Last visit was: 24 Jul 2024, 05:08 It is currently 24 Jul 2024, 05:08
Toolkit
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2015
Posts: 198
Own Kudos [?]: 3145 [394]
Given Kudos: 85
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6991
Own Kudos [?]: 64576 [123]
Given Kudos: 1824
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Tutor
Joined: 15 Nov 2013
Posts: 100
Own Kudos [?]: 950 [62]
Given Kudos: 4
GMAT Focus 1:
805 Q90 V90 DI90
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
General Discussion
Director
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Status:Learning
Posts: 864
Own Kudos [?]: 571 [1]
Given Kudos: 755
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Hi ,
My answer is wrong as per the OA given.
The argument talks about headlines which can be understood by all who have read the story .
If only reporters write the headlines then , people who will read the headlines will not consider them clever or even worse will not be able to deduce them from the story.
So editors should write the headlines

Is my reasoning correct ?

Originally posted by arvind910619 on 30 May 2017, 00:11.
Last edited by arvind910619 on 16 Aug 2020, 07:51, edited 1 time in total.
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 277
Own Kudos [?]: 378 [3]
Given Kudos: 99
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
3
Kudos
ganand wrote:
Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories. The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) The reporter who writes a story is usually better placed than the reporters' editor is to judge what the story's most newsworthy features are.

(B) To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.

(C) Most reporters rarely bother to find out how other reporters have written stories and headlines about the same events that they themselves have covered.

(D) For virtually any story that a reporter writes, there are at least a few people who know more about the story's subject matter than does the reporter.

(E) The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever.

Summary - Reports write headlines that allude to little know details of the story => That's why editors should not allow them to write the headlines.
Strengthen - Editors might want people to read the headline and be able to relate the entire article back to the headline.

A - Weakens
B - If we assume the answer says reporters, it actually weakens the conclusion.
C - Irrelevant
D - Reporters knowledge Vs other people isn't mentioned in the argument
E - Sounds Correct as the editors want people to read the entire story and be able to relate that with the story.

E is the correct answer IMO.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4915
Own Kudos [?]: 7817 [11]
Given Kudos: 221
Location: India
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
6
Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Top Contributor
let us simplify the argument given --

Headlines that reporters write allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but does not appear explicitly in the story --> Editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories

let us take a look at the answer options given --

Option A - Incorrect

If the reporter is better placed than the editor to judge the story's most newsworthy features, then probably the editor should let the reporter decide on the headlines. This weakens the conclusion.

Option B - Incorrect

Not relevant as the argument is concerned about whether reporters should get to decide the headlines for their stories. We have no information to evaluate whether the person who will write the headline has sufficient information about the story or not. If he does not, then this weakens the argument.

Option C - Incorrect

How other reporters have written stories and headlines for the same events is not relevant to evaluating the conclusion.

Option D - Incorrect

This can either strengthen or weaken the argument. If the number of people who know more than the reporter is limited, then the argument is strengthened. However, if the number is quite high, the argument is weakened since a lot of people now can relate to the headlines. Since, this does both, it is incorrect.

If the editor wants people who have read the stories to recognize the headline as clever, there is no point in letting the reporters choose the headlines as they allude to information that does appear in the story.
Intern
Joined: 04 Aug 2014
Posts: 16
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
GMAT 1: 620 Q47 V28
GPA: 3.2
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
hello experts
my concern is what is the inference of word " clever" here used multiple times in the argument and in the correct answer choice."while they are clever , what makes them clever is" couldn't understand the phrase"
Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2012
Posts: 301
Own Kudos [?]: 432 [8]
Given Kudos: 331
Location: Pakistan
GPA: 3.76
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
8
Kudos
sidagar wrote:
hello experts
my concern is what is the inference of word " clever" here used multiple times in the argument and in the correct answer choice."while they are clever , what makes them clever is" couldn't understand the phrase"

