The McLaren thing just keeps on rolling?
Discussion
stephen300o said:
castrolcraig said:
stephen300o said:
Ron could have a bloodied knife in his hand and you lot would still say "look at the mess Ferrari have made of our Ron's knife"
yawn, suppose you didnt have a flexi floor either, or a poisonous vile t
t of a manager.why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing, ferrari fans can never admit to them cheating with the flexi floor!!
t than Todt."why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing", when did anyone admit that!, must have been inbeween the bile spewing and spite, I must have missed it.
The foor was no more cheating than Mclarens famous second brake pedal, the FIA just readjust the rules when someone has a bitch about it.
The principal Mclaren used was perfectly within the rules and still is and it is currently in use by many teams, they simply dont use the brake method anymore.
There was wrong doing, yes. However the charge from the FIA has always been about damaging the reputation of the sport. This damage has been added to by Ferrari leaking the information, Mclaren personnel receiving it and by the FIA/Max Moseley for blowing it out of all proportions. I really hope Mosely losses his job over this, especially after the pathetic, pointless comments he made during qualifying.
Strangely Brown said:
derin100 said:
In summary, the season has been ruined...but really ruined by the ruling and:
" Who's fault is that?!?"
If I were RD/McLaren/MB...I'd make damn sure it was clear who's fault it was!
Easy.. it was McLaren's fault." Who's fault is that?!?"
If I were RD/McLaren/MB...I'd make damn sure it was clear who's fault it was!
They cheated and got caught... deal with it.
The No1 rule of cheating is, "don't get caught".
Edited by Strangely Brown on Saturday 15th September 17:33
However, I have to agree with Gavin also. If 'somebody' gets such information; maybe 'somebody' else shouldn't have allowed a situation to arise for that information to be "got"?
As soon as the cars pull out of the pit door all teams will be inspecting, taking note, I dare say photographing, the developments on that car. Where is the line on exclusive information drawn? have Ferrari taken neither taken note of nor used anything they have ever seen on a McLaren? Where is the line actually drawn on information gathering?
Yet my issue isn't so much about the rights, wrongs and extent of the 'crime' of 'cheating' per se. It is more to do with the inconsistency of the punishment dealt out to McLaren after having been caught.
Surely, it is logical that if by cheating their cars are not at the head of the constructors championship then by the same token neither should their drivers. It seems illogical to me that the FIA can on the one had say that McLaren have been 'cheating' yet at the same time sanction their drivers being at head of the drivers championship when by inference and extrapolation of the sequences they have got there on the back of 'cheating'.
Nevertheless, in coming up with this disjointed and crass judgement I can forsee a position where if there really are significant personal issues between RD and Mosley....and indeed Mosley and others within the F1 world(as Stoddard seems to be alluding to fairly clearly in that interview in the link earlier on in this thread) now is the time where RD really could turn this to have Mosley "by the balls"!
Instead of doing something as benign as....Well, I don't know... saying something like: "We know you all do try to do it...always have done...Don't do it again...and certainly don't get caught! [smack wrists}". Let's not forget the huge damage already done to McLaren/MB image etc..
And then turning to Ferrari and saying: "If you've got something you want to keep secret...for Godsake make sure you keep it secret! The onus is on you to be the gatekeepers of your own intellectual property not us! So don't come crying and bleating to us if you're foolish enough to allow those secrets to get out."..."Now, both of you two go away whilst we deal with De La Rosa!Actually, may be we'll just let Ferrari deal with him!"
Instead they've come up with what is effectively:
"McLaren! You're out because you've got 'cheat cars' (because actually when this is taken to the 'nth degree' that's what it's saying)...But you're drivers, who got to the top can stay...and they can stay at the top even though they got to the top in your 'cheat cars'!"
It is such a stupid stance that all it needs is to be exposed as such.
Then the question will be: Do people (or does 'someone') who can come up with such a judgement really deserve to be in charge of such an important governing body ? Would you trust someone who can come up with a resolution like this to be in charge on making important decisions in your life?!(we haven't even talked about the $100 Million fine and the apparent 'logic' behind arriving at this figure offered by Mosley this afternoon....because on the scale of things, vast though the sum is, it is actually a relatively small amount!)
