there being a difference between fantasy and reality. Surely if one is aroused by the fantasy of extreme violence then it actually must effect the way that one looks upon women (or submissives) in real life too.

Personally i do not believe being a submissive equates with receiving violence.

emma_sub

Emma's points are at the heart of most bdsm discussions and I agree with her. Consent may be within a couple or group, involve a (nonbinding in reality) contract, or rely on another mechanism but it provides the easiest "cover" for arousal in the face of another's pain.

Some nonconsensual stories work for me, though, and there is a category of nonconsensual stories I have not seen discussed.

First the exceptions.

Some stories are set in times and places where the victims' consent could not be an issue. Stories based on historical or hypothetical societies (Roman treatment of slaves and war prisoners; tyrannical governments' treatment of "out groups," spies, etc.; unpleasant future societies) may be painful to read, but their violence is "in bounds" in their settings. Several stories on this site use such designs and I find some of them thought provoking if not arousing.

Some stories are partly nonconsensual (sfmaster's "Janet" stories and the late, great Leviticus' "Valley" stories), but they allow the (usually remote) possibility that society will apprehend the sadistic torturers. Leviticus even brought the FBI into some of his stories (partly) for that purpose. This group shares many features of mystery, thriller, and other mainstream stories.


I have a bigger problem with stories set in societies whose authority to intervene is prevented by authorial design.

The first example is "Her New World," also by Leviticus. An entirely consensual group that wishes to colonize an uninhabited planet has no one with some skills needed to make the trip. They trick a woman who has the skills into accompanying them and then treat her the same as those who consented. (Note: This is not a cheap shot at a dead man. I admire his other work and the site that continues to operate in his name. We had a fairly lenghthy exchange about my reaction on the forum the site had for a while, ending with an agreement to disagree.)

Two other examples are by Crimson Dragon ("Time Out of Time" and "Dawn of Time"). A man learns to operate on two time lines, the "real" line and one where he is the only person able to move around. He brings selected women into "his" time line to bind, whip, etc. although there is little explicit sex and no "rape."

The villains in such storie are beyond even the potential reach of society. The victms have no way out, so their acceptance is merely a defense mechanism. No matter how well written ("Her New World" is up to Leviticus' usual high standards), no matter how much the victims seem to submit happily, such stories are over the line for me.

What do you think?


(Note: sfmaster's "Janet" stories are on this site. Leviticus' stories are on the "Writings of Leviticus" site. Crimson Dragon's stories are on his ASSTR pages.)

[QUOTE=longrover]
What do you think?
QUOTE]

I agree with you. The context of the story is of vital importance. If a story is psychopatic then it needs to sit in that context and be acknowledged by the author that s/he is exploring the world of a psychopath. I find nothing arousing or rewarding in a story that is free from moral or social restraint. Characters set free to do whatever they want at will, to me is not a story, it is an author out of control of the craft they are trying to master.

Myself, I find very few stories arousing. I find arousal in the psychology of a story rather than in the depicting of graphic sex. I don't need a depiction of a woman bent over and a man pumping away at her. I want to know the psychology and the motivations that brought the characters to such a point. I want to understand and empathise or be disgusted or provoked by them.

It is quite legitimate for a character to get away free with their crimes (which is what non consensual behaviour is) but I think the reader should be left with a feeling of disgust in them but that requires the author to set moral bounds which is where I came in.

sub emma,

All I can say in response to your posting is, yes, yes, yes, and I agree completely.

You have an excellent insight on this topic.

Btw, I see you have your private messaging block, were you aware of this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by longrover

Some stories are set in times and places where the victims' consent could not be an issue. … Several stories on this site use such designs and I find some of them thought provoking if not arousing.

---

I read one just the other day. The torturers were not apprehended and it didn’t have a happy ending. I don’t begin to understand the warped and twisted motivation I had to keep reading it. I didn’t ‘enjoy’ it, but it was thought provoking for sure, for hours later I was thinking, “What if…?”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProjectEuropa

I find nothing arousing or rewarding in a story that is free from moral or social restraint. Characters set free to do whatever they want at will, to me is not a story, it is an author out of control of the craft they are trying to master.

---

Yes, it’s kind of interesting that people enjoy stories where the characters are "…free from moral or social restraint" and "…set free to do whatever they want at will.." so long as they’re reprimanded, or deal with, before the story ends. We love to hate these characters. We feel a vicarious relief and satisfaction when they get what, we believe, they deserve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProjectEuropa

...I find arousal in the psychology of a story rather than in the depicting of graphic sex….

---

Well, now, here’s a fetish I’m sure none of us has ever heard of before. *gg* Just, kidding! It’s really all a matter of taste, isn’t it? Maybe, I’m a ‘greedy’ reader—I want both when I read erotica. Although, I do understand what you mean. Some of the hottest stories I’ve read, at this site, have been so cleverly subtle sexually that I found myself getting aroused long before the ‘fun’ had even started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Bragi

It’s really all a matter of taste, isn’t it?

---

For sure! I'm not condemning people for having different tastes than mine and I can fully understand the enjoyment of graphic sex. When I am turned on by it, boy! I just want to explode!

However I find very little graphic sex that does that too me. I've analysed this ad infinitum and I think the problem is, that most writers and artists of erotica tend to illustrate graphic sex rather than live it and so the graphic sex appears detached. Observing sex in an objective manner reduces it to a very silly jig. If the author/artist is radiating their own desires, that tends to permeate through to me.

Maybe I'm just talking a lot of bullshit but I'm trying.

For all that is holly please authors never use the word Cunny in reference to a womance vagina.

I cant stand the word cunny it just drive me nuts

I would much prefer

Cunt
Vagina
Beaver
love Vally
inner core
molten vally
woo hoo
but never cunny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProjectEuropa

However I find very little graphic sex that does that too me. I've analysed this ad infinitum and I think the problem is, that most writers and artists of erotica tend to illustrate graphic sex rather than live it and so the graphic sex appears detached. Observing sex in an objective manner reduces it to a very silly jig. If the author/artist is radiating their own desires, that tends to permeate through to me.

Maybe I'm just talking a lot of bullshit but I'm trying.

---

As a writer, I've found that my stuff has tended to get more internalized and subjective as time goes by, and I've come to believe that the sexiest stuff always happens inside people's heads. I think that when we read objectified, detatched BDSM -- the kind of stuff where the author just gives you an objective description of what was done -- we miss out on seeing the character's feelings and reactions and thereby miss out on some of the juiciest stuff.

Part of the problem is that, to a lot of writers, the sub's feelings aren't of any interest. They tend to objectify her and use her as a sexual toy, so the characters come across as flat and basically pretty dull. The whle experience feels remote and unreal. You can still get good porn that way, but the reader has to use their imagination to supply the missing thoughts and feelings, doing the job the author should have done.

Anyone who's fooled around with BDSM knows something of the incredible intensity of feeling that goes on, and it just seems like such a waste to ignore it. Like I said, that's some of the sexiest stuff.

---dr.M.

ProjectEuropa, Doc,

What's exactly is too much graphic sex? How much detail is too much? Shouldn't some of it at least be left to the reader's warped imagination?

I think one of you ought to start a new thread on this. It's an excellent topic for a fresh discussion.

I'm ticking over already.

Alex :)