Slaughter's my name, Luke Slaughter. Cattle's my business. It's a tough business. It's big business. I got a big stake in it, and there's no man west of the Rio Grande big enough to take it from me. Luke Slaughter of Tombstone. Luke Slaughter of Tombstone. Civil War cavalryman turned Arizona cattleman across the territory from Yuma to Fort Defiance from flagstaff to the Wachukas and below the border through Chihuahua and Sonora, his name was respected or feared, depending on which side of the law you were on. Man of vision, man of legend, Luke Slaughter of Tombstone. Like a violent storm or an earthquake, you can feel a lynching coming on long before it arrives. And there was lynch in the air that afternoon in Tombstone. Since he's so uncommon-concerned over a few rustlers, why don't you catch him, same as I do? Hello, Sutton. Afternoon, Slaughter. I got me one in jail right now.  You wanted to see me? Yeah, we may be in for trouble. Listen. There's only one thing good enough for rustlers, I say, and that's hanging. They caught me one and that's what's going to happen to him. McCuddle! Two stalwarts of the Cattleman's Association. You, gents, going to come around to the courthouse and see the fun? What fun, McCuddle? What fun? Why, ain't you heard? My wranglers caught a rustler on my spread last night, caught him red-handed, butchering the yearling. We're going to hang him this afternoon. Isn't that up to the judge? The judge? Why, this is a plain case out, not law-breaking, and I aim to see justice done. When is the trial? The trial. Oh, yeah. The trial is going to be at 2 o'clock and all you gents is invited. Come on, everybody, let's go to the court. See what I mean, Slaughter? Yeah, I do, Sutton. We'd better go to the courthouse and see to it that McCuddle doesn't do something we'll all have to answer for. The court will now come to order. The deputy will bring in the prisoner. Say, Sutton. What is it, Slaughter? I think I know that man. What's your name? Yancy Bell. I do know him. You know the charge? Cattle Russell. Now, how do you plead? Guilty or not guilty? Neither one. Well, you got to plead one or the other. Well, I don't. Who's the plaintiff in this case? Why, you know dang well I am, Judge. And he pleads guilty. My man caught him butchering a yearlin with my brand on it and my property. Now, come on, let's get this over with. Hold your horses, McCuddle. I ain't holdin' no horses.  Well, man, man's entitled to a fair trial. Well, he's gettin' it. Now, come on, say it. Your Honor. Slaughter, you stay out of this. This man. Hello, Yancy. Luke. Luke Slaughter. It's been a long time since Vicksburg. I recognized you even without the cavalry uniform. What is this? I'll tell you what it is, McCuddle. This man and I soldier together in the Illinois Cavalry during a war. Unless he's changed a lot since those days, he's not a thief. Your button into my business, Slaughter. This is a public trial, McCuddle. And I'm takin' on the job of this man's attorney. Any objections, Your Honor? Well, I don't... No. Now, tell the court, Yancy. Did you butcher that yearling? Yes. Yes, I did. Why? Because... because I was hungry. I don't know this part of the country, and I didn't know I was so close to town. You intend to pay for it? I would have if there'd been anybody to pay. Do you have any money? I had $500 Mexican until last night. What happened to it? The men who jumped me took it. That's a lie! A lie! You gonna take the word of a stranger against my man?  He's not a stranger to me, McCuddle. Now, what do you figure that yearling was worth? What's that got to do with it? I'm gonna pay for it and request the court to release the accused. What? $15. I'd ought to cover it. You can't do that! I am doing it. If the court so pleases. Well, uh... Well... Well, yes. Under the circumstances, restitution having been made and motive-explained. What? Are you gonna let this Stephen Russell go? Uh... Yes. Yes, I am. I put you on that bench, George, and I'm gonna take you off of it. You can't get away with this. And this is a court of law, Mr. McCuddle. You cannot intimidate the bench with threats. Case dismissed. Why you! Thank you, Luke. Thank you. I'm staying down at the San Jose house, Yenzie. Let's get your stuff and go down there so we can talk in private. You'll pay for this, slaughter. I already have $15. Come on, Yenzie. Oh, this feels good. I haven't been on a bed in over two weeks. You weren't on a bed for two years during the war. Yeah, that's right. You realize it's been nearly 15 years. Yeah. You were kids, Yenzie. Greenhorn kids. What have you been doing since? Went east for a while, New York. Big Don was too much for me, though. Finally went home to Quincy a couple of years back and I got married. Is that too much for you, too? She died six months ago in childbirth. Kid died, too. I'm sorry, Yenzie. So that's why I come out here. Starting all over again, you might call it. How about you, Luke? Well, cattle's been my business since the war. Kansas, Texas, a tombstone. You must be mighty big in these parts. That was quite a show you put on in the courtroom. No, you were getting a raw deal. You mind if I take my boots off? Peter kind of swelled in. Go ahead, stretch out. You're welcome to anything I've got till you get organized. That's mighty nice of you, Luke. Especially since I've been cleaned. That's at least I could do. I remember a sniper one night about four weeks into the siege of Vicksburg and what you did about him. That's long ago, Luke. Forget it. Man doesn't forget things like that. You've lost a spur. Yeah, those jaspers weren't very polite when they jumped me last night. Took 500 Mexican silver, huh? Yep. I aim to get it back, though. I'll handle that for you. You just take it easy. I got some work to do over at the cattle association office. Nancy, you aren't leaving anything out on this yearling butchering, are you? When I get ready to lie to you, I'll let you know in advance, Luke. Yeah. Well, you get some rest. I'll be back about supper time. Hold it, Sutton. I was just closing the office. Well, I'll close up later. I'll be back on the bills of sale on that last herd I brought up from Texas. Yeah, all right. See, that was quite a stunt you pulled in court today. Well, the way I figured it, Nancy Bell was being railroaded. I would have stopped that even if I didn't know him. Some of the boys thought you was taking a little too much in the own hands. Wasn't that just what McCartle was trying to do? Yeah, I suppose so. How do you know he's innocent? He says so. Well, think out of town to feed back. See you later. So long, Sutton. Slaughter. Hey, Slaughter. Wake up. Wake up. Oh, Sutton. I must have dozed off. See, what time is it, anyway? Time, what? It's almost eight o'clock. Eight o'clock? I forgot all about supper. Slaughter, listen to me. Oh, what are you so all fired upset about? There's been a shooting at the Crab Tree Livery Stable right next to the San Jose house where you're staying. Who got shot? Drake McCordle. In a moment, Luke Slaughter of Tombstone returns. A trio of rough and ready prospectors make trouble for our frontier gentleman, J.B. Kendall, in his next dramatic exploit on CBS Radio. The trouble starts when a young hitchhiker, whom Kendall has picked up, discovers gold. For more Western thrills, stay with us on CBS Radio right after Luke Slaughter, as most of these same stations bring you another exciting adventure with our frontier gentleman. And now, act two of William M. Robeson's production of Luke Slaughter of Tombstone. Excuse me, let me through. Let me through there. Hello, Slaughter. Hello, sir. I've been wondering if you'd show up. Let me see your gun. What for? Seize to me you'd know the answer to that. It was bad blood between McCordle and you, wasn't it? Here, look at it. Well, it ain't been fired, or it's been cleaned awful fast. That gun hasn't been out of its holster all day. All right, all right. Now, you know anything about this? I only heard about it five minutes ago, Sheriff. When did it happen? About an hour ago. Where's the body? Inside the delivery stable there. Is it where it happened? You're asking an awful lot of questions, Slaughter. Now, let's get one thing straight, Sheriff. I'm as interested in who committed this murder as you are, maybe even more so.  