RD et al now have a really good way of exposing that incompetence. There is no doubt this is indeed very bad for McLaren/MB...demonstrably RD isn't enjoying it but if I were him and I did have genuine issues with certain individuals I'd now possibly have the words: "Clouds", "Lining", and "Silver" (not necessarily in that order) running around in my head!
Edited by derin100 on Saturday 15th September 19:16
woof said:
[
Mclaren have a long list of systems that they have developed (within the rules) only to have them banned. A few years back they developed a system to harness the energy created under braking - spent a fortune to develop it - for the FIA to create a rule saying that type of system would be illegal
There's a clear difference between breaking an existing rule and creating new systems within the rules
Hmm.Mclaren have a long list of systems that they have developed (within the rules) only to have them banned. A few years back they developed a system to harness the energy created under braking - spent a fortune to develop it - for the FIA to create a rule saying that type of system would be illegal
There's a clear difference between breaking an existing rule and creating new systems within the rules
Wouldn't it be ironic if Max introduced the requirement for that sort of technology as part of the 'greening' of F1.
Sorry, I meant " ... if the FIA introduced ..."
Having touched on the perceived benefits of the FIA influence over recent years and the possible future I wonder about EuroNCAP and similar Mosely projects.
5 Star safety if you have all the right labels but in engineering terms it seems to have resulted in cars getting heavier and with reduced visibility. (That they also all look the same, largely, may be a benefit to the manufacturers I suppose - shared platforms and all that.)
So engine efficiency gains lost by having to drag more weight around?
Or have I missed something?
NightDriver said:
stephen300o said:
castrolcraig said:
stephen300o said:
Ron could have a bloodied knife in his hand and you lot would still say "look at the mess Ferrari have made of our Ron's knife"
yawn, suppose you didnt have a flexi floor either, or a poisonous vile tt of a manager.why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing, ferrari fans can never admit to them cheating with the flexi floor!!
t than Todt."why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing", when did anyone admit that!, must have been inbeween the bile spewing and spite, I must have missed it.
The foor was no more cheating than Mclarens famous second brake pedal, the FIA just readjust the rules when someone has a bitch about it.
The principal Mclaren used was perfectly within the rules and still is and it is currently in use by many teams, they simply dont use the brake method anymore.
There was wrong doing, yes. However the charge from the FIA has always been about damaging the reputation of the sport. This damage has been added to by Ferrari leaking the information, Mclaren personnel receiving it and by the FIA/Max Moseley for blowing it out of all proportions. I really hope Mosely losses his job over this, especially after the pathetic, pointless comments he made during qualifying.
derin100 said:
Surely, it is logical that if by cheating their cars are not at the head of the constructors championship then by the same token neither should their drivers. It seems illogical to me that the FIA can on the one had say that McLaren have been 'cheating' yet at the same time sanction their drivers being at head of the drivers championship when by inference and extrapolation of the sequences they have got there on the back of 'cheating'.
You'll get no argument from me on that point and I have already said as much earlier.The reason given for their exclusion from punishment is one of amnesty in that if they hadn't testified then the full facts would not have been revealed. I suspect that in reality it is more likely to do with the fact that the viewing public would be far too pissed off if they had done anything to spoil goldenbo
ocks' shot at the title.Strangely Brown said:
derin100 said:
Surely, it is logical that if by cheating their cars are not at the head of the constructors championship then by the same token neither should their drivers. It seems illogical to me that the FIA can on the one had say that McLaren have been 'cheating' yet at the same time sanction their drivers being at head of the drivers championship when by inference and extrapolation of the sequences they have got there on the back of 'cheating'.
You'll get no argument from me on that point and I have already said as much earlier.The reason given for their exclusion from punishment is one of amnesty in that if they hadn't testified then the full facts would not have been revealed. I suspect that in reality it is more likely to do with the fact that the viewing public would be far too pissed off if they had done anything to spoil goldenbo
ocks' shot at the title.Example...It was palpable to the point of embarrasing to watch the qualifying on ITV4 today with Steve Ryder and Marc Blundell trying desparately to 'deflect' and continue the 'excitement' "...of the racing to come at the wonderful Spa Francochamps circuit etc etc..."
