Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

This really comes from Ed Forbes, and came up as we were purusing Classical
Warrior on Saturday after a couple of games.

Here's the situation: LI in the brush are charged frontally by Numidian LC. Do
they take a waver test for being charged by mounted?

The argument for no: Of course not; they're still in the brush, which is defined
as rough terrain, and that definition is not superceded by the list rule.

The argument for yes: Of course they do; there is no sense in which it is rough
terrain for the Numidians, and so there is no rough terrain for the Numidians
which the LI are beyond.

A reason to be careful how you answer: currently we require loose or open order
foot behind stakes to take a waver test if charged by elephants, the rationale
being that the elephants "ignore" the stakes. To be consistent, since the
Numidians "ignore" the brush, it seems the same logic should apply.

So there seem to me three possible outcomes:

(1) The LI don't test, and the stakes rule is amended so that foot don't test
for elephants either; IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) not the best choice.

(2) The LI test, just like, and for the same reason, as foot behind stakes
facing elephants. I like this option a lot, but it seems to me it may well
extend the Numidian list rule further than its designers intended.

(3) The LI don't test, even though foot behind stakes facing elephants do,
because....? I'm OK with this option, but I'd just like to know what the
rationale would be for differentiating the two situations.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

Sorry, I meant to say NO, they do not take the waver. The rest of my answer was
correct.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:20:40 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] list rules question - Numidians



This really comes from Ed Forbes, and came up as we were purusing Classical
Warrior on Saturday after a couple of games.

Here's the situation: LI in the brush are charged frontally by Numidian LC. Do
they take a waver test for being charged by mounted?

The argument for no: Of course not; they're still in the brush, which is defined
as rough terrain, and that definition is not superceded by the list rule.

The argument for yes: Of course they do; there is no sense in which it is rough
terrain for the Numidians, and so there is no rough terrain for the Numidians
which the LI are beyond.

A reason to be careful how you answer: currently we require loose or open order
foot behind stakes to take a waver test if charged by elephants, the rationale
being that the elephants "ignore" the stakes. To be consistent, since the
Numidians "ignore" the brush, it seems the same logic should apply.

So there seem to me three possible outcomes:

(1) The LI don't test, and the stakes rule is amended so that foot don't test
for elephants either; IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) not the best choice.

(2) The LI test, just like, and for the same reason, as foot behind stakes
facing elephants. I like this option a lot, but it seems to me it may well
extend the Numidian list rule further than its designers intended.

(3) The LI don't test, even though foot behind stakes facing elephants do,
because....? I'm OK with this option, but I'd just like to know what the
rationale would be for differentiating the two situations.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

Just to be double sure - the blow is an ERROR. The answer is NO, the LI would
not take the waver. The only exception is El over stakes.

J

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@...
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:31:26 -0400
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] list rules question - Numidians




<< Here's the situation: LI in the brush are charged frontally by Numidian LC.
Do
they take a waver test for being charged by mounted?>>

Yes.

The exception for El over stakes is the only exception to this rule. Note that
LI would also take the waver if charged by MCm in a dune....

Jon


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Mark Stone]

Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

As stated in our policy, we answer why questions on a case by case basis. When
I don't answer, it is almsot always due to time constraints and not because I
want to frustrate the asker or to hide some piece of info.

The non-disorder effect is that the Numidians are more effective in the terrain,
not that they prevent the enemy from finding local protection and security from
it.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:44:08 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians



Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kelly Wilkinson]

I'd like to follow up this question with one of fatique. Tired troops take 1
fatique point for moving in rough terrain or so I believe. Does this apply to
Spanish or Numidian LC since rough terrain is not really rough to them?

kw



Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:
This really comes from Ed Forbes, and came up as we were purusing Classical
Warrior on Saturday after a couple of games.

Here's the situation: LI in the brush are charged frontally by Numidian LC. Do
they take a waver test for being charged by mounted?

The argument for no: Of course not; they're still in the brush, which is defined
as rough terrain, and that definition is not superceded by the list rule.

