FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

Tin foil hat alert …AGAIN

Gatehouse should come out with an explanation for the corrupt BRAC selection process, or come out with an apology for the corruption.

Silence mixed with accusations of tin foil conspiracy just come off as desperate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

It was within the last day or so that the former GFCA secretary went public saying that she and the former President had been kicked out of the GFCA by its Executive Board due to their role in facilitating a $5,000 donation to FairFACTS Matters to support that group's opposition to boundary changes. She contended the donation was approved by the membership, and that the action of the GFCA Executive Board was unjust. Today the former President of the GFCA posted a similar message, saying that the two former GFCA officers and members "view the proposed school boundary change fight as the most important issue faced by Great Falls residents." It's hardly surprising that a dispute like this among Langley-zoned residents would attract attention. Given that the GFCA has advocated directly on boundary issues in the past, it also raises questions as to why the GFCA decided in this case to funnel money to FairFACTS Matters instead.

[Anonymous]

I live no where near Great Falls. I do not belong to FairFacts. I am strongly against this redistricting as my neighborhood might be a domino and no other school is as close as the current high school. Our elementary school is easily walkable, so I am not concerned about that.

I read this thread regularly. It seems to me that there are reasonable people all over the area who are against this.
My neighborhood has been through this two or three times and it is not fun. It is disruptive and it pits neighborhood against neighborhood. I've seen it first hand.

The justification for this study is weak. I only see additional $$$$ spent with few, if any, good results.

The selection process of the committee--aside from the videos--is questionable, at best. NDA's for members? Really? All the activists selected? Questionable.

If the SB wants programming equity, there is an easy answer: get rid of IB. Simple. Saves money. Solves problems.

Reid throwing in MS 6-8 is just dumb at this time. That is a whole other issue.

I know of no one I know on Fairfacts. I do appreciate the video that exposed issues. Why doesn't FCPS respond? Why isn't this process transparent? Why aren't the meetings public?

I read WAPO every day. I have seen nothing about this study that reveals anything. So, the Fairfax Times is my only source other than DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

Really? It has me thinking that the group is getting desperate for attention because their efforts have gone nowhere.

They raised money months ago and so far no sign of them spending it. Maybe fairfacts matters needs to come clean and open their books to an audit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

It was within the last day or so that the former GFCA secretary went public saying that she and the former President had been kicked out of the GFCA by its Executive Board due to their role in facilitating a $5,000 donation to FairFACTS Matters to support that group's opposition to boundary changes. She contended the donation was approved by the membership, and that the action of the GFCA Executive Board was unjust. Today the former President of the GFCA posted a similar message, saying that the two former GFCA officers and members "view the proposed school boundary change fight as the most important issue faced by Great Falls residents." It's hardly surprising that a dispute like this among Langley-zoned residents would attract attention. Given that the GFCA has advocated directly on boundary issues in the past, it also raises questions as to why the GFCA decided in this case to funnel money to FairFACTS Matters instead.

This is exactly the type of story Asra Nomani would typically dig into but betting she won’t in this case. It doesn’t make the SB look bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

Really? It has me thinking that the group is getting desperate for attention because their efforts have gone nowhere.

They raised money months ago and so far no sign of them spending it. Maybe fairfacts matters needs to come clean and open their books to an audit.

It’s pretty clear they’ve spent money on FOIA requests and are keeping some money on hold for future litigation.

[Anonymous]

This is exactly the type of story Asra Nomani would typically dig into but betting she won’t in this case. It doesn’t make the SB look bad.

Well, please tell me what makes the School Board look good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3/13/25 is the SB meeting with the presentations of the potential scope for the Coates and Parklawn boundary processes. Total 25% of FCPS elementary schools in these 2 processes running concurrently with the divisionwide process. What's the implementation school year? 1 apart? And to top it off there is the Reid middle school 6-8. Plus AAP movement to/from sites not in the base school including those with AAP proposed scope: Forest Edge, Sunrise Valley, Canterbury Woods.
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DEGNCN5F4E0B/$file/Presentation%20-%20Proposed%20Scope%20for%20Coates%20ES%20Boundary%20Study.pdf

You post frequent with lots of valuable information.

But it is so difficult to understand what you are posting because you post everything in random fragments that are completely uncomnected to the previous fragment. It reads like an inner monologue starting midway between several independent conversations.

Would you consider posting either in complete sentences or bullet points?

I think your sharing of valuable insight and history would be so more effective if it was written in a simple, clear and concise way.

