Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Programming is a waste of time

Today I wasted two hours trying to fix a programming problem. The problem arose from the bad behavior of the Java JTree class: when you select and edit an item in the tree, it automatically deselects it. I wanted to be able to retain the selection, but Java blocked my every effort. I called up Dave Walker, our technical guy, and asked his help. We screwed around with the documentation and the program for nearly an hour, trying to get it to function properly. Finally, Dave hit upon the solution: accept the deselection. After all, only rarely will a storybuilder edit an operator in a script and then wish to edit it again; normally you alter an operator and then move on to another.

The moral of the story is that sometimes it's best not to try to find a programming solution.

37 Comments:

Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

Since the whole idea of Storytron is to make coding unnessecary for the creative creation of interactive experiences, its fitting that the creator should have such epic struggles trying to lay the foundation.

Its a shame things aren't going so smoothly for you, however.

9:57 AM  
Anonymous aevarsson said...

I read on the wikipedia site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_storytelling that the closest form of traditional storytelling to interactive storytelling is the soap opera.

For storybuilders that want a model for building storyworlds do you think that soap operas offer a good source of inspiration for building storyworlds ? Are there any other kind of models that can be drawn on for building interactive storyworlds.

4:56 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Aevarsson, This is a huge issue which I think will need to be addressed before we start seeing mature storyworlds. Art isn't the result of just creativity and skill - an artist must be rooted in a strong canon. We don't have a strong canon for interactive entertainment in general, not to mention interactive storytelling.

In my opinion, linear stories aren't a good alternative, because, as any "Ludologist" will tell you, what makes a good story - inexorable directionality - breaks a good interactive experience. This can be averted with a more abstract approach to plot, but you won't learn that from linear stories. As for soap operas, I'd scarcely recommend them as a source for inspiration. Structurally they are very similar to interactive storytelling, because they involve a combinatorial process, where several given characters (Actors) go through several given dramatic occurrences (Verbs), with variations on their positions in these occurrences (who fills which Sentence part, who gets which Role), and the order in which they occur (the endless combinations of different Sentences which can be created from a single set of Verbs). This comparison is helpful to try and understand what interactive storytelling is about, but there's no point in watching soap operas, so why would there be a point in playing them?

The best alternative, I think, is to identify interactive experiences that we like, but which could've been better, and try to imitate the good while improving the bad. This is perhaps not as exciting as creating one's own magnum opus, but I think this is the state of the art and of the artists. There's more glory to it than may seem - after all, creativity is about synthesis, not genesis.

If you want to try this approach, I would look at Siboot, which you can get at www.the-underdogs.org. I would love to look at Shattertown, the only full-size Storyworld to date, but haven't been able to secure a copy from Laura ;-). There were two little demonstration storyworlds used for the old Erasmatron, a barroom brawl and a corporate meeting. Those can give useful pointers.

Now for the "g" word. There are a couple of computer games which provide a kinda-sorta interactive story. They're great inspiration because they teach what NOT to do, while also showing that even a bad interactive story can be a powerful experience. I hope Chris doesn't have me beheaded for it, but I think Wing Commanders I-IV have some valuable lessons to teach. Don't bother playing them unless you really like action games, though (and, with WCIII, have a lot of patience for excessive FMV's). Deus Ex is the best of a bad lot, and there's one moment in that game which was amazingly effective (when you capture Lebedev and Anna Navarre shows up - anyone else impressed by it?). Don't bother with the sequel. There are some games that are highly interactive but have a non-interactive (and not very good) story, which you can easily imagine taking in different, dramatically appropriate directions. They teach one how frustrating it is to not have dramatic options. Two very popular titles come to mind - Starcraft and Half-Life.

Another source for inspiration, I would suspect, can be pencil-and-paper roleplaying games. I don't know if such a thing exists, but if you find a group that has a good DM (or whatever s/he's called), and that concentrates on interpersonal interaction instead of swords & sorcery or some such, you might be able to learn a lot from them. I haven't studied this in depth, but it seems you'll have a better chance with the White Wolf games, judging simply from the fact that they have a relatively small number of rules focused on combat.

By the way, we'll be releasing something soon that will allow you to start working on Script. Since Scripting is the most beneficial skill for a storybuilder, I'd suggest you gave it a stab at the least.

5:07 AM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Oh, there was another storybuilding example for the old 'tron - Chris' LMD. It was only a partial storyworld, but interesting.