Ok what makes them clever?
If you write explicitly in the headlines say " an earthquake at xyz place killed 8 people" this explained headlines gives a clear information and most of the people wont be interested in reading the whole story. A clever reporter wont write such explicit info in the headline cuz he/she wants he reader to read the whole story
argument says that editor should not let reporter to write a headline because reporter knows the story. The right choice says that editor wants a kind of headline that doesn't give the whole information to the reader and so for that a clever reporter is a must.
Intern
Joined: 04 Aug 2014
Posts: 16
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
GMAT 1: 620 Q47 V28
GPA: 3.2
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
here is my analysis

conclusion : editors should not allow reporters to write headlines

premise:even though headlines reporters write are clever , what typically makes them clever - lost as could not understand the meaning

would appreciate your analysis.Also is this from official guide 2018
Current Student
Joined: 18 Aug 2016
Posts: 531
Own Kudos [?]: 587 [1]
Given Kudos: 198
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1
Kudos
GMATNinja wrote:
sidagar wrote:
here is my analysis

conclusion : editors should not allow reporters to write headlines

premise:even though headlines reporters write are clever , what typically makes them clever - lost as could not understand the meaning

would appreciate your analysis.Also is this from official guide 2018

The headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever. However, the headlines are only clever because they refer to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter. If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that information and thus will not appreciate the clever headlines.

Imagine that a physicist were to give a lecture to a classroom of students at a university. During the lecture, the physicist makes several jokes that would only be funny to someone working in the physicist's laboratory. Sure, the jokes might be funny, but none of the students would understand or appreciate the humor.

Similarly, the headlines written by the reporters are often clever, but most of the readers cannot understand or appreciate why they are clever even after reading the story. In other words, unless you happen to know the "little-known information" that the reporter knows, you will not recognize the headline as clever, even after reading the entire story.

Thus, if newspapers editors prefer headlines that can be recognized as clever by anyone who has read the story in its entirety (choice (E)), then newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.

GMATNinja
Understood why E is more appropriate than other options...but not able to reject option D.. can you throw some light...
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6991
Own Kudos [?]: 64576 [2]
Given Kudos: 1824
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Luckisnoexcuse wrote:
GMATNinja
Understood why E is more appropriate than other options...but not able to reject option D.. can you throw some light...

Quote:
(D) For virtually any story that a reporter writes, there are at least a few people who know more about the story's subject matter than does the reporter.

Choice (D) does not provide any information suggesting that reporters should not be allowed to write headlines for their own stories, so it does not directly support the conclusion. Furthermore, Choice (D) does not tell us anything about the cleverness of reporters' headlines and thus does not strengthen the argument used in the passage.

Since choice (D) does not support the conclusion or the evidence cited in the passage, it can be eliminated.
Intern
Joined: 30 Mar 2017
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I narrowed this question down to B and E and ended up picking B over E

I negated B -> if one did not need a sufficient understanding of the story to write a clever headline, then anyone (including editors) could write a clever headline. This would weaken the conclusion if true. Therefore, the opposite would strengthen the conclusion. Further, the premise states that the clever headlines "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter." Therefore, if one did not have knowledge of the story, how would one be able to write a clever headline?

I saw several people mention B as a weakener, not a strengthener. Can anyone care to elaborate further? Thanks
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6991
Own Kudos [?]: 64576 [0]
Given Kudos: 1824
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
jwang1191 wrote:
I narrowed this question down to B and E and ended up picking B over E

I negated B -> if one did not need a sufficient understanding of the story to write a clever headline, then anyone (including editors) could write a clever headline. This would weaken the conclusion if true. Therefore, the opposite would strengthen the conclusion. Further, the premise states that the clever headlines "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter." Therefore, if one did not have knowledge of the story, how would one be able to write a clever headline?

I saw several people mention B as a weakener, not a strengthener. Can anyone care to elaborate further? Thanks

First of all, just because negating a statement makes it a weakener, does not necessarily make that statement a strengthener. Regardless, the conclusion here is that "newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories". The reason is NOT that reporters write clever headlines. The reason is that very few readers would be able to appreciate and understand those headlines, so the cleverness of the reporters' headlines would be wasted.

Saying that anyone can write clever headlines does not weaken the conclusion. If anything, it suggests that editors do not have to rely on the reporters themselves to write clever headlines. Choice (B) could potentially be seen as a weakener - you could argue that a reporter is more likely to have a sufficient understanding of the story and thus perhaps more capable of writing a clever headline. But that logic only really works if we assume that the headlines SHOULD be clever. If the headlines don't have to be clever, then such a "sufficient" understanding of the story might not be necessary to write an acceptable headline.

Refer to this post for an explanation of the correct answer.

I hope that helps!
Intern
Joined: 19 Oct 2014
Posts: 29
Own Kudos [?]: 56 [0]
Given Kudos: 41
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 2: 670 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.26
WE:Operations (Manufacturing)
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
GMATNinja wrote:
If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that information and thus will not appreciate the clever headlines.