All right, all right. Why, you cattlemen can't leave things to the law. Where did it happen? Right here in the alley in front of the delivery stable. Anybody see it? Jack Crabtree, the owner of this table. Hey, Jack. Yeah? Yes, Sheriff? You come here. This gent wants to know what you're seeing. All right, I'll tell him. I sure will. Oh, hello there, Mr. Slaughter. Mr. Fon, didn't you? Well, during this thing I ever saw, I was telling the sheriff and the boys... Just tell me what happened, Jack. Well, I was sitting back there by the harness rack working on a snaffle bin. And I heard somebody singing out here in the alley. You know how a man will sing when he's had a couple of snorts. It appeared from the sound that he was coming in. About that time I looked up, but I couldn't see very well because it was dark and I was back inside there under the lantern, you see.  Then it was a shot and Ricardo fell right here. Of course, I didn't know it was Ricardo then. You know who made the threat? No. No, but don't. I doused the lantern in a hurry because I was a setting duck, you see. Then I got down behind a bale of hay and waited. Did you hear anything else? Just one thing. A man, a sobbing. Oh, it's an awful thing to hear a man sobbing. It's just... Well, I got up then, come out here and looked around real cautious like. There was nobody in the alley except in Drake, Ricardo's body. That's when I ran to get sheriff. Thank you, Jack. You reckon you know who did it? That's my job, Jack. You just give me the information. I'll take care of finding the killer. Oh, sure, sure. Well, that's all I know. Jack, would you recognize that voice if you heard it again? Well, now that's good question. Oh, good question.  It's a real... strange. Strange.   He's not a rustler, sheriff. I don't know where he is right now, but I'll find him. And if I think he did this, I'll turn him over to you. Where are you going? Up to my room. Wash up and get some supper. Any objections? Don't try to leave town. Don't worry. You missed the excitement. You know about it. Couldn't very well help it. Quite a commotion out there in the alley. How come you didn't go out and join the crowd? Well, I look at it this way. I'm new here and none too popular with the law and some of the people. Somebody might jump to conclusions. Figured I'd just stay out of it. I see you're cleaning your gun, Yancy. Mmm. You mind if I take a look at it? Yes, Luke. I'm mined. Why? Because a man's gun is his own business. Unless he's done something wrong with it. Have you? Depends on how you look at it. Yancy. I want to see that gun. Then you'll have to take it away from me, Luke. Give it to me. No. I said give it to me. This gun's been fired recently, Yancy. I didn't say it hadn't. Did you kill Drake McCartle? No. It isn't the question you're asking, Luke. It's the way you're asking it. I'm not going to answer you. I'm trying to help you, Yancy. I'm trying to help you. Then you'll have to find some other way to do it. I told you when I get ready to lie, I'll let you know in advance.  She was going out for some supper. It changed my mind, Sheriff. You have anything new on the killing? I'm working on it, Slaughter. I'm working on it. Ain't very much to go on so far. What about McCartle's enemies? Oh, he had lots of them. He was a pretty bullheaded man. If he couldn't get his way by asking for it, he got it by force. I know that. You know of anything that happened today that'd make somebody want to shoot him? Well, you're about the best man to answer that question. Let's turn up any clues in the alley next to the body. Clues? Empty cartridges, footprints, anything like that. There were some cartridges, but there was old ones. As for footprints with all them people milling around afterwards, there was lots of them. Nothing at all, hm? One thing. Might not mean nothing at all. Again, it might. This. Broken spur. Well, I see you got both yours so that lets you out. But when I find the man who's missing one, I sure want to talk to him. Can I borrow that for a little while? What for? I saw a man with one spur missing today. This might make two missing. Just point them out to me. No, Sheriff. This is my play. I'll make it alone. We had one, Killin. We don't want another. There won't be. If I can help it. Yancy! Oh, oh, yeah, Mr. Slaughter. You've been on duty all evening? Oh, yeah, ever since supper.  Mm-hmm, about 10, 15 minutes ago. You say where he was going? Well, he asked me was there a place to get drunk. Good and drunk. I told him he could do that most anywhere, but the Crystal Palace was the biggest saloon in town. Did he go there? Well, I can't say. He just headed out the door. Say, he looked awful like he'd been in a fight or something. He had. He may be in another one. Where'd you get the money to buy that liquor, Yancy? Hello, Luke. You have a drink. Where'd you get the money? I got it. Where? From the people who owed it to me. There. Help yourself. Did you take it by force? You might say that, but it was mine in the first place. Let me see your spurs, Yancy. Spurs? What for? Just let me look. Sure? You were missing one this afternoon. Now you're missing two. Sure am. Does that one fit where the left one's broken off? Can't tell without trying, can we? Let's see. Yeah, it fits. Where'd you find it? In the alley, back of the San Jose house, near Drake McCartle's body. I guess it must have broken off there. Then you were in the alley. Luke, it's customary for a man to put his horse up at the stable nearest to his hotel. Sure I was in that alley. Yancy, let me have your gun. I'm going to turn you over to the sheriff. You're going too far, Luke.  I'm taking you in. No, you're not. Drop your gun, Beltiancy. I'm warning you, Luke. I'll shoot. Now make your place. Who killed McCartle? I'll tell you who killed him. It's the judge. I'll push a man around forever, I told him. A man's got some rights. A man can be pushed so far. And I did his dirty work for him. I was covering up for his rustling. And the first decent thing I do, letting that fellow off, he has his ride, and he's jumped me and beat me.  And he didn't think I could do it. But I did. I did it. Just like this. And he deserved it. I did it. Easy, Judge. It's all over now. I'll take him slow. All right, Sheriff. Come on, Judge. Yeah, Luke. Hey, made a mistake. A man can't always be right, Luke. I understand. Thanks. Now, about my gun and his money. No, you don't have to tell me. Like you said, a man's entitled to his privacy. I want to tell you. I was out east of town late this afternoon practicing on rattlesnakes. When one of the hands that jumped me last night came along. I guess I got a little mad. He had $20 on him, so I took that on deposit. Why were you practicing shooting? Because an old man living can call me a cattle rustler. If the judge hadn't gotten him first, I'd have killed McCurdle. Was it that important to you? Pride's a real funny thing, Luke. I guess I don't have to tell you that. No, I guess not.  Now, that would make me right happy, Luke. And then I'm going to buy you one. Next week at this time, we return with... Slaughter's the name. Luke Slaughter. When we meet up again, you can call me that. Luke Slaughter. Now, stay tuned for Frontier Gentlemen, which follows immediately over most of these same stations. This is the CBS Radio Network.