5:12 AM  
Anonymous aevarsson said...

Jonathan, I know there is not much point in watching soap operas, but they are still very popular all over the world. The reason why they might be so popular is because they generate a lot of word of mouth, people talk about what happened in the last episode. Most of the soap operas on TV seem to go in endless circles, and still generate a lot of talk among people that watch them. I am not sure if this is the real reason for their success, but could the same apply to Storyworlds with a similar content?

Storybuilders that are trying the medium, might want to create storyworlds that get people attention. What I mean is just as people talk about soap operas while at work, they might talk or blog about Storyworlds while online. The difference might be that in a storyworld they get a more active involvement than just watching a soap opera. They get to try different ways of interacting with the characters in the Storyworlds. Storyworlds dont have to be bound to a similiar content as soap operas, because they are interactive and offer a lot of other alternatives.

I also think that the alternative that you point out by identifying experiences we like, might work better in a storyworld. In this regard I think we only have to maybe look at things like the news, or what is happening in the world. People could try political Storyworlds, or other kind of Storyworlds that are based on real or imagined events. I guess movies have done this, so maybe Storyworlds could allow people a more interactive choice.

I have not tried Siboot, but I am going to look at it. I have tried the games you mention, and like the Wing Commander games and Deus Ex. I think they had a very cinematic experience, and did try some original things.

9:31 AM  
Blogger LauraJMixon said...

Superb post, Jonathan. I'm right there with you on your points, and agree about 1000% both on the need for a canon, and the limited value of soap operas, other than structural hints.

11:17 AM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

Interesting.
I would like to submit one other source of inspiration, with some explanation, Improvisational Theatre. I'm an improv director and teacher and (ironically enough) I currently direct an improvised soap opera. Mostly when people think of Improvisation they think of television shows such as "Whose Line is it Anyway?” or Robin Williams, or other glib and comedic examples that are light on content. I think most people misunderstand the art form because of these popular examples. My training was under Keith Johnstone, sort of an improv guru that created Theatresports and a bevy of other formats. Keith is always encouraging improvisers to do more than make the audience laugh; he suggests making them thrill with suspense, or cry, or become outraged. The only way to do this is by telling a story, and he has a few theories about spontaneous story creation that I believe would be incredibly useful to anyone creating an interactive story. Now, not all of his ideas are immediately applicable to interactive storytelling as it currently stands, some of his exercises are aimed towards releasing the power of the human mind so it can be fully creative. Since computers don't have human minds (yet), those techniques will probably have to wait. But Keith also has some other extremely pragmatic nuts and bolts ideas about what makes a story, and what makes a story entertaining, that could be helpful now.
I’d love to pass on some of these ideas, you can also check out some of Keith’s books.

3:52 PM  
Anonymous Jordi said...

The above example of improv theatre made me think of the improvisation involved in real life storytelling. When one person tells a story to another, they will often alter and embellish aspects of it on the spot - in a sense, feeding off the emotions of the person listening. An example would be noticing the audience in suspense showing a keen interest in the story, and this reaction playing into the storyteller's hands. The storyteller may then draw out the suspense for longer, choosing to enhance the emotions of the audience. If something in a scare story shocks the audience (such as a gory description), the storyteller may decide to continue describing in more depth, thus magnifying the shock being experienced by the audience.

Perhaps for a more interactive storyworld, some method could be developed for the story to shift and adapt based on the mindset of the player (although emotions would be very hard to detect through a computer program). Although, there could be certain giveaways such as the particular responses chosen by the player reflecting their current mood, or even how quickly they are responding to events in the storyworld. Admittedly there would be flaws in this approach, but perhaps in the future the computer AI could be developed to the point where it takes note of patterns in the player's behaviour and can alter the pace of the storyworld accordingly.

10:53 PM  
Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

Hey, thats cool, you guys have hit on an idea from the "soft" perspective of acting that AI oriented game designers have been blue skying for not too long now, that of adaptive content creation.

If you consider each narrative discourse as content, then Storytron does this, but the real content of a storyworld are the reaction scripts written up for each verb.

However, there are some examples of games which are weakly adaptive in their design, in that they encourage players to attunte themeselves to whatever style or difficulty level they chose, simply through the act of play. A great example is Jenova Chen's thesis project, a flash game called Flow: http://intihuatani.usc.edu/cloud/flowing/

Another example is a game I did level design for recently, called Fireball, which has its content split into Fun, Puzzle and Challenge paths.