The argument for yes: Of course they do; there is no sense in which it is rough
terrain for the Numidians, and so there is no rough terrain for the Numidians
which the LI are beyond.

A reason to be careful how you answer: currently we require loose or open order
foot behind stakes to take a waver test if charged by elephants, the rationale
being that the elephants "ignore" the stakes. To be consistent, since the
Numidians "ignore" the brush, it seems the same logic should apply.

So there seem to me three possible outcomes:

(1) The LI don't test, and the stakes rule is amended so that foot don't test
for elephants either; IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) not the best choice.

(2) The LI test, just like, and for the same reason, as foot behind stakes
facing elephants. I like this option a lot, but it seems to me it may well
extend the Numidian list rule further than its designers intended.

(3) The LI don't test, even though foot behind stakes facing elephants do,
because....? I'm OK with this option, but I'd just like to know what the
rationale would be for differentiating the two situations.


-Mark Stone




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

Items such as this need to fully spelled out in the list rules. Reading the
rules as written, as you want us to do, having the LI test is the logical
conclusion.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


As stated in our policy, we answer why questions on a case by case basis. When
I don't answer, it is almsot always due to time constraints and not because I
want to frustrate the asker or to hide some piece of info.

The non-disorder effect is that the Numidians are more effective in the terrain,
not that they prevent the enemy from finding local protection and security from
it.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:44:08 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians



Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Okay, where does the list rule say that Numidian LC do not count brush as rough
terrain? All I recall is that they are not disordered by said terrain when they
charge. So why make the LI waiver test?

kw

JonCleaves@... wrote:

<< Here's the situation: LI in the brush are charged frontally by Numidian LC.
Do
they take a waver test for being charged by mounted?>>

Yes.

The exception for El over stakes is the only exception to this rule. Note that
LI would also take the waver if charged by MCm in a dune....

Jon


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kelly Wilkinson]

That second paragraph certainly makes sense and is cogent enough for me.

kw


JonCleaves@... wrote:
As stated in our policy, we answer why questions on a case by case basis. When
I don't answer, it is almsot always due to time constraints and not because I
want to frustrate the asker or to hide some piece of info.

The non-disorder effect is that the Numidians are more effective in the terrain,
not that they prevent the enemy from finding local protection and security from
it.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:44:08 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians



Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

I am forced to non-concur. The list rule says Numidian cav is not disordered for
charging in a rough area. The rules say open/loose foot don't take a waver if
the mounted cross a rough area (5.52). The rules do NOT say open/loose foot
take the waver if the terrain does not disorder the mounted.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:10:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians




Jon,

Items such as this need to fully spelled out in the list rules. Reading the
rules as written, as you want us to do, having the LI test is the logical
conclusion.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


As stated in our policy, we answer why questions on a case by case basis. When
I don't answer, it is almsot always due to time constraints and not because I
want to frustrate the asker or to hide some piece of info.

The non-disorder effect is that the Numidians are more effective in the terrain,
not that they prevent the enemy from finding local protection and security from
it.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:44:08 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians



Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kelly Wilkinson]

"Is the sky falling?" I have to agree with Jon. The list rule is quite specific
after going back and reading it. There is nothing in the rule that states that
brush is open terrain for this troop type.

kw

JonCleaves@... wrote:
I am forced to non-concur. The list rule says Numidian cav is not disordered for
charging in a rough area. The rules say open/loose foot don't take a waver if
the mounted cross a rough area (5.52). The rules do NOT say open/loose foot
take the waver if the terrain does not disorder the mounted.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:10:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians




Jon,

Items such as this need to fully spelled out in the list rules. Reading the
rules as written, as you want us to do, having the LI test is the logical
conclusion.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


As stated in our policy, we answer why questions on a case by case basis. When
I don't answer, it is almsot always due to time constraints and not because I
want to frustrate the asker or to hide some piece of info.

The non-disorder effect is that the Numidians are more effective in the terrain,
not that they prevent the enemy from finding local protection and security from
it.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Stone <mark@...>
To: warrior <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:44:08 +0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians



Jon,

OK, so the LI do not take the waver test. I understand _that_ this is so; I
guess I don't understand _why_ it is so.

