Okay, I'm AJ, that's Andrew, that's Francois, we're all, well, we're developers and you're still a maintainer, right? So how many people in this room are developers, Debian developers, and how many are Debian maintainers? We've got one, and how many people have something, have a program that they think should be in Debian, but isn't? Okay, so this is kind of you guys. How many of those people were Debian developers? Yeah. How many people work in Google is apparently a question someone wants to ask. Yeah, whatever. And how many people have PPA in Ubuntu? Nobody, gosh. Wow, okay. So basic philosophy of getting something into Debian, find some software, make it into a dev, upload it. Yeah, profit, not so much, but whatever. Seriously, my indentation went away. Okay, so in all the rest of these slides, the top bullet point is meant to be what's happening, and the rest of the bullet points are meant to be how it's happening. So if you want to package something, it's generally polite to talk to the upstream author and say, hey, I want to distribute your software to millions of people. Checking the license. You're in a Debian mini conference, I guess you're obsessive about free software and license checking and stuff like that, or at least are familiar with people who are. If not, talk to the person next to you. Sorry. It's generally good if you're trying to package something to actually look through the compiler warnings that spits out or the warnings that spits out at runtime if you're packaging something built for KDE or GNOME. Running the test suite, stuff like that. Good idea to do that stuff before shipping stuff to other people. It's rarer than you might hope. Packaging software has, how many people here have not ever actually packaged something as a dev? Have you ever tried? Okay, so it might look hard, or if you try googling, there are many, many, many pages of instructions. It's not as hard as it looks. If you try and do it perfectly, then it gets hard because it's kind of a long tail of bugs to fix, or policy to comply with, or little tweaks you can do to make packages better. What? Okay, so packaging, the first things you want to know about is dev helper and DH. Make DH or make dev helper will basically take most packages and turn it into a dev for you with almost zero effort. You'll want to install things like dev scripts and depot. And if you install that package and have a look what's in it and look at some of the main pages or the help, that'll give you a fairly good start. The developers reference dev and policy, good things to start reading eventually, put it on your nightstand or something, and read through a chapter as you go. I personally think they're quite readable, but your mileage may vary. Once you've actually got a package run it through LinkedIn, it'll complain at you, fix the bugs, run it again, it'll complain some more, fix those. And once you've completed that cycle and it's not whinging, mostly people won't whinge either. And a lot of Debian folks are on ISE or mailing lists and it's fairly easy to ask for help there too. So once you've actually made the dev, then you want to get it into Debian. So I don't know how many people have tried this or heard gossip about it, but that was my take on what you probably expect. So you get a GPG key and then you get it into the Web of Trust by getting a billion people to sign it. Prove you can recite all those documents that I just told you about backwards. I probably should have put in something like become a legal expert on the GPL and stuff. Then you put in an application and wait five or 10 or 20 years.  Consider that all wrong. If that was your worry, then try and throw it out. The best approach is go through the Debian maintainer approach, which just means get a key, get it signed by a couple of people. You can do that by the end of the day, if not the end of the week, or I'm doing that the other way around I guess. You have to agree, sorry, yes. Why do we have a key? Because we need a class hierarchy so that the aristocrats like you and I can live off the labor of the serfs. Does that clear it up? The real answer is because making things easier is hard because DDs have to be super smart for some reason. Politics is the real answer probably. You're welcome to propose a GR to get rid of the distinction, I don't know. This policy is basically how I got to be a DD back in the day. The DD processes have created rules and bureaucracy since then for good and bad reasons. If you had a time machine and could go back to 97 or so, this would be your process to become a developer.  Again, you can do that here this week. Then the mechanical processes, you file a bug in the bug tracking system, referencing all these things, and that will get you into the Debian maintenance key ring, at which point a Debian developer can grant you access to help do uploads for whichever specific packages. You can do it, so if you can already make a package and you just want to get it into the archive, if you go through those steps this week, you're set. The other bits, if you want more help for stuff like this than things to know about are all of the counts, the various subgroups that may be relevant, so Debian Perl, Debian Python, Debian Haskell, Debian Med, Debian Science, I think there's still a ham radio group. There's the collab main group, which basically says, yeah, these packages are just maintained by everybody, and there's a bunch of stuff like packages QA to help to QA analysis of Debian packages, and those are some links, and I figured anyone who wants some questions who's got a key that they want to get signed is basically the rest of this session. So the collab main thing, when I tried to get repository created for a couple of us to maintain a particular package, the Allioff maintainer said it's kind of a pain in the backside to get individual group things set up, so use collab maintenance and it'll be all be fine. So while it's true that it is meant to be committable by anybody, I think there are certainly formalisms around that, so rather than just jumping in there and committing something and uploading it like I was planning to do this afternoon, you really should ask the people who are on the uploaders and the maintainers list, mostly just because it's convenient to have a single repository. What I'm not sure about with respect to the Debian maintainer thing is it is a separate keyring, but once the initial upload has been blessed, in theory that person can continue to upload that same package without further oversight by the original developer. So that was the way it worked originally. The way it works now is there is a separate database table that says which Debian maintainers have permission to upload which packages, and that's controlled by Decut, so any DD can basically say, yes, this person can now upload this package or no, this person can no longer upload the package. So it sounds like Debian maintainer is actually the correct solution for somebody who has one package that they care about deeply and they want to upload, but they don't want to be bothered with the rest of the fruit. Yeah, or a particular subset of packages they care about, yeah. So the other thing is that the Debian maintainer, being a Debian maintainer is basically considered a step on the way to being a Debian developer these days. Just wondering if you had any advice about what to do if the upstream is very unkeen on your packaging efforts. It depends in what way they're unkeen. Like it's free software, so you can just say screw them and do it, right? But that's not the best way if you kind of have some bugs and you'd then like their help to get those bugs fixed. Okay. And just what is... Okay, so I'm looking at some large Java libraries, unfortunately, and there is a gigantic kind of trail of dependencies and dependencies for the dependencies, and of course there's test dependencies for the dependencies. So is there any kind of minimum level of usefulness? What's the kind of threshold for getting something into Debian? I mean, it seems to be rather kind of, if you're interested in it, then go ahead, but is there any more comments about that? You guys want to... I think this threshold is basically kind of an informal one, which is like if you're willing to maintain something in Debian, then you pretty much can. You can upload it, but if you're a DD, you can upload it. If you're just a random person in the community, then you need to convince the Debian developer to upload it for you. At that point, you can maintain it. As long as you don't have too many release-critical