These examples are far from being truly adaptive, and they aren't dramatic in their play, but I think the theoretical groundwork needs to be laid with simpler examples first.

I'd say an adaptive storytelling engine would be a feature of a third generation drama platform, with Storytron being first generation. Think about that, as complex and monolithic as Storytron is, by 2009 we'll see context-specific engines with inference engines and more complex characters. Thats second-generation. A few years later (or maybe more, depending on who dives into the innovation) we'll see a few engines come out that take different approaches. I've got one in mind that uses the memetic algorithm with a toy-language that triples as event-type, authoring language and evolving hueristic code (I think by then we'll have better interface schemes so the guts of the system can be transparent to the user.)

But its definetly cool to see you all talking about this.

8:24 AM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Jordi, that's a good idea that can actually be implemented using the current Storytronics technology. There are several tools built into the technology specifically for this purpose, most notably a special Actor called Fate, who serves as the storybuilder's agent in the storyworld. He can be set to react to the player's behavior invisibly, making subtle changes that reflect what the player seems to enjoy. The challenge for the storybuilder is to program Fate to be sensitive to the right things and respond in the right way, which isn't as intuitive as responding in real time to a live audience, but if you can figure it out the sky's the limit.

12:03 PM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

A lot of Keith's excercises are based on understanding what the audience wants. One example is the exit game. One performer tries to entertain everyone else and if people are bored they leave the room. Once half the audience has left, the game is over. Sounds harsh, but if taught right it becomes a very interesting learning experience about what makes an audience "turn off" to a particular story. Usually people leave in large groups because of one specific event. For example, destroying the reality of the story will usually clear the room. I've been trying to think of how to program a Drama Manager with some of these rules. A tricky proposition, since many of the rules rely on "common sense" reasoning that's beyond current computational power.

2:42 PM  
Anonymous aevarsson said...

The special actor Fate reminds me of one of Joseph Campbells archetypes, which is called a Shapeshifter. A Shapeshifter acts in a similiar way, but its relationship with other characters is more based on trust.
It would be interesting to see if myth could be applied to Storytronics in some way.

6:27 AM  
Blogger LauraJMixon said...

aevarsson, I do believe we can create archetypal characters and outcomes, using the Stron. I'm eager to experiment.


-l.

7:36 AM  
Anonymous jordi said...

Hmm, Fate sounds interesting. What sort of variables in the player's behaviour is Fate able to react upon?

8:15 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Jordi, Fate can react upon anything and everything. You can monitor the player in whichever way you wish, give him scores based on performance in various fields as you define, or run background checks to see patterns in his past behavior. Likewise, you can have Fate react in whichever way you desire to whatever circumstances you define. The main constraint is that you have to be skilled enough in Scripting to create the behavior you want.

12:37 PM  
Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

Basically, there are two types of adaptivity, Passive and Active. Passive involves having a system of metrics moniter player performance, and then adjusting content according to pre-defined dynamics. This involves a lot of insight on the part of the programmer/designer, and probably wouldn't really sharpen until some user-testing has been done. Active involves designing the game with a few flexible parameters in mind, so that the player naturally attunes to their own ideal flow, as per the above examples.

A great example of Passive Adaptivity in a simple gameplay model is a freeware shooter called Warning Forever, where each succesive enemy has a different body and weapon configuration based on the previous fights. Google it, its a lot of fun.

I think a key difference between an actor trying to improvise for an audience, and a storyworld, where the author is the actor, is that Passive and Active adaptivity need to work together. You need to start by thinking about the dynamics along which people will tend to play, the simplest dynamic being difficulty, some people will be hardcore and opt for less material support, some will take it slow and steady. A storyworld will typically always have multiple dynamics which are more interesting than mere difficulty, the simplest way to visualize these is to think of your themes.

From a systems point of view, your themes will fall into three categories: singular attractors (dominating factors like power), dualities (like Le'Morte D'Arthur's King vs. Warrior behaviorism) and intransitive conflicts (three different angles on a problem that cancle each other out, perpetuating the conflict, the classic game analogy being rock-paper-scissors). Any dynamics will probably intersect, making things more complex. The most direct way to code Fate then, is to come up with the natural play dynamics that people will tend to gravitate along, then code these dynamics as metrics for Fate, so you have a clean graph of where in the story-space the user is. A more indirect approach is to use this "clean" data as a base-line, and through testing and the statistical feedback of rehearsals, come up with metrics that better frame how the dynamics tend to overlap and lead to complex or "emergent" behaviors.

