Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Essay Link: What is Art to a Fascist? (Patreon)

Published:
2026-10-28 15:49:32
Edited:
2026-11-02 16:28:24
Imported:

Content

this essay was written for Jacob Geller's book. for reasons that will be apparent if you click the link, I no longer want to be professionally associated with Jacob Geller, so I am publishing the essay for free.

it contains, by some ways, the best dick joke I have ever written.

Files

(No title)

Comments

Evan Davis

> They aspire to more than helping you wrench your hog. Incredible

Ultraczar

Thanks for sharing Ian. As always, I love reading your work.

Lunasticks

Great read. I hope everyone collectively never stops shutting up about the connection between that exact view on conceptual art and fascism.

John Christoph

Ok so 1: this is really cool work, as always. But then also 2: it inspired some thoughts. In the time since your conclusion of "Who Shot Guybrush Threepwood," the usage of the word "art" you're gesturing at with Pirsig became a lot more prominent in my life. A former partner of mine started a job at the US Patent & Trademark Office, & in the training course they went through there was this whole thing about how IP law conceptualizes "prior art." Here, we're not talking about art as aesthetic medium, but something closer to "state of the art." While most of us might connotatively use that phrase to mean "innovation" or "progress," what the patent examiners & IP lawyers mean by "state of the art" is more literal: a view of "art" as the sum total of what humans have figured out how to do at the present moment. This same former partner had also introduced me to Rothko shortly before "Ceci n'est pas une tomate" came out. The thing they pointed to which made Rothko legible for me was to deconstruct the "abstract expressionism sucks because it's unskilled" reaction. In his color field paintings, you don't notice the brush strokes unless you look *really* hard for them.... except for the times when they're obvious, & thus they look intentional. And your ability to see those strokes depends a lot on whether Rothko decided to apply acrylic or oil or watercolor to the canvas, as well as *how* he decided to apply them. Think about how much intentional & precise control you'd have to exercise over the medium to get the piece to look *exactly* as uniform or irregular as it ended up being... is that something you could *ever* have achieved by accident with magic markers in Kindergarten? At that point, it's not just conceptual or abstract; it's trying to find the absolute limits of what a human can do with pigment, brush, canvas, & time. It's doing something incredible, right before your eyes, in a way that looks totally unremarkable. But then too, so is your phone, by connecting by radio waves to a swarm of artificial satellites to measure exactly where you are on Earth & then solving age-old geometry problems on the finest-detailed maps ever made to tell you how to get to the art gallery! Someone (in fact a whole bunch of someones) had to figure out how to do all of that! It's amazing! We might not call it "art" reflexively, but if you called the latest smartphone the "state of the art," nobody would bat an eye, even as the inherent implication of unfathomable skilled performance would whiz right over their heads unacknowledged. There's the typical response of the security guard: maybe you could've done that, but you didn't, & *that's* the point. But then there's another response: "wait, actually, doing this is *so* much harder than it looks." And there's a moment of wonder when you first realize the presence & degree of skill required to create a work of art you're encountering for the first time. And at least for me, there's something antifascist in being able to look past a surface portrayal which I might ordinarily dismiss, & see the inherent humanity in the thing a human has created. If the reactionaries want to reduce art to a formulaic set of rules, I'm gonna be over here like Socrates continuously annoying Euthyphro with "WELL then, is *this* not a skilled performance?"

PC Escobar

"Despite the protagonist’s initial rejection, the arc of “NippleJesus” is him coming to like the **titular** portrait" -- That had to be intentional.

Agwic

I haven't read the essay yet, since I was unaware of the Jacob Geller situation until now, and looking into it, and the response you characterized as "noncommittal", what would you want him to do? While the punishment he did receive was relatively minor, it sounds to me like he basically immediately realized he made a mistake, and complied fully with the victim's wishes, and continues to regret his actions. While I understand not wanting to associate with someone who committed rape, your characterization of his response causes me to worry that you are not of the belief that people who have committed such actions can be rehabilitated, and I expected better of you.