I love watching when they're at this circuit...my favourite (!) but there's no getting away from the fact that in reality things have now gone somewhat 'flat' and there is now a serious risk of F1 all going completely to pot. 'Golden Boy' is the one thing that is going to keep any significant public attention (certainly in this country)...and the media machine and all the other money making 'machines' need it!
I wonder how much pulling the plug on that would be worth in addition to the monetary damage already done? Maybe RD/MB should ask Mosely and the FIA to try to do the sums on that one
If I were him/them I'd ask them to do the sums before they read out the verdict on any appeal against the initial ruling! 
I think if they're clever somebody's head may roll for this one?
LongQ said:
Having touched on the perceived benefits of the FIA influence over recent years and the possible future I wonder about EuroNCAP and similar Mosely projects.
5 Star safety if you have all the right labels but in engineering terms it seems to have resulted in cars getting heavier and with reduced visibility. (That they also all look the same, largely, may be a benefit to the manufacturers I suppose - shared platforms and all that.)
So engine efficiency gains lost by having to drag more weight around?
This is going off topic a bit here I guess, but although I wouldnt disagree that making cars safer has made them heavier, the safety increases are certainly impressive so personally I wouldn't put that particular achievement of the FIAs down as a failure. I don't know if you saw it but on 5th Gear last week they did a head-on offset crash test between an early 90's Volvo 940 which at the time was accepted as one of the safest large cars you could buy, against a Renault Modus which I think is their replacement for the Scenic thats been out for a couple of years and has NCAP 5 rating. 5 Star safety if you have all the right labels but in engineering terms it seems to have resulted in cars getting heavier and with reduced visibility. (That they also all look the same, largely, may be a benefit to the manufacturers I suppose - shared platforms and all that.)
So engine efficiency gains lost by having to drag more weight around?
The results were pretty amazing really, the 940 front end and front cabin crumpled to a state that the driver would almost certainly been killed, yet the Modus's cabin, despite being an MPV style with short bonnet, was hardly touched. There's a Youtube clip here, makes interesting watching.
LongQ said:
NightDriver said:
stephen300o said:
castrolcraig said:
stephen300o said:
Ron could have a bloodied knife in his hand and you lot would still say "look at the mess Ferrari have made of our Ron's knife"
yawn, suppose you didnt have a flexi floor either, or a poisonous vile tt of a manager.why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing, ferrari fans can never admit to them cheating with the flexi floor!!
t than Todt."why is it that no matter how many times mcmerc fans say we accept there was some wrong doing", when did anyone admit that!, must have been inbeween the bile spewing and spite, I must have missed it.
The foor was no more cheating than Mclarens famous second brake pedal, the FIA just readjust the rules when someone has a bitch about it.
The principal Mclaren used was perfectly within the rules and still is and it is currently in use by many teams, they simply dont use the brake method anymore.
There was wrong doing, yes. However the charge from the FIA has always been about damaging the reputation of the sport. This damage has been added to by Ferrari leaking the information, Mclaren personnel receiving it and by the FIA/Max Moseley for blowing it out of all proportions. I really hope Mosely losses his job over this, especially after the pathetic, pointless comments he made during qualifying.
To follow NDs point, McLaren actually submitted the plans for the 2nd pedal system to the FIA for inspection by Charlie Whiting prior to the season starting and it was cleared as being within the rules.
When McLaren submitted the plans for the flexi floor on behalf of Ferrari (I bet that Ferrari themselves didn't do it) the FIA immediately realised the ommission in the testing procedures and changed things.
I was very annoyed by Max Mosley's comments today - how did he know that Ron was not telling the truth?
Has anyone any proof that Ron knew about the emails etc. ?
No, I thought not.
And for Max to, effectively, call Ron a liar, in my mind, is a far bigger offense/bad for F1 than anything that has gone on up to date.
............
So Max and Ron have 'kissed & made up':
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62438
The only bit I will comment on is:
"The FIA is very disappointed that Fernando Alonso and Pedro de la Rosa have been criticised in the press. They had no choice but to make available the information in their possession. It is up to every team to ensure that the rules of sporting fairness are respected.
"No driver should be put in the position in which Fernando and Pedro found themselves."
Hello Max, they had a choice not to send emails/texts/whatever about something they both knew they should not have information about.
My respect for Ron gone up today.