Hmmm, I reckon with a bit of clean-up that could be an article for this site, Jon, any editorial remarks?

3:12 PM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

I'm not sure if I understand the difference between active and passive adaptivity.

Are the overview variable Chris writes about in "Interactive Storytelling" active or passive? Or is it based on what they alter?

4:34 PM  
Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

My impression of Fate after reading that was that it would function as what I know recognize to be a Passive adaptation system, all the measuring and adjusting is supposed to happen "behind the scenes" in the algorithms. This would be similar to you acting for an audience and adjusting your act based on what you infer from their passive reaction.

Active adaptivity would be more like running a tabletop RPG and letting the players push the events in a number of different directions. The audience's reactions are actually interactions, but unless the GM has a lot of pre-meditated framing in mind, and only the really good ones do, the results don't end up to be very dramatically interesting, though player's often find satisfaction out of custom tuned games that don't have narrative depth. Deus Ex is a pretty good example, there were often many solutions to each problem, but the narrative wasn't very dynamic or interesting compared to what I'm sure we'll be coming up with.

If you had a GM who framed the game to be played with mutiple play styles, the variations of which were also meaningful dynamics of the story, then you'd have something close to a marrige between active and passive adaptation. Thats what I'm imagining great storyworlds will play like.

7:48 PM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

When I direct or teach improvisation the style I use involves "side-coaching." With side-coaching the director will give the performers information to nudge the story back on track when it's getting boring. For example two people might be cleaning up after a party and talking about how great the party was, this is fine for awhile but if it starts to get tedious a good director would say something like "Find the dead body of a partygoer." Thus moving the story forward. This extra agent is above and beyond what the performer might be thinking if they are totally in character - it is metastory (although good improvisors are aware of metastory while they are on stage too). This seems to me similar to how Chris explains the role of a Drama Manager. If the story is going great you don't really need a Drama Manager, but if people are just talking about the weather for too long - you need Fate to come in and have some one struck by lightning. I'm trying to figure out if any of the principles I've learned from directing will be helpful for programming Storytron's Drama Manager.

1:05 AM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:47 PM  
Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

The principles I would think to use involve analogies to game desing theory, and constructs such as dominant strategies, intransitive relationships ect.

I think alot of post-Method acting is pretty interesting, I sat in on a class a friend of mine was taking with Eric Morris, he would get them in a certain mood and then have that channel back into a piece.

But I'm not sure precisely what principles you're talking about, could you explain? Maybe there are some similiarities with my background to yours.

7:03 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Patrick, I think your analysis of adaptivity is very interesting, although I would rephrase the issue as follows:

What you call Active Adaptivity I would simply call interactivity - when the player gets to act freely inside the story, and the story shapes around his or her actions, then and only then can that story be called interactive. You rightly say that this kind of experience is very rare, but it won't be once Storytronics becomes widespread. What you call Passive Adaptivity I would simply call Adaptivity, which is the kind of experience where the audience is essentially passive, but the artist is gauging his or her effect on them in real time and modulating the experience accordingly. In improvised theater and similar media this is an essential rhetorical tool - in interactive storytelling it is also the main vehicle for authorial voice.

There is constant tension between interactivity and adaptivity, because in a truly interactive experience the player has volition, while in a completely adaptive experience the audience is a helpless captive to the artist, who gauges them so perfectly that he or she can extract any desired reaction from them, precluding the possibility for volition on their part (not that there's anything wrong with that).

This brings me to Joseph's question. In General, the kind of experience you describe does seem to be very useful for storybuilding, but for someone with that kind of experience there is also a special challenge: the need to cede volition to the player. The player is the director here, not merely an improv actor. As a storybuilder, you have the dangerous power to ignore this and force the player down a primrose path (or, as often happens in "interactive fiction", one of several such paths), which the player will resent and you will regret. A storybuilder needs to provide good drama without controlling the plot.