All right, good afternoon, everybody. My name is Kyle Campos. I am the Enterprise DevOps and Platform Leader at CSA Insurance. We are a 100-year-old company insurance provider for AAA. I am a frustrated but hopeful cloud leader inside of a large enterprise. Our journey inside of Cloud Foundry actually came out of the frustration of change management to a large degree. It was extremely painful to get infrastructure. It was extremely painful once you had that infrastructure to get your code on it. So really, it was a engineering revolt that started Cloud Foundry at CSA that got it in there. So I know we all have different experiences with ITSM. Some of these are obviously going to be my experiences. I know they are to a large degree shared experiences. Some of the details might, you might have optimized some areas where we haven't, and that's great. But hopefully at the end of this, we can see that we have different delivery models and where we can align, we should. Where we can optimize one or the other, we should. But at the end of the goal, I'm here to talk about injecting value around fast delivery and inverting that risk, speed, fear that currently exists in large enterprises around ITSM. So when I set some definitions to, when I refer to our legacy ops environment, that is very low levels of automation, low to none, and extremely high levels of control. So friction everywhere at every turn. So I can start with, I'm focusing on change management for ITSM. So if I pull up the ITIL definition, the goal of change management processes is to ensure that standardized methods and procedures are used for efficient and prompt handling of all changes in order to minimize the impact of change-related incidents upon service quality and consequently improve the day-to-day operations of the organization. So just definition-wise, I'm like, I'm aligned. I'm with you. Like, those outcomes sound great, and we're in full alignment. The trick is, when you extract those words efficient and prompt, I look at what's happening in our legacy ops stack. I look at what's happening in our Cloud Foundry stack, and you can't help but think that those words mean entirely different things to each side of that organization. So we have to kind of tear that back a little bit and say, OK, well, what are the attributes of those methods and procedures in the legacy ops stack versus Cloud Foundry continuous delivery stack? So what I've found is, in the ITSM world, the methods and procedures are traditionally expressed through documentation primarily. The ownership is through governance boards, quite large ones, depending on the size of your enterprise. And the focus tends to be lowest common denominator or slowest common denominator. It has to account for everything. So whatever crazy app team did something 20 years and it's insanely complex, the process has to bend to that. It's measured by compliance. That's kind of its primary focus. Just as long as you do what we say, you're good. Some of the smells here, if you're like, I think I'm in that world, accountability is more highly valued than determinism. So at any point in the process, they feel like there's somebody accountable for that. It doesn't matter in what form they bring that accountability, just as long as they have a name or a team. That's all that matters. And I'm not saying accountability doesn't matter. I'm just saying that it tends to matter the most here. Over time, delivery slows just by nature as more teams come into the process, as you get more applications, governance boards increase, processes increase. So meetings in human touch point tend to increase over time. In continuous delivery models, the methods and procedures tend to be expressed through code, or they should be expressed through code. The ownership should be in the delivery team's hands. The focus should be acceleration, and you measure it by performance. Some of the fruits that start to come out here is that determinism is more important than accountability. So how you get to that decision is more important than who's the name, who can I blame if it goes wrong. I assume most of you have experience in this world. You'll know that a lot of the decisions, approvals are left up to people's whims. They have no idea what this change is about, but they will be accountable because they hit the approve button. So here we wanna inject determinism into how we deliver software. And over time, the delivery should get faster. If the focus is acceleration, we're always looking to optimize speed. And then pipelines increase and human touch point decreases over time. So when you're continuously delivering anywhere a human comes into contact with it, sticks out like a sore thumb, right? And it's a target too for optimization. If we take the same approach here, old and new against efficient and prompt, what are some of the characteristics here? So efficiency, the aim tends to be process refinements. Like that's how you squeeze out efficiency in ITSM. Like, okay, we had five dropdowns on this first ticket. Maybe we'd take it down to four. That's primarily where the process refinements come in. And then the vehicle is training, right? Get people into more training. Let them learn the new processes. It's measured by traceability. Is there other breadcrumbs at every step? The smells here is traceability first. Just as long as you know what happened, it tends to be good enough for efficiency's sake. And then what you run into is that the process, it gets gained to gain efficiency, right? So people naturally feel frustrated that there are changes in getting through in time. And there's all sorts of crafty methods, people gain that system by, whether it's how you get a change approved, whether it's how many changes you shove into some approval form, right? Like, okay, well, if I do one request with 50 things and then I'm gonna get that through faster than I can, I had 50 different releases. There's a very high tolerance towards wasted effort, right? I've been in deployment meetings with literally 100 people on the phone and nobody is embarrassed by that. And I'm embarrassed and nobody's embarrassed. And I'm like, we should all be shocked right now that this is what it's taking. And it creates specialized workforces, right? So there's teams that exist solely to help people navigate that complexity, right? In the new model, the aim is higher quality on time software, full stop. Our vehicle to get there is through automation. We measure it by delivery KPIs. And repeatability first is one of the main fruits, right? It isn't just get it through at all costs and then we celebrate, it's what you've done repeatable and then namely through pipelining, right? The pipeline in this case is the most efficient way to get it to prod. So whereas in ITSM, you're frequently gaming it to get things going faster in continuous delivery, your pipeline is the best way to get there, right? There's no faster way to get it into prod or better way, I should say, faster and better. There might be a faster way, but not a safe way. And in the pipeline world, there's really low tolerance for wasted effort, right? Where you see it, it sticks out and you attack it. And there's team ownership on these pipelines because it's a cross-functional pipeline, right? You're taking it from an engineer's hands and laptop into production and depending on your gates and all the quality and security and performance stuff you have to do, there's a lot of people that are contributing to that pipeline and they have to feel a sense of ownership over it. They have their own KPIs for their boxes along that pipeline and how efficient they run. All right, the illusion. So here's some of the illusions we fall under and inside of ITSM. You get the sense that there's safety and complexity, right? There's this feeling like the harder we make this process, the more people that are involved, the more steps that are involved, it must be injecting safety because there's just so many checkpoints, right? But most of those or many of them tend to be arbitrary. They're non-deterministic. So it's mostly in many cases a facade. Another illusion is that approval is the same thing as accountability. I have conversations probably every week with some other vice president who says, I just keep clicking approve on these things. I have no idea what they are, right?  So approval really at the end of the day when you look at changes, there may be one person there that had any idea in that chain of what this change was. The other illusion and it's sort of this false dichotomy that gets set up on the ITSM side, right? Is that if you're going fast, it must be reckless. So I'm here to talk on a third way that is fast and not reckless, fast and safe. The way I kind of explained this landscape for getting software into production is this, this dangerous road off in the horizon there if we imagine off in the valley is where we're gonna start with a code commit and up here are heavenly production on the top of that we ascend the mountain. So many turns, right? We start with a code commit and then our first sort of junction point if we're being good stewards here is that you have some measure of testing that's gonna happen, right? And after that, you gotta make another turn at process. You gotta make a change request with whatever that artifact is and whenever the change logs are. And then that's gotta go through some set of approvals however many it takes to get through your organization. Then you gotta open up a change window when's this gonna happen, right? And then you do the change and then you gotta wrangle another group of people that are gonna come back around and validate the change and say everything that's right, you didn't break the 60 other teams in your company. This is a very generous view. I'm gonna say, we'll say success at that point. That's a very generous amount of steps there. But congrats, you got it into one environment, right? Okay, now go ahead and repeat all of that for your test environments. You're gonna have to cross the bridge of real data which is always a harrowing effort. However many pre-prod environments you may have and then eventually you get it into production, right? And so ITSM overlords will kind of show these huge process maps and say like, yeah, that's it.  