How will the most readers not appreciate if the reporters do mention 'little known information'as a part of headlines and not mention in the story ?

What you wrote above makes me feel as you it is contrary to the information in stimulus(in quotes below). Please help me understand.

"what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself."
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6991
Own Kudos [?]: 64576 [0]
Given Kudos: 1824
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
gocoder wrote:
GMATNinja wrote:
If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that information and thus will not appreciate the clever headlines.

How will the most readers not appreciate if the reporters do mention 'little known information'as a part of headlines and not mention in the story ?

What you wrote above makes me feel as you it is contrary to the information in stimulus(in quotes below). Please help me understand.

"what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself."

Just because the headlines ALLUDE to the little known information does not mean that most readers will understand the headline.

Imagine that a physicist were to give a televised speech and make several clever jokes about string theory. In order to get the jokes, you have to understand string theory. However, most of the viewers do NOT understand string theory. So even though the jokes might be clever, the only people who get the jokes are the very few people who understand string theory. Just because the physicist ALLUDES to string theory in the speech does not mean that most people will suddenly understand string theory or the joke. And if the physicist never explains the relevant theory in the speech, then most people will listen to the speech without understanding any of the jokes.

Similarly, the headlines written by the reporters are often clever, but most of the readers cannot understand or appreciate why they are clever even after reading the story. They didn't know the necessary information before reading, and they don't know it after reading. In other words, unless you happen to already know the "little-known information" that the reporter knows, you will not recognize the headline as clever, even after reading the entire story.

I hope that helps!
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Posts: 360
Own Kudos [?]: 839 [2]
Given Kudos: 646
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Organizational Behavior
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
2
Kudos
arvind910619 wrote:
Hi ,
My answer is wrong as per the OA given.
The argument talks about headlines which can be understood by all who have read the story .
If only reporters write the headlines then , people who will read the headlines will not consider them clever or even worse will not be able to deduce them from the story.
So editors should write the headlines

Is my reasoning correct ?

This reasoning is the most correct in my opinion.

For example: A reporter covered a story where a very precious diamond of national heritage was stolen from International museum in United States. Being a reporter, he overheard the FBI agents at the crime scene talking that the diamond was stolen by N.Korea. Now imagine that the reporter writes the headline as "Can a diamond cause World War 3?" He already has raised curiosity in reader's mind with such a headline but unfortunately the story that he covered was published accurately and thus, had no mention of any such statement about world war.
Would not this allusion at the headline disappoint the readers after they have had read the entire story? As a result, the reputation of the newspaper company will be compromised. Hence the newspaper editors would want the kind of headlines that is appreciated or probably called as clever by the readers after they have had read the story.
In this case, headlines that the editors would want can probably be - "States loses a cultural heritage".
Intern
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 34
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [0]
Given Kudos: 5
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
Conclusion: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.

Premise: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.

First let me explain why I rejected E:
E says "The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever". From the argument we can see that the headlines are clever when "they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself." So, this option means that the readers of the newspaper will be able to understand that the reporter has little information about the story and hence consider the headline to be "clever" and this is what the editor wants. This clearly weakens the argument because the editors would like to have headlines which do not "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.". This in a way weakens the argument.

I chose B and here's why:
Choice B says "To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.". Now we can clearly take this as an assumption to arrive at the conclusion. Though, again "clever" has been used here as well, it is compensated by the second part of the choice "a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies". I believed that this is a better choice.

Please explain where am I going wrong
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6991
Own Kudos [?]: 64576 [3]
Given Kudos: 1824
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
2
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
aviejay wrote:
Conclusion: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.

Premise: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.

First let me explain why I rejected E:
E says "The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever". From the argument we can see that the headlines are clever when "they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself." So, this option means that the readers of the newspaper will be able to understand that the reporter has little information about the story and hence consider the headline to be "clever" and this is what the editor wants. This clearly weakens the argument because the editors would like to have headlines which do not "allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.". This in a way weakens the argument.

I chose B and here's why:
Choice B says "To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.". Now we can clearly take this as an assumption to arrive at the conclusion. Though, again "clever" has been used here as well, it is compensated by the second part of the choice "a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies". I believed that this is a better choice.

Please explain where am I going wrong

aviejay, thank you for explaining your thought process! I think I see where you went wrong...

As stated in an earlier post, the headlines written by reporters are only clever because they refer to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter. If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that same information. Since the readers do not know that information, they will not be able to appreciate the clever headlines.

