I was unable to go to the NCTM Annual Conference in Boston this month. The link gives me reason #78.4 why I appreciate Dan Meyer. He collected *every* handout from any speaker who posted them online. Quite an amazing collection!
http://blog.mrmeyer.com/2015/everyhandoutfromnctm/ Richard 
Well, yes, Richard, but he only does this because he's avoiding mathematics. If he were an honest math teacher teaching Honest Math, he'd spend his time checking to ensure that others were honestly teaching honest math, honestly! I'd say "Honest Injun!" but wouldn't want anyone to think I'm trying to inject multiculturalism into this forum!!!!
Honest. Richard Strausz wrote: > I was unable to go to the NCTM Annual Conference in > Boston this month. The link gives me reason #78.4 why > I appreciate Dan Meyer. He collected *every* handout > from any speaker who posted them online. Quite an > amazing collection! > > http://blog.mrmeyer.com/2015/everyhandoutfromnctm/ > > Richard 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
> Well, yes, Richard, but he only does this because
> he's avoiding mathematics. If he were an honest math > teacher teaching Honest Math, he'd spend his time > checking to ensure that others were honestly teaching > honest math, honestly! I'd say "Honest Injun!" but > wouldn't want anyone to think I'm trying to inject > multiculturalism into this forum!!!! > > Honest. Interesting you'd say that, CW. He cleverly indicates with a small MA (for Math Avoidance, I believe) next to the name of every session where it applies. Richard > > Richard Strausz wrote: > > > I was unable to go to the NCTM Annual Conference in > > Boston this month. The link gives me reason #78.4 > why > > I appreciate Dan Meyer. He collected *every* > handout > > from any speaker who posted them online. Quite an > > amazing collection! > > > > > http://blog.mrmeyer.com/2015/everyhandoutfromnctm/ > > > > Richard 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
It's on my cap, "NCTM Shift Happens". Amazingly,
when I first joined, the NCTM was about teaching mathematics it was led by people with genuine mathematics competence with a special interest in its communication as opposed to its avoidance and people such as dy/Dan. The cracks were already there at the elementary level it was already chafing over the name of its 2ndmost important journal, "The Arithmetic Teacher," already denying that teaching arithmetic is BY FAR the most important responsibility of elementary school mathematics education. "Mathematics" is so much broader than just arithmetic, you know. True, of course, but the inability to teach arithmetic effectively leaves little hope for competence with deeper stuff. By revelation of the holy writ in 1989, the NCTM nonStandards, secondary had been lost as well. I can't remember his name but one of its past presidents (with a PhD in math, not math ed) spent the rest of his long life trying to undermine them but, of course, to no avail. Math avoidance was too ingrained throughout the organization. Once again, give credit where credit is due, our colleges of education and "professional" math ed in particular. Wayne At 04:05 PM 4/27/2015, Richard Strausz wrote: >I was unable to go to the NCTM Annual Conference >in Boston this month. The link gives me reason >#78.4 why I appreciate Dan Meyer. He collected >*every* handout from any speaker who posted them >online. Quite an amazing collection! > >http://blog.mrmeyer.com/2015/everyhandoutfromnctm/ > >Richard 
The NCTM is an organization of math teachers for math teachers. Some choose to be a math teacher to teach math, to pass down the art, and some choose to be a math teacher to be a math teacher. The latter group looks for ways to make being a math teacher more enjoyable, for math teachers.
Bob Hansen > On Apr 28, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Wayne Bishop <[hidden email]> wrote: > > It's on my cap, "NCTM Shift Happens". Amazingly, when I first joined, the NCTM was about teaching mathematics  it was led by people with genuine mathematics competence with a special interest in its communication as opposed to its avoidance and people such as dy/Dan. The cracks were already there at the elementary level  it was already chafing over the name of its 2ndmost important journal, "The Arithmetic Teacher," already denying that teaching arithmetic is BY FAR the most important responsibility of elementary school mathematics education. "Mathematics" is so much broader than just arithmetic, you know. True, of course, but the inability to teach arithmetic effectively leaves little hope for competence with deeper stuff. > > By revelation of the holy writ in 1989, the NCTM nonStandards, secondary had been lost as well. I can't remember his name but one of its past presidents (with a PhD in math, not math ed) spent the rest of his long life trying to undermine them but, of course, to no avail. Math avoidance was too ingrained throughout the organization. Once again, give credit where credit is due, our colleges of education and "professional" math ed in particular. 