It's really uncomfortable and annoying. And you start complaining enough about that and they're like, okay, we'll optimize a little bit. And then they're like, we got a newer car for you to take all the same turns. You gotta do all the same process bits, right? Nothing is substantively changed with the process. You might, maybe a little more comfortable. We took a few radio buttons away. The approval list is from 30 to 25, whatever it may be, right? And then we come along with Cloud Foundry and we try to explain that there's a paradigm shift, right? Now I have a cable car that goes from the bottom straight to the top of that mountain. It's repeatable. It's the same journey every time, right? I don't have to make those turns. I don't have to stop at that stop light. I don't have to look both ways here or there, right? You're still gonna get the questions. Okay, great. They'll say, I understand you have this whole fancy thing out there, but you still have a driver's license, right? And you're gonna still obey all my rules and you kind of give them, no. That's not exactly what I'm talking about here. So then we get into the paradigm shift and how we explain this. And by the way, just as encouragement, this will be, if you're involved with this now, this will be, you'll have this conversation many, many, many times and you'll win it and then you're gonna have to win it again in two weeks. And so that's the frustrated part of me, but I'm remaining hopeful here. So in the old ITSM, right? Change request is out of band. It's never, it's not event-driven.  The approval, as we've talked about, it's broad and it's arbitrary. The change windows are very often coordinated and they're static, right? They're either a set window you have or it's a unique one-time window that you set. The change is unique, non-item potent, right? So if you were to do it again, you'd have to do all the stuff again each way, even though if it's a scripted or a standard change set that you have in your process, it's essentially a unique event each time. And the change validation is unique to the change type, right? So you're like, oh, I think I might have messed up group X over there, so get them in here. And the larger point here is that the posture is that the more times you do this, the more operational risk you're adding, right? So everybody's just terrified of you doing the process, the terrible process that they set up. Like, please don't do this. The more times you deploy, the more operational risks there are. In the new, we're saying change requests are event-driven, right? They happen the moment, packages made perhaps, or once your tests say that it can be deployed, right? It's as soon as it needs to. The approval should be deterministic and automated. So when I was doing this change, I would, for our products, I'd look at that approval list, I'd go to each one of them and I'd say, you approve this, what do you need to know about when we're deploying this app for you to say it's good? And they're like, I don't even care, I just always hit approve. So I'm like, okay, you're out of the list. And just one by one, go down. And I honestly, in this case, found exactly zero people that cared for whenever we deployed this. They had no dependency chain to it, not a care in the world. So in their case, it's only our, in this one app's case, it's only our test that matter. But there's certainly room for external dependencies and automation that you can weave in there. And we have that for some of our applications. But the point being, get determinism into that. Like what is the, what needs to light up green for you to be happy that it can go? That change window is encapsulated in dynamic, right? So it's, since we're event driven, the deploy will happen once all the tests say is safe. And then the change window is as small as it needs to be for that change to happen. And obviously with Cloud Foundry, we have a lot of great ways of doing zero downtime deployments, right? Change should be uniform and not impotent, right? So part of this being the nature of immutable software, the other part of it being that you have great pipelines. And again, change validation, we build that into your blue-green deployment, right? So if we have some fear that production is significantly different than staging or your pre-prod environments, which in most enterprises, there's always some measure of surprise. You can build in all types of safety mechanisms into your blue-green deployment, cut over traffic slowly, you know, the Netflix model, you can carry stuff, whatever you need to do in production. But the point is I don't want anybody calling my team to say stay up at 1 a.m. and go tell us if this is broken. We want the robots to do that. And then here, the posture is, change reduces operational risk, right? So we're trying to say the more times we do this, the better we get at it, the better our product is, the more value our customers receive on time. So we're really trying to invert that posture. So I talked a little bit about it performance being measured by KPIs.  But a macro KPI here for us is the time from the package build, so that the second something could possibly get to prod, to the time it actually lives in prod, what is the time difference between that? And on our most optimized pipeline, that time is 38 minutes, right? So we set baselines for each one of these products. So from the time engineer commands, all the tests runs, the package is built, typically takes about 38 minutes for that to go through all the different testing QA browser tests and API tests and security and performance and land up in production, right? And so for us, we're like that, that's pretty aren't great for us. Like 38 minutes is pretty fantastic. I don't know that we can do much better than that though we should try. Now for others, that is just mind blown. What are you doing?  And so they're like, Kyle, why are you not getting into the cab meeting for this stuff? And this is actually a real life conversation I had. I am on the board, I've just, haven't been in any of those meetings in a long time. So the big idea that I'm trying to get through here I guess is that undefployed code is at best a depreciating asset, right? Every minute delay from the time it could be deployed to the time it's in production decreases the value and increases the risk. You can ask any engineer, would you rather fix a problem you committed 38 minutes ago or one that you worked on three months ago? If they're still working there by the time it makes production which we've had examples of both, right? So risk in that sense from an application engineering sense also obviously from a security posture, right? So the security has done application developers the biggest favor here in stories like Equifax and such that were sort of frozen by change sets that were too big, they couldn't get through, couldn't update their web stacks. And now everybody learns from that. Oh, I guess it is a problem when you can't deploy at a moment's notice very quickly and safely to your environments, right? So the security story has helped us illuminate the application story here. So some takeaways here. I'm asking us Cloud Foundry evangelists here to really embrace the paradigm shift and to not shoehorn CF in as a step forward optimization. It's a new path.  And we have to do the hard work to communicate the paradigm shift here. Otherwise you're not gonna reap all the benefits of the platform. And as good DevOps engineers, we need to use system thinking with the goal of continuous delivery into production as the framework through which you optimize. So if our mental framework is that pipeline from engineers hands into production and we use system thinking about how do we optimize that whole pipeline? Your considerations need to be for the performance of that entire pipeline like that KPI I showed. And not just, oh, the QA guys like to work this way. And so they take the football and they run away for a week and they come back or the security guys like to do the same and performance likes to do the same. And then four weeks later, we have a release optimize for continuous delivery in production. And the truth is we're beyond rejecting the false dichotomies and non-to-inverse relationships when I talked about speed and security. So the legacy mindset will be fast is reckless and we're not just saying it's a false dichotomy and they're disconnected. Or now we're on to actually saying, actually there's industry proof that it's the inverse of that. Being slow is reckless, right? If your whole business can vanish if you can't get fixes out at a moment's notice. We got to relentlessly hunt down in determinism, right? Where it exists, where people's whims are there, where it's a phone call, where it's a meeting, where it's people's hunches and fears, you got to drive that out of the room and certainly don't let it all into the pipeline. And time to market is a KPI for every change. Minimize depreciating assets in the form of undeployed code. So I mean frequently we use that KPI at a business abstract layer, right? This product, this big feature, but you really got to drive that down to every change. Like how are we treating every change as important to get into a product as soon as possible? Champion convention rather than chastise over compliance. So this is more of a culture awareness note for the two different models. Frequently the feeling in the legacy ops and ITSM stack is that you're just getting browbeat for compliance on the process, right? Regardless of if you're like, but I found a new efficiency or something like that. So champion the convention of your pipelines, right? And like I was talking about the pipelines, if it is the most efficient way, then you're just creating opportunity for application teams to leverage the most benefit, right? If you inherit this convention, your life will be so much easier. And the process should serve the outcome not the other way around. I'm really consistently amazed about how often you get into meetings and processes held up like this, just like unchangeable force in the room where the humans, we create these things, we shouldn't make them do what we want. And the outcomes are really an alignment opportunity. So as I engage with our ITSM partners, you know, I tell them like look, we want the same thing. We're gonna get there differently and where we can align on technology, let's do it, where we can talk together, where my robot can talk to your robot, let's do that, right? But let's align on the outcomes and not the how. So to wrap up, I think we just really need to leverage this paradigm shift as Cloud Foundry enthusiasts to establish that new organizational value structures around the speed of delivery. It takes a lot of work, a lot of repeated work, a lot of unfun work, but it's necessary.  Let's deliver fast, safe, and deliver value. And there's one last thing here before I close. I have change request 24, winging 79.68 for ending this presentation. If you could just approve that, I'll be done. There's my contact information. If you have any questions, I will be talking with Pivotal guys on a panel about Platform as a Product a little bit later. Yeah, I'll be hanging out. That's all, thanks.