LemonSoiree

I’m sympathetic to this viewpoint, and I do want people to have a path to change, grow, make amends, and become better people, because otherwise there’s no incentive but to just deny, double down, and become a worse person. But I think there are two problems here. What else has he done besides not deny it and take his slap-on-the-wrist punishment? Does he contribute to RAINN regularly? Has he talked about his actions in an effort to help other people avoid doing something like that in the first place? Like, those are actions that would show more regret than just saying you feel regret when it comes to light years later. Which is not to say I don’t believe him when he says he regrets it! I hope that’s true, and I hope he takes whatever actions he can to make amends and do whatever good he can going forward! But it’s fair to believe he hasn’t done enough yet. And the second, and probably bigger issue, is that we only have his side of the story because the victim has, quite understandably and fairly, stayed anonymous. Maybe everything he’s saying is true, but maybe there’s more. Maybe he fought it more than he’s saying. Maybe he didn’t just immediately accept it and apologize. We don’t know, and we probably never will. And that sucks, and you’re free to think that’s unfair to him, but sometimes that’s how life is. It can suck and it can be unfair. And absent her account to confirm what he’s said, it’s entirely fair to, on a personal level, decide you’re uncomfortable and no longer want to be associated with this guy.

Ian Danskin

ask this question again without being an asshole

Agwic

Uh, sorry, I really wasn't trying to be an asshole. I even asked one of my friends to look over the comment to make sure it looked good, because you're someone I deeply respect and I didn't want to come across that way. It probably didn't help that both me and the friend I asked for help are autistic. I suppose I could phrase the question more directly, maybe that will come across as less asshole-ish. What makes you describe Jacob Geller's admission of guilt as noncommittal?

Agwic

@LemonSoiree I agree, it's not his refusal to associate with Jacob Geller that I take issue with, that much is entirely reasonable. My question is what is "noncommital" about Jacob Geller's admission, and what would you have him do as a proper response? I suppose your answer is that you would have him elaborate on the way he's tried to make up for his crime, but I'm mostly curious about Ian's answer, since he is someone who I deeply respect the political opinions of, and "What is the correct way to atone for raping someone?" is fundamentally a political question.

Reade Bramer

FWIW I don’t think you were being an asshole and it seemed like you were acting in good faith. I’m not sure why Mr. Danskin reacted the way he did.

LemonSoiree

Yeah, I mean I gave a couple ideas off the top of my head, but there’s no one answer, and Ian likely has a different response. For some people, their answer may be that it’s just unforgivable, and I get that. It’s tough. I look at what Dan Harmon did as a good example (although that was sexual harassment, not rape). Worth looking at that, if you’re unfamiliar. Also, fwiw I can’t speak for Ian, but I think “I expected better of you” is what came off the most assholish. I think I understand the way you meant it, but it comes across as a very rude way to address this.

Reade Bramer

I don’t think “you’re an asshole for even asking the question” is at all a reasonable take, and I’m not even the one who originally asked the question.

Agwic

@Asterian Monarch I jumped to that conclusion because that was absolutely the attitude espoused by many of the people in the replies to Jacob Geller's admission, with many calling for him to be deplatformed. I think that combined with the implication that people should not buy the book makes this a reasonable conclusion to jump to, but I'll admit, there's a fine line between reading into subtext and making unfounded accusation. I was in fact worried that the phrasing of "I expected better from you" was too strong, but my friend who I checked with said it was fine. Maybe I should have waited for my emotions to cool down more before posting the comment. It's less that I'm giving more good faith to Geller than Ian, than that I care more about what Ian has to say than Geller. Ian is, in my opinion, the best video essayist on YouTube, and whatever his take on this topic is, I have every intention of continuing to support him on Patreon, because his work is important. His harsh reply to my question upset me far more than his initial criticism of Geller's apology.

Ian Danskin

being as succinct as I can: - general rule of thumb: if you want to know what I think, ask me what I think. please do not assume my position, judge me for it, and then share your judgment. - Reade, if I thought Agwic was an asshole for even asking the question, I wouldn't have asked them to rephrase the question. the asking is not at issue. see above. - I found Jacob's response noncommittal because: he admitted to assault but downplayed the details (they are *not* unknown, and they are damning) - he phrased "the next day I agreed it was assault, later she reported me to the school, and I cooperated with the investigation" in such a way that may people have gotten the impression he turned himself in and the punishment is what the victim wanted, which is absolutely not what he said, but I know it's what people think because they keep saying it to me in arguments - he has *only* admitted it on BlueSky and has made no admission on his YouTube or - last I heard - his Patreon; he also froze YouTube comments after the news broke (you can check, no comments have been approved for three weeks) - broadly all of this makes me feel like he wants us to think he "did everything right" after the assault, making a point to share that his wife knows and trusts him, saying that his guilt has informed the progressiveness of his videos, implying he didn't realize until the next day what he did was assault (which, again, if the details people who went to his school are sharing are correct... it is unambiguous), and I find all of it really, really gross - as for what I would have him do instead: I don't know, and I don't think it's my job to have the solution, but he could start with *anything*. like, maybe *anything*? what has he done? admitted to it and said he regrets it? admitted it *after* someone else outed him. I just gave nearly a thousand dollars to RAINN and I didn't even assault anyone, and Jacob makes a lot more money than I do, what the fuck is he doing for assault victims? what did he even do for his *own* assault victim other than "comply" with the investigation she brought against him and "accept" the punishment he agrees was mild? if I am to accept that "making progressive videos" is atonement, I would like to enter into the conversation that his atonement has made him a lot of money. - also, let's be real, because he and I are in the same business: my videos are also progressive and I'm not doing them out of guilt over sexual assault. and I'm not gonna downplay the value of my work, but I don't believe it does more good in the world than the two years I spent doing afterschool education with low-income kids. let's not pretend "YouTuber" is some altruistic calling; it ain't hurricane relief. - I do not believe in punitive justice, but I do believe in justice. I am distressed at how many people seem to draw a binary, where anything other than "we forgive him and move on" is punitive. it is not my job to forgive Jacob Geller. - as far as rehabilitation goes, I believe Jacob regrets what he did, I believe it has informed his growth as a human, and I believe he won't do it again. barring further information, I accept all of these things. - I consider that the bare minimum. when you harm someone, you owe them something. nothing can make it *right*, but you owe amends. you have to do right by the person you hurt. they are your first responsibility, far more than your own growth. I know trauma a little too well. unless she is inhumanly well-adjusted, this woman is probably going to be talking to therapists about Jacob Geller for the rest of her life. this question of "when does Jacob get to move on?" when the person he hurt has to carry it forever is just... it's fucking gross, folks. I know too many survivors to accept that. - I don't need Jacob to suffer, but I need him to do right. there are a lot of models of restorative justice, and, from what little I know of them (which is not much, but more than most people arguing about it know), results are mixed. people are messy. there aren't hard-and-fast rules for doing right by someone you have grievously wronged. anything I could recommend Jacob do would be "well, I've heard of this? maybe it would be good?" I don't have a good answer to "what should perpetrators do, beyond simply not doing it again?" - I am more than comfortable saying "this wasn't it."

Reade Bramer

FWIW I was not responding to you with the “even asking the question makes you an asshole” thing. I was responding to another commenter.

Agwic

I'm sorry for assuming your opinion, that was my bad. I guess I'm interpreting his cagey attitude as him considering it a personal matter and not wanting to make it more public than it already is, whereas you're interpreting it as an indication that what he said is the most he could say in his defense. Like, I would generally assume that someone who has the level of guilt Jacob Geller is implying he has would have done several of the things you mention, and I don't see why those actions would need to come up in his confirmation, but I also see why him not mentioning anything of the sort could been seen as damning. Ultimately, I'm probably being overly charitable just because he did the bare minimum, but when the vast majority of men who do horrible things like this don't even manage that, I think the bare minimum counts for something. Of course, I'd be acting very differently if the wishes of the victim were known at all, but all evidence does seem to point to the victim wanting nothing to do with this. I'm not expecting forgiveness (in fact, if anyone makes a show of forgiving him, that seems incredibly bad, considering that right should belong to the victim and the victim alone), nor am I expecting people uncomfortable to continue supporting him or associating with him. I simply made the incorrect assumption that you were going along with the bandwagon calling for him to be entirely deplatformed and removed from public life, and that's my bad.

fvbs

Your section near the end on prioritising technique over subjectiveness made me think of a dark, terrible though that has been brewing in my mind for a while. I am (allegedly) a poet, and as such have to deal with what all poets have to deal with, which is the inevitability of people asking "Oh, but is that *really* poetry?" about, well, basically everything. Is free verse poetry, is prose poetry poetry, are villanelles really poetry, if you break form are you really writing poetry and so on and so forth. And eventually the darker, more obvious thought occurs: poetry has been written and been the predominant way of communicating narrative for thousands of years, since the time of Gilgamesh (maybe earlier). Surely the *actual* determining question shouldn't be "define poetry" but rather "define prose"? I worry I might be a bit mad for this thought.