bugs, well, any release-critical bugs that you fix them quickly, and it's not a big burden on the security team, then you can pretty much maintain a package that only three people use. That's like... We don't really... And that's off to the good first step. Can you repeat that one more time? You can repeat it if you like. Yeah, you can host all... You can build your Debs locally and host them locally without having to upload them to the archive. So that's particularly not a bad idea if you've got a whole bunch of dependencies. So you want a package, open rocket, and it's got a whole bunch of new Java dependencies every release. So you then have to package all those dependencies as well and to actually make sure that those work, then you might as well do that, or locally set up your repository, rebuild stuff against the repository to make sure it builds, and then you can upload them all at once. Yeah, I've ended up packaging two... another two kind of Java testing frameworks, which I'm not sure how many Java testing frameworks Debian needs, All of them. So if you look through the packages that are in Debian, you'll find things like Chiak Utils, which is some stuff that Ian Jackson and some of the guys in that run the Chiak server in the UK happen to find useful and figure other people might find it useful to. I'm sure you can look through a popularity contest and find some that only one person uses, or one person who runs popularity contests and reports uses. It's not really very nice to upload something and then not maintain it when it starts getting RC bug reports or something later, so that's a limitation, but it's all pretty informal. Okay, thanks guys. Yeah, I was just going to add on that there's probably some, as Ajay just sent it on, I guess there's some kind of social expectation that you will continue to maintain or you upload for at least a period of time. Otherwise it's going to get dropped. Yeah, and if you don't, the expectation is that at the very least you'll be, you'll orphan the package to make it explicit that you're no longer maintaining this thing. Like there's a process for getting something into Debian and there's a process for signaling to the rest of the project that you have no interest in this package anymore and you want someone else to take it over, or you just want to rage quit the package. So as segue on from that, and this is just a hypothetical, I haven't run into this in Debian, but I'm going to go back to the C-Pan, is what do you do if you want to help out on a package but the current maintainer or person in charge that isn't being responsive or doesn't, yeah, maybe it's on its way to being orphaned, but what do you do if you can't work with the person? Well, so the first thing that I would say is try to get in touch with the person and like some people will be unresponsive when you ask them for help, but when you offer help they become responsive, especially like would you like to have a co-maintainer? I've picked up a few packages where a person was like, no, I'd like you to be the maintainer if you don't mind, and then it's like, sweet, I want to fix this. So that's one thing, just offer help to the person that's not responsive. If the person still doesn't respond, then basically what you want to do is there's a process called the MIA process of missing in action, and you can report that person as potentially missing in action and then there's a team within the end that will try to contact that person and if it fails they will offer the package for you and then you can pick it up. But the other thing you can do as well is you can do a non-maintainer upload in NMU. So if there's a bug that annoys you and it's not being fixed, you can't contact a person while the MIA team is trying to get in touch with them, but you can do a non-maintainer upload, which is basically like, you get a debut developer to upload something and you tell the maintainer, here's the patch where I applied, here's the patch where I applied to the package. The package has been uploaded into a special queue so that it will actually enter the archive in 10 days. If you disagree with this, feel free to block it. If you don't do anything in 10 days, it will go through. So that's something you can do. Did you have something to add? No, I think you nailed it. There are occasionally hostile takeovers, but they're not that common. The solution of contacting the maintainer and offering to help, and perhaps being an uploader, I'm pretty sure we'll often end up with, you can have it. I've certainly done that from the other end. Somebody's been really keen to help on Debsongs, for example, and I said, it's all yours. Take it and run. If you're looking for packages, you want to be involved with Debian and you don't know what to package, one good thing to look at is actually, what is it that you use that's not very well maintained? Maybe there's this particular tool that has had five new upstream versions that haven't been packaged.  It's kind of likely that you'll end up the maintainer if you ask nicely, and the person doesn't have any interest in it anymore. Along those lines, also checking the list of packages that have either been orphaned or upropped option to see if there's anything they actually care about and might be worth picking up, otherwise they may not be in the next release. And there's a tool in Debian called, I think it's part of the Dev Scripts packages called WNPP-Alert, and what that is, WNPP is work needed in prospective packages. So it's a special meta-bug within Debian that keeps track of packages that have an orphan that need help and all sorts of things. So that tool, if you run it, it will show you of the things that you have installed on your system, which ones have an orphaned, which ones need a new maintainer, those kinds of things. So that's a really good start. I've picked up a whole bunch of packages myself and I have this running as a cron job on my machine so that whatever is a new package that gets orphaned that I use because it's installed on my system, that I'll get a notification like I'll get a cron job hotel, and then I can look into either adopting their package or at the very least, subscribe to that bug where it was orphaned to keep an eye on it to make sure that it actually gets picked up by someone at some point. So people here have not filed a bug against Debian. Not filed a bug against Debian. And how many of those people have not experienced a bug in Debian? Okay, so you should be able to file those bug reports when you actually hit them. I assume everyone here, because you're at LCA, is kind of smart and knows how to help debug problems and do sysadmini tasks and maybe compile programs and whatever, because that's really all it takes to contribute is file a bug, help debug it, help produce a patch that resolves it or makes it better in some way. Filing bugs, getting patches, that's like the first step in getting stuff into Debian. Just on the bugs, if you discover a bug and it's quite clear to you that it's a bug in the package itself, not in the... Sorry, a bug in the software itself, not in the packaging of the software, do you prefer if it's just handled upstream? Do you prefer if it's submitted in both? It depends a lot on the package maintainer. The debug bug tracking system in Debian has a feature to let you forward bugs upstream so that you file it in Debian, you forward it upstream. The upstream fixes it depending on how... on what bug tracker they use it might even get tracked back down to Debian when that bug's closed upstream. Being a... If it's... I don't like the way the GUI's put together on this program, then that's probably something you might as well just keep upstream, but I don't think there's any rules on saying, no, this is an upstream-only bug, don't file it in Debian ever. I think the observation you made that it depends on the package maintainer is quite true. For some packages, the maintainers will be heavily modifying the upstream source for whatever reason. Ideally, we try to avoid that, but sometimes it's inevitable. In those cases, you're probably better off if the Debian version is heavily patched, you're probably better off submitting the bug via Debian because it could be one of those patches. On the other hand, if you actually get the source from upstream, test it out, see that it has your bug, then you may as well file the bug upstream. What you can do as well is you can file a bug upstream and then file a bug in Debian market as forwarded upstream, that way it's tracked in both places. Especially if you have it patched