A brief statement here, then I imagine you've got something to say. This has been a productive week, looking back a particularly busy year for the Atlantic Alliance and a most successful one. Despite Soviet propaganda and attempts at intimidation, NATO has remained unified and strong, and we can be thankful and proud that NATO's determination to defend Europe, defend our freedom, and, yes, defend the peace. The summit that we just concluded demonstrates the unity of the western industrialized nations, the enduring strength of our shared vision and values, and our resolve to advance our common interests. And so today, I leave London, I am leaving with renewed confidence that the future belongs to the free and that our great democracies can meet the challenges before us. Together, we can protect peace with liberty, create greater prospects for growth, move toward more free and open trading markets, and build an era of progress for the 80s, spreading opportunities and benefits to people throughout the world. Sometimes people become so absorbed in day-to-day problems they forget the big picture, but step back a moment and consider the progress that we've made. In 81, the economies of the seven major industrialized nations represented here at the summit had an average growth rate of 1.8 percent with an 8.5 percent inflation. Today, our average growth rate has risen to 4 percent while inflation has been cut in half. And in our own country, we've created more than six million jobs in the last 18 months. We are succeeding, and thanks to closer cooperation, closer coordination, and thanks to steady adherence to policies that have proven to be sound, that is why we are succeeding. And now, because by some inadvertence, I may have missed a point that you wanted to hear about. Yes, Lou? Mr. President, in the big picture of our relations with the Soviet Union, you've made a lot of appeals for them to come back to the table. You embraced a new proposal at Stockholm, but there doesn't seem to be any movement at all. What evidence is there that the Soviets are prepared in any way to negotiate with the United States or with any of the Western powers? Well, we're so accustomed to viewing the Soviet as engaged in various kind of machinations and so forth. It's beginning to occur to some of us that maybe the silence is because they don't know what to say right now. So we'll let them, after all, you know, this is the third leader in the period that I've been in office here, let them make up their minds what it is, and we will keep the door open for any time that they want to come back. Mr. President, do you believe that they will take a different attitude if you are re-elected to a second term? Well, I think there's probably more chance that we'll be talking to each other if I am than there is before. Helen? Mr. President, the community says that you'll go anywhere, any time, with no preconditions to negotiate with the Soviet Union. Does that mean you will negotiate underground testing, anti-satellite treaties, and the Star Wars shield? Well, Helen, I think that when you negotiate, from my own experience back in the labor management days of doing that, both sides, whatever is on their mind that they think are problems, or facets of the problem that brings you to the table, get them all out in the table and see what the solutions might be. Yes, if this is what they want to talk about, we're very willing to talk about it. We have refused to talk about the underground testing and anti-satellite. There is one thing we have that we want on the table, and that is also that there will be a recognition of the need for adequate verification. Now, the anti-satellite thing is one that is the easiest thing to hide in the world, anything that's going forward in that, the possible exception of chemical warfare. So on our part, they know that we want to be sure that we can come together on some reasonable verification so we won't live in suspicion of each other, and whatever they want to bring up in these others, we'll be happy to see it, Chris. Mr. President, everywhere you went on this trip, there were big crowds supporting you, but there were also tens of thousands of demonstrators opposing your policy on nuclear arms. Why, despite all of your efforts and all of your speeches in recent months, do so many people still oppose your policies in this area? Well, I don't take credit for all of the demonstrators being there for me. I don't think yesterday picked out any single individual. I think we all felt that we were being, but isn't that sort of, doesn't that go with the territory anymore that wherever we go, or governmental people go, figures go, or even if they don't go there, demonstrations have become a fact of life. Somehow people have felt that that's the way to express their ideas in a democracy in spite of all of the legitimate channels that are open to them they take to the streets. And I wasn't too conscious of them, the here and there, yesterday was the great major demonstration of course, but that's, I don't think they're speaking for a majority. And I think sometimes they're unreasoning in that, as yesterday, hasn't any of them ever stopped to think that no one is demonstrating and they're not demonstrating in the nation that has the most nuclear weapons of all. If I may follow up though, sir, why do you think it is that they oppose your policies? Well, they seem to think they have a simple answer to warfare that if we just lay down our weapons and stand back empty-handed that somehow peace will come to the world. They haven't stopped to figure it might be the peace of the grave. Mr. President, the summit leaders, you and the other leaders confronted three very urgent economic problems, high American interest rates, the threat of default by debtor countries, and the possibility of an oil cutoff, and came up with solutions for none of these three. Couldn't the American taxpayers wonder whether this was really worth the time and the money, you smell? Oh, I disagree with that, that we didn't come up with answers for any of them. We had very thorough discussions of all of these problems and we came to great agreement about how you go forward now in dealing with these problems. The they aren't problems that you suddenly say here, we will automatically do this if something else happens. The we have a general agreement about the necessity of us all staying together in the event of another oil crisis to for two reasons, not only to see that we don't have economic breakdowns and in countries because of the lack of energy, but also to, well, to that we do not see the panic increase in prices that has occurred before, which could set back the recovery that's taking place in every one of our countries. But all of those things we dealt with. Just to follow, you said that there was agreement, but there was certainly no agreement on interest rates. You were the only one of the seven who said that they were not linked to budget deficits. Do you feel that possibly you could be wrong about that? No, because I'm the only one there that with figures proved it. Right now, our deficit as a percentage of gross national product is lower than that of three other nations that were present. And one nation alone was lower than ours and one nation was tied with ours. But if you lump them all together and roughly their combined gross national products are about equivalent to ours, and you would find that their percentage of deficit in total was greater in regard to gross national product than ours. What I was able to establish is that the connection is between deficit and interest rates cannot be established at all. When we made our greatest cut in interest rates from 21 and a half down to 11, the deficit was going up. But you go under the next column of inflation in all of those countries and you find that that's what the interest rates are tied to is inflation or the fear of inflation. And in our country, because we've been so successful with curbing inflation, I have to say it is the fear that we still are going to let inflation get out of hand. Mr. President, when you say that the Soviets don't really know what to say right now, are you indicating that perhaps Mr. Chanyanko is in over his head or maybe just too old to do the job? No, I'm kind of. I was really pointing at someone else. So after his, I'll take hers back there. But no, I think that the come times when, since they sort of ruled by committee, the Poland Bureau, that there isn't a consensus there on the course that they should should be taking right now. And this was presented in a very fine article in The Economist a short time ago that said that maybe the bear is hibernating. The statement on terrorism that was issued here outlines some proposed actions, but apparently not a coordinated plan for action. What do you think the significance of that statement is and what kind of discussions were held on cooperation on preemptive strikes? I don't think there anything came in the nature of thinking in terms of attacking some place if we believe, but we did discuss thoroughly the problems of terrorism, the fact that actually the greatest defense against it is to try and behave, know in advance what some of the plans are and what they're going to do and for that reason we've come to great agreement on the sharing of intelligence information of all kinds between us. It isn't the kind of problem that you come down with a hard and fast plan which you then discuss publicly. There's you come to an agreement about number one, the necessity of dealing with it, number two, then what together we can do to better deal with it. But you don't spread the details of that around. For great many ramifications that go beyond defensive measures, what kind of a signal are you trying to send here? Well, I think what the secretary was probably referring to is the fact that more and more we are seeing certain countries in the world more or less endorse openly the use of terrorism. And that is a separate problem also to deal with. Well, they've told me the Scotland, Mr. President. The Scots say you really belong there. Well, on my mother's side, her father came from Scotland. We didn't know much more about his line than we had about my grandparents and my father's side. But then on my on the maternal side, my mother's family, the family came from Epsom in County Surrey just south of London here. And we do know something about them. How they got together and baked bread in the backyard in a brick oven that they built and get enough money to come to America. Are you going there next year, sir? Are we going there next year, sir? What? Before the election, you've got to go there. I know that I know you would never believe this, but the decision to go to Bally Purin was in response to a longstanding invitation from them once they had established and told me what I did not know about my family. And I also had an invitation from the previous prime minister of Ireland and from the present prime minister of Ireland. And this date was set a long time ago for the summit. And I didn't see why I could fly over Ireland to England without stopping by and accepting those invitations. Are you anxious to get at Walter Mondale, Mr. President? Are you anxious to get at Walter Mondale, Mr. President?


