Sunday, 19 August 2018

If you save a life, you save the world.

The Talmud has a saying: "If you save a life, you save the world."

This is true. Look at the 12 little Wild Boars and their beloved coach. All saved by the Navy Seal rescuers, ready to put their lives on the line.

One diver Saman Gunan even gave his life to save them. Indeed, the spirit of "no greater love than this" is deeply encouraging, and we are indebted to such exceptional bravery and sacrifice. 

We also have the local community coming together to lend any aid they could humanly provide. 

In the past 17 days, the world witnessed the best of humanity at work. One local farmer even cheerily allowed the drained water from the cave to overflood her field knowing that it would ruin her harvest. 

In a press conference, this heart-warming observation was made:- 

"People who washed clothes for the Seal unit. People who brought up noodles to the rescue base. People who picked up trash in the area. All Thais will remember this, and this should be a lesson in how Thailand should move forward in the future." 

And, if I may say, how the world should move forward in the future. 

In fact, one local resident, Mr Thirawit, 44, told ST this: "In Mae Sai, nobody is watching the World Cup. Instead, they are watching the rescue operation and counting down on how many have been rescued. This is definitely more exciting than the World Cup."

Levity aside, the world community also sent their best to assist in the rescue effort. It reports that "the rescue team numbered in the hundreds, and included divers and specialists from around the world, who came as soon as they heard to lend their help."

And the Talmudic saying here is multiplied manifold since it is not just one life saved, but many, including the doctor and the divers who went into the cave to provide the kids and coach with food supplies. And the world is better for it, she is richer, brighter and more resilient. 

The stories of their courage and love will send ripples through the chronology of time. 

One foreign diver said that the kids were "incredibly strong". "They are getting forced to do something that no kid has ever done before. It is not in any way normal for kids to go cave diving at age 11."

One BBC reporter (Mr Karadzic) who had been stationed near the cave and helping to guide the people through the terrain said this with great relief: -

"I cannot understand how cool these small kids are, you know? Thinking about how they have been kept in a small cave for two weeks, they haven't seen their mums. Incredibly strong kids. Unbelievable, almost."

Lesson? Just one. 

There is saying that "altruism is like rings in the water when you toss a pebble. At first the circles are very small, then they get larger, and finally they embrace the entire surface of the ocean" (Alexandre Jollien). 

This is in line with the Talmud about how the world is saved by the souls of courage, of resilience and of an overcoming spirit. 

While this rescue effort is not an everyday event, the rich narrative it speaks about is what this world desperately needs to nudge it towards a better tomorrow for our children, that is, a world that is less about self and more about others, and a world that does not blindly chase after the mighty dollar, mindlessly betray relationships just because it is convenient, and callously hoards wealth to build an island of extravagance and arrogance to flaunt at all and sundry. 

Alas, the Tower of Babel is all about self-prominence, but Calvary is about self-sacrifice. And while the tower is gone, the one who hangs on the Cross is still a city of light on the hill. 

True, what this world need is not another lecture, another speech or another self-improvement seminar. 

The reality is, the self doesn't need any more improvement. It needs to put itself out there and make a difference, anywhere and everywhere, in the marriage, in the family, in the workplace, and in the community. 

Here is a fact: The world is looking for happiness, and many in the well-off estates have found it. 

A poll in 2014 noted that the rich in the developed countries are largely happy, secure and lacking in nothing. But this poll also noted that suicide rates are also higher amongst them. For example, suicide rates in high per capita Japan is higher than third world country like Sierra Leone. 

The poll researchers were in fact puzzled over this social phenomenon until they dug deeper and realised as a whole that happiness does not solve our existential vacuum. Meaning does.

The search of happiness is ultimately a mirage, because what is deemed as a lifelong search is no more than the refusal to admit (or see) that happiness has never been lost in the hugs of our loved ones, the longing for us in their eyes, the touch of true love, the joy of a simple meal together, and the holding of hands in times of adversity. 

For there is nothing more joyously rewarding than an overcoming love. 

Oh, what trial can separate the joy that priceless love brings to a soul who embraces it fully, unconditionally, and faithfully. 

The happiness that humans crave after is averse to adversity. It has little resilience for it. Its courage is limited to keeping suffering at a distance.