forth, then go for it and file it upstream directly. Because the maintainer's going to have to do that work anyways. The other interesting point along those lines is that if it's an active, if it's a project which is reasonably dead upstream, then often it's more active in Debian having bug fixes done within it. And there's been a few packages where the Debian project has ended up adopting those packages and effectively become the upstream. So again, depending on what the package is, if upstream is pretty much dead, then the Debian bug track is probably the best place to put it. One of my upstream is actually hosted on GeoCities. Is there any rhyme or reason to the new upload queue? Just looking at the packages going into and out of the new queue, some of them seem to have been there for literally years. Sometimes it takes a week, sometimes it takes a day. Yes, there is rhyme or reason to it, probably more rhyme than reason. So library packages will tend to go through fairly quickly. One's where there's no complicated licensing stuff, will tend to go through pretty quickly. Stuff where the licensing is hard, like one file says it's licensed under this license and another one says it's licensed under the other license and they're not the same. Or when you're dead in copyright, notice says these are the licenses and the C files disagree. All of those will cause either ejections or delays. I wouldn't have thought there was anything, so there's a freeze on at the moment that causes delays. Stuff gets prioritized within the new queue, so if something's needed to fix an RC bug, then that'll tend to go through quicker. As far as I know, it's going reasonably well at the moment, so I would have thought anything that was over a cup. When did the free start start of December or November? Yeah, so anything that's more than two and a half months or so, that probably means that there was something really odd about the packaging. It might be that the license is really clear, but it's not clear if that's actually open source or not because it's some funny one, or there might be some patent stuff about it. So new checks of when things get thoroughly reviewed by a third party, basically. So the FTP masters check the licenses and check the packaging, it's not completely crap. And if it's clearly crap, then that's easy, it just gets rejected. If it's clearly fine, that's easy, it gets accepted, but if it's somewhere in the middle, then it gets left in the queue to make a decision. I guess there's not much visibility from your point of view unless you email someone about it and you just get to see it. It's in the queue and how long. That's all the information you have. Yeah, you can ask the FTP masters what's going on. I think they usually actually ping the maintainer who uploaded it if there's questions or whatever, but if they don't, then yeah, you should definitely ping them. It's the people watching from the sidelines who don't have any idea what's going on. Okay, thanks. Yeah, because often they will, you get a lot of information when they reject your upload because then it'll come with like it failed these checks and you need to fix this licensing thing or whatever. Yeah, you don't have a lot of feedback while it's weighing in the queue. My experience is it hasn't taken that long recently. A couple of years ago, it used to take like a month or two or sometimes more to get something through because the FTP master team was not very many people, but now they have FTP assistants that help out reviewing these things. I guess one thing I'll just say is that I went through the demon maintainer process and it was incredibly painless. So if you are thinking about trying to upload, have a package that you would like to get into the event, don't be scared of it. It really is pretty straightforward. My sponsor, who's this guy here, did come back with some feedback on my packaging, but it was all pretty trivial stuff to fix up. So yeah, don't be afraid of it. I certainly recommend it and I said as a step towards becoming a DD, which I will do at some point in time. Yeah, and in fact you don't have to, if you want to get involved with Debian, you don't actually have to apply for any of these official titles. If you want to just maintain a package in Debian, there's lots of people to do that. There's a bunch of upstream developers that happen to use Debian and they want to package their own software in Debian. They want to be responsible for it because it's easier. They get all the bug reports themselves and they can fix it and they have no interest in packaging anything else, but they're quite happy. I've got a sponsor, a couple of those upstream developers, they package their own stuff in Debian. They're quite happy doing all of the packaging work for their own stuff. They have no intention of ever becoming a Debian, a DM, a Debian maintainer or DD, but they get a really easy way to get into Debian. You just need to find someone like a Debian developer who's willing to sponsor your uploads. If you're not familiar with what sponsored uploads mean, it basically means that you do all the work of actually doing the packaging and then you find a Debian developer to upload it and they get all the credit. The other thing to point out is that we're also talking about getting packages in Debian. Debian isn't all about packaging and the packages that are in there. You can also get involved with things like documentation, triaging the bug system. There's huge amounts of other areas of work that Debian needs to have done that people can do within it. That if packaging or maintaining software isn't your thing, then that's not the only way to get involved. There's probably a major load of other tasks that could be done by people that people definitely want help on. For example, if you're really into licensing stuff, then I'm sure something that Robert Collins would be really into, but you can volunteer to be an FDP Master Assistant or something like that to do these checks and help reduce the new queue. If you're into other things, then you can find different teams within Debian that you can contribute to. Some people get started with something that AJ mentioned earlier, the little packaging teams on Aliath where you don't have to have access to the archive. You don't have to be a DD, you don't have to be a DM. All you need to do is to be interested in, say, Perl packages or Python packages in Debian, and then you'll get access to a Git repo where the work is done and you can contribute to that. There's a mailing list, and then some people will move from there to becoming Debian maintainers or not sometimes they just care about the quality of CPAN modules in Debian, so it's an easy way to get started. Are there any other questions about any of this kind of stuff or even other generic questions around Debian that people got? I guess I have a question. Has anybody ever run into problems? Has anybody wanted to get involved in Debian and run into problems where they hit a roadblock, they couldn't find a sponsor for their package or anything like that? Only from the perspective of reading what's involved and basically just getting scared off at the pass. So what in particular was scary? Honestly, it was the time commitment involved in getting involved in Debian beyond... So I'm far more in the camp of there's a few things I care about, but I don't really want to commit to the Debian political sphere. So when I looked at what was involved, it seemed to be take two years of your life and deposit your soul here, sort of process, and it just looked like far too much work, to be perfectly honest. I think that's what Ajay was talking about when you said you have to get your key signed by 50DDs and then work five years and do a couple of recite policy backwards. I think if you think of being in Debian as being a Debian developer, if you have never done any Debian work and you want to be a DD, there's a few intermediate steps, but being involved in Debian is not necessarily about being a Debian developer. That's if you really care about a project and you want to increase your involvement, that's not the way that people first get involved in Debian. If you're using Debian on your machines and you run to bugs, submitting a bug in the first place is extremely helpful because, especially if you have a workaround or something like that, but even if you don't, just exposing a bug is really useful. Then the next level up is kind of fixing it, submitting a patch. Then you can get involved and do sort of little drive-by contributions by doing a non-maintainer