Right now the posts read like

"Bacon and eggs. Blew my budget... annoying cashier, (insert link) Kid always complaining; FIVE HOURS! (Insert link) Recipes never work for me??? thanks mother in law.. quit calling. Always start the day with breakfast"

OMG, I’m dying. Spot on.
DP

That’s just cruel.

It is not at all cruel.

The information she posts is almost always quite important and valid, but her posts are so difficult to follow. It is not because she appears to struggle with English as she appears to be a native speaker. And it is not because of typos, as all her many posts are like that.

Her posts are a bunch of random, seemingly unconnected thoughts written as phrases in one long run on sentence with a lot of punctuation.

I sincerely wish she would post in a concise, direct, coherent way because she seems to know so much and is sharing information that is valuable to this discussion.

Right now, people are seeing her posts and thinking "What the eff did ai just read?"

But if you go back and read the posts 2 or 3 times, you can see that this poster has a ton of valuable information to share.

Most people won't get beyond the "What the eff did I just read" part, so they will completely miss her valuable contributions to the discussion.

Thanks for all the advise. English is my first language and I tend to abbreviate. Basically FCPS has a massive number of elementary schools plus extra AAP centers in 2 boundary processes running concurrently to the divisonwide process. New boundaries could be implemented 1 school year and the division wide study the next year. I read the Parklawn community meeting comments and some one wrote how does this balance with the county wide study.

Reid/FCPS wants a divisionwide scenario on grades 6-8 middle schools. Coates study is preK-6 schools. Parklawn is preK-5 schools. Canterbury Woods is an AAP center prek-6 and dragged into that study's scope.

Whatever is decided divisonwide on middle school grade span makes 1 of those boundary processes moot. Bottom line is FCPS should produce a scenario where Holmes, Poe, and Glasgow are grades 7 and 8 only with maybe Holmes converted to an elementary school. To keep Poe under capacity FCPS would have to keep an AAP feed to Glasgow and maybe move 1 ES feeder from Annandale to Justice. Glasgow would be a sole AAP feed whereas FCPS currently split feeds Poe and Holmes to Frost and Glasgow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

Really? It has me thinking that the group is getting desperate for attention because their efforts have gone nowhere.

They raised money months ago and so far no sign of them spending it. Maybe fairfacts matters needs to come clean and open their books to an audit.

Ha, proving my point.🤣

Totally on brand that you would demand a non profit to open its books based off of ???(your perception that the money is not being spent?) while doggedly defending FCPS’s BRAC-selection scandal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3/13/25 is the SB meeting with the presentations of the potential scope for the Coates and Parklawn boundary processes. Total 25% of FCPS elementary schools in these 2 processes running concurrently with the divisionwide process. What's the implementation school year? 1 apart? And to top it off there is the Reid middle school 6-8. Plus AAP movement to/from sites not in the base school including those with AAP proposed scope: Forest Edge, Sunrise Valley, Canterbury Woods.
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DEGNCN5F4E0B/$file/Presentation%20-%20Proposed%20Scope%20for%20Coates%20ES%20Boundary%20Study.pdf

You post frequent with lots of valuable information.

But it is so difficult to understand what you are posting because you post everything in random fragments that are completely uncomnected to the previous fragment. It reads like an inner monologue starting midway between several independent conversations.

Would you consider posting either in complete sentences or bullet points?

I think your sharing of valuable insight and history would be so more effective if it was written in a simple, clear and concise way.

Right now the posts read like

"Bacon and eggs. Blew my budget... annoying cashier, (insert link) Kid always complaining; FIVE HOURS! (Insert link) Recipes never work for me??? thanks mother in law.. quit calling. Always start the day with breakfast"

OMG, I’m dying. Spot on.
DP

That’s just cruel.

It is not at all cruel.

The information she posts is almost always quite important and valid, but her posts are so difficult to follow. It is not because she appears to struggle with English as she appears to be a native speaker. And it is not because of typos, as all her many posts are like that.

Her posts are a bunch of random, seemingly unconnected thoughts written as phrases in one long run on sentence with a lot of punctuation.

I sincerely wish she would post in a concise, direct, coherent way because she seems to know so much and is sharing information that is valuable to this discussion.

Right now, people are seeing her posts and thinking "What the eff did ai just read?"

But if you go back and read the posts 2 or 3 times, you can see that this poster has a ton of valuable information to share.