Has anyone any proof that Ron knew about the emails etc. ?
No, I thought not.
And for Max to, effectively, call Ron a liar, in my mind, is a far bigger offense/bad for F1 than anything that has gone on up to date.
............
So Max and Ron have 'kissed & made up':
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62438
The only bit I will comment on is:
"The FIA is very disappointed that Fernando Alonso and Pedro de la Rosa have been criticised in the press. They had no choice but to make available the information in their possession. It is up to every team to ensure that the rules of sporting fairness are respected.
"No driver should be put in the position in which Fernando and Pedro found themselves."
Hello Max, they had a choice not to send emails/texts/whatever about something they both knew they should not have information about.
My respect for Ron gone up today.
Ron Dennis has confirmed that Alonso threatened him that, unless he was given number 1 status he would spill the beans. Blackmail, pure and simple. And that Mosely reckons that the press should not vilify him.
The wierd and wonderful thing is that Ed Gorman of the Times, whom I don't normally read - and I can see why now - has said that Ron Dennis was out of order by not saying to the hacks that Alonso apologised 30 minutes later. To my mind, Ron Dennis was out of order not sacking Alonso immediately. I might have misread Gorman but he seems to be suggesting that it was all Dennis' fault for reporting the emails to the FIA as soon as he knew about them, from Alonso, and not waiting for Alonso to crawl back.
Firstly, it's the last time I'll read Gorman. Secondly, it's a sign of moral bankruptcy that Mosely should defend Alonso and criticise the press. And Dennis, come to that. It's the pot calling the newly fallen snow black because that's what the press, and RD, are in comparison to Mosely, pure.
What a mess this all is.
The wierd and wonderful thing is that Ed Gorman of the Times, whom I don't normally read - and I can see why now - has said that Ron Dennis was out of order by not saying to the hacks that Alonso apologised 30 minutes later. To my mind, Ron Dennis was out of order not sacking Alonso immediately. I might have misread Gorman but he seems to be suggesting that it was all Dennis' fault for reporting the emails to the FIA as soon as he knew about them, from Alonso, and not waiting for Alonso to crawl back.
Firstly, it's the last time I'll read Gorman. Secondly, it's a sign of moral bankruptcy that Mosely should defend Alonso and criticise the press. And Dennis, come to that. It's the pot calling the newly fallen snow black because that's what the press, and RD, are in comparison to Mosely, pure.
What a mess this all is.
Derek Smith said:
Ron Dennis has confirmed that Alonso threatened him that, unless he was given number 1 status he would spill the beans. Blackmail, pure and simple.
I think the fact that Ron didn't boot Alonso out and is still willing to support him after that says a lot about him. If someone who worked for me tried something like that he would be out the door as fast as possible, regardless of how good he thought himself to be. It makes Alonso look pretty bad.Edited by tank slapper on Sunday 16th September 18:42
LocoBlade said:
This is going off topic a bit here I guess, but although I wouldnt disagree that making cars safer has made them heavier, the safety increases are certainly impressive so personally I wouldn't put that particular achievement of the FIAs down as a failure. I don't know if you saw it but on 5th Gear last week they did a head-on offset crash test between an early 90's Volvo 940 which at the time was accepted as one of the safest large cars you could buy, against a Renault Modus which I think is their replacement for the Scenic thats been out for a couple of years and has NCAP 5 rating.
You're right it is going off topic somewhat except in the sense that it broadens the discussion about the power wielded, apparently, by the FIA well beyond motorsport. Which is interesting for what seems to be pretty much a self appointed non-democratic NGO.The thing that puzzles me most is why, for example, F1 can become so much safer than it was by building very light structures but road cars head towards bigger and heavier. Yet both approaches are set according to rules developed at the behest of the FIA.
I had not seen the program but have now watched the clip you referenced. Very interesting but I just wonder if it was as conclusive as 5th G was making out in its summing up. I don't doubt the point they were making was generally valid though I would have liked to have seen a second Modus v Modus test for a more complete report on the likely risks in real current conditions.