upload. You need to find a sponsor, but if you find a package that's not being maintained very well in Debian, you can fix some bugs that way and that doesn't mean you have to take over the maintenance of the package. It just means that you're doing this one upload to fix a bug and that's really useful. I fixed a couple, for example, in the Jesse release cycle. I've done a couple of NMUs to clean up a few things before the release to make sure that Jesse... those packages actually work in Jesse. Then you have other things where you can be a co-maintainer for a package, so that means that you're not the only one responsible for a package. You can help out the other maintainer. So there's lots of ways to get involved in sort of small doses. And also the other thing is if you take over a package that almost never gets updated, I've got a couple where, well, I've got my GeoCities one where obviously the upstream is pretty much dead because the GeoCities doesn't exist anymore. So that never gets any new update, new upstream versions. All I have to do to keep that package in Debian is to fix the occasional bug, but the code doesn't change, so there's not that many bugs that get reported. And just keep up the packaging stuff. So I can probably do one upload every year to that package. There's a very low maintenance, and that's under the primary maintainer, the only maintainer for that package. So the amount of work that you do on a package varies immensely from one to the other, even when you're the maintainer. So that list of things up there to become a Debian maintainer or up there, whichever, are you able to do all those this week if you're still interested? Because, I mean, that's the sort of time frame that should take. Some people can take much longer, I don't know, Eric or Tom Marble might be watching this on the video once it's up, but they can take years just getting those steps done just because they're lazy basically, but it really shouldn't take any time. There was another question up there, while there's another question over the side now. We have time for one last question, then it's lunchtime. It was just about you're asking for friction points, and one friction point I have is just the documentation on the Debian website, and I understand documentation's hard, but there's a lot of orphan pages, there's a lot of how-to guides that are missing the juicy bit of detail. They'll have the very overview, but they won't have the steps where you actually need help. It's just something I wanted to highlight, an issue I have is trying to find my way through the Debian website to find that bit of information. Like the other day, I tried to find where to download the Jesse Bieder installer, and it took me through like seven or eight pages, and I ended up going to a seat to the archive and chopping off bits to find out that, so... It's a recent thing, and for every man that's probably able to do it, they will be able to have the relevant information. Fair enough. But there's a lot of orphaned documentation I find, or on the website, but the mailing list might be a better way of doing it. I'm just used to googling for stuff, so hence I'm more a browser help finder. I just want to point that out as a point of friction, and I understand documentation's hard. Yeah, I mean, I have the same point of friction, like finding stuff on the wiki that thoroughly documents what I'm interested in is hard. The other thing as well is, like on the wiki, is finding some of that information there, maybe out of date as well. So you do have to sort out, you know, some of the way from the chef. I find searching for stuff using your favorite search engine is usually a pretty good way. I typically find the information. You may have to sort through a few different hits to get what you actually need, but I tend to find it to be pretty good. But yes, digging out some of the obscure commands or how to do that particular thing you need to do in your package can be tricky. I don't know, at this point, there's been a couple of times where someone started on an engine that's completely inside too, and it's a long time, so I don't think you get to the level of the data and start to be done. Yeah. To be important. Well, a lot of that stuff's on a wiki, so once you actually do search the mailing list and find the answer, you put the answer in the to be done part, right? Plus one. OK, lunchtime. We're now out of time. Thank you, my fellow panellists, for assisting with this. Lunchtime, we'll be back here at 20 past one. Thanks guys.


Men who are doing this will rarely commit to you and we're gonna get into this in just about a second. But I wanna share something personal with you that illustrates a point I'm about to make. And that is, have you ever walked into a grocery store, a liquor store, a gas station and a home, what appears to be a homeless person comes to you and asks for some money. Most likely to buy alcohol or even drugs in their life. And have you ever said go get a job or something like that, has that ever happened to you? The reason why I'm sharing this with you, if it's happened to me recently and I thought to myself, this person must be in so much pain that they have to panhandle in this moment to buy most likely alcohol in front of a liquor store to relieve the pain that they're experiencing. And that's what we're gonna talk about today is pain men and women experience in their dating, mating and relating life. So I wanna read to you a comment that came through me through one of my social media posts and says, Jonathan Asley, since you work with mature, single men and women and women wanting to improve themselves, you typically work with those who have or are doing their work and investing in their personal growth. As a father of two boys and four girls, this guy was busy. I have raised my children to know that investing in themselves is the greatest investment they can ever make. With that being said, here are my comments. In my life experience and in particular, as of late, is it true that alcohol and drugs play a major role in the destruction of all relationships, be it interpersonal family or friends? This is a sensitive subject and a sensitive and subjective subject. I know as there are varying degrees of consumption from casual drinker to daily drinker to full-blown alcoholic. And by the way, what he doesn't mention is drugs in this post, but I also think there's people that use plant-based medicine for spiritual journeys. There's people that use cannabis for healing ailments. And then there are those people that do heavier drugs to zone out. So he doesn't mention that, but I wanted to add that in the mix. It is certainly not a one-size-fits-all application, but address the subject, please. As you deem appropriate, would you share your thoughts and feelings on this most important topic? And he goes on to say a little bit more. So why I'm bringing this up today is shortly after my divorce, I got, after turning 40 and going through divorce in 2005-ish through 2007, I found myself incredibly depressed. I found myself in not just the divorce itself, but I also lost my high-paying corporate job. And then there was the market crash of 2007. And during that period of time, I began consuming a lot of alcohol and I also did cocaine to self-medicate from the pain I was experiencing. I was doing drugs and alcohol to numb the pain. And yet I was still actively dating in the single marketplace. I was on the online dating sites. I was on, back then it was Yahoo! Personals and AOL Personals. I'm laughing because I'm just feeling nostalgic for a moment, thinking back to that. At the same time, I was in a tremendous amount of pain and actually online dating was another form of clouding the pain, of numbing the pain. So not only was there alcohol, not only was there drugs, but there was also online dating to numb the pain. Why was online dating numbing the pain? Because interacting with women, having women interested in me was filling that void that was inside of myself. I was experiencing a huge void. Within myself. In fact, that void was quite frankly, not loving myself. And when I think of that person that was asking for money at the liquor store, in that space, they're most likely feeling a deep pain, a deep pain. And that pain is I'm not good enough, I'm not lovable, I'm not likable, I have no purpose, I have no direction. And we can criticize that person or those people that use drugs and alcohol to numb the pain, to gas like the pain, or even those that use online dating as a version to numb or gas like the pain. The real