But a life of meaning, a life that is fortified by love and joy in overcoming, takes adversity as they come (and they will come) and grows in step with it, and outpaces it eventually. 

Such life of meaning never ceases to marvel and inspire the world (like the rescuers above) because they do not seek after the happiness of one (self) but spread joy of many. And that is why the saving of one life is saving of the world. 

Let me end with this thought. 

"I don't know what your destiny will be," said Albert Schweitzer to a group of schoolboys, "but one thing I know: the only ones among you who will be really happy are those who have sought and found how to serve."

Truly, the best of humanity is when we give and not take, when we love and not hate, when we share and not hoard, and when we live an overcoming life for meaning and growth and not build a hedge around ourselves to keep adversity at bay. Cheerz

Sunday, 12 August 2018

The Fall of Bill Hybels and the Failings of a Megachurch.

What do Harvey Weinstein and Bill Hybels have in common? 

Well, they are both accused of sexual harassment by a considerable number of women. 

Todate, 80 women have come forward, some famous movie stars, to accuse Harvey of inappropriate sexual advances and even rape.

For Bill, more than 10 have accused him of "improper conduct and abuse of power."

Their modus operandi seems quite similar too, although Harvey's actions are more blatant and daring and he is currently facing criminal charges. Bill however is retiring early.

Basically, it is about the abuse of power and trust, and both assumed that their victims sought them out because of what they can offer to them. 

For Harvey, it was a fast-tracked movie career to stardom that was dangled. For Bill, it was guidance, advice and employment opportunities he offered as a Christian leader of global repute. 

The similarities do not stop there. They worked in largely similar patterns too. It was always about meeting up somewhere private, away from the public eye. 

Harvey had invited many of his victims to his hotel suite so that he could sexually violate them. 

Bill would however do it with more subtlety (in terms of meeting up). While he had met them in hotel rooms, he had also met them in the gym, in his room to watch a movie together, in his beach home in Michigan, on his yacht and in restaurants. 

When they were alone, Bill would have long conversations with them and in one alleged conversation, it was said to have confessed to the victim how unhappy he was in his marriage.

After that, in the same initial advances Harvey would make, Bill would progress from there to be flirtatious. Some of the allegations from women included lingering hugs, rubbing their feet, putting his two hands on their thighs, and telling one woman that she needed to dress sexy more often.

One former assistant from his church (Willow Creek) even accused him of touching her breasts repeatedly, rubbing against her, having oral sex with her on one occasion, and "once asked her to watch porn with him as a research project."

Although Bill has come forward to officially deny the allegations, saying he "never had an inappropriate physical or emotional relationship with her" at any given time, that accusation was nevertheless the last straw for the church (Willow Creek) to bear. 

In April 2018, Bill Hybels was asked to resign six months earlier than he was scheduled to do so in a church that he had led for 40 years. And mind you, the allegations of sexual indiscretions went back to more than 20 years ago. 

It should also be noted that Bill had helmed the Global Leadership Summit ("GLS") for more than 20 years with hundreds of churches participating. He was respected as a leader to the churches worldwide.

After the fall, a pastor (Bill Clark) from Redeemer Covenant Church said that their church staff "decided to take a break from hosting the GLS this year". 

Pastor Clark said he has lost confidence "in the church's ability to host a leadership conference." 

He added: "It seemed hypocritical to us to endorse a leadership training model that was incubated in a climate of sexual harassment and sexual impropriety. I know there is a separation between the summit and Willow Creek. But we could not distinguish between the two."

In fact, many other churches were disappointed with how Willow Creek had handled the whole affair. 

Willow Creek did not deny that they have failed the church at large. 

When they first heard about the allegations years back, they took the convenient road most travelled and "labeled the allegations as lies being spread by disgruntled former church staffers." 

It was then easier to believe Bill Hybels, their founder, than to believe the accusers. You can't get any more human than that.

The default position was to protect the church (not the victims) and this invariably included its founder because the often-denied-but-no-less-true fact is that its founder is inseparable from the church. 

In the normal course of things, the reputation of the church becomes the reputation of her founder or top leader. The charisma embodies the church leadership. Think of City Harvest Church without the power couple, or New Creation Church without Prince, and you get the drift. So you attack the founder, you attack the church. 

Alas, Jesus may be the head of the Church, but most times, the unspoken reality is that the head is the one who is seen most often on stage rather than the one who is being preached about behind the pulpit.

