Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man, I know they really want to keep the boundary review conversation to one thread, but I sure do wish everyone talking about the Springfield high schools could have their own thread. A lot of passionate conversation to be had there... And I want to hear what other people around the county are thinking about the new scenario!

I agree. Maybe break this boundary discussion by region 1-6 like the FCPS.

You could start a thread on "Website Feedback," explain that FCPS is broken into six regions, and ask if there could be separate threads for the boundary changes affecting each region.

I've noticed Jeff allows more overlapping threads on the MCPS forum relating to boundary changes on the horizon in MCPS than he does on this forum, probably because some of the earlier FCPS threads got particularly nasty.

No this is a stupid idea, not everyone knows what region they are in.

If they can't figure out their region, then they need to spend 3 minutes googling it.

The titles can note the high schools from that region to make it easier for uniformed folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did that School. Board member who was trying to help out a donor by moving their house from Lewis to WSHS get their way?

Yes. And that School Board Member was Sandy Anderson for the folks in the back.

Wow.
Even if this does not affect you personally at all, the corruption of this shpuld be highlighted. In no world does it make sense to move kids from an underenrolled school into an overcrowded school

Especially while moving decades long, established WSHS neighborhoods out. This was her talking point all along. She never wanted to hear from neighborhoods who were advocating to stay WSHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading some of these comments sounds like there are school board members being ‘anonymous’ trying to defend rationale for pushing this redoing of boundaries. Telling WSHS families to ‘just stop’ when the data shows kids moving from Lewis to WSHS when there is an overcrowding issue makes no sense and moving Sangster kids to LB for really no reason.

I bet too that if WSHS parents had a vote they’d rather the kids being moved in scenario 4 than taking in the Lewis kids—prove me wrong.

Not on school board. No one knows how many potential Lewis to WSHS students are in that cluster. It’s all speculation based on nonsense.

Of course no one knows. The point I think some WSHS parents are trying to make on this, however, is that we've seen this play before. It is the same thing that happened with Daventry. The Daventry parents 10 years ago argued that they just would be moving in a handful of kids by moving from Lewis to WSHS. And now there are a LOT of kids coming from that neighborhood. We can't tell you how many because FCPS staff doesn't make that info available.

It can start as 9 kids and end up at 40 or 50 real quickly. Also, the idea that you'd move current WSHS kids out to make room for Lewis kids, when Lewis is already underenrolled just boggles the mind.

Yes, and that's why they should be looking at how many household units they are adding or subtracting. I don't know the numbers, but if there are 100 townhomes in the small area that is moving from Lewis to WS, it doesn't really matter if there are only 10 high school kids there now. There is the potential for there to be 50 or so with that many housing units.

It is the reality that the people who live in those townhomes move when their kids are middle school aged, pupil place to a different school, or go to private. I live in this community - I know. They won't move if they can go to Irving/WS. They are lovely townhomes - large and some with garages.

Adding 100 and losing 400+ townhomes.

Adding almost 300 townhomes.

Incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we really supposed to believe there’s a $$$ donor to Sandy Anderson living in those townhouses? Come on, they’d have bought a SFH elsewhere in the first place if they had enough money to do that.

You're believing someone who had a vendetta against Sandy Anderson. There is one person who just hates her and goes on and on and sock puppets about it. It's a lie.

DP. Do you remember when Sandy sniveled at her constituents at the July 2024 boundary meeting?

Man, she’s the worst.

We had a neighborhood meeting with Sandy earlier this year, and it did not go very well. She was very dismissive of our concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading some of these comments sounds like there are school board members being ‘anonymous’ trying to defend rationale for pushing this redoing of boundaries. Telling WSHS families to ‘just stop’ when the data shows kids moving from Lewis to WSHS when there is an overcrowding issue makes no sense and moving Sangster kids to LB for really no reason.

I bet too that if WSHS parents had a vote they’d rather the kids being moved in scenario 4 than taking in the Lewis kids—prove me wrong.

Not on school board. No one knows how many potential Lewis to WSHS students are in that cluster. It’s all speculation based on nonsense.

Of course no one knows. The point I think some WSHS parents are trying to make on this, however, is that we've seen this play before. It is the same thing that happened with Daventry. The Daventry parents 10 years ago argued that they just would be moving in a handful of kids by moving from Lewis to WSHS. And now there are a LOT of kids coming from that neighborhood. We can't tell you how many because FCPS staff doesn't make that info available.

It can start as 9 kids and end up at 40 or 50 real quickly. Also, the idea that you'd move current WSHS kids out to make room for Lewis kids, when Lewis is already underenrolled just boggles the mind.