truth it is, we are swimming in a sea of emotional pain out in the universe, or at least here in the United States, this universe that we live in. So coming back to his post, he mentions about doing the work. Well, this is why I wrote my book, What the Heck Is Self-Love? Anyway, A Journey of Personal Development, Self-Upspurture Work. I actually share my journey over the last 20 years to be in a place where I don't need drugs and alcohol or even online dating to numb the pain. See, here's the thing, when someone is in such pain, they rarely can they fully commit to someone. Rarely can they fully commit to someone. Now, I know everything I'm sharing with you is rather obvious. You probably wouldn't want to be dating someone who uses drugs and alcohol to numb the pain, but many people are so good at hiding this, you may not be aware until it's too late, until you are hooked on this person. If you're not familiar with my chart, I share this regularly, the three types of people actively dating, this is not a fact, it's merely an opinion, but there are the users, the spenders and the grower and builders, and I say it's roughly 20% are users, 60% are spenders and 20% are grower builders. The users are those people that are in it for short-term game, love bombers, players. The grower builders, they want a significant relationship, they have their act together and they're not on drugs and alcohol. The spenders that represent 60% of the population, they want companionship, they want connection, they want sex, but they're incapable of commitment. These are the people that the drugs and alcohol people fall into this category most likely because we are in an environment particularly where there are a lot of people in pain, many of you are in pain as well. This is why I'm such a big proponent of doing the inner work of healing childhood wounds and traumas and adult traumas. And so coming back to online dating, because I'm gonna add this to the piece of what he mentioned, is that right now we have this, think about this for a second. For the first time in history, through our devices, we have the capacity to connect with people we wouldn't otherwise meet in our purview, in our scope of vision, okay? Think about hundreds of years ago. I'll use Native American tribes. Maybe there was 150 people in the tribe. You basically mated within your tribe, right?  There was no long distance dating. There was no text messaging. There was no Instagram posts. There was no selfies. See, we connected with the people that were right in front of us in our purview. Now, many people, particularly after COVID, live more isolated lives. I know I tend to live in a little bit more of an isolated life. And so through our devices, we can connect with all kinds of people. We can connect with people we wouldn't otherwise have met in our lives. I was in a long distance relationship that turned into a living together situation with someone who I would never have been able to meet if it wasn't for the internet. So there are blessings and curses to the internet. The blessing is we can connect with people we wouldn't otherwise be able to meet. The curses is we could be hiding our deeper pain through the internet. We could be hiding our deeper pain. This is why, folks, I've said this before, and I'd say it again, dating is a vetting process. But Jonathan, I'm just supposed to sit back on my feminine energy and let men all do the work because that's the way it's supposed to work. Men are the leaders. They're the provider protectors. They love the hunt. They love the chase. If I listen to the book, the rules and all these other books that tell me this is what I need to do. Folks, I'm here to say, dating is a vetting process. You know, in the phrase finding a needle in the haystack? Well, the haystack is filled with lots of dysfunctional people. It's not the right, the needle represents the right person, but I'm also here to say the rest of the hay are people who are dysfunctional. This is why, look at right here, jonathanasley.com forward slash coaching. This is where I set up my, I have created a coaching program to teach you how to vet for emotional maturity, how to fix your picker, because many of us have not been indoctrinated in some form of education, particularly because we've been indoctrinated in the fairy tale way of relationships, the Cinderella or the romcom version of relationships instead of the real reality that we are swimming in the sea of humans that are hurting, they're hurting. See, I was hurting because I lost my identity. I was hurting because I lost my job. And in addition, going through a divorce and that is an emotionally traumatic event whether we like it or not. And by the way, it's the unraveling of the tapestry of a life we created with another human being. Even when you date someone for a few months you've curated a life together only to in many cases have it pulled apart from you. Not intentionally, but there's emotional effects that occur when we engage in a romantic relationship with someone and it doesn't work out. So we have to recognize that this is the environment we live in, okay? So what's the antidote to all of this? I'm here to offer, as I said in my book what the heck is self love anyway? First and foremost is to be able to know within yourself that you don't need someone in your life to feel fulfilled. I know many of you know this cognitively but many of you still underneath have your own wounds and pain. So first is recognizing that. Recognizing that every human being across from you every human being that you meet in the dating realm is not a bad person. I wasn't a bad person. I was a train wreck after my divorce and going through my job loss I was a train wreck but I wasn't a bad person. Most everybody is a good person. Even the ones that might be classified as narcissist and players and users they're inherently most humans are good people at their soul, they're a good person. And I just wanna remind you when they were born they were an innocent person. Now that doesn't necessarily, I'm not here to absolve anyone of bad behavior. That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm saying at someone's spirit, they're all good people. Now I did a post that I think really illustrates this. I did it today on my Instagram and it might be worth sharing right now. I wanna show you the meme that came up. It says, souls don't meet by accident. Souls don't meet by accident. Okay, do you have that picture in your head for a second? I wanna read you my commentary. It says, from what I've observed there is quite a bit of judgment and disdain for investing time with a person who is wounded or broken. Let me repeat that. There is quite a bit of judgment and disdain for investing time with a person who is wounded or broken. And I don't believe anyone is broken but we certainly are wounded, okay? The byproduct of these experiences often leads to victim consciousness and bitterness can follow. Let me repeat that. The byproduct of these experiences often leads to victim consciousness and bitterness can follow. What if every encounter has a deeper purpose? If love is never wasted, I'm assuming time can be wasted but love is never wasted. Maybe there are more profound reasons why people meet and whether you are the giver or the receiver everything happens for a reason. I'm gonna repeat that for everyone. What if every encounter has a different purpose? If love is never wasted, maybe there are more profound reasons why people meet and whether you are the giver, the receiver everything happens for a reason. So if you found yourself with a person, drugs, alcohol, or internet dating is their self-medication. Because that's what this is, is self-medication. It's avoiding the pain we're trying to, we're trying to numb the pain, avoid the pain we're experiencing.  