I don't know if it's a nationwide phenomenon or not but it is
definitely the case here at Cal State LA (with a huge teacher prep focus). WAY too many prospective math teachers want to be teachers but have no special ability or interest in mathematics. They are in it because there is a perception of a job at the end. That's an important consideration, of course, but it does not bode well for their effectiveness in their chosen "profession". 3 decades ago, I saw essentially no students in that category; now I see lots. Wayne At 07:22 AM 4/28/2015, Robert Hansen wrote: >The NCTM is an organization of math teachers for math teachers. Some >choose to be a math teacher to teach math, to pass down the art, and >some choose to be a math teacher to be a math teacher. The latter >group looks for ways to make being a math teacher more enjoyable, >for math teachers. > >Bob Hansen > > > On Apr 28, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Wayne Bishop > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > It's on my cap, "NCTM Shift Happens". Amazingly, when I first > joined, the NCTM was about teaching mathematics  it was led by > people with genuine mathematics competence with a special interest > in its communication as opposed to its avoidance and people such as > dy/Dan. The cracks were already there at the elementary level  it > was already chafing over the name of its 2ndmost important > journal, "The Arithmetic Teacher," already denying that teaching > arithmetic is BY FAR the most important responsibility of > elementary school mathematics education. "Mathematics" is so much > broader than just arithmetic, you know. True, of course, but the > inability to teach arithmetic effectively leaves little hope for > competence with deeper stuff. > > > > By revelation of the holy writ in 1989, the NCTM nonStandards, > secondary had been lost as well. I can't remember his name but one > of its past presidents (with a PhD in math, not math ed) spent the > rest of his long life trying to undermine them but, of course, to > no avail. Math avoidance was too ingrained throughout the > organization. Once again, give credit where credit is due, our > colleges of education and "professional" math ed in particular. 
In reply to this post by Bishop, Wayne
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Wayne Bishop <[hidden email]> wrote: It's on my cap, "NCTM Shift Happens". Amazingly, when I first joined, the NCTM was about teaching mathematics – it was led by people with genuine mathematics competence with a special interest in its communication as opposed to its avoidance and people such as dy/Dan. Sounds like romantic nostalgia maybe? They didn't know much math back then. No base 2. Worthless. Approximately all arithmetic is done in base 2 these days, if we count all the operations done with numbers around the world. People who learned arithmetic in the 1950s or before are too ignorant to be allowed to have a job? Not true! They've been learning ever since. Education, even in arithmetic, does not stop with elementary school. The cracks were already there at the elementary level – it was already chafing over the name of its 2ndmost important journal, "The Arithmetic Teacher," already denying that teaching arithmetic is BY FAR the most important responsibility of elementary school mathematics education. Depends what you mean by "arithmetic". If it's all in base 10 it's a complete waste of time and all such curricula need to be junked immediately. One *must* know about bases to be a functioning human being in today's world. So as long as we don't use a narrow definition of arithmetic we'll be OK. "Mathematics" is so much broader than just arithmetic, you know. True, of course, but the inability to teach arithmetic effectively leaves little hope for competence with deeper stuff. Again, arithmetic is not a selfdefining term. No term is.
I'm not convinced that PhDs in math have been paying sufficient attention to CS. CS is the new mathematics. Any curriculum advisory board with only PhD mathematicians is likely to be a dinosaur body. Lets avoid those at all costs. Kirby 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
Written like someone who has never belonged to NCTM or any other organization of professional mathematics teachers, researchers, educators, or the like. Who hasn't the foggiest idea what such organizations are about, of their lengthy histories, of their range of ideas, practices, philosophies, etc. And who is himself not a mathematics teacher, researcher, educator or anything of the kind.