Yes, and that's why they should be looking at how many household units they are adding or subtracting. I don't know the numbers, but if there are 100 townhomes in the small area that is moving from Lewis to WS, it doesn't really matter if there are only 10 high school kids there now. There is the potential for there to be 50 or so with that many housing units.

It is the reality that the people who live in those townhomes move when their kids are middle school aged, pupil place to a different school, or go to private. I live in this community - I know. They won't move if they can go to Irving/WS. They are lovely townhomes - large and some with garages.

Adding 100 and losing 400+ townhomes.

Adding almost 300 townhomes.

Incorrect.

The streets are listed earlier in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading some of these comments sounds like there are school board members being ‘anonymous’ trying to defend rationale for pushing this redoing of boundaries. Telling WSHS families to ‘just stop’ when the data shows kids moving from Lewis to WSHS when there is an overcrowding issue makes no sense and moving Sangster kids to LB for really no reason.

I bet too that if WSHS parents had a vote they’d rather the kids being moved in scenario 4 than taking in the Lewis kids—prove me wrong.

Not on school board. No one knows how many potential Lewis to WSHS students are in that cluster. It’s all speculation based on nonsense.

Of course no one knows. The point I think some WSHS parents are trying to make on this, however, is that we've seen this play before. It is the same thing that happened with Daventry. The Daventry parents 10 years ago argued that they just would be moving in a handful of kids by moving from Lewis to WSHS. And now there are a LOT of kids coming from that neighborhood. We can't tell you how many because FCPS staff doesn't make that info available.

It can start as 9 kids and end up at 40 or 50 real quickly. Also, the idea that you'd move current WSHS kids out to make room for Lewis kids, when Lewis is already underenrolled just boggles the mind.

Yes, and that's why they should be looking at how many household units they are adding or subtracting. I don't know the numbers, but if there are 100 townhomes in the small area that is moving from Lewis to WS, it doesn't really matter if there are only 10 high school kids there now. There is the potential for there to be 50 or so with that many housing units.

It is the reality that the people who live in those townhomes move when their kids are middle school aged, pupil place to a different school, or go to private. I live in this community - I know. They won't move if they can go to Irving/WS. They are lovely townhomes - large and some with garages.

Adding 100 and losing 400+ townhomes.

Adding almost 300 townhomes.

Incorrect.

The streets are listed earlier in this thread.

Ok, go count them. It’s~100 townhomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I doubt the whole Oak Hill would go to KAA. But maybe Emerald Chase goes to South Lakes and the rest of Oak Hill go to KAA.

Remember currently Emerald Chase kids (and Bradley Farm kids south of West Ox) go to Westfield. Moving them to KAA won’t give relief to Chantilly.

I don't take it for granted that Thru and the school board will do what makes sense, but what makes sense is to send Emerald Chase to KAA with the rest of Oak Hill in order to keep pyramids aligned (and, assuming the Franklin Middle School kids get redistricted for Carson, to eliminate a split feeder).

I agree. The school board has an opportunity to build an actual school pyramid with no split feeders with just making a few changes. I hope they don’t find a way to screw that up.

From last night's meeting:

Centerville had three split feeders (Bull Run, Powell ES and Union). They fixes ZERO of these split feeders
Robinson had one split feeder (Oak View). They DID NOT fix this split feeder.

Why are they 'fixing' some split feeders and not others? This was never about fixing split feeders.

Because this map version is highly focused on feedback from the BRAC. The Thru guy at the meeting last night made that very clear. He didn't sound happy about it either.

I could not care less if he wasn't happy. His outfit was the one that came up with ridiculous scenarios that would move kids living next door to Marshall to McLean and next door to Westgate to Franklin Sherman, create a new, lopsided split feeder at Shrevewood, and even now leave Marshall with a ridiculous Westbriar attendance island out near Reston even after many families asked to move to closer Colvin Run. And we're still paying them for this garbage.

If the quality of Thru's earlier work had been better, we wouldn't have what we now have, which are basically a limited number of changes largely intended to allow the School Board to wrap up this turd and move on to the next great thing.

What’s the point of implementing any of it? Just look at Marshall. Shrevewood still becomes a split feeder under scenario 4. The Westbriar attendance island is even more isolated. And Thoreau is still a three way feeder.

Marshall could just as easily be fixed by adding the 200 seats back to Kilmer that mysteriously disappeared after the 2023-24 school year.