But the remarkable thing to me seems to be that the results of all the engineering advances in the last 20 - 25 years (the probable time difference between the inception of the designs) don't really seem to be carrying through to the real world results as we might expect them to. That in turn leads me to question whether or not the FIA - and in that respect Mosley always seems to take a lot of personal credit for the 'benefits' - is as beneficial to the process as many think. It seems to me that they (or perhaps he?) retain their authority largely because of that perceived broader influence.
The Modus is a smallish car by today's standards but is not actually that small if you compare it to the equivalent market position 15-20 years ago. In an ever evolving engineering world (like F1 in fact) what worked at one time may well become less capable against revised designs. What works with a constant feature - like a concrete block - may not work quite so well in a more general sense. I did wonder why they bothered with the crash ytest dummies in the video and then did no analysis with the result. Watch the video carefully and we see the Volvo doing very well until crumple zone of the Modus is fully expended at which point the Volvo is hit by the full force of the extra rigid passenger cage of the Modus and its 20 year old metal suddenly gives up. Not good, but then the passengers are not being thrown around like rag dolls as those in the Modus are. Looked like they could do with compulsory HANS devices. Legs intact but necks broken?
So how does this relate to the topic other than my tenuous connection above?
Well, as I understand it though I have not checked for a few months, the FIA are rather keen to extend their influence in Europe and all the closely affiliated parts fo the their world empire in the area of road safety, based on the apparent success of EuroNCAP. That success can most easily be measured in the way that all the manufacturers now seek to find ways to maximise the potential for the 5 star rating which, as I understand it, is greatly influenced by ensuring they include a range of warning stickers about, say, airbag use with child seats, in very readable positions and similar things. To this end the FIA have the manufacturers in thrall. How this influences the manufacturers who are in F1 on their own account I can only guess. Paul Stoddart's comments may be relevant there.
The FIA associate activity groups seem keen to encourage road charging and systems that automatically limit the driver's ability to control a car in terms of, say, speed. Just two examples of concepts for which they seek to influence - perhaps to be the prime influence in the case of the EU - matters well outside the terms of reference of a Motor Sport Management body.
If the bureaucrats think they are infallible in their decision making Mosley could probably get almost anything he thinks is a good idea accepted without question. They seem to want to give Mosley a number of prizes so I assume he is making sure they know who is behind the proposals.
More importantly if he is working with in the EU, he is doing what he wants without anyone having a democratic political route to express their disagreement.
Back closer to the topic ...
I noted somewhere that Mosley is saying the 'fine' will in effect be distributed amongst the other teams who will be elevated on position in the constructors championship and therefore get a larger cut of the TV take - that should have helped Ferrari already then by guaranteeing them the biggest slice - and the the rest will be distributed by the FIA around the world to promote motorsport talent. Presumably they mean like funding up and coming drivers - as McLaren and Mercedes have been doing for some years without the FIA being involved in the benefactor role.
It will be vaguely interesting to see how all this pans out, especially sionce Mosely and Bernie are not exactly spring chickens and, come to that, nor is Dennis.
How about this ...
Bernie sees a possible empire crumble and sells out all further interest after buying QPR football club and then quickly taking over world football with the help of Briatore.
They appoint Mosley to run FIfA pointing out that this represents only a small change - an extra f in the name.
Dave Richards takes over F1 worldwide and within three years makes it as successful as his worldwide Rallying championship. He ends up owning both teams.
Mercedes decide to take on Toyota in NASCAR and compete in the Truck and the Car series plus a new SUV championship they instigate and sponsor. RD is persuaded to stay on to be the figurehead of that team and oversee Lewis Hamilton's move to the States to run for Mercedes in NASCAR alongside team mate Juan-Pablo Montoya ...
Mercedes buy most of Weybridge so that they can extend their facility at Brooklands and rebuild the old banked circuit which is considered to be an excellent location for a permanent southern UK base for NASCAR events. Similar facilities are identified near Berlin, Paris and on top of a car factory in Italy.
Ok, so it may not all happen (or any of it ...
) but it would make life a little more interesting if it did.Grant
BTW a couple of thoughts re De La Rosa's supposed actions.
Suggesting trying a re-programming of the simulator might not arouse too much suspicion if he is seen a fairly interactive member of the team - and it sounds like he is. Obviously he is expected to do more than turn up and drive around on the odd test day. "What would happen if ...." is a reasonable question to pose and it sounds like the response to the proposal was negative anyway.