Most people won't get beyond the "What the eff did I just read" part, so they will completely miss her valuable contributions to the discussion.

Thanks for all the advise. English is my first language and I tend to abbreviate. Basically FCPS has a massive number of elementary schools plus extra AAP centers in 2 boundary processes running concurrently to the divisonwide process. New boundaries could be implemented 1 school year and the division wide study the next year. I read the Parklawn community meeting comments and some one wrote how does this balance with the county wide study.

Reid/FCPS wants a divisionwide scenario on grades 6-8 middle schools. Coates study is preK-6 schools. Parklawn is preK-5 schools. Canterbury Woods is an AAP center prek-6 and dragged into that study's scope.

Whatever is decided divisonwide on middle school grade span makes 1 of those boundary processes moot. Bottom line is FCPS should produce a scenario where Holmes, Poe, and Glasgow are grades 7 and 8 only with maybe Holmes converted to an elementary school. To keep Poe under capacity FCPS would have to keep an AAP feed to Glasgow and maybe move 1 ES feeder from Annandale to Justice. Glasgow would be a sole AAP feed whereas FCPS currently split feeds Poe and Holmes to Frost and Glasgow.

This is great info.

Thank you so much!!!

I was not trying to be mean, but rather, I wanted to give a concrete example of what your abbreviated posts sounded like to me, and possibly others. They basically sounded like my inner monologue when I am trying to make breakfast and get my salty teenager out of bed while running through my grocery budget as my MIL keeps texting.

I hope no offense was taken. You clearly have a lot of background knowlege on these topics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was out in Loudoun earlier today and just traveled from 193/Route 7 (Dranesville) to Cooper and Langley.

Non-rush hour and perfect driving conditions.

To Cooper: 9 miles and 21 minutes

To Langley: 10 miles and 25 minutes

No doubt that trip is considerably longer during rush hour and when driving conditions are poor.

Whatever else happens with the boundary review, if there is a practical way to send those kids to a closer school, that's what FCPS should do. We are paying a lot just to allow one set of wealthy kids to attend school with other wealthy kids and no poor kids.

Just to push back against tour narrative. I live out there, and have taken to checking travel times from Forestville when the buses go by my house. The delta is 3.4 minutes longer to cooper than HMS on average and 9.8 minutes longer to Langley than HHS.

Not sure what you think it costs to employ an extra bus driver for half an hour a day, but I assure you $12 is the lowest hanging fruit that they could go after.

Get yourself a better argument, or at least admit it’s all an equity play for you.

Dude - there is a group on replying with the same argument; their goal is to get the Dems out. This was brought up before on the other forums. Certain Republicans are using the FCPS forum to foment some anger. There was even a debate to show where equity was the primary goal - it's not anywhere. The goal has been dealing with over populated schools.

Geography cannot be defeated by bussing. This is a physical limitation.

If there is a Republican plan to handle the overcrowding then let's hear it. But so far it's get the Dems out and make some deep cuts to FCPS.

Maybe stop wasting millions of dollars on political fads (e.g., million dollar+ name changes from Woodson to ... Woodson) and DEI crap and FCPS would have more money to actually, ya know, carry out their mission of educating kids. Just a thought.

You didn’t really answer PP’s question. How do we get rid of overcrowding if not boundary changes?

DP.

Well, PP said that two of the three overcrowded schools are chantilly and centreville, and the centreville expansion costing hundreds if millions seems to be on track. So not sure why they couldn’t do something similar for McLean. Problem solved.

Otherwise, move the two McLean islands and call it a day. There is no need for further moves than that.

You just don't want the poor kids at McLean. You want to turn it into another Langley. Shame on you.

You do know you’re likely responding to a Langley poster who’s saying whatever they do with McLean needn’t require moving anyone out of Langley (“no need for further moves than that”), right?

That poster doesn’t care one way or the other how many poor kids end up at McLean. They just want to be unaffected by any boundary changes.

DP. Give it a rest. Your constant invoking of Langley as some kind of boogeyman just makes you look idiotic. You have no idea who wrote the post in question. Grow up, for once.

Have you completely lost your marbles or never read the FairFACTS Matters FB page? Great Falls posters there often talk about potential boundary changes that could affect other schools but not require moving anyone out of Langley.

You blaming fairfacts matters for what posters post on their Facebook page is like me blaming dcurbanmoms for the drivel that you write.

FFM is a county wide organization that doesn’t limit its members to GF.

Come up with a better argument, because you’re floundering.