12:17 AM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

Thanks Jonathan,
Chris is pretty clear about the dangers of forcing the player to follow a non-interactive storyline, I think I have a pretty good understanding of what he means on a general level. The more nuts and bolts practical level of interactivity vs. adaptivity and the tension between the two is going to be the real challenge. I think that's where a good portion of the "art" of I.S. will have to be discovered (or invented). It seems to me that it'll be tricky to have a nice fuzzy possibility tree that doesn't include at least some (and possibly many) lame stories, but I don't have a ton of experience with the technology so I'm just wildly (and inappropriately) speculating. I just know from experience with improv theatre that it's pretty easy to wreck a story, and the real challenge is to keep a story alive and interesting.

Patrick,
I don't think the school of improv that I learned from is really widely known (although amongst improvisers it might be). You can check out Keith Johnstone's Wickipedia entry "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Johnstone" to learn more. Johnstone’s theories are focused on creating narrative. It seems to me that there might be some useful ideas for I.S., the concept of status alone is incredibly valuable to anyone that works with stories on any level (in fact it's valuable to anyone that's human).

I would separate improvisation from other acting or stage performance because the performer is essentially also the writer, and is creating the story along with fellow performers. In this sense the performer is also similar to a player in a storyworld, because you don't know as an improv performer what your partners on stage are going to do - you make a choice, watch them react, and then make another choice. I would also point out again that this style is different from shows like "Whose Line is it Anyway," the goal of which is to be clever and make the audience laugh, not to tell a story.

1:48 AM  
Blogger Patrick Dugan said...

I think the notion of collaborative play is an interesting one to consider, and perhaps we can frame storybuilding as a collaborative game played between the author and the audience, where the "win" condition is to tell a good story.

An interesting example is in the Lord Of the Rings Board Game, which I just read about through this link at Roll The Bones: http://cultureraven.typepad.com/roll_the_bones/2006/03/tolkein_game_un.html

The game is balanced in such a way that in the paper's example, Pippin was a likely candidate to be the Ring Bearer at Shelob's Lair, but was too close to Sauron on the board and likely to be corrupted. The decision made by the players was to pass the ring to Frodo and let Pippin be willingly corrupted. Whats interesting is that the collaborative play and the role-balancing between the different hobbits created a pressure for the players to, of their own free will, make a meaningful descision that made sense from a goal-oriented and narrative perspective, since Frodo and Sam seem like the best candidates to finish the game and vicariously fulfill the frame of the original storyline.

I wonder if maybe Fate can frame similar collaborativity between the Player Actor and the other Actors in a storyworld?

11:14 AM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

I am just now reading all the great information about the Storytron buried in the overview. It's kinda hard to find. It was written by Jonathan, right? Great stuff. Answers a lot of my questions. The links are cleverly hidden at the bottom of each section.

I've also been reading (actually rereading) On Interactive Storytelling. I must admit I'm pretty excited about this art form.

1:42 AM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

That's great! I had the feeling those articles were needed. Everybody else go read them and then come back and say nice things about them. Actually, you're welcome to say nasty things about them too, just let me know how I'm doing. In particular, I'd like to know:

1. What answers were you looking for when you read them?
2. Did you get all those answers? What was missing?
3. Besides what you were looking for, what did you find there that was superfluous? What did you find there that was interesting?
4. What other articles would you like to see in the overview?

Joseph, I'm glad you're as excited as we are about Storytronics. Right now it's hard to tell, but people interested in becoming storybuilders are very important to us, and we'll soon be giving you something to unleash your excitement on. Good to have you along for the ride.

5:37 AM  
Blogger Designer Christian said...

Heys, i have been following storytron from years! I am too really exited about making storyworlds and also playing them.
But a critique about the articles, they are too long for most people, i dont think "normal" poeple would be attracted to read them (too much to read! argh!!), maybe make another version for the masses?.

10:07 AM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

Jonathan,
Here are the answers to your questions. Take with grain of salt.

1. I don't know if I was looking for specific answers, I've just been obsessively-compulsively checking the site and reading all I can about Storytronics because I've been interested in it for years and now that things are moving forward I'm excited.
2. When I said above that it answered my questions I meant that in a general way. It's hard for me to imagine how storytronics works. I've never played a storyworld, I've only seen the descriptions on Chris' site by Laura and Chris about their work on the earlier versions of the Storytron, and at one point I downloaded and fiddled with one of these earlier versions. I've read Chris's book on Interactive Storytelling, and that's helped clarify things - but reading your explanation gave me a different viewpoint that filled in some gaps. Particularly the explanation of Roles, the idea that the player should only be presented with choices that are dramatically appropriate, the verbweb and subnet description, and the overview of how to go about creating a Storyworld, helped me visualize some things that were hazy in my imagination. It would be hard for me to say what is missing.
3. I don't think anything was superfluous, you add humor into your writing and I like that style. Some people might not. I think I explained what I found to be interesting in #2.
4. I don't know what else you would add - but here is my 2 cents. You should add links for the "subsections" to be indented below their headers on the left. I've spent quite a bit of time poking around this site and I just recently found them down there at the bottom of their respective sections. Christian might have a point that there should be a simpler description for potential customers, with a more detailed description for people who want to delve into the creative side. It seems like the learning curve for creating storyworlds might be a bit steep. There are a lot of concepts that need to be digested and put together before it starts to become clear, but you seem to understand that.

If that helps, great - if not, ignore it. Anyway, I really liked the overview and I'm looking forward to reading more.

9:28 PM  
Blogger LauraJMixon said...

joseph and Jonathan, I found your posts on the tension between player volition and author direction really interesting. Patrick, I also like your concept of the author and players being, essentially, in "dialog" with each other.

Fate is a really interesting character and can do a lot -- including something analogous to the side coaching joseph was talking about earlier. In Shattertown, I had Fate continually checking the sum of verb import levels, and if that number was low (i.e., mostly boring stuff was happening), I'd have Fate shake things up in a few different ways.


-l.

12:01 AM  
Blogger Jonathan Beyrak Lev said...

Christian and Joseph, thank you very much for your feedback. Sorry I haven't been able to reply until now, but I'm frantically working on the tutorial. About the suggestion you both raise, to have shorter versions for "the massess", the text on the main page of each overview section was meant to provide that. Are you saying that it's TOO short?

Joseph, your reaction is uncanny! That is EXACTLY what I had in mind when I wrote those articles, down to the last detail!

11:17 AM  
Anonymous Joseph Limbaugh said...

Hey, great minds think alike. . . and so do ours.
Sorry, it's an old joke but I can't help telling it.
I think the overview in general is fine for hoi polloi, but the links at the bottom of the Storyworld section go into more detail than I believe a casually curious person would want. I would put material specific to people who are interested in becoming storybuilders in a seperate section so they won't get scared off by the technical aspects. Make a transition link (with perhaps a warning that technical yet exciting material lies ahead) and add another tab that gathers all the technical SW-building stuff together. That's my suggestion.

7:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good site you have got here.. It's hard to find high-quality writing like yours these days. I seriously appreciate individuals like you! Take care!!

Feel free to surf to my webpage; Openmindspace.org

6:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you writing this write-up and also the rest of the site
is also really good.

Check out my page :: game.pointblank-kings.com

5:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just desire to say your article is as astonishing.
The clearness for your post is just great and that
i can think you're knowledgeable in this subject. Fine with your permission let me to clutch your RSS feed to keep updated with impending post. Thank you 1,000,000 and please keep up the enjoyable work.

Also visit my website ... the Jump manual review

12:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its such as you read my thoughts! You seem to know a lot approximately this, such as you wrote the e book
in it or something. I believe that you just could do with
a few % to pressure the message house a little bit, however instead of that, that is excellent blog. A fantastic read. I'll certainly be back.

Feel free to visit my web blog: http://cheyne.net/wikka/AlyssasqDoylevm

6:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for a marvelous posting! I truly enjoyed reading
it, you can be a great author.I will remember to bookmark your blog and definitely will come
back later in life. I want to encourage continue your great
writing, have a nice day!

my homepage: exercises to jump higher exercises to improve vertical exercises to improve vertical jump exercises to improve vertical leap exercises to increase vertical exercises to increase vertical jump exercises to increase vertical leap exercises for vertical exercises for vertical jump exercises for vertical leap workouts to jump higher workouts to improve vertical workouts to improve vertical jump workouts to improve vertical leap workouts to increase vertical workouts to increase vertical jump workouts to increase vertical leap workouts for vertical workouts for vertical jump workouts for vertical leap vertical jump exercises vertical leap exercises vertical jump workouts vertical leap workouts

10:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was extremely pleased to discover this great site.

I want to to thank you for your time just for this fantastic read!

! I definitely loved every little bit of it and i also have you saved to fav to look at new stuff in your site.


Also visit my blog :: workouts to increase vertical jump

9:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home