As the accusations piled up, the other leaders/elders in Willow Creek had to take notice. It came to a point when the church admitted that Bill had "entered into areas of sin." This stop short of confirming that he had committed any sexual misconduct.

Despite Bill's consistent denial, even he himself was hard pressed to neutralize this saying: "If one calls you a donkey, pay her no mind. If two call you a donkey, look for hoof prints. And if three men call you a donkey, get a saddle."

In April 10 this year, Bill apologised for "his habit of meeting alone with women in private settings, including in hotel rooms and at his home." 

This is what he said: "I placed myself in situations that would have been far wiser to avoid. I was naive about the dynamics those situations created. I'm sorry for the lack of wisdom on my part. I commit to never putting myself in similar situations again."

From the above, it's anyone's guess what he did to his accusers when he had so "naively" entered into "areas of sins". It's also anyone's guess what the church meant when they said that Bill had entered into "areas of sins" without supposedly committing any sin. One has to ask, why then enter into it in the first place, and repeatedly so if lines were not crossed?

Be that as it may, as far as the church is concerned, the errors of their ways were that they ought to have "defended the vulnerable - the orphan, the widow, the oppressed, and those who suffer under the misuse of power." In other words, they had failed to give Bill's accusers a voice, a fighting chance.

The church admitted that their trust for Bill had clouded their judgment. This clouded judgment had prevented Willow Creek from thoroughly investigating the allegations of sexual misconduct, including an alleged affair Bill had in 2014. 

They said: "We are sorry that we allowed Bill to operate without the kind of accountability that he should have had. Our desire going forward is to retain what is good and pure about Willow, but to drive out the dark places that are unhealthy." Obviously, this lack of accountability was the implied license for Bill to freely enter into (and escape from) the "areas of sins".

De Vries, the Willow Creek's president, said:-

"There is no map for the journey we've been on. We've had missteps, mistakes, slip-ups, blunders not condemning Bill's actions to a greater degree and more publicly; not showing more support to the women who courageously came forward with their concerns; perpetuating a narrative of false allegations and collusions. We are sorry for the places where we could and should have done better."

One leader said: "I know that God is not done with our church, though, and he promises each of us a hope and a future. He is still at work, and we will follow where he leads. Let's pray desperately and fervently."

And another leader added: "We want to be the kind of church God is calling us to be. A church that learns lessons, grows through healing...and demonstrates the love of Christ."

Lesson? Seriously, is there any that we don't already know? 

It is said that history is an endless repetition of the wrong way of living and leading. That may be an extreme position, more of a lamentation, but the kernel of truth in that statement is that we have been down this road before. 

Recent history is littered with fallen pastors. In our own backyard, we have our own church leaders who have fallen from grace in a bitter 7-year legal battle that has proven more costly than is redeeming. 

So when De Vries said above that "there is no map for the journey we've been on," I beg to differ. 

The map for the journey has always been there. The consequences for the abuse and manipulation of power and the tendency for the church to valorize their leaders and villainise their accusers (for as long as they can "pray" for the problem to go away) have always been the script that has been considered, taught about and played out in the entire leadership framework behind the pulpit.

What is different for Willow Creek is that now, the church has to confront it, walk through it and suffer the loss of trust, respect, credibility, legitimacy and membership as a result.

As it stands today, two lead pastors have left and the entire elders board have resigned. More than 100 churches have also pulled out from being the host sites for the GLS. 

Before the ignominious fall, the map for the journey had existed in theory. It existed in forms of reminders, advice and consultations. I am even sure that it has been preached over the pulpit in their many GLSs, for whom Bill Hybels himself had personally led. 

Now, after the scandal and fall, the church as a whole have to put their confession to action, and their words to works. 

In other words, they have to walk the map for the journey towards repentance and change. And when you are taking that humbling journey, you have to walk according to scale, that is, one centimetre on the map in paper is now one kilometre in reality. That is another way of saying that it will take time to restore confidence, build trust, heal the wounds and live out the reformation. 

Truly, if there is any lesson to be learned here, I have two - one, negative and the other, positive. 

First, how do you sift out exemplary, self-sacrificing pastors who are humble, faithful to the call and who persevere to the end and those who are power-hungry, exploitative and have narcissistic personality disorder? 

In a survey done in US, it was reported that "there were 384,000± Christian churches in the U.S. in 2012, 65% reported serious internal conflict in the last 5 years, and...approximately 120,000 had malignant narcissist pastors." (Dr Darrell Puls). 


The numbers in a church is frightening. Although some positive illusions of one's worth may be deemed as healthy, when such narcissistic disorder is however found in leaders leading not just lives but souls, claiming to do so in the name of Christ, the outcome - like in Bill Hybels' case - can be soul crushing. 

He thus becomes not a means to the members' end, that is, an instrument to be used by God to help his members towards the path of redemption, but he and his insatiable appetites become the end, and his members and their lives become merely the means to that end.

And I believe the "malignancy" only worsens in the context of religion because "whitewashed tombs" not just cover the rot inside, it also allows their predatory behaviour to flourish outside under the trance of spiritual infantilization; that is, when it comes to spiritual matters, most believers are generally less discerning, less critical and more credulous. 

"Thus saith the Lord" is the magical spell to somehow put believers' maturity on a perpetual state of mental stasis and arrested development. In such a state, questioning everything is as heretical as disbelieving the holy trinity.

The problem is, you can't sift out the good pastors from the bad ones not because the signs are not obvious when given enough time to observe them, but because nobody in the inner circle has the political will to do it. Who wants to rock a reasonably self-rewarding, smooth sailing boat anyway? They are usually beholden to their superior for the commanding niche he had provided for them. 

And especially for such a larger-than-life personality like Bill Hybels, whose leadership books and conferences were treated like gospel truths in the secular marketplaces and leadership circles, calling him out for accountability would be like trying to catch a leviathan with a fish hook or tie its tongue down with a rope.  

This is the whole problem with institutionalised leadership in organised religion where those at the top are accorded tribal immunity to do as they please because of the long spell of spiritual infantilization and a muted and often jaded pastoral and/or elders board. 

Most times, it takes a sexual scandal of such proportion as experienced by past megachurch preachers like Ted Haggard, Bill Gothard and Jimmy Swaggart to put a stop to the narcissistic and deviant reign at the top. 

For Bill Hybels, he got out just in time for his retirement. His apology did not appear to me to go far enough to assure his victims that he was truly sorry. And the church, although had apologised and some had stepped down, did not appear to me to want to plumb deeper into Bill's dark history of leadership. It seems like the urgent need to press the reset button so as to start on a fresh page for the church stood in the way of the call for more piercing transparency and accountability.  

So, like I said, my first lesson is a negative one. But my second lesson ends on a positive note and it rides on the experience of a pastor I truly respect: Eugene H. Peterson. 

He wrote a memoir a few years back entitled "The Pastor". I devoured the book and learned what it takes to be a true pastoral shepherd of the heart - both of his own and that of his sheep. 

In one part of the book (@ p 281/282), he wrote about Herman Melville's Moby Dick.

If you know the tale, you can imagine the chaos out at sea. Pastor Peterson described it as "a cosmic conflict between good and evil...chaotic sea and demonic sea monster (the great white whale "Moby Dick") versus the morally outraged man, Captain Ahab (whose leg got bitten off by Moby and he was out for revenge)".

While the sailors labored fiercely, "every muscle taut, all attention and energy concentrated on the task," Pastor Peterson noted that "there is one man who does nothing." 

He wrote that "he doesn't hold an oar; he doesn't perspire; he doesn't shout. He is languid in the crash and the cursing. This man is the harpooner, quiet and poised, waiting." 

This next sentence captures the crucial role of the harpooner hell-bent on firing the killer shot. He knows he only got one shot to make it counts. 

The sentence is this: "To insure the greatest efficiency in the dart, the harpooner of this world must start to their feet out of idleness, and not out of toil."

For Pastor Peterson, the image of the unbusy and still harpooner describes the role of a pastor well. 

He wrote that "our culture publicizes the opposite: big, the multitudinous, the noisy. Is it not, then, a strategic necessity that some of us deliberately ally ourselves with the quiet, poised harpooners, and not leap, frenzied, to the oars?"

Indeed, to be still and know that I am God is an essential discipline to cultivate in a world where either our attention is torn apart by a million demands or our ego is stoked to unearthly heights by them. Give a malevolent narcissist limitless power and you would have given him the keys to his own destruction.