I think it's too late to revert to the status quo given the options that have been dangled before people but it would certainly make more sense if:

1. The Westbriar island moves to Colvin Run/Cooper/Langley (and part of Forestville moves into the Herndon pyramid, if but only if truly necessary);

2. The area east of Trap Road, south of the Dulles Toll Road, and north of Old Courthouse moves from Wolftrap to Westbriar, and stays at Kilmer/Marshall;

3. The remainder of the Wolftrap area south of the Dulles Toll Road previously at Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison;

4. The remainder of the Westbriar area previously at Kilmer/Madison moves to Marshall and stays at Kilmer; and

5. The small area at Vienna ES that currently feeds to Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison with the rest of Vienna ES.

This would result in more compact boundaries, eliminate split feeders at Wolftrap, Westbriar, and Vienna, and eliminate (rather than make worse) the Westbriar attendance island.

Wasn't that done in Scenario 4? The latest maps eliminated the Wolf Trap split feeder so that all of Wolf Trap goes to Thoreau/Madison

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I doubt the whole Oak Hill would go to KAA. But maybe Emerald Chase goes to South Lakes and the rest of Oak Hill go to KAA.

Remember currently Emerald Chase kids (and Bradley Farm kids south of West Ox) go to Westfield. Moving them to KAA won’t give relief to Chantilly.

I don't take it for granted that Thru and the school board will do what makes sense, but what makes sense is to send Emerald Chase to KAA with the rest of Oak Hill in order to keep pyramids aligned (and, assuming the Franklin Middle School kids get redistricted for Carson, to eliminate a split feeder).

I agree. The school board has an opportunity to build an actual school pyramid with no split feeders with just making a few changes. I hope they don’t find a way to screw that up.

From last night's meeting:

Centerville had three split feeders (Bull Run, Powell ES and Union). They fixes ZERO of these split feeders
Robinson had one split feeder (Oak View). They DID NOT fix this split feeder.

Why are they 'fixing' some split feeders and not others? This was never about fixing split feeders.

Because this map version is highly focused on feedback from the BRAC. The Thru guy at the meeting last night made that very clear. He didn't sound happy about it either.

I can see why- it seems like THRU was a massive waste of time and money. Most of their suggestions were reversed and now we're going with a low fewer minor changes made by someone else (BRAC).

Changes based on a ragtag group of volunteers are not what the comprehensive boundary review was supposed to result in. What a waste of consultant money and a whole bunch of time and angst. The policy goals are not advanced in scenario 4. It’s just a wishlist of vocal residents - just like other boundary changes. This was supposed to fix the mess caused by one offs and personal interest. And now our system which always cries poverty spent a huge amount of money on this nonsense. Scenario 4 should be dropped in favor of the expert created ones.

I agree with this. Please share this with your board reps as I have. At the meeting last night all they keep repeating is this is based on BRAC in an attempt to scapegoat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I doubt the whole Oak Hill would go to KAA. But maybe Emerald Chase goes to South Lakes and the rest of Oak Hill go to KAA.

Remember currently Emerald Chase kids (and Bradley Farm kids south of West Ox) go to Westfield. Moving them to KAA won’t give relief to Chantilly.

I don't take it for granted that Thru and the school board will do what makes sense, but what makes sense is to send Emerald Chase to KAA with the rest of Oak Hill in order to keep pyramids aligned (and, assuming the Franklin Middle School kids get redistricted for Carson, to eliminate a split feeder).

I agree. The school board has an opportunity to build an actual school pyramid with no split feeders with just making a few changes. I hope they don’t find a way to screw that up.

From last night's meeting:

Centerville had three split feeders (Bull Run, Powell ES and Union). They fixes ZERO of these split feeders
Robinson had one split feeder (Oak View). They DID NOT fix this split feeder.

Why are they 'fixing' some split feeders and not others? This was never about fixing split feeders.

Because this map version is highly focused on feedback from the BRAC. The Thru guy at the meeting last night made that very clear. He didn't sound happy about it either.

I can see why- it seems like THRU was a massive waste of time and money. Most of their suggestions were reversed and now we're going with a low fewer minor changes made by someone else (BRAC).

Changes based on a ragtag group of volunteers are not what the comprehensive boundary review was supposed to result in. What a waste of consultant money and a whole bunch of time and angst. The policy goals are not advanced in scenario 4. It’s just a wishlist of vocal residents - just like other boundary changes. This was supposed to fix the mess caused by one offs and personal interest. And now our system which always cries poverty spent a huge amount of money on this nonsense. Scenario 4 should be dropped in favor of the expert created ones.

I agree with this. Please share this with your board reps as I have. At the meeting last night all they keep repeating is this is based on BRAC in an attempt to scapegoat

The others were worse. Scenario 4 has issues but the other were way worse. Use the tool, submit feedback and attend meetings to voice your displeasure.

