Hosting Poser scenes in Lightwave etc. is certainly a major feature of ProPack, but whether it is the main feature depends on usage. Animators might view the simultaneous multi-view, motion blur, and character setup features as equally important...and those features are in P5. As to whether CL is good at marketing, I would say they have generally been very good at staying in touch with forums like this one, but in moving to position Poser as equally valuable to pros as hobbyists, they've undertaken a difficult task that is difficult to market. Certainly some of the complaints about P5 (though not all) are from hobbyists who didn't understand that a firefly render was going to take a lot longer than a P4 render and that you can't just leave all of the maps set to their P4 settings and expect a quality result. kupa did a good job of getting everyone hereexcited about all of the new P5 features, but he may not have stressed the learning curve sufficiently, which only added to their current PR problems. You asked: "Perhaps you would like to disclose your involvement and where you get your information from for the public scrutiny of the community?" I apologize if that was not meant as an attack on my credibility. However, my point was that people who want to launch an attack ought to be able to back it up...in what way does my involvement or sources of information matter to that point? It was in the context of that question in my mind that led me, perhaps erroneously, to believe that you were looking for a motive. Jack, on the other hand, neither wants to apologize or even discuss what he has written. As for whether Jack's story is related to information obtained under an NDA, or the scope of said NDA, I must confess that I have no idea; you were the one who brought up the NDA. Jack wrote that "he gave [his] word to Mr. Cooper that I would not share or disclose any of that [insider] information." Regardless of whether he's referring to an NDA signed as a beta tester, the principle is the same: if you promise not to disclose information, should you then write a story, then mention that you have such information in the course of attempting to justify yourself? As for attacking Jack's character and motivations, it might help you to actually read what I have written. In post 29, I specifically state that I never formed an opinion regarding some of the prior controversies with which he is involved, and did not have a probem when he took this site commercial. I did write that I was baffled that he would want to stir the pot after having been more conciliatory recently, but my "involvement in the community" is sufficiently long that I can state without fear of contradiction that there was a ton of flaming and venom when he originally took the helm here all those years ago. I didn't say that he was solely responsible for it, but I think it is beyond dispute that it existed. In post 51 I wrote nothing that could be viewed as attacking Jack's character or motive. To the contrary, I attempted to repeat to Jackson that such was not intended in post 29. Post 54 is much the same, again not criticizing Jack so much as pointing out that he has no facts backing up his veiled critique of CL's business strategy. In post 58, I wrote: "I would submit that if Jack had any inside info, he would be sharing it. Jack has been called many things over the years; "shy" is not one of them. Yet he has presented nothing (and, I note, chosen to disappear from this thread)." Again, my main point. And I think it is beyond dispute that Jack has been called many things over the years, though never by me, I would note. I don't consider not being shy to be an attack; I consider that a compliment. And when I wrote, it was true that Jack had chosen not to contribute to the thread. In post 62 I criticize Jack's response, not Jack. And I think that criticism is entirely valid. He does not want to state the basis for his opinions, or even discuss his opinions. Jack wrote that he wants to express his opinions and move on. However, in those past controversies that I am not supposed to mention, I distinctly recall Jack being willing to respond to attacks that he thought were unfair, so he should not be surprised that I and others have responded as we have. Until Jack started posting these more recent messages, I had thought that perhaps he would respond as he had in the past and we all could have learned something, but no such luck. Rest assured, if Jack comes after CyberStretch, I will respect his wishes and not ask Jack to support whatever mud he wants to sling.