I believe Bill Hybels was a victim of such a world he had unwittingly created for himself. It was a world of attention and he had thrown himself into it, and with every reckless abandonment, he elevated himself to dizzying heights that gave him the delusion of his own invulnerability. 

Let me end with Pastor Peterson's own words and how crucial it is for pastors to distance themselves from the noise, the empty adulation, the lust for power and the appetites of the world so that they, like a harpooner, may continue to cultivate "quietness" and "attentiveness" before God and their congregation and not allow "Moby Dick" (the world) and "Captain Ahab" (man's righteousness) to call the shots. 

"A harpooner? Pastor's are in a position to be reminded daily that there is something radically wrong with the world. We are also engaged in doing something about it. The stimulus of conscience, the memory of ancient outrage, and the challenge of biblical command place us in the anarchic sea that is the world. The white whale, a symbol of evil, and the crippled captain, a personification of violated righteousness, are joined in battle. History is a novel of spiritual conflict. The church is a whaleboat. In such a world, noise is inevitable, and immense energy is expended. But if there is no harpooner in the boat, there will be no proper finish to the chase. Or if the harpooner is exhausted, having abandoned his assignment and become an oarsman, he will not be ready and accurate when it is time to throw his javelin."  

Have a quiet and reflective Sabbath then. Cheerz.



Emeritus' Trilogy: Ministerial Pay (Part III)

He clarified. On National Day, he left no stones unturned. 

You can call it backpedaling or rearguard defensiveness, but Mr Goh saw "a silver lining" in the "heated reactions" from Singaporeans to his comments on ministerial salaries last week.

He said the whole episode shows that "Singaporeans care deeply and hold leaders to account for their words and performance."

His magnanimity did not stop there. He said this: "I welcome diverse and dissenting views. I hope to engage them, perhaps through a forum in due course."

As such, I only have three lessons on Mr Goh's clarification and they are premised on his Facebook post of late.

Here goes...

1) On his statement that "those who are not able to command a high salary are "very, very mediocre" people", he clarified with this: 

"I do not mean nor believe that Singaporeans at whatever level of income are mediocre. Those who have worked with me know people matter the most to me. That is what I am in politics for."

Alas, there is a saying that in the art of conversation, one must not only listen to what is said but what is not said. Because what is not said, what is unspoken, most times, speaks louder than words. 

So, it goes without saying that Mr Goh, as a former PM for 14 years, and in politics for decades, know how politics is played. 

If politics is about people management, with all their expectations, hopes and conflicting desires involved, it is political suicide to make that sweeping "very, very mediocre" statement. So there is more here than meets the eye about Mr Goh's quick-draw remarks. 

If any of the 4G leaders would to make that same statement, which is clearly elitist, inflammatory and divisive, and meant it as it is said, he or she would risk losing a lot of votes in a GE as a result. 

So, what is not said then is what Mr Goh has come forward now with great resolute to clarify (on the eve of the nation's birthday), that is, "those who have worked with me know people matter the most to me." 

If there is any lingering doubt to the matter, this would clear it for good. He added: -

"Salaries are not our starting point in looking for ministers. Character, motivation, commitment, selflessness, practical abilities, competence and proven performance are the main attributes we look for. The first four attributes are veto factors."

2) The second lesson here needs a little explanation. 

Now, while Mr Goh deemed "character, motivation, commitment and selflessness" as "veto factors" (meaning deciding factors), he is still insistent that he sees pay as important.

Here is why in his own words. 

"In times of prolonged crisis and upheaval, I have no doubt that Singaporeans will step forward to serve. Money would not be a key vector. In peace and prosperity however, there are no dragons to slay. Personal aspirations, freedom, privacy and lifestyle take precedence."

If you discern his underlying intention, he is trying to be nothing more than realistic and practical in the whole scheme of things (or in relation to how our society has evolved in a capitalistist way of life). 

A good example of a time of "prolonged crisis and upheaval" would be the time our birthing nation is struggling in the womb of independence and developing her wings to fly in the 70s and 80s. 

During that time, upping the ministerial pay is the last thing in the pioneers' or founders' mind. 

That is why LKY said that one of his greatest regrets was to deprive EW Barker of the millions he would have earned if he had worked in the private sector. 

To me, that is high sacrifices in desperate times. 