Welcome back to the run-up. Well, the president-elect, Bola Tinubu, has extended an olive branch to fellow contestants of the PDP, Atiku Obuboka and Peter Obie of the Labour Party and others to join him as a team in making Nigeria a great nation. Tinubu made a call in his acceptance speech after he was declared winner of Saturday's presidential election by the chairman of the Independent Electoral, National Electoral Commission, Aina Mahngudyakubu. Tinubu polled 8,794,726 votes and won in 12 states to beat Alhaji Atiku Obuboka of the PDP, who came second with 6,984,520 votes and also won in 12 states. The Labour Party candidate Peter Obie polled 6,101,533 votes to place a close third. He also won 11 states and the FCT. Former governor of Kano State and New Nigeria People's Party, the NNPP candidate Senator Rabiu Kwon-Kwasew, came fourth with 1,496,687 votes. Joining us to discuss the 2023 outcome of the presidential elections are our guests are Kabiru Sophie, a public affairs analyst. He teaches political science at the Kano State College of Education and Preminary Studies. Hello. Thank you for having me on the program. All right. We also have Vincent Isian, a member of the APC Presidential Campaign Council. He's a professional forum. He is a lawyer and joins us from Aqaibom State. Hello, Vincent. Thank you for having me here on the program. It's a pleasure. Congratulations to Nigerians. It's a great day. Thank you very much. Aranyamgo, perhaps we should start with Vincent because it's their moment. Vincent, it's your moment. You're already basking in the excitement and we understand that. But tell us, what's your assessment of how things played out on the 25th? Well, I'll say once again Nigeria has chosen to ensure that the official democracy is sustained. It was a very tough campaign. It went, probably according to our projections, but it was a tough campaign in spite of attempts by some, so attempts were made by some anti-democratic elements. But the key thing is Nigerians can vote to sustain our democracy. And it's also, we feel good as the APC that Nigerians have decided to continue to entrust their mandates with us. We think we're the best party to sustain this sure democracy and to sustain and to improve on the positive foundations that have already been laid in our, where we're running out of second term. Of course, there are areas that we need to think high in as we come as we run into the new administration. And fortunately, we have also selected, in my view, a candidate and the capacity to deliver the expectations of Nigerians. We thank all Nigerians for putting their trust in the APC. We commend the other parties, especially the PDP, the Labour Party, and even the NNPP and even the other 14 other parties. We are a victory as well to the other parties in many ways. We don't need to say that. So we thank them and we ask them to continue to believe in the institution of democracy. That's democracy in action. You don't win today, you probably win tomorrow. And besides, everybody is a winner. There's still a role. Black countries have said they've invited them to come and join in the process of building Nigeria, taking Nigeria to the level so that we can actually have a nation, a Black African nation that the globe, the whole world is waiting for. And it has to be Nigeria. There can be no other country. And I'm confident that we are sewerable and continue to start to feed our expectations. Well, Kaviru, do you share the same sentiments with Vincent? Well, he gave us almost like another acceptance speech he's basking in the moment. I quite understand that. But do you share the same sentiments? Do you think what went down and culminated in the announcement of the APC presidential candidate is something worth applauding? Yes, I think I agree with him right from the beginning where he mentioned the challenges of his party, I mean, in the context. It was a very tough battle for them, especially considering the fact that many people were skeptical of the ticket even flying through the same fit ticket. And some people wanted to play the religious card against the ticket. And then secondly, of course, they are the infighting that we have seen within APC, the accusations from the presidential candidate on sabotage within the party, especially his and what has you. But despite that, the party got much victorious. So I think yes, about the challenges he has rightly mentioned. And of course, it was a very keen contest. Nobody thought that the Labour Party would beat the APC in Leblos and that helped too. So it was really a very interesting scenario for the elections. It makes the election more acceptable despite the rejection of the process by some party agents. And then we must commend also the what's the announcement of the final results when they reached out to the very soul. Something good from the acceptance speech of Ashwajibullah Ahmad. Kaviru, you have to look around you, maybe there's something that is obstructing your audio at some point, at definite points, we're losing your audio and then it's coming back maybe in a matter of seconds. So look around you, something that might be obstructing your audio. Good thing we still have Vincent, whose audio is clear. So Vincent, we cannot overlook the fact that these elections were seriously marred with controversies. And even the international community, the EU inclusive, have cast passions, they've declared it to be very short of expectations, especially of that of Nigerians. How do you respond to that? I'd like to say that the views of the international observers are still being collated. We are not an observer of the election. But what I'd say is that this election, in my view, seems to be probably one of the most credible elections we have had. And I'll say this especially because of the introduction with the signing of the electoral act, which was done by a president. And that was an important innovation, which brought about a few noble processes in the electoral process, especially the beavers. What we'll see also show that the beavers have actually introduced a lot of credibility in terms of the overall voter turnout. You see that? You talk about credibility. Sorry, I have to cut in here because you talk about credibility, saying the beavers has brought in credibility, but the beavers, the inability or refusal of the INEC officials to use the beavers, which was the main reason why most Nigerians came out on the 25th of February to vote, is a major reason why this election has been questioned. And so for you to be ascribing victory to the beavers or credit to the beavers is getting me a little bit confused. No, it's not because the most important thing I can say is that, first of all, the Nigerians came out to vote because of the renewed interest in the electoral process. Nigerians are actually demanding for those in government to be more responsive to their needs. That's the first thing. And the beavers actually are the primary function. It's actually the biometric voter accreditation system. The most important function of the beavers is voter accreditation. And that has shown true. You see, for instance, in my unit in Fibrom, where we generally have a voter report of about 500 to 600, for the first time in this election, we had a voter report of about 250. That I totally give credit to the beavers. And that you could see that trend running all through Legos for the states that just have 2 million voters. And that's the picture that people are not taking account of. Before the election, we actually asked for the report of collected voters cards. And for instance, in Legos, we have 6 million voters cards. But the figures for people who actually voted is about 1.5. So we are demanding 4.5 voters card that we're collecting. It's a figure. It starts something that we need to start to interrogate. And the people are describing a lot of ratio to not a secondary function of beavers, which is the fact that you can use visa cards to scan results and send to the INX server. That is a secondary function. It's not the primary function of the machine itself. And so that's why I say that machine is actually introducing a lot of credibility to the voter report from the units which are now collated and to these words, local government states. That is the big clause that I've seen that people are missing the point of. Because a lot of people are focusing, well, for whatever reasons, on the fact that they thought that beavers were just, that's a secondary function of beavers. And I think it succeeded. So I think that we need to wait for the final report of the observers. Of course, there were incidents of violence and all that. Nobody's going to deny that. And nobody supports that. And definitely the law enforcement agencies to do what they need to do. INEP also has a part to review the process, like everybody knows, under electoral act. And they're probably going to look at that. So anybody who has complaints, whatever parties, whatever institutions, whatever agents have parties, should go by the book and make whatever complaints they have. And I can look at it. And eventually, of course, we can still go back to our legal approach, which is a very institution that is well regarded and has shown capacity to ensure that the will of who is respected, I have no doubt that anybody who is by the course will know. But I think that this election, it might be, when everybody cools down and reduces it, this election has actually set a lot of marks that we should start to review. Okay. Thank you, ASEAN. I would have loved to stay with you, but let me go to Kabiru, hoping that his audio has improved now. Kabiru, are you there? Yeah, I'm here with you. Let me just take what ASEAN has said. I didn't understand what he meant by secondary function, because that's why I would have wanted to stay with him. But since you can also share your own perspective to this issue, let me just ask you, Bivas, we were made to understand that it can do a lot of things. It can multitask. Not really. It has so many functions. It will aid us in the accreditation process, and it also will