As a result, we see a person who simply makes things up to suit his ntil own historical disdain for a few teachers whom he feels wronged him as a youngster. Not much foundation for analyzing what actually goes on in K12 mathematics classrooms, but an excellent basis for seven or so years of ranting about any mathematics teacher who doesn't fit his own narrow notions of "honest" math teaching and accusing his betters of a host of imaginary crimes and misdemeanors. Are there bad mathematics teachers out there? Of course there are. But as to what percentage are bad we will never know from reading the comments of Robert Hansen. Until we are looking at meaningful definitions of what it means to be a "bad mathematics teachers," and real data on those currently teaching, all we are going to find from the antiteacher side of the aisle is hot air and bile. In the tiny echo chamber of mathteach, the naysayers will trip over one another in the rush to clap one another on the back as each posts another antiteacher, antipublic education screed, and even those who know better will applaud Robert's inventions and flights of fancy since they fit the  dare I say it?  prime directive: never write anything about American society that questions a fundamentally racist and classist system increasingly rigged to serve a shrinking percentage of its people. Blame everything but those really running things, particularly convenient scapegoats like unions, progressive educators, or, when all else fails, Al Sharpton. No doubt this keeps the naysayers happy, but it has little, if anything, to do with reality. Robert Hansen wrote: > The NCTM is an organization of math teachers for math > teachers. Some choose to be a math teacher to teach > math, to pass down the art, and some choose to be a > math teacher to be a math teacher. The latter group > looks for ways to make being a math teacher more > enjoyable, for math teachers. > > Bob Hansen 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
CW, I chuckled as I read the comments of Wayne and Robert about the NCTM in response to the collection of handouts by presenters at the NCTM conference.
It's like criticizing Op Ed pieces in a newspaper by saying 'I never liked that newspaper.' Oh well! Richard 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
Richard, I was thinking of the old saw about looking gift horses in their mouths, but perhaps this also applies:
http://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/04/29/amathteachersguidetoexplainingtechnologytoyourparents/ > CW, I chuckled as I read the comments of Wayne and > Robert about the NCTM in response to the collection > of handouts by presenters at the NCTM conference. > > It's like criticizing Op Ed pieces in a newspaper by > saying 'I never liked that newspaper.' > > Oh well! > > Richard 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
CW says:
>Richard, I was thinking of the old saw about looking gift horses in their mouths, but perhaps this also applies: http://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/04/29/amathteachersguidetoexplainingtechnologytoyourparents/ So called digital natives think they are techy because they are good consumers. How American. I give up, Don Draper has won after all. Cheers, Joe N 
On 4/29/15, 11:37 AM, "Joe Niederberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:
So called digital natives think they are techy because they are good consumers. How American. I give up, Don Draper has won after all. Well, I was a member of NCTM. You don’t have to be a professional teacher to join NCTM. I have probably read and studied more NCTM material than Richard. And I joined MAA as well, partly to have access to JSTOR without having to drive over to the college
campuses every time I wanted to track down a reference to an article. Sometimes you get lucky with google, but most of the original quality is still (unfortunately) locked up in journals.
Bob Hansen

In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
Richard Strausz wrote:
http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9757681 > I was unable to go to the NCTM Annual Conference in Boston this month. > The link gives me reason #78.4 why I appreciate Dan Meyer. He collected > *every* handout from any speaker who posted them online. > Quite an amazing collection! > > http://blog.mrmeyer.com/2015/everyhandoutfromnctm/ I think this is a great idea and I'm surprised no one (that I know of) has done this before. MAA Section meetings should have something like this, and I may suggest it to those in charge of the section I belong to. I quickly looked through the titles for something of possible interest to me (didn't see anything) and at some of the names to see if I recognized any (I didn't), but I'll probably come back when I have more time. If I were still teaching (especially high school teaching), I'd probably find a few things that would be useful for student projects (or that would suggest something that I could modify to be useful for student projects), and I'd certainly refer Meyer's list to students looking for ideas of things to present at a state math convention meeting. As for what I think of dy/dan's blog regarding math or lack of math (often discussed in mathteach), I dug up an old post of mine that discusses this and which I don't feel differently about now. My main concern, and it's really a matter of my likely not finding it of much use or interest to me if I was still teaching and not that I'm all that bothered by what he does do, is summarized in the following statement I make below: "One of the faults I see with many "applications" and "side detours" made by teachers and textbooks is that there seems to be little attention paid in trying to pick those detours that reinforce things you want to reinforce." For example, given that students often have trouble with fraction manipulations, I might want to find an activity or cute story that helps reinforce fraction manipulations or generates interest in the students to look at this topic, such as Pat Ballew's 30 December 2008 blog entry "Division of Fractions by the Alien Method" (URL below).     