Alas, now that we are in our 53rd year of Independence and the struggles seemed to be over (at least from a make-it-or-die perspective), and we are flying high as First World Nation and Economy, the impression I get from Mr Goh is that in such times of peace and prosperity, since "there is no dragons to slay," it is therefore time to talk about no less "high sacrifices" from our 4G leaders but with a touch of comparable compensatory reward to sweeten the deal (and deepen the honey pot?).

Bottom line, Mr Goh is just being unapologetically practical about changing times. 

And if you think about it, I guess we are what we have made for ourselves. 

By this, I mean that we have studiously followed the predominantly capitalist road to fame and fortune, stability and resilience. 

As such, with that road we have taken by conscious choice and technocratic engineering to nation building comes certain "legitimate expectations" we cannot escape from. 

Those legitimate expectations have to do with a consumeristic, prosperity-minded, elevated standard-of-living and market-driven mindset.

You see, with Apple crossing the trillion dollar mark in market valuation, the richest billionaire hitting 150b in net worth and the youngest-to-be billionaire in her early twenties, you get the feeling that you can't be a minister in this day and age with an income that doesn't match those at the top tier of society. It somehow comes with the territory. 

Mind you, it is still expectedly high sacrifices, yet with a touch of the silvery spoon of compensation to equalise status and maintain dignity in high places in an earnest bid to attract talent. 

So, I believe that is Mr Goh's train of thought or process of reasoning. Perceptibly, there are no dragons to slay, no existential threat to worry about, no life-and-death sink hole to fill, so let's focus more on comparable compensation without losing sight on the four key vectors. 

That about sums up his view expressed in staggered fashion over one week of clarification. 

And lastly,

3) Mr Goh said: "Singaporeans know quality costs money - from durians to clothes to football players to military weapons."

And I think this applies to ministers too. They are up there with the costly durians, expensive football players and heavily invested military weapons.

In times of peace and prosperity, where "personal aspirations, freedom, privacy, and lifestyle takes precedence," the last thing our government wants to do is to shortchange our ministers with mismatched pay. 

And this is what most Singaporeans (earning below $500k yearly) will have to come to accept about our ministers and their pay in such times of peace and prosperity.

It is not about getting "very, very mediocre" people in government when you pay below market rate, but it is about satisfying or meeting legitimate expectation (wrought by changing times) when it comes to attracting people into government by paying comparable salary. 

The social and economic conditioning here is quite straightforward: If I am headhunted by the government, then I am deemed good enough for them; if I am deemed good enough for them, then I am worth above average wage; and if I am worth above average wage, I have to be paid above that - deal with it. 

I guess I have to end this post on that note - dealing with it. 

As a nation, we dream of equality but equality has always been a mirage and has to remain so because in a system dictated by market demand and supply, economic rent, capital gain and financialization where values and wealth are created by self-engineered market price surges, the inequality gap will always be unbridgeable. 

In a changed world like this, I feel that the only hope for the poor to get less poor is for the rich to get much richer. It will therefore always be about ensuring the rich leads the poor out of poverty by making sure that they are paid more than enough first.

My only concern with that form of extrinsic motivation as part of the package to attract talent is that with such hedged financial security and increasing wealth that ironically widens even further the income and social gap, is there a risk that one's public service and duty may conflict with one's "personal aspirations, freedom, privacy, and lifestyle"?

In other words, will our leaders be seen to understand the visceral problems of the poor should the gap inevitably widens further? Will there also be an issue of legitimacy to lead and empathise when their pay is pegged to ever-rising market rates? 

In such a situation, if the problem worsens, will trust - the glue of society - breaks down and collective disillusionment sets in? 

Personally, it is hope that on this National Day, as we renew our collective commitment and resolve, we will see better days ahead. 

But admittedly, the reality of things is this - just as there are dragons to slay during "times of prolonged crisis and upheaval," there are also dragons to slay during "times of peace and prosperity". One dragon is more scaly than the other, but no less sinister. 

In fact, if you read the history of the rise and fall of civilisations, good times like peace and prosperity always precede an imminent fall because there is a greater tendency to take things for granted and let our guard down. 

So, while the dragons to slay during bad times are mostly that which is external to us like war, social unrest and struggle for independence, the dragons to slay during good times are mostly that which is within us like complacency, arrogance and a mindset that this time, things are just different because we are in control. Cheerz.