Maybe you gave them a gift. What if we can reframe all of this in a different narrative? What if we can frame it from a positive narrative that we gave this person a gift, a gift of our heart, a gift of our love? My invitation for you is when you can actually honor your gift and if you can look at every past relationship and ask yourself these four questions, these four questions, the first question, what positive things about myself did I learn in this experience? Excuse me, what positive things about myself did I learn in this experience? Number two, how have I healed from this experience? How have I healed from this experience? Number three, what was good about this experience? Hopefully there was some good things, what was good? And number four, what am I most grateful for? When you can actually sit with those questions and answer them in a positive, loving way. When you don't have to point the finger at the other person for being bad, when you're no longer charged, you have a charge. When you think about this other person, when you're sharing about your past experience and you can come at it from a place of gratitude, what was good, how have you healed and what positive things you learned about yourself, you're in a great position to become a magnetic attractor for what you want. Remember earlier we were talking about needle in the haystack and the haystack is filled with dysfunctionality. I'm here to invite you to become the electromagnet so you can magnetize that needle that feels so elusive. How do we do this? First is shoring up our own sovereignty, our own self-worth. Forgive those, not because they deserve or need forgiveness, you forgive them because it benefits you. When you can be in a state of forgiveness for someone, it actually benefits you. And then when you practice intentionality and discernment going forward, when you practice intentionality and discernment going forward, like again, what I teach in my private coaching, you're going to have a greater chance for success. You become a electromagnet for what you want. Many of you want to have a significant relationship but do you have a long-term mating strategy or do you have a short-term mating strategy? Many people have a short-term mating strategy because it's what they can get out of the experience. Instead of what can I give? Just like that meme I showed you that picture of the sewing of the heart. What if it is all about showing up as a giver? Now, I know many of you saying, Jonathan, I am exhausted giving. I get it, it made feel that way. But until you take ownership in your part of every experience, because you are the common denominator, then you're no different than the person who might've, okay, that might seem a little harsh, okay? If we can't take ownership of our part and if we can't take how we benefit and heal, then we're just as broken and wounded as the person who's more deeper broken and wounded. See, just like when there are varying degrees of woundedness and brokenness. And we all have a bit of brokenness and woundedness in us. But does that brokenness and woundedness define our life? Does it define our choices? Are we in charge of our relationship destiny? But Jonathan, men are the leaders, they're supposed to be in charge. Ladies, you're giving the job to the wrong person. Let me be clear. If you think men are the leaders of the relationship, you're giving the job to the wrong person. You are in charge of your relationship destiny. Don't give that up to a man. Not because a man isn't a good person, but women study this material 10 fold. By the way, it's 11-11 on my computer right now at the time I'm recording this. Should I make a wish? I invite my soulmate to enter my life today or my true love, I hope to meet her today and we recognize and see each other. I'm doing that at 11-11. Okay. Oh gosh, I just did a squirrel and I got lost of where I was going with this. Folks, is this sinking in? Is this resonating? Men, who do drugs? Alcohol are addicted to online dating. They rarely can commit. It's not your job to heal them. If you're watching this today and you find yourself in that dynamic, you've done all the work you need to have done for him. It's time to do it for yourself, to redirect all of that love back to yourself so you can become a magnetic attractor for what you want. Because when you heal internally, when you've let go of the charge, when you consciously date with intentionality, when you're vetting people and you approach it with love, you have a greater chance of being that electromagnet I talk about. Is this sinking in? Is this resonating? Please let me know if it is. Post a comment below. I'd like to hear your thoughts. And if it did resonate with you, hit that like button. Please share this video. Please subscribe to my channel and hit that notification bell so you can be notified of new videos as well. All right. I think I'm gonna wrap up this video with a big, gigantic Jonathan Bear hug of appreciation. I'm gonna reach into the camera and give you a hug of love. I'm asking you to turn to someone, a pet, a teddy bear pillow, and give Iter them a hug of love because hugs are a great source of love. And let's face it, we could all use more love in our lives. Thanks a bunch. Bye-bye now.


Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of Frightfully Forgotten.  You insisted on wearing it. Would you just take it off already? Hello, and welcome to Season 7 of Frightfully Forgotten horror movies. And we're gonna kick off Season 7 with a Part 7 horror movie, Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Wow. Seven seasons already. We've had some growing pains. And some drinking pains. Show me that VHS. Show me those movies. I got a tube TV in the basement. I got a KGP. Our night is just about to begin. Wes Craven wrote and directed New Nightmare to kind of revive the whole series and to make it scary again, and to make Freddy scary again, because let's face it, he became a joke. I still want to hear that record. Yeah, there's a Freddy record and the Freddy rap. So we're gonna take a look at Wes Craven's New Nightmare and see why it failed to revive the franchise. There's none made after this. He basically killed his own series. All the mainstays are in this movie from the original. Heather Langenkamp, Robert England, John Saxon is in this, Miko Hughes that we have to mention. He was in Pet Cemetery, a kindergarten cop just to mention two movies. Wes Craven's New Nightmare starts off with this montage of Freddy and he's building this new animatronic claw or something. There's all these flames and he's in his lair and everything. And we find out this is actually part of a movie set. They're designing Freddy's new claw. And it's all just a movie. This claw starts to go haywire and start killing people on set.  She's been having these dreams about Freddy Krueger in real life. And she's getting these prank calls from this obsessed fan. She's on edge. She's trying to continue her acting career, move it forward while staying away from the whole Freddy thing. She's got a family. She's got little boy Dylan and her husband who is an effects artist. She gets a call from New Line Cinema to picture this new idea. So she goes down to New Line and guess what the idea is? A new nightmare in Elma Street movie. Wes Craven's been working hard on this script and he wants her to reprise her role as Nancy. She's not really sure if she wants to do this or not because she's been having these weird nightmares and she's kind of haunted by the whole experience. Her son Dylan also is having these weird things happen to him. He's having these seizures. He's foaming at the mouth. She keeps finding him like downstairs at night in the dark watching the original Nightmare in Elma Street movie. Heather's husband's off on the new Nightmare set working on that new claw that we saw in her dreams.    On his ride home in the dark on the highway the Freddy claw comes through him and he actually dies in his car crash because, well, Freddy is real. At the morgue, Heather sees that there's claw marks on his chest and so right away she thinks about Freddy. During the funeral, she gets a vision that her son gets nabbed in the grave by Freddy Krueger and pulled through the side of the coffin. Then she wakes up from a dream. She goes and has a meeting with Wes Craven. Wes Craven proceeds to tell her that Freddy actually is real. An ancient being kept locked away in these movies.   