And let me put some broader context around this. Lots and lots of times on this
list, you offer a ruling or clarification without any explanation, even when
asked for some rationale. As rules author, it is your perogative to do so. And
indeed, given that any rationale you provide is immediately subject to second
guessing and counter arguments by the more vocal members of this list (myself
included), I can understand your reluctance to open up that can of worms.

But please understand the customer perspective as well. We are trying to
understand and master a very complex rules set, and part of that effort is an
attempt to understand the underlying logic that ties the rules together.
Getting some insight into that logic helps us not only with the case at hand,
but also helps us better understand cases unforseen that will come up in the
future.

So I don't care very much about the case at hand. My son would like me to paint
up Hannibal's army at some point, and one of these years I may get around to
it; or may not. It's an interest, but not a high priority. But I care a great
deal about understanding what it is about the game system that makes this --
the LI not testing -- the outcome most consistent with the logic of the system.

Because frankly, I just don't get it. I can't think of any reasons why loose or
open order foot behind stakes would waver test for a charge by stake-ignoring
elephants that does not equally apply to LI beyond brush when charged by
brush-ignoring LC. Saying "it's the rule" doesn't help me much; I'm looking for
the deeper rationale.


-Mark Stone





Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

Is there a new clarification on 5.52 that is not yet on the web?

I just looked and did not see one.

Rule Book 5.52, bullet #8...."difficult terrain must be crossed to reach them.."
for the LI to test.

I could find no mention of "if mounted cross a rough area" LI do not test.

As written, if the Numidian cav is not disorded by the terrain, the LI test.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


I am forced to non-concur. The list rule says Numidian cav is not disordered for
charging in a rough area. The rules say open/loose foot don't take a waver if
the mounted cross a rough area (5.52). The rules do NOT say open/loose foot
take the waver if the terrain does not disorder the mounted.

Jon



___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!

[joncleaves]

Difficult terrain includes rough areas, very rough areas and obstacles. 12.32.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:17:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: list rules question - Numidians




Jon,

Is there a new clarification on 5.52 that is not yet on the web?

I just looked and did not see one.

Rule Book 5.52, bullet #8...."difficult terrain must be crossed to reach them.."
for the LI to test.

I could find no mention of "if mounted cross a rough area" LI do not test.

As written, if the Numidian cav is not disorded by the terrain, the LI test.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


I am forced to non-concur. The list rule says Numidian cav is not disordered for
charging in a rough area. The rules say open/loose foot don't take a waver if
the mounted cross a rough area (5.52). The rules do NOT say open/loose foot
take the waver if the terrain does not disorder the mounted.

Jon



___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Greetings Ed,
Rule 6.71 dificult terrain is further broken down into rough area...
rough area includes ... Brush

The list rule the Numidians from disorder by the dificult terrain, it
doesnt make the terrain not difficult. besides the LI dont realize
that the Numidians are that good till the get ridden down by them
Terry
PS will you be at Kublacon on the Friday?

-- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
<eforbes100@j...> wrote:
>
> Jon,
>
> Is there a new clarification on 5.52 that is not yet on the web?
>
> I just looked and did not see one.
>
> Rule Book 5.52, bullet #8...."difficult terrain must be crossed to
reach them.." for the LI to test.
>
> I could find no mention of "if mounted cross a rough area" LI do not
test.
>
> As written, if the Numidian cav is not disorded by the terrain, the
LI test.
>
> Ed
>
> -- JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
>
> I am forced to non-concur. The list rule says Numidian cav is not
disordered for charging in a rough area. The rules say open/loose
foot don't take a waver if the mounted cross a rough area (5.52). The
rules do NOT say open/loose foot take the waver if the terrain does
not disorder the mounted.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________
> Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
> Now includes pop-up blocker!
> Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!

[Ed Forbes]

Terry,

I will be running a Fan War demo in 25mm fri night. Hope to be at the con by 5
pm.

Ed

-- "Terry Dix" <notalent@...> wrote:

will you be at Kublacon on the Friday?



___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!