upload the results. He kept saying a secondary function. And I was thinking about my phone, like, okay, the phone is for making of calls. And then you're now telling me that because a text message is a secondary function, when I send a text message, I can now resort to say, okay, copy it out, because that's what exactly happened in this thing. There was the ability by the Bivas to upload results. But now they kept telling us that it has to go to the local government before it passes to the state and then to the National Collation Center, and we're asking ourselves why. And then they brought the manual one. So it's like sending a text message and someone on the other side copies it out before forwarding it to where it should go. It makes no sense to ask. So what is your own perspective to this discussion about Bivas having accreditation as a primary function and having the uploading of results? He said scanning and uploading. The uploading of results as a secondary function. Will you take that as a good enough excuse to say that the election was free and fair? Well, I think this explanation of it being a primary or secondary may likely come from INIC. I expect it to come from INIC because INIC had admitted the thought that Bivas was used for accreditation and it was used to upload results like you rightly mentioned to local government and to state level. I think where everything felt is where the result was uploaded from the states to the National Collation Center. And I think that was what was challenged by the agents of the political parties that worked out of the National Collation Center. So I think ideally what should have been done was the same way it was uploaded and sent to the local government then electronically should be sent to the state and electronically it can be sent to the National Collation Center. Even if something is going to be brought manually then at least let it be done simultaneously at the same time. And then when that fell the next thing to do is to see whether there are discrepancies between what was announced in the states and what was announced in the National Collation Center. And if there are no discrepancies then I think it may not really challenge the validity of the results. It depends on the lawyer and he knows the legal aspect of it. So I think if there are no discrepancies but definitely initially what everybody thought based on the promises of INEC was that these results will be transmitted electronically from various levels up to the National Collation Center and that was done up to state level but then from the state level then it was done manually to the National Collation Center. And I think that is where an adherence demanded an explanation and that is where the political parties to even had to stage a workout. But then like I mentioned earlier on the results went ahead and it was announced. And I think like the presidential elect setting is on acceptance speech that if there are legal issues it is expected that the political parties can go to court and challenge the legality of the process. But even it being primary or secondary I think that should come from INEC and then if that is challenging the court will be made to understand whether it is really primary or secondary. But Nigerians based on the promises of INEC expected that these results will be transmitted the local government and from the local government to the states and then from the states to the National Collation Center electronically and that simply did not happen. So Vincent let me come back to you and being a lawyer I'd like to ask you what should be done to INEC because INEC obviously has some questions to answer and explanations to give. First a major reason why a large turnout was witnessed on Saturday was because of INEC's promise. I remember my children would say to me mommy a promise is a debt. INEC told Nigerians that the elections would be electronically transmitted the result and we know that result is the name of the game whether you call it primary function or secondary function Nigerians were assured that whatever they cast are the polling units who will be transmitted through the beavers to the IRA and that gave Nigerians the hope that okay this time around the courts will not decide this time around it's not going to be a case of who rigs the most winning it's going to be our votes counting. Now the inability or refusal of INEC officials to upload through the beavers broke the hearts of Nigerians and that changed the narrative. What should Nigerians be doing with INEC at this point in time? First of all INEC has and I haven't seen except I missed the broadcast INEC giving any form of apology to us as to the reasons why their promise was not kept. So first of all from the legal angle what should Nigerians and what can Nigerians do to INEC? Well first of all I have to speak for INEC you know I can only speak for my party. Now I wanted to speak as a lawyer this time. Speak for Nigerians. Speak for Nigerians as a lawyer. What I would say is that I'm going to give curious to INEC for what I think is the major statistic on the table and people sometimes miss points. There are 176,800 polling units in Nigeria and what INEC said by the regulations is that like I said the beavers has a scanner which is first of all used for scanning facial recognition where fingerprints fail. That's primary photo scanner but that scanner can also be used to scan the results directly to the INEC server. That's my understanding and after that we talk about irony. So what I see is this but there's all what is important is that there's a process for collision. Collision happens at the world local government estate. Collision is actually a process of verifying that what was done at the unit is in compliance with law and it's an important process and there's a reason why it is there. And so INEC understand that every time I hear the INEC chairman speak he keeps saying that the process as we speak I've gone to IRF. I think they have polluted about 180,000 results from polling units. In four days we're just having a bit of audience. Even when we compare it to results in the United States. Results in the United States we're still coming on for five days and we're here. Can I rephrase this? Excuse me Vincent. Can I rephrase this? It takes two days so I think we should be fair and understand. And Vincent just just a moment just a moment Vincent. I understand what you're saying and how you're saying it. The question is Nigerians because they say justice should not only be done but should be perceived as being done. So Nigerians are perceiving that they've been shortchanged by the actions of INEC. Now if you were to advise that's what Moran was asking you. If you were to advise the Nigerian populace on the steps to take to get the answers they need to get from INEC. What should they do? We're not saying what INEC has done right or wrong but the way Nigerians are perceiving it may not be the way INEC is seeing it. So they owe us an explanation. How do we go about it to get that explanation? What I would say is this every Nigerian who voted right every Nigerian who voted also had the opportunity to see the results from the only units. You probably did see the results of only units. You could actually take a picture of it. If you go to IRA and you just go with an open platform we can actually go to view the result of your unit whether it's the same. Now if there is any alteration there must be a reason and I don't think that that is the case in a lot of situations. People I don't say that they want to have an interview. But that has been proven to be the case and they may see their results. So that's been a lot. Just like when they after they didn't see it. So go and check first of all and verify whether the results of your polling unit is the same as the one that was signed after conclusion of voting. That is when you start to make the argument. So like I said maybe there's no argument but they should accept the results. That's my view. Yeah Vincent speaking strictly as a Nigerian speaking strictly as a journalist without bias. We are working with facts. We are working with the things we are seeing and we've seen videos. We've seen pictures. We've seen we've seen evidence that well this is not a court but we're working with some of the things we've seen where we've seen tippets being used to cancel results at polling units. We've seen all of that. We've seen people presenting their results saying it's different from what they are seeing uploaded. And that is why it was so crucial that these results were uploaded at the polling unit to avoid a city because what Nigerians want it's not about APC, LP, PDP, whatever party. It's about the system working. It's about the system working. We want a system that we can trust that if you lose you lost squarely. You lost fairly. If you win you won fairly and squarely. So that is what this is about. It's about a system that works so that even the next because people are saying that the major reason we saw pictures and videos where even a polling unit very close to mine you could see the reluctance on the part of the staff to upload. The person behind her behind him was saying you were putting the wrong code so it's not going to work. And at that point people got agitated and almost beat him up. So we're talking about things we saw. And that's why I said INEC owes Nigerians an explanation because we were hopeful of a system that we could trust. I think INEC would give an explanation. Like I said I've seen the response of the INEC Chairman to a lot of the arguments even at the National Coalition Center. So I'm sure that that's the capacity to give that explanation. And like I said the law actually makes provision for him to review where anybody calls for a review of any results it may. The law gives that opportunity within seven days. And for those circumstances I don't really want to go into that but I can't speak for INEC. But I think they are they understand their processes and they keep emphasizing that there is a process. There is a process that needs to be done even with dealing with the results that have been uploaded. So I think I mean prior to upload even. So I think that they probably have their own process which I cannot speak about. But I'm sure that they have an explanation to give when they are called to give an explanation. But again let's not try to change the entire process. Because I'm sure that whatever complains whatever what's the margin what you respect. And the only issue of the upload or real-time upload is just one factor. There are other things that happen in the election that could have influenced the whole oppression. How the logistics happened, got there on time, network. So that intimidation, pressure. Don't forget that I saw many of this agents, these polling agents, these are youth corpus, young people who are sharing their country with under extreme pressure. So I mean people really need to be considered. And like I said we are building a process. Democracy is not the bus stop, it's a journey and we are heading somewhere. I think we have to understand that we must take the wins, the step by step wins and build upon their future. Thank you. Thank you Vincent. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I suspect that you get it right 100% at the first bite. I think it's a bit of a mess. Okay thank you.  But let me go to Cabiru. Be careful. Yeah I know, I know that too. Let me go to Cabiru now. We don't have much time but I'd just like you to as much as possible, as quickly as possible respond to this Cabiru. We had an electoral act which everybody thought was the game changer. That was the one that also brought the beavers. And that was the one that gave some other guidelines for someone to be qualified to contest an election. And then we have the judiciary. Now all of them, these are coming together because of what I'm going to give as an analogy. We go up not to Yobes state where the sitting Speaker, President of the Senate came from wherever he came from and became the candidate, the senatorial candidate for that, a senatorial district. We also have from Aqaibon state where the governor, former governor of Gotswila Aqabiu came from nowhere, that's what I will say, to become the candidate for that senatorial district. In spite of the provisions of this electoral act, in spite of what we hope the beavers will give us, in spite of what we felt the judiciary, the kind of role that will play to make sure this electoral act is followed to the letter. Now do you still believe that the electoral act has performed anything significant in this election that has just been concluded? Well, yes, I think I will agree with Vincent that it is a process and we have made a headway. The problem you have cited, all the examples you have cited of the Senate president, Gotswila Aqabiu and others, I think you can ascribe it to the judiciary. But even that you can see like that of the Senate president, it was just a majority judgment. There was still the minority judgment there and you can read it and see. So each one of the two sides have presented the reasons why they have taken the decisions they have taken. So I think there is not much of a problem with the electoral act except if you are trying to say that we should not accept the judiciary, the Supreme Court as a final, having the final say in determining who flies the ticket when I think that will be taken as part. So the electoral act has done well and the beavers has really, we have tried it. What I had expected with the beavers was we could have made a lot of trials so that INEC has offered excuses as to why real-time that the results will not be uploaded to the national level. But I had expected us to make a trial and to see, like Vincent has said, over 170,000 polling units, we could have made a trial and if there were challenges, all those things would have been overcome before we come to the final process. But like Marin has slightly said, we expect, apart from the explanations and apology where there is a failure, but then the electoral act has done well and the beavers have added a little credibility to the electoral process and we can now take a look back and see areas that need to be improved, then we can improve on that. It is really a process and but I think we went into this election with a lot of hope and in some cases these hopes were dashed. The logistics issues alone are enough to have, I mean, surprise Nigerians despite the chest beating and of course the assurances of INEC are still, we have some places where by 12 pm there were no electoral materials and then in a lot of places elections have to hold on Sunday against the normal processes. So yes, there should be some explanations, there should be some apologies, but I believe we have made some progress. Thank you. Thank you. We're sorry we don't have much time but we'd just like to thank you and hope that this conversation, if we have anything else to ask, we can also contact you and make sure we unravel all the things that need unraveling and explanations where we need the explanations. Thank you gentlemen for coming. Thank you very much. Vincent and Kabiru, thank you for coming on the show. Thank you very much. Congratulations to you. Congratulations to you based on ACN and the APC family. Congratulations. Well, ladies and gentlemen, we take a break for the news and we'll return on the other side to conclude the program. Stay with us.


M.G.N. We don't play games with your YouTube gaming career. What is up everyone? Today on this show we've got the Big Will Bowsky. Why don't you tell us a bit about yourself? Thanks Nate. I'm Will, aka Will Bowsky. Actually I get asked a lot how I came up with my name and it's kind of a funny story. When I was younger I used to watch WWF a lot and there was this character named Val Venus who named a certain part of himself the Big Val Bowsky. So people in my school for some reason started calling me the Big Will Bowsky. So that's pretty much been my nickname ever since then.  No matter what game I play I try to make it funny. I want people to feel like they're sitting right next to me having a fun conversation when they're watching my video and I hope it brings a smile to their face. Will, you seem to be all over the place with the different types of games you play. From games like Destiny to Pregnancy, the game, that's a game. I actually started playing only PS4 games and doing Let's Plays but after a while I got a better PC and realized how many amazing indie games there are out there and how much fun they are. But also how little recognition they get. So that's when my channel kind of changed to covering all types of games.  Well the way that I decide what game I'm going to do next really depends on my mood. I'm in a silly mood, I play a game like Pregnancy the Game or Gas Station Simulator. Or if I'm feeling really brave I'll go for a horror game which is usually never turns out that well because it always ends up with me running for my life crying and not being able to sleep at night. Pregnancy the Game already sounds like a horror game to me. Do you have a favorite game? My favorite genre has to be horror which is a huge change for me since I was young. I used to love the platformer games like Super Mario and Pac-Man and all those types but since I started playing indie games and mostly horror ones there are so many different ways a horror game can go and you never know what to expect. Myself I work in radio and playing a horror game and having a radio show are kind of like the same thing. You never know what's going to happen when you record a game or when the show goes live on the air. That's what I love the most. Every game is different, every reaction is different, every recording is a new adventure and you never know how it's going to turn out. It appears that a lot of horror games just get by with the whole jumpscare routine. Of all the games you've covered on your channel what's your favorite series? My favorite series by far is easily The Walking Dead game because it's a very serious game but I turned it into a funny game because it turned into a jerk addition as I played because I wanted to kill everyone off. I made it my mission to kill off everyone and be mean to absolutely everyone including Clementine in the game regardless of alliance or real actual feelings towards the characters and it was really really fun to rewatch and see just how ruthless I was to everyone since normally I would not like that so it was interesting to see me in a different way. Going back to the whole pregnancy the game thing, Will what would you do if you found out that you were pregnant? Well let's say first off I would record every minute of my reaction of finding out and the days leading up to the birth because turns out when you look at a lot of the videos on YouTube those ones get a ton of views and I would definitely name him William the third. I tell everyone that's what I would name my first child and then they ask me if I'm William the second I say no I'm just so awesome I'm worth two which usually I only laugh at which obviously isn't true but funny either way. Then I would get a year off work and then I could record more. Now see this is a trick question because we don't know the key parts of what's going on while he chugged.  If he was just chilling watching some old episodes of say Charles in charge or who's the boss he might only have one shot or two because those shows were awesome. It was sort of a trick question because Chuck Eger is still alive at 92 and at this point there's nothing stopping him so it's really all about seeing how much he can down. Maybe we should interview him next and find out and lastly Will if you were a worm how long would you be and why? How long would it be? That's what she said yes! Sorry I say that all the time on my channel and you kind of set me up for it so thanks for that I appreciate it Nate but it would be cool to be like an inch or two so no one could see me or use me as fishing bait. Truly you are a great sage Wabowski with those words of wisdom we must depart but worry not friends we shall be back next week this is Nate Zenning out.