That's why he's writing this new script? Yeah, exactly. To keep Freddy locked away. Heather's son, Dylan, actually gets taken by Freddy Krueger and Heather has to go sort of into his lair to go get him back. Big showdown, of course, at the end in Freddy's lair. Why did Wes Craven's new nightmare fail to revive the series? It's kind of interesting because Wes Craven started this big phenomenon. Nightmare on Elm Street, man, and he also killed it inadvertently at the same time. So we're going to take a deep dive into why this movie ultimately didn't work and why it killed the franchise. The least grossing of all the nightmare films, too. Which is strange because there's so much hype behind it. Wes Craven's coming back. It's new nightmare. Freddy's going to be scary again. Even we made fun of Freddy when we were kids making home movies. We had a sketch where he dressed her buddy up as Freddy. He goes to the barber shop and we just beat him up. How come it bombed? I know I was excited. Remember, we were kind of excited. It's like, oh, yeah. And Wes Craven's doing it now. It's like, oh, this is going to be awesome. Wes Craven's new nightmare. Miss me. And it was not awesome. It was a huge disappointment. And let's tell you why. The general atmosphere of the movie right from the get go pretty much is just flat. It just feels boring. It's not scary. There are very little points in the whole movie where there is suspense, where you're on the edge of your seat and you feel like you need to see more. Defeats the whole purpose of making Nightmare on Elm Street. Scary again. Exactly. If we're going to make it scary again, make it scary. Don't make it boring and bland and kind of just flat. It's also the longest running movie of the series as well. Yeah, an hour and 51 minutes. It's that long, eh? An hour and 52 minutes. And it feels it. It drags. Yeah. And the dream sequences don't really feel like dream sequences which I kind of get where Wes Craven's going for. It's kind of more like realistic, like are they dreaming, you know? They don't really clue you in that this is a dream. But that's kind of the charm of the first couple of movies.  It's not only the new nightmare, it's the no nightmare. There's no nightmares really in this movie. It really hurts the movie. The fact that Wes Craven chose to make it a meta movie where it takes place in the real world where the movies are just movies. Yeah. That killed this movie because it makes it too convoluted. Yeah, and there's too many things that can go wrong with that plot. So how does Freddy really exist? How does a character that he just thought up on a script come to life and like become real? They don't explain that. It's all vague and like it just doesn't make any sense and because it doesn't make sense, it's not scary. Yeah, you can't relate to it whatsoever. You have to believe in something for it to be scary. Heather Langenkamp and Robert Englund go to that TV show because all those kids in the Freddy outfit like, okay, yeah, Freddy, obviously he's not scary if kids are dressing like him and like idolizing him. Yeah, exactly. They did redesign Freddy to make him look a bit different but he still kind of looks the same. He still kind of looks the same and honestly, I think he looks worse. He does.  You can see that he's wearing a mask. He's just fucking, it's a mask and his hands are all rubbery. There's claws. You can tell they're all rubber. There's like, they're not real claws. You don't suspend your disbelief at all in this movie.   That's the nail in the coffin. So it really makes no sense that West Craven set out to make a movie that's so much different than the bad sequels and still gives Freddy shitty one-liners. He still fell into the trap.  They shouldn't have really even showed him. They should have kept him in the shadows. That's what made the first two movies the best, the scariest. West Craven is out to make Freddy scary again. Why not do what you did in the first movie and keep him in the shadows and keep him scary, you know? It's like he didn't know what he was doing. Exactly.  The studio was like, well, sure, he got this good idea, but we need you to do this, this and this. The acting does not help with this movie at all.  What makes that such a shame is that West Craven has probably the most pivotal point in this movie explaining why this is happening. And it should be probably one of the scariest scenes in the whole movie, and he blows it completely.  You're not an actor.   And you can't even drive it home. It's like, oh man.  Yeah, he's all rich and everything. It's like, how are you supposed to care about him too? He's supposed to be going through all these problems with these dreams he's having. He used to write the script because these awful nightmares.  He's keeping on all this money and everything.  Yeah, well like, one of the ideas was that he was supposed to be cutting his eyelids so he could stay awake.  That would have been so much better. Nico Hughes really doesn't do enough to carry this movie.  If not the main character.  You got a bad child actor. It destroys the movie. It doesn't matter how good everything else is.  And it's not that he's bad. He's just not good enough for this role. Foaming at the mouth. Not good.  Just like the general look of the movie, it's boring. There's nothing special about it. I can see why you want to make it different but at the same time, don't make it different and boring. Exactly. Make it different and interesting. Yeah, and like, somebody like West Craven should know that music is probably half the movie. It creates the atmosphere of whatever scene you're watching. So I mean, if you don't make scary music, you don't make a scary movie. No. Basically. The kills for this movie, there aren't enough for one thing. There's like two. Yeah, there's only two kills that you see and two other kills that you hear about. The kills are boring and unimaginative.  Really puts a damper on the whole thing. Yeah. Just shits over all the other practical effects. West Craven being the man that he is at this time, he helped to pioneer some of the best practical effects. The ending of this movie is so anti-climactic. Like, so they're in a dream, I guess. You don't.  Yeah. And that's it. That's how they kill. They don't like have to like do anything clever, like bring him into the real world like in the first movie. They just push him in some oven and he dies. Yeah. That's it.  Or it could be also that West Craven finished the script, right, because he says as long as there's Freddie movies, Freddie's kept away. Yeah. So maybe they never beat Freddie, but West Craven beat Freddie by finishing the script.  Can you think of a more lame way to beat a bad guy in a movie by finishing a script? Yeah. Ooh, boy. You really got him. Why didn't West Craven just write a two-page script? Yeah. And just like write that everything's finished and fine.  Like what the fuck? So it is really interesting how West Craven had this grand idea to reboot the series, to make it more scary, to make Freddie more serious, and failed completely at all those things. Yeah, on every level. How could you fail this miserably? I find it mind-boggling. Yeah. You know, he's not a poor director. He's made scary movies before, to legitimately scary movies, the first one. Serpent the Rainbow is pretty scary.  I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt, and I'm gonna say that it's the studio that got involved without really knowing. I'm just gonna throw that out there, because it has to be, it has to be at least some of it. It's really hilarious that West Craven created this phenomenon, and then also completely destroyed it. Was it on purpose? Did he purposely sabotage his own movie just to kind of be like, I don't want nothing more to do with this. Yeah, and I'm gonna make it so bad that nobody else is gonna want to touch it. Maybe then fucking, if that's what it was, he's a genius.  But what do you guys think of New Nightmare? Yeah. You know, maybe some of you guys like it. If you do, let us know. Let us know why, because I'm curious as to why someone would like this movie. And maybe there's more behind scene stuff that we don't know about, right? That made West Craven go in a different direction than he wanted to. Let us know.  And until then, keep drinking.


We are really proud today on behalf of all British Columbians to launch a memorial across the license plate. It's a small but significant gesture on behalf of all British Columbians to really reflect the gratitude that we all feel for the men and women who go overseas on our behalf and often some of them don't come home. We have tried to find another way to show our gratitude and I think that by having a memorial cross license plate it recognizes those families who have paid the ultimate price where they've lost a loved one in conflict. And so from our perspective a very emotional day to day as we step up to say thank you to express our heartfelt gratitude and to ensure that the people of British Columbia recognize the incredible sacrifice that these families have made. Matthew was 25 years old when he was killed on the 25th of May 2007. He was serving with the RCD. He's a good man. He was a real man. So many of these guys stood up for us and are ready to stand up for us. We owe them a thanks. It shows respect for my son. It helps the memory carry on. I'd like to thank the government of BC for doing this. There's no way you can understand to pride it when you have this plate. Thank you.