Alex Acton

Now you understand that leftists are lying when they say they want justice to be rehabilitative.

Alex Acton (edited)

Comment edits

2026-11-03 05:00 I think this Jacob Geller controversy has taught me that leftist have no strongly held commitment to rehabilitative justice as they claim. It's all virtue signalling. They are as impulsive as any right winger. Ignore the fact that he embrassed his punishment he should be burned at the stake.
2026-10-29 13:09

Ian Danskin

I said I wanted justice to be restorative

Aischa

That is simply bullshit. Yes, some leftists do not believe in rehabilitative or restorative justice. And I myself am not always wholly consistent in this belief either (do not ask me what I think Elon Musk deserves). But when it comes to sexual assault, crying for harsher punishments and still believing in restorative or rehabilitative justice are not contradictory. Simply because the punishment for sexual assault is so often non-existent to negligable. Rehabilitative justice does not mean no justice or no consequences. And while I do not know what the "right" consequences are, trying to not endure any consequences whatsoever by keeping the info on the down low, only half owning up to it, and moving on as fast as possible, is definitely not justice in any definition.

Ian Danskin

I don't think "do right by the victim" has to mean "punishment."

Alex Acton

Ian, he went to her the next day. They agreed it was sexual assault and reported it together.

Crissa Kentavr

What would him talking about it do? That would be the perpetrator taking advantage of the victim more.

Ian Danskin

here is the direct quote from his shit-ass apology: "She and I spoke about it the day after and agreed - I had assaulted her. She later reported this to the university's Title IX office, I cooperated with the investigation..." as I already explained in the other thread, he never said it was reported the next day and explicitly says she - not "we" - reported it to the university. he just phrased it such that you would think he turned himself in. you are the fourth person to tell me "he turned himself in the next day" and the third to keep saying it *after I pointed out it was false*. your version of rehabilitative justice seems to be "if you don't forgive the rapist immediately you're the cops."

Ian Danskin

love how you've added "he went to her," another thing he did not say. just, what, showing up at her dorm the next morning to confess "I assaulted you, let's go to the Title IX office together"? just making up scenarios where you can forgive him.

LemonSoiree

@agwic, I hear what you’re saying about it feeling refreshing to see someone actually admit what they did rather than reflexively deny and call their accuser a liar. That is indeed so rare that even clearing that low bar is striking. But I think if you want to see why looking at the bare minimum response and assuming there’s more there that you’re not seeing isn’t necessarily the best move, I’d point you to the letter Louis C.K. released after his allegations came out. He was someone I had a lot of hope would be introspective and take actions to use his voice and his power to do what he could to make things right, to whatever extent he could. To say he has failed to do that would be, uh, quite an understatement, I’m afraid.