In other words, according to the author, the problem with headlines written by reporters is that most people, even after reading the story, will NOT be able to appreciate the clever headlines. But what if editors are okay with that? Maybe the editors prefer headlines whose cleverness is only appreciated by a small portion of readers. If that were the case, then the editors SHOULD allow reporters to write their own headlines.

Choice (E) assures us that this is not the case. Editors want headlines whose cleverness will be appreciated by ANYONE who has read the entire story. The cleverness of headlines written by reporters is only appreciated by a small portion of readers. So, if (E) is true, then editors would NOT want headlines to be written by the reporters. Thus, (E) strengthens the argument.

Choice (B), on the other hand, could actually be used against the author's argument. The reporter who wrote the story would surely have a sufficient understanding of his/her own story. If (B) is true, then a sufficient understanding of the story is a necessary condition for being able to write a clever headline. The reporter would meet this condition, so (B) suggests that the reporter would be qualified to write a clever headline.

At best, choice (B) does not affect the argument (surely the editors could find other people, besides the reporters, with sufficient understanding of the story). But (B) does not strengthen the argument. (E) is a better choice.

I hope that helps!
Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 62
Own Kudos [?]: 108 [0]
Given Kudos: 71
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 620 Q41 V34
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
Quote:
Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories. The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story itself.
Conclusion: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.
Support: The reason for this is that, while the headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever, what typically makes them clever is that they allude to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter but that never appears explicitly in the story
So may be it doesn't sound clever to the people who read it.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

Quote:
(A) The reporter who writes a story is usually better placed than the reporters' editor is to judge what the story's most newsworthy features are.
This is exactly opposite to what the argument suggests. Hence it goes out.
Quote:
(B) To write a headline that is clever, a person must have sufficient understanding of the story that the headline accompanies.
The reporter who owns the story is definitely has the understanding of the story, but the conclusion of the argument refrains them from writing the headline of their own story.
Quote:
(C) Most reporters rarely bother to find out how other reporters have written stories and headlines about the same events that they themselves have covered.
Out of scope. Other reporters aren't the matter of concern here in this argument.
Quote:
(D) For virtually any story that a reporter writes, there are at least a few people who know more about the story's subject matter than does the reporter.
Certainly there would be such people. But firstly thy haven't been discussed by the argument. Secondly, we don't know what information would those people allude to if they would write the headlines. If they would be able to make clever headlines. Insufficient. Goes Out.
Quote:
(E) The kind of headlines that newspaper editors want are those that anyone who has read a reporter's story in its entirety will recognize as clever.

This hits the bulls eye. They newspaper editors want those kind of headline that is considered clever by someone who has read the story in its entirety. This strengthen the claim that Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories as they allude to little known information.
Intern
Joined: 29 Jul 2017
Posts: 42
Own Kudos [?]: 23 [1]
Given Kudos: 236
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Schools: ISB '21 (A)
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.94
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1
Kudos
GMATNinja wrote:
sidagar wrote:
here is my analysis

conclusion : editors should not allow reporters to write headlines

premise:even though headlines reporters write are clever , what typically makes them clever - lost as could not understand the meaning

would appreciate your analysis.Also is this from official guide 2018

The headlines that reporters themselves write are often clever. However, the headlines are only clever because they refer to little-known information that is familiar to the reporter. If that information is little-known AND if the reporter does not mention that information in the story, then we can infer that most readers will not know that information and thus will not appreciate the clever headlines.

Imagine that a physicist were to give a lecture to a classroom of students at a university. During the lecture, the physicist makes several jokes that would only be funny to someone working in the physicist's laboratory. Sure, the jokes might be funny, but none of the students would understand or appreciate the humor.

Similarly, the headlines written by the reporters are often clever, but most of the readers cannot understand or appreciate why they are clever even after reading the story. In other words, unless you happen to know the "little-known information" that the reporter knows, you will not recognize the headline as clever, even after reading the entire story.

Thus, if newspapers editors prefer headlines that can be recognized as clever by anyone who has read the story in its entirety (choice (E)), then newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines for their own stories.

Thanks for the wonderful explanation.

Could you explain to me how I can determine the logical antecedent of 'them' in "what typically makes them clever"?
Re: Newspaper editors should not allow reporters to write the headlines [#permalink]
1   2
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6991 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts
CR Forum Moderator
824 posts