The posters on that FB page generally are identified by name and typically indicate where they live or their pyramids.

It’s neither controversial nor insulting to observe that quite a few Langley posters argue that, whatever happens to boundaries at other schools, they don’t think anyone needs to be moved out of Langley. In some cases, they illustrate that by referring to specific boundary changes that might involve other schools.

And, as I’ve pointed out before, their position is bolstered by the fact that Langley could claw back 100 additional seats just by ceasing to accept pupil placements.

I will say that, since DOGE started cutting federal jobs, some on that page have argued that the entire boundary review process should be halted, but that’s a more recent development.

DP. I have heard NO ONE say they want boundary changes. Well, except for those who would stand to benefit from them, of course. Stop your incessant blathering about Langley. They don’t want their kids moved any more than you want YOUR kids moved.

So NO ONE wants boundary changes except for those who DO want boundary changes?

Can we look forward to more brilliant analysis of this nature?

+1. Yes more of that will come with “School Board shills,” “equity warriors” and “boundary changes for ther but not for me” peppered in. This topic has made me wish DCUM required registration. I suspect that a few people have made hundreds of posts about boundaries.

That’s a different poster, not me. But her point is a valid one, namely that peoples who want boundary changes are primarily looking to mooch off of other Fairfax families. It’s pretty gross if you think about it.

You two love to attack the messengers, but it’s because you are devoid of any actual compelling reasons for boundary changes that would significantly negatively affect the impacted students and also drive the country further along its death spiral.

An idiotic yet surprisingly bigoted comment.
"Mooching off other Ffx families." Glad you are not my neighbor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was out in Loudoun earlier today and just traveled from 193/Route 7 (Dranesville) to Cooper and Langley.

Non-rush hour and perfect driving conditions.

To Cooper: 9 miles and 21 minutes

To Langley: 10 miles and 25 minutes

No doubt that trip is considerably longer during rush hour and when driving conditions are poor.

Whatever else happens with the boundary review, if there is a practical way to send those kids to a closer school, that's what FCPS should do. We are paying a lot just to allow one set of wealthy kids to attend school with other wealthy kids and no poor kids.

Just to push back against tour narrative. I live out there, and have taken to checking travel times from Forestville when the buses go by my house. The delta is 3.4 minutes longer to cooper than HMS on average and 9.8 minutes longer to Langley than HHS.

Not sure what you think it costs to employ an extra bus driver for half an hour a day, but I assure you $12 is the lowest hanging fruit that they could go after.

Get yourself a better argument, or at least admit it’s all an equity play for you.

Dude - there is a group on replying with the same argument; their goal is to get the Dems out. This was brought up before on the other forums. Certain Republicans are using the FCPS forum to foment some anger. There was even a debate to show where equity was the primary goal - it's not anywhere. The goal has been dealing with over populated schools.

Geography cannot be defeated by bussing. This is a physical limitation.

If there is a Republican plan to handle the overcrowding then let's hear it. But so far it's get the Dems out and make some deep cuts to FCPS.

Maybe stop wasting millions of dollars on political fads (e.g., million dollar+ name changes from Woodson to ... Woodson) and DEI crap and FCPS would have more money to actually, ya know, carry out their mission of educating kids. Just a thought.

You didn’t really answer PP’s question. How do we get rid of overcrowding if not boundary changes?

DP.

Well, PP said that two of the three overcrowded schools are chantilly and centreville, and the centreville expansion costing hundreds if millions seems to be on track. So not sure why they couldn’t do something similar for McLean. Problem solved.

Otherwise, move the two McLean islands and call it a day. There is no need for further moves than that.

You just don't want the poor kids at McLean. You want to turn it into another Langley. Shame on you.

You do know you’re likely responding to a Langley poster who’s saying whatever they do with McLean needn’t require moving anyone out of Langley (“no need for further moves than that”), right?

That poster doesn’t care one way or the other how many poor kids end up at McLean. They just want to be unaffected by any boundary changes.

DP. Give it a rest. Your constant invoking of Langley as some kind of boogeyman just makes you look idiotic. You have no idea who wrote the post in question. Grow up, for once.

Have you completely lost your marbles or never read the FairFACTS Matters FB page? Great Falls posters there often talk about potential boundary changes that could affect other schools but not require moving anyone out of Langley.

You blaming fairfacts matters for what posters post on their Facebook page is like me blaming dcurbanmoms for the drivel that you write.