And then vote next school board election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I doubt the whole Oak Hill would go to KAA. But maybe Emerald Chase goes to South Lakes and the rest of Oak Hill go to KAA.

Remember currently Emerald Chase kids (and Bradley Farm kids south of West Ox) go to Westfield. Moving them to KAA won’t give relief to Chantilly.

I don't take it for granted that Thru and the school board will do what makes sense, but what makes sense is to send Emerald Chase to KAA with the rest of Oak Hill in order to keep pyramids aligned (and, assuming the Franklin Middle School kids get redistricted for Carson, to eliminate a split feeder).

I agree. The school board has an opportunity to build an actual school pyramid with no split feeders with just making a few changes. I hope they don’t find a way to screw that up.

From last night's meeting:

Centerville had three split feeders (Bull Run, Powell ES and Union). They fixes ZERO of these split feeders
Robinson had one split feeder (Oak View). They DID NOT fix this split feeder.

Why are they 'fixing' some split feeders and not others? This was never about fixing split feeders.

Because this map version is highly focused on feedback from the BRAC. The Thru guy at the meeting last night made that very clear. He didn't sound happy about it either.

I could not care less if he wasn't happy. His outfit was the one that came up with ridiculous scenarios that would move kids living next door to Marshall to McLean and next door to Westgate to Franklin Sherman, create a new, lopsided split feeder at Shrevewood, and even now leave Marshall with a ridiculous Westbriar attendance island out near Reston even after many families asked to move to closer Colvin Run. And we're still paying them for this garbage.

If the quality of Thru's earlier work had been better, we wouldn't have what we now have, which are basically a limited number of changes largely intended to allow the School Board to wrap up this turd and move on to the next great thing.

What’s the point of implementing any of it? Just look at Marshall. Shrevewood still becomes a split feeder under scenario 4. The Westbriar attendance island is even more isolated. And Thoreau is still a three way feeder.

Marshall could just as easily be fixed by adding the 200 seats back to Kilmer that mysteriously disappeared after the 2023-24 school year.

I think it's too late to revert to the status quo given the options that have been dangled before people but it would certainly make more sense if:

1. The Westbriar island moves to Colvin Run/Cooper/Langley (and part of Forestville moves into the Herndon pyramid, if but only if truly necessary);

2. The area east of Trap Road, south of the Dulles Toll Road, and north of Old Courthouse moves from Wolftrap to Westbriar, and stays at Kilmer/Marshall;

3. The remainder of the Wolftrap area south of the Dulles Toll Road previously at Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison;

4. The remainder of the Westbriar area previously at Kilmer/Madison moves to Marshall and stays at Kilmer; and

5. The small area at Vienna ES that currently feeds to Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison with the rest of Vienna ES.

This would result in more compact boundaries, eliminate split feeders at Wolftrap, Westbriar, and Vienna, and eliminate (rather than make worse) the Westbriar attendance island.

3, 4 and 5 was done I. Scenario 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I doubt the whole Oak Hill would go to KAA. But maybe Emerald Chase goes to South Lakes and the rest of Oak Hill go to KAA.

Remember currently Emerald Chase kids (and Bradley Farm kids south of West Ox) go to Westfield. Moving them to KAA won’t give relief to Chantilly.

I don't take it for granted that Thru and the school board will do what makes sense, but what makes sense is to send Emerald Chase to KAA with the rest of Oak Hill in order to keep pyramids aligned (and, assuming the Franklin Middle School kids get redistricted for Carson, to eliminate a split feeder).

I agree. The school board has an opportunity to build an actual school pyramid with no split feeders with just making a few changes. I hope they don’t find a way to screw that up.

From last night's meeting:

Centerville had three split feeders (Bull Run, Powell ES and Union). They fixes ZERO of these split feeders
Robinson had one split feeder (Oak View). They DID NOT fix this split feeder.

Why are they 'fixing' some split feeders and not others? This was never about fixing split feeders.

Because this map version is highly focused on feedback from the BRAC. The Thru guy at the meeting last night made that very clear. He didn't sound happy about it either.

I could not care less if he wasn't happy. His outfit was the one that came up with ridiculous scenarios that would move kids living next door to Marshall to McLean and next door to Westgate to Franklin Sherman, create a new, lopsided split feeder at Shrevewood, and even now leave Marshall with a ridiculous Westbriar attendance island out near Reston even after many families asked to move to closer Colvin Run. And we're still paying them for this garbage.

If the quality of Thru's earlier work had been better, we wouldn't have what we now have, which are basically a limited number of changes largely intended to allow the School Board to wrap up this turd and move on to the next great thing.