Akshay! His last name is Kumar, we said Akshay!  He has movies he makes and a trailer has dropped today! BAM! BAM!  I'm stupid, that's true. And you can follow us on Instagram and Twitter! Juicy Compton. It's so juicy. And thank you for watching us on Patreon and follow us on official Twitter account. And follow us if you like American reactions, follow us on our 2.0 channel. Yep, we get a lot of comments that are saying, hey, did you guys know this movie dropped? Why don't you react to this trailer and it's an American film and we're like, happened a few days ago guys, we're going to 2.0. Dude, boy no, if you want American stuff. But a trailer dropped at, I believe, one AM hour time last night. What? Yes. This was one we didn't get up for so I'm sorry. Sorry. But we are getting to it now. But you should be proud because sometimes when we've done those, the comments are, Corbin you need sleep, don't kill yourself, Corbin you look so tired. I still need sleep. But this is called Houseful 4. I don't know if there's a Houseful 1, 2 and 3. Who knows, I hope not. I love that they just go straight to the 4 like George Lucas did with the Star Wars. He just went straight to New Hope. Episode 4. You're watching that movie for the first time, people didn't realize it. Wait, episode 4. But it has Aceh and a ton of other people. Creedie? Yeah, Creedie. That's got a bunch of people. Yeah, there's a lot of names in that title. But I have no clue what it's about but why not just get into it. No clue. Houseful 4. It's not like a take on Full House, is it? I don't think so. Here we go. So now what I was expecting. I was expecting that. And now I was expecting that. Wait a minute. Is it a 4? No, it's similar. I'll show you what it is. It's your wife. It's not your wife. It's my wife. Are you talking about your wife? It's your wife. You can tell us if this is actually a... It's said franchise but I don't know if there's 1-2-3 maybe. Do they all have to deal with different kite, like different people being reincarnated kind of thing? Right. Because it looks like he's in a previous life, he was like in Padma Vat basically. Right, exactly. It looks very much spoofier than Padma Vat. Even the villain. Even the villain. Very spoofier than Padma Vat. It looks like that. And then he comes and then he gets reincarnated to modern day time. Yeah. But everybody is figuring out who they were in a past life and how they're connected now. Yeah. That's a funny concept.   And Akshay was known for, you know, in his early days obviously as we know for comedy. Oh man. That's what he was known for. He's one of the funniest... We thought he was Kassari. And I know he didn't mean to be this... I don't think this was meant to be funny. One of the moments I've laughed hardest on this channel was when we were watching... We were having... I think it was the laugh challenge, wasn't it? And the bubble bath happened and we saw a foot come out. And I said, if that's Akshay, I'm gonna die. And it was. That's one of the hardest laughs I've ever had on the channel was Akshay in the bathtub. Oh yeah. And he's got some of the awesome 90s. But see, those weren't intentionally funny. And... Come on. That little cameo by Nawaz. I'm glad you went back to show me that because I was still laughing. I heard the voice and I was like... Yeah, I was laughing from the words and I looked down at what he was saying and I didn't capture who it was. I'm glad you spotted them and brought it back. Okay, so there is in a house full two, three and one. Okay, yeah.  Themed on reincarnation.  This is one of those where don't go in for anything other than just get ready. Have fun. Like a Mel Brooks movie. Yeah, have fun. Just go in and have a good time. Or at least October 25th. He's also the director is... Farhad Samji. And it's... The Chennai Express. Chennai Express Diwali. Bol Bachchan. Bol Bachchan. And so he's done quite a few, I think.  Oh, he's a writer of Sinbya. And I guess did Houseful Three. He's a writer on all those that I listed off. Okay. Okay, yeah, yeah, writer. So that's good. I mean, great. It means it should have good writing, hopefully, right? And I would hope so.   I love it. Maybe they were trying to make it a surprise because Nawaz's name is not in the... I'm sure it was. In the title card. I'm sure. You know what it reminds me of a little bit? I don't know that his role will be this large. Yeah, it's probably not big. It reminds me of Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder. Tropic Thunder. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, it's going to be so fun to see Nawaz stretch his comedy skills, man. Yeah. Because he wasn't, like, from what we've seen, that BBMBS thing. Yeah, that's where you got to start, which was a comedy movie. And he's done a few comedy films that we haven't seen. Yeah, but we know him as the sizzling still. Yeah. One of the greatest actors we've ever seen getting to now show off his comedy. And he was big right there, man. He was over the top.  And I mean that in the best way. Yeah. Yeah, it definitely looks like a fun entertaining. I don't know how the others were, so you can tell us if, like, they were terrible and this is probably going to be terrible or I don't know. Right. Because we don't, we've never even heard of them. You may say, guys, do yourselves a favor. Yeah. I don't know. Are the... Hold on. Who's in the other ones? Is it all Akshay or do they just... I don't know. I didn't even know there was anything before this. The first one, the third one came out in 2016 and that has Akshay Kumar, Bakchan's son. It's really interesting. Jackie Shroff. Jackie Shroff. It's really interesting because this seems like a one and done kind of premise, but are all of the films the premise about, I mean, if it's still Akshay, is every film... It's different reincarnations. Reincarnations. That would be funny. Every film he's realizing a different life he lived, as he's had different lives, as he's reincarnated. That's a really funny concept. Yeah. John Abraham? He's the second one. Wow. And then Akshay still. So it's Akshay's franchise, basically. Yeah. I don't know how they are. So you're going to the ones that are going to have to tell us how they're... Do we need to see the other ones? Yeah. Because there are some comedy franchises that you don't need to see the other ones. It doesn't look like we need to. Police Academy, you don't need to see the other police academies. Yeah. You just see Police Academy. Police Academy 4. Oh, yeah. You just watch them. You can take them out of sequence. Same things. I mean, you don't have to. It helps. But like, you don't have to watch the first Ron Burgundy film to laugh at the second one. Shout out. You don't. We are not going to agree on that. So we don't want them to talk about that. Oh, really? You think you do need to see? I think the first one is far superior. I wasn't talking about the superiority of them. I don't think you can watch the second one. I'll watch the first one. Really? Yeah. Well.  So, you know, that's not saying much. Burn. Great argument. Likely, I think you're really smart.  Anyways, but this, please let us know actually how it is. I wonder why his name is not in... Oh, here. We actually have a synopsis on YouTube. Synopsis. When six lelos are parted because of an evil conspiracy and revenge in the era of 1419. They crossed paths once again in 2019, which those of you doing the math at home, that's exactly 600 years. However, in the present life, the three boys fall in love with the wrong women and are about to marry the sisters-in-law. As destiny would have it, history repeats itself when the three couples end up in sit and guard. Once again, what it all began. Will they remember their past lives in time for marriage? Or will they be stuck with the wrong lovers forever? So far it's coming to confuse you.  Come. There was a few more things, but you scroll. That's right. We're done. Come. I like a bit of that. Come and witness this epic reincarnation comedy. That's not very often you get to say it's an epic reincarnation comedy. I don't think you've ever said that. I don't know if I've ever said those words. Well, that was... A new genre, the epic reincarnation comedies. Well, that was funny. Let us know what you thought of it down in the comments below.