FFM is a county wide organization that doesn’t limit its members to GF.

Come up with a better argument, because you’re floundering.

The posters on that FB page generally are identified by name and typically indicate where they live or their pyramids.

It’s neither controversial nor insulting to observe that quite a few Langley posters argue that, whatever happens to boundaries at other schools, they don’t think anyone needs to be moved out of Langley. In some cases, they illustrate that by referring to specific boundary changes that might involve other schools.

And, as I’ve pointed out before, their position is bolstered by the fact that Langley could claw back 100 additional seats just by ceasing to accept pupil placements.

I will say that, since DOGE started cutting federal jobs, some on that page have argued that the entire boundary review process should be halted, but that’s a more recent development.

DP. I have heard NO ONE say they want boundary changes. Well, except for those who would stand to benefit from them, of course. Stop your incessant blathering about Langley. They don’t want their kids moved any more than you want YOUR kids moved.

So NO ONE wants boundary changes except for those who DO want boundary changes?

Can we look forward to more brilliant analysis of this nature?

+1. Yes more of that will come with “School Board shills,” “equity warriors” and “boundary changes for ther but not for me” peppered in. This topic has made me wish DCUM required registration. I suspect that a few people have made hundreds of posts about boundaries.

That’s a different poster, not me. But her point is a valid one, namely that peoples who want boundary changes are primarily looking to mooch off of other Fairfax families. It’s pretty gross if you think about it.

You two love to attack the messengers, but it’s because you are devoid of any actual compelling reasons for boundary changes that would significantly negatively affect the impacted students and also drive the country further along its death spiral.

An idiotic yet surprisingly bigoted comment.
"Mooching off other Ffx families." Glad you are not my neighbor.

Do you know what bigot means? Might want to consider whether your using it correctly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live no where near Great Falls. I do not belong to FairFacts. I am strongly against this redistricting as my neighborhood might be a domino and no other school is as close as the current high school. Our elementary school is easily walkable, so I am not concerned about that.

I read this thread regularly. It seems to me that there are reasonable people all over the area who are against this.
My neighborhood has been through this two or three times and it is not fun. It is disruptive and it pits neighborhood against neighborhood. I've seen it first hand.

The justification for this study is weak. I only see additional $$$$ spent with few, if any, good results.

The selection process of the committee--aside from the videos--is questionable, at best. NDA's for members? Really? All the activists selected? Questionable.

If the SB wants programming equity, there is an easy answer: get rid of IB. Simple. Saves money. Solves problems.

Reid throwing in MS 6-8 is just dumb at this time. That is a whole other issue.

I know of no one I know on Fairfacts. I do appreciate the video that exposed issues. Why doesn't FCPS respond? Why isn't this process transparent? Why aren't the meetings public?

I read WAPO every day. I have seen nothing about this study that reveals anything. So, the Fairfax Times is my only source other than DCUM.

[/quote/]

DP. WaPo doesn’t really cover local news. FFXNOW, which is part of a local digital news org, does a better job of covering local news and doesn’t have the issue Fairfax Times has of some reports being overly biased. (And I say this as a former reporter.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard fair facts matters raised over $50,000 to fight the boundary review. Is that right? If so, crazy!!!

The focus on Fairfacts matters today definitely has me thinking that the school board and gatehouse are trying to vilify the organization because of the recent revelations of corruption in the BRAC selection process.

Really? It has me thinking that the group is getting desperate for attention because their efforts have gone nowhere.

They raised money months ago and so far no sign of them spending it. Maybe fairfacts matters needs to come clean and open their books to an audit.

Ha, proving my point.🤣

Totally on brand that you would demand a non profit to open its books based off of ???(your perception that the money is not being spent?) while doggedly defending FCPS’s BRAC-selection scandal.

Legitimate nonprofits post their financials all the time and fill out IRS disclosure forms that are all publicly available. It’s called a form 990. Google it.

Facebook groups masquerading as non profits? They don’t publish financials. Gee I wonder which category “fairfacts matters” falls into?? Who did all that money go to anyway? Now the GFCA is embroiled in a scandal for donating to this “nonprofit”??

Btw. Soliciting funds for reason X, then not spending them on reason X, is not a good look and may violate the law.

This “group” has some explaining to do.

[Anonymous]

Great Falls Citizen Association executive board held a closed Executive Board Meeting and two days later announced a new President with a note saying their support for the special committee for school boundaries would not change? Is this partisan politics at play? That would be a crying shame if it is.