mathteach post (21 June 2010) http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=7104589 In the case of dy/dan, I wonder if the lack of math is because he devotes most of his efforts to his classes and only posts initial "attention getters" on his blog? Anyway, I haven't looked at his blog much (mainly because when I have I haven't seen much of interest to me), but it seems to me that a better blog for the purposes that dy/dan's blog is praised for is Pat Ballew's blog. The motivation and pictures are there, and then he launches into the math. Here's a purely random selection from his archive: http://pballew.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_archive.html As for dy/dan's blog about annuli, one topic I've seen a few teaching/expository papers on (I can post specific references if anyone is interested) has to do with playing/recording speed (density?) on record groves. As a record is played, the angular velocity remains constant (33 and 1/3 rev/min, for example), but the groveradii get smaller, so the the needle travels more slowly along the grove. Thus, in order to have the sound play uniformly, one would like to have a formula giving the speed the needle travels along the grove as a function of time and, while solvable, this is not something that's totally trivial. Below is another schoolappropriate topic related to annuli, which I posted here about a year ago. Note how the difference of squares factorization makes an appearance, as well as the standard trick of multiplying and dividing by the same number. One of the faults I see with many "applications" and "side detours" made by teachers and textbooks is that there seems to be little attention paid in trying to pick those detours that reinforce things you want to reinforce. It's not enough for something to look pretty. You can look out the window at trees for that (tree trunks are cylinders, leaves are ... well, like the leaves in an nleaf rose I suppose [1], etc.). What you want is something that is (and can be shown to be) mathematically relevant to the topics the students are (or have been, and maybe sometimes "or will be") studying. [1] http://www.google.com/images?as_epq=n+leaf+rose     Dave L. Renfro 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
Chuckle to your hearts content and continue to
post these inspired demonstrations of math avoidance. Your Naperville example was classic; after the initial flush, checking the details showed that it had absolutely NOTHING to do ANY of the unusually strong high school's actual math classes. The entire focus was on what to do with kids in high school who a!re not prepared to do high school work. Instead of making up essential mathematics deficits to proceed with honest high school, have fun and games of the athletic field. Regarding how far the NCTM has diverged from actually teaching mathematics (what a concept!), nothing summarizes it better than its current president, Diane Briars. I know her "research" only too well from when she was the head of a particularly wellfunded (NSFEHR) math program across the Pittsburgh Public Schools. I was commissioned by its Board of Ed to participate in a study of the district's program and actual student performance was nothing close to the way it was presented with lots of national fanfare. How to do that? Never mention Pennsylvania's state exams, the PSSA. In spite of being "proven" that Everyday Math, and its discovery based pedagogy, was the longawaited mathematics education salvation for low socioeconomic, high minority populations, reality was that by the 5th grade, at least 60% of those kids were already in the bottom two categories, Below Proficient or Far Below Proficient. Regarding your analogy with OpEd pieces in newspapers If you do not believe that they reflect the editorial philosophy of the newspaper; you need some elementary lessons in that area as well. Publishing some token opposition is often done to feign objectivity but that's about all. Wayne At 03:05 AM 4/29/2015, Richard Strausz wrote: >CW, I chuckled as I read the comments of Wayne >and Robert about the NCTM in response to the >collection of handouts by presenters at the NCTM conference. > >It's like criticizing Op Ed pieces in a >newspaper by saying 'I never liked that newspaper.' > >Oh well! > >Richard 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
Robert Hansen wrote:
> On 4/29/15, 11:37 AM, "Joe Niederberger" > <[hidden email]<mailto:niederberger@comcast. > net>> wrote: > > So called digital natives think they are techy > because they are good consumers. How American. I give > up, Don Draper has won after all. > > Well, I was a member of NCTM. You don’t have to be a > professional teacher to join NCTM. I have probably > read and studied more NCTM material than Richard. And > I joined MAA as well, partly to have access to JSTOR > without having to drive over to the college campuses > every time I wanted to track down a reference to an > article. Sometimes you get lucky with google, but > most of the original quality is still (unfortunately) > locked up in journals. > > Bob Hansen Once again, Robert, you leave me breathlessly awaiting the smallest shred of evidence to support quantifiable claims like "I have probably read and studied more NCTM material than Richard." Really? Richard spent his entire career, perhaps 40 years give or take a few, as a secondary mathematics teacher. Any chance he actually has read considerably more NCTM publications than you have? More importantly, unlike you, Richard actually appears to have mastered both reading and writing English. So how many NCTM publication have you "read" and utterly misunderstood, misinterpreted, misconstrued, and generally destroyed in the process of translating them from something meaningful to you typical reductionism into "Gee, these are dumb folks who just aren't in my league when it comes to math, teaching math, and the rest of my fantasy life"? Having your eyes move over text isn't quite the same as digesting the content therein. Your posts are daily proof of that sad reality. 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
I've heard of "value added." Your post appears to be a case of "nonsense added." You seem to specialize in selfamused little bon mots that I speculate must pass in your own mind as rapierlike skewerings of whatever you disagree with. Somehow, translating my comment and/or the blog post I cited as paeans to consumerism seems not only well offpoint but fundamentally wrongheaded. Technology is out there. We choose to use it or do not. You, no doubt, are well off the modern grid yourself, connecting to the Internet to share your witticisms with us via a Dixie cup and a thread. You likely have no television, let alone any sort of educational technology. No wonder you feel compelled to try to dismiss so many of Kirby's posts: his unwillingness to simply reject human ingenuity and cling fiercely onto the 11th century or so must be so frustrating, particulalry since he manages to ground it in egalitarian notions like open source, the work of Bucky Fuller, and much else that it's!
hard to make a real argument that he's some sort of ignorant victim or worshiper of consumerism. Yet you seem dedicated, via your cup & thread from an unheated cabin in the hills (of Montana? New Jersey?) to just that hopeless, fruitless task. The Don Draper remark below is similarly ineffectual. And frankly, it's not even funny. Joe N. wrote: > CW says: > >Richard, I was thinking of the old saw about looking > gift horses in their mouths, but perhaps this also > applies: > http://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/04/29/amathteach > ersguidetoexplainingtechnologytoyourparents/ > > So called digital natives think they are techy > because they are good consumers. How American. I give > up, Don Draper has won after all. > > Cheers, > Joe N 
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
This from the fellow who has made clear more than once that he need not actually read something to know it's worse than worthless. :) Apparently those with proper psychic gifts CAN judge books and research journals, etc., by their covers (knowing the author usually suffices for you). It must get a little dicey when people grow and change, as did, for one noteworthy example, Diane Ravitch. Or when an old ally like the Fordham folks confusingly come out in FAVOR of the Common Core State Standards! What to do? Well, you always manage to juggle the contradictions.
And when all else fails, attack people not here to reply, as in the latest case of Diane Briars. Don't forget to blow your own horn while you're at it. And though you failed to do so in this particular smear, you can always tell us about one or another of your genius offspring. Snore. Wayne Bishop wrote: > Chuckle to your hearts content and continue to > post these inspired demonstrations of math > avoidance. Your Naperville example was classic; > after the initial flush, checking the details > showed that it had absolutely NOTHING to do ANY > of the unusually strong high school's actual math > classes. The entire focus was on what to do with > kids in high school who a!re not prepared to do > high school work. Instead of making up essential > mathematics deficits to proceed with honest high > school, have fun and games of the athletic field. > > Regarding how far the NCTM has diverged from > actually teaching mathematics (what a concept!), > nothing summarizes it better than its current > president, Diane Briars. I know her "research" > only too well from when she was the head of a > particularly wellfunded (NSFEHR) math program > across the Pittsburgh Public Schools. I was > commissioned by its Board of Ed to participate in > a study of the district's program and actual > student performance was nothing close to the way > it was presented with lots of national > fanfare. How to do that? Never mention > Pennsylvania's state exams, the PSSA. In spite > of being "proven" that Everyday Math, and its > discovery based pedagogy, was the longawaited > mathematics education salvation for low > socioeconomic, high minority populations, reality > was that by the 5th grade, at least 60% of those > kids were already in the bottom two categories, > Below Proficient or Far Below Proficient. > > Regarding your analogy with OpEd pieces in > newspapers If you do not believe that they > reflect the editorial philosophy of the > newspaper; you need some elementary lessons in > that area as well. Publishing some token > opposition is often done to feign objectivity but > that's about all. > > Wayne 
In reply to this post by Dave L. Renfro
On 4/29/15, 12:00 PM, "Dave L. Renfro" <[hidden email]> wrote:
But this is not Dan. He has, both directly and indirectly, on many occasions and in many ways, stated his and his student’s dislike for math. As far as he is concerned, if and when he does anything at all with what we call math, what he calls procedure,
it is because he is forced to. Even when he was teaching, several years ago, when I first came upon him, his philosophy was the same. Counter math.
This is from 2010, when he was teaching.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_meyer_math_curriculum_makeover?language=en
Teacher angst, not math.
I also went further an checked the results of these classrooms, his and those of others on his blog. If your hypothesis was true, we would see the evidence of math in the classrooms and in the exams.
Just another crank that most of our children would never encounter because we are not disadvantaged.
Bob Hansen

In reply to this post by Richard Strausz
> Chuckle to your hearts content and continue to
Wayne, a difference between you and a typical K12 teacher you put down is that she has to gather comparative data on how her students are doing compared to others local and beyond. You, on the other hand, make excuses to duck comparisons *and* give your students the midterm as their final.
> post these inspired demonstrations of math > avoidance. Your Naperville example was classic; > after the initial flush, checking the details > showed that it had absolutely NOTHING to do ANY > of the unusually strong high school's actual math > classes. The entire focus was on what to do with > kids in high school who a!re not prepared to do > high school work. Instead of making up essential > mathematics deficits to proceed with honest high > school, have fun and games of the athletic field. > Richard > Regarding how far the NCTM has diverged from > actually teaching mathematics (what a concept!), > nothing summarizes it better than its current > president, Diane Briars. I know her "research" > only too well from when she was the head of a > particularly wellfunded (NSFEHR) math program > across the Pittsburgh Public Schools. I was > commissioned by its Board of Ed to participate in > a study of the district's program and actual > student performance was nothing close to the way > it was presented with lots of national > fanfare. How to do that? Never mention > Pennsylvania's state exams, the PSSA. In spite > of being "proven" that Everyday Math, and its > discovery based pedagogy, was the longawaited > mathematics education salvation for low > socioeconomic, high minority populations, reality > was that by the 5th grade, at least 60% of those > kids were already in the bottom two categories, > Below Proficient or Far Below Proficient. > > Regarding your analogy with OpEd pieces in > newspapers If you do not believe that they > reflect the editorial philosophy of the > newspaper; you need some elementary lessons in > that area as well. Publishing some token > opposition is often done to feign objectivity but > that's about all. > ... Except of course when they don't reflect the same philosophy... Richard 
In reply to this post by Robert Hansen
Beautiful, Bob, and entirely consistent with his popularity among the
math avoidance legions; it's always good to have a Messiah. By
contrast with his perception of reality, cookbook word problems were what
convinced me that I had some potential in mathematics. I understood
arithmetic, of course, and if I slowed down enough to pay attention to do
it correctly, even got the right answer but I hated doing so. Word
problems exactly the stuff that he disses so persuasively were an
entirely different story. His focus is babysitting students who
have no business being in classes called "mathematics".
Unfortunately, babysitting is the highest priority of precollegiate
public education.
Haim keeps telling us that even trying to teach mathematics to turnips is a fool's errand and he is right but, fool that I am, I keep trying. Leaving the name mathematics while selling math avoidance snakeoil is so much more productive and amply financed in spite of its constant appeals for more. Wayne At 09:38 AM 4/29/2015, Robert Hansen wrote: On 4/29/15, 12:00 PM, "Dave L. Renfro" <[hidden email]> wrote: 
Free forum by Nabble  Edit this page 