Agwic

@LemonSoiree Okay, so, I kind of wanted to leave this thread alone after I got elaboration from Ian, which is all I wanted, but I keep getting emails any time anyone replies to this thread(and I can't turn that off without turning off all Patreon comment notifications), and this latest comment bugged me more than the rest. I am in fact of the opinion that exile from public life is not a reasonable punishment no matter how severe the crime, given that in pretty much all cases it results in the punished doubling and tripling down, and punishments should generally be designed to reduce recidivism. Like, looking into the Louis C.K. situation (I'll admit, I hadn't heard of this, as I never really cared much about him, so I might have gotten some details wrong), I do think that if the public response had been less all-encompassing and unforgiving, he would have been less likely to have fallen down the hole he fell down, though this is of course complicated by the fact that his position was what enabled him to hurt his victims, and the safety of victims and the prevention of further harm is vastly more important than rehabilitation in cases where the harm is as vast as this. Ultimately, for that situation, I think the public response should have been far more focused on providing help to the victims, rather than removing Louis C.K. from any platform he had, though some amount of deplatforming would likely still unfortunately be necessary. However, the Jacob Geller situation is not comparable whatsoever to the Louis C.K. situation, from what I can tell. Louis C.K. used his platform to sexually assault numerous women as part of an ongoing pattern, his victims were the ones who shared what happened, and his immediate response was denial and claiming he did nothing wrong. Meanwhile, Jacob Geller raped a single woman ten years ago, long before he had any platform to speak of, with no evidence of a continued pattern of doing so, admitted to his wrongdoings pretty much immediately within the social circle he had at the time, had allegations shared not by the victim but by a spiteful acquaintance, and then again admitted his wrongdoings publicly pretty much immediately. While there is some amount of downplaying his actions, I feel like it is solidly within reasonable levels, at least unless he doubles down on that downplaying such as by pushing back against people referring to it as rape or by continuing his radio silence on Youtube and Patreon indefinitely. Of course, time will tell if I'm wrong. If Jacob Geller returns to making videos in a few months like nothing happened, and never mentions this again, or if he simply disappears off the face of the internet, never to be seen again, that would be a pretty bad look. If he falls down a similar rabbithole as Louis C.K., that would be far worse. But someone with the intent to do any of those things wouldn't have made an apology like this, I think. Of these possibilities, I think him waiting a few months before unceremoniously showing back up is the most likely, given that I can see the argument for a well-written apology being better for ensuring it blows over than just not saying anything. However, I think the most likely outcome is that he addresses it further relatively soon in a manner that is larger and more well-prepared. I'll admit, not announcing anything on Patreon is a bit odd, but it is very possible that he doesn't have very much in savings, as even being a popular Youtuber is not the most stable career. I'd probably say there's a 75% chance he's going to actually properly address the situation, 20% chance he waits for it to blow over, and 5% chance he either never shows up again or does something worse. Even if the chances were worse, as many people seem to believe they are, I'd still advocate giving him the benefit of the doubt, however, since there is no reason to believe he is currently hurting anyone. Also, while I'm here, I feel like I should mention that I strongly disavow Alex Acton's bad-faith comment. Justice being restorative is far more important than it being rehabilitative, though it should ideally be both. Of course, given that the victim is unknown and it is likely they intend to stay that way, there is little the court of public opinion can do in the way of restorative justice, but admittedly there also isn't much it can do in terms of rehabilitative justice, simply given the nature of how interaction works on the internet, other than not pushing him away from his primary source of income or support network. Ian doesn't seem to be calling for either deplatforming him or for his personal friends to cut him off, so there is no reason to accuse him of not believing in rehabilitative justice. His reply to the bad faith comment in question does somewhat imply that he doesn't, but I don't think it's reasonable to extrapolate someone's beliefs from single-sentence replies to bad-faith comments, especially when Ian's longer and more effortful comment pretty clearly implies that he does believe in rehabilitative justice, with lines like "I do not believe in punitive justice" and "I don't need Jacob to suffer". Also, like, Alex Acton, if you're reading this, why the hell are you commenting on a Patreon post for a leftist Youtuber if you're not leftist? I swear, with this and other comments I'm seeing elsewhere, I'm getting the feeling that there's some sort of right-wing astroturf going on here to divide the left, but it's also possible that there are just a lot of shitty people lurking around in leftist spaces, some of whom apparently aren't even claiming to be leftist. Most likely a combination of both, honestly.

Ian Danskin

- actually Louis CK made what was considered a pretty good apology right after he was outed, and went quite saying he was just going to listen for a while. THEN he came back spiteful and transphobic. - I know how much I make, and I know Jacob is making more than me on Patreon, plus every video has multiple mid-roll ads, plus he releases them more often, plus they all have sponsorships, plus he had multiple podcasts, plus speaking engagements, plus two book deals, plus he lives in a cheaper city than me, plus he was one of the primary drivers of subs on Nebula which means he had one of the biggest revshare cuts. Jacob definitely has money in savings. - I think the idea that "rehabilitative justice" means the community has to make sure the assailant doesn't reoffend, that we must police our authentic reaction to make sure they assailant doesn't double down, and that we have to assure them they will be loved and accepted and not face too many consequences, is 1) an unethical responsibility for us to take on, 2) impossible to enforce, and 3) more likely to encourage reoffense than prevent it. Louis CK is a shitheel now, but I don't think he'll be assaulting anyone again.