Then there is the thing about the gas in the tyres. I think I read he asked or planned to ask a Bridgstone engineer about that. Now I doubt the tyres are left to McL to deal with - Bridgestone will surely have their people overseeing fitting and advising on pressures and technology issues. (Or does that not apply these days?) In which case such a question might have aroused suspicion at Bridgstone. However nobody has mentioned that likelihood at all in anything I have read.
Of course Bridgstone have a long term relationship with Ferrari and may have some sort of dedicated team and special security in place to stop any IP leaks from the Ferrari camp. They also seem to have a close relationship with the FIA so would not want to put themsleves or the FIA in an embarrassing situation I would guess.
I just can't help feeling that there is more to all of this than has been made public so far. So it could roll for some time.
Suggesting trying a re-programming of the simulator might not arouse too much suspicion if he is seen a fairly interactive member of the team - and it sounds like he is. Obviously he is expected to do more than turn up and drive around on the odd test day. "What would happen if ...." is a reasonable question to pose and it sounds like the response to the proposal was negative anyway.
Then there is the thing about the gas in the tyres. I think I read he asked or planned to ask a Bridgstone engineer about that. Now I doubt the tyres are left to McL to deal with - Bridgestone will surely have their people overseeing fitting and advising on pressures and technology issues. (Or does that not apply these days?) In which case such a question might have aroused suspicion at Bridgstone. However nobody has mentioned that likelihood at all in anything I have read.
Of course Bridgstone have a long term relationship with Ferrari and may have some sort of dedicated team and special security in place to stop any IP leaks from the Ferrari camp. They also seem to have a close relationship with the FIA so would not want to put themsleves or the FIA in an embarrassing situation I would guess.
I just can't help feeling that there is more to all of this than has been made public so far. So it could roll for some time.
Edited by LongQ on Sunday 16th September 01:50
LongQ said:
How about this ...
Bernie sees a possible empire crumble and sells out all further interest after buying QPR football club and then quickly taking over world football with the help of Briatore.
They appoint Mosley to run FIfA pointing out that this represents only a small change - an extra f in the name.
Grant
I'm dead chuffed someone actually thinks that QPR could possibly be the start of a takeover of world football Bernie sees a possible empire crumble and sells out all further interest after buying QPR football club and then quickly taking over world football with the help of Briatore.
They appoint Mosley to run FIfA pointing out that this represents only a small change - an extra f in the name.
Grant
Takeover of the local park maybe...
<Somehow still a QPR fan>
LanCat said:
I'm dead chuffed someone actually thinks that QPR could possibly be the start of a takeover of world football
Well, it's Bernie's modus operandi. Look back at his involvement in F1 for example. It didn't take him too long to turn an interest in a team that was not at the topp of its game when he arrived into global domination of the that part of the sport. Now he has all the experience and contacts required to make things happen more quickly.
Or maybe he just wants some of the QPR assets to give himself space to build a new home in London ...?
Ron Dennis said:
I put my integrity above everything, above this sport, and certainly above Formula One
I thought that was a very poignant distinction.Max Mosely said:
323 SMS phone calls
Nice to see that the head of the organisation in charge of the pinacle of motorsport technology understands something as complicated as text messages.LocoBlade said:
npope said:
McCheater fans will never agree that they cheated how ever much proof come out. What will be even better they will lose the No. 1 on there cars next year when Alonso takes it with him.
Im a Mclaren fan and yep I'll admit they did get caught and I do agree with the verdict (if not the fine), but surely you aren't naive enough to believe that this is the only time this kind of thing has happened, and that Ferrari (or any other F1 team) have never received illegally obtained technical information about another team's car, or parts of it? 
SS7
shoestring7 said:
LocoBlade said:
npope said:
McCheater fans will never agree that they cheated how ever much proof come out. What will be even better they will lose the No. 1 on there cars next year when Alonso takes it with him.
Im a Mclaren fan and yep I'll admit they did get caught and I do agree with the verdict (if not the fine), but surely you aren't naive enough to believe that this is the only time this kind of thing has happened, and that Ferrari (or any other F1 team) have never received illegally obtained technical information about another team's car, or parts of it? Edited by Strangely Brown on Sunday 16th September 17:46
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff