First of all, I can not believe that I only have four starts while Mr. Bodhavista has five. Never the less, I was going to write in response to Cameragod that I really enjoy the give and take on this site. For the most part, it gives me exposure to the best professionals in the business, and these are ultimately the kinds of questions and issues I have to deal with in my work all the time. I have enormous respect for you guys, for your depth of knowledge and your devotion to quality. To answer Mr B's question, I do this because I believe in the democratization of television. that more than anything else. Television today, for the most part is terrible. It is terrible in terms of its intellectual content (not technical). It is for the most part vapid, banal and insipid. When you compare it to the world of print it is tragic. The average American watches 4 hours of TV a day. The average American reads one book a year. So what is on TV is important. And what is on TV, the range and depth is a function, in my opinion, of who has access to trying to make it. Television will not suddenly get better because Les Moonves wakes up one day and has an insight. Television will get better when millions of people try to make it...and only the best get published. This, after all, is how writing is done. Millions of people try to write a novel, and only the best get published. If we ran the world of print the way we run the world of TV, you would walk into Barnes and Nobles and all the best sellers would be by Katie Couris, Dan Rather and Matt Lauer. What kind of books would we have? What kind of vapid culture would we be? And TV is VASTLY more powerful and pervasive than print. So THAT, is why I do this. OK?