Agwic

- I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about. There's a NYT interview on September 11, 2017 in which he explicitly denies all accusations made toward him. Once the allegations grew more substantial, he changed his tune, but nonetheless, his initial response was absolutely outright denial of wrongdoing. - His videos are also higher budget, with his latest video having an amount of spending that I remember at the time considering to seem like a bad idea for a single video. After that, as well as considering the general financial irresponsibility that video implies, I can absolutely see him having less savings than he felt comfortable with. - I'm not talking about policing people's authentic reactions, I'm talking about not calling for total deplatforming and cutting people off. For instance, whose authentic reaction was the removal of Louis C.K.'s voice from animated projects? What purpose did it serve beyond simple punitive action? For Jacob Geller, whose authentic reaction was publishers pulling his books from sale, and purpose did it serve? Also, I do think that policing people's "authentic reactions" can be helpful, when they start causing damage to those other than the perpetrator. I have seen multiple people outraged at anyone who continues to follow or support Jacob Geller, despite no attempt by them to excuse his actions. Guilt by association is a dangerous thing. Also, I don't know what you're talking about with Louis CK being unlikely to assault anyone again. In the media circles he's hanging around now, there's no way he'd face any consequences whatsoever. There are still women hanging around conservative media circles, and they are actually probably even more vulnerable to assault than women in mainstream or leftist media circles, due to the fact that conservative media circles are typically at least somewhat pro-sexual assault of women. Meanwhile, if he had been permitted to remain in mainstream media circles, I imagine everyone involved would be more on guard around him, to ensure he does not have access to the means to assault women as he had previously. It's possible that there's something I'm misunderstanding here though, as this is a very complicated subject, so feel free to elaborate. Please don't feel any obligation to respond though, as I have no desire to waste your time or energy. Even if it does seem like we have some disagreements on this topic, your opinion does still seem well-supported, and you are still the video essayist I respect most on Youtube.

Ian Danskin

could people please stop imagining reasons to sympathize with the rapist

Agwic

Why? Rapists are still people, and thus deserving of sympathy. Obviously victims require more sympathy, but we don't know anything about the victim in this case. Do you think that the scenarios I'm presenting are unlikely? While the culture around rape does make it reasonable to waive the usual principle of "innocent until proven guilty" in such cases(not that this is relevant here, Jacob Geller has been proven guilty), it doesn't mean that once someone is found guilty of rape they no longer deserve application of that principle. Thus, there is no reason to assume that he is being protective of his Patreon income out of greed or malice. The fact that he raped someone ten years ago did not somehow turn Jacob Geller into a different person than we previously believed him to be, unbound by any moral principles. He's still the same person, just with further clarifications regarding his past. If the suspicious action in question was questionable behavior regarding women, then I might agree that him being outed as a rapist would indicate that he would do something uncharacteristically malicious here, but rape and being unnecessarily protective of one's income are not particularly similar wrongdoings.

Ian Danskin

why are you imagining scenarios at all? why are you imagining scenarios where Jacob is struggling, not only *without evidence* but with the evidence I have suggested that Jacob is very likely doing QUITE WELL? why are so many people imagining things he didn't say like "he turned himself in" and "he went to her to confess"?

Ian Danskin

you do not know him. you cannot take your previously knowledge of his character into account because you had none, and you just got an ENORMOUS piece of evidence as to his character. you owe it to him not to assume things are worse than the evidence suggests; you do NOT owe it to him to assume they are better.

Ian Danskin

fucks sake, I actually knew him, how are YOU more protective than I am?

Agwic

To answer your second question, because him locking his Patreon is evidence that he may be struggling. Also, like, I might as well add that even if he has decent savings, his career could be completely over if this goes poorly, so I still think there is not sufficient reason to assume he has malicious intentions with protecting his income. To answer the other two questions, because people like to fill in blanks in stories, extrapolating based on what evidence they have to form complete narratives. Jacob Geller did admittedly phrase his story in such a way to cause certain extrapolations, but I think people are within their right to not frame their own actions in a negative light, and if he wanted to actively deceive people, he could've just lied and there wouldn't be anyone to contradict him. Personally, I don't care whether he turned himself in or went to her to confess or whatever, because he did still rape someone, and there is no immediate response that makes up for that.