What’s the point of implementing any of it? Just look at Marshall. Shrevewood still becomes a split feeder under scenario 4. The Westbriar attendance island is even more isolated. And Thoreau is still a three way feeder.

Marshall could just as easily be fixed by adding the 200 seats back to Kilmer that mysteriously disappeared after the 2023-24 school year.

I think it's too late to revert to the status quo given the options that have been dangled before people but it would certainly make more sense if:

1. The Westbriar island moves to Colvin Run/Cooper/Langley (and part of Forestville moves into the Herndon pyramid, if but only if truly necessary);

2. The area east of Trap Road, south of the Dulles Toll Road, and north of Old Courthouse moves from Wolftrap to Westbriar, and stays at Kilmer/Marshall;

3. The remainder of the Wolftrap area south of the Dulles Toll Road previously at Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison;

4. The remainder of the Westbriar area previously at Kilmer/Madison moves to Marshall and stays at Kilmer; and

5. The small area at Vienna ES that currently feeds to Kilmer/Marshall moves to Thoreau/Madison with the rest of Vienna ES.

This would result in more compact boundaries, eliminate split feeders at Wolftrap, Westbriar, and Vienna, and eliminate (rather than make worse) the Westbriar attendance island.

Wasn't that done in Scenario 4? The latest maps eliminated the Wolf Trap split feeder so that all of Wolf Trap goes to Thoreau/Madison

Yes. This was an overall suggestion for changes impacting Marshall.

Pretty much everything Thru has proposed so far has had major flaws. Scenario 4 cleans up the Wolftrap split feeder, but is also takes what had been a Westbriar attendance island and makes it even more isolated by turning it into a Kilmer and Marshall attendance island as well.

PP suggested rolling back everything affecting Marshall, but I think that will be a challenge now, because many of the people they are now proposing to move from Marshall to Madison from Wolftrap and Vienna ES will want that to occur. Conversely, there are some Westbriar areas that logically should go to Marshall rather than Madison. And some in that attendance island want to move to Colvin Run, which is much closer, and the Langley pyramid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we really supposed to believe there’s a $$$ donor to Sandy Anderson living in those townhouses? Come on, they’d have bought a SFH elsewhere in the first place if they had enough money to do that.

You're believing someone who had a vendetta against Sandy Anderson. There is one person who just hates her and goes on and on and sock puppets about it. It's a lie.

DP. Do you remember when Sandy sniveled at her constituents at the July 2024 boundary meeting?

Man, she’s the worst.

We had a neighborhood meeting with Sandy earlier this year, and it did not go very well. She was very dismissive of our concerns.

It's stupidity masquerading as smugness. You have to recognize that she's in well over her head here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we really supposed to believe there’s a $$$ donor to Sandy Anderson living in those townhouses? Come on, they’d have bought a SFH elsewhere in the first place if they had enough money to do that.

You're believing someone who had a vendetta against Sandy Anderson. There is one person who just hates her and goes on and on and sock puppets about it. It's a lie.

Is it a lie? Are you sure?
Even so, what is the actual justification for moving that neighborhood? You're moving it from an underenrolled school to one with capacity issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we really supposed to believe there’s a $$$ donor to Sandy Anderson living in those townhouses? Come on, they’d have bought a SFH elsewhere in the first place if they had enough money to do that.

You're believing someone who had a vendetta against Sandy Anderson. There is one person who just hates her and goes on and on and sock puppets about it. It's a lie.

Is it a lie? Are you sure?
Even so, what is the actual justification for moving that neighborhood? You're moving it from an underenrolled school to one with capacity issues.

Go ask at the meeting. This thread has had enough of that topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we really supposed to believe there’s a $$$ donor to Sandy Anderson living in those townhouses? Come on, they’d have bought a SFH elsewhere in the first place if they had enough money to do that.

You're believing someone who had a vendetta against Sandy Anderson. There is one person who just hates her and goes on and on and sock puppets about it. It's a lie.

DP. Do you remember when Sandy sniveled at her constituents at the July 2024 boundary meeting?

Man, she’s the worst.

We had a neighborhood meeting with Sandy earlier this year, and it did not go very well. She was very dismissive of our concerns.

It's stupidity masquerading as smugness. You have to recognize that she's in well over her head here.

I hadn't thought of that before, but maybe you are right. It was my first interaction with a school board member (I'm not very political) and only was engaging because of the boundary process. Anyway, she made me feel very small and not worth her time. I spoke with a few parents after and they felt the same. Based on your comment, now I'm thinking she was just really unprepared for people to be upset? Oh well, I'm sure I'll never interact with her again.