Okay, let's start with what we need to bless and release. We missed the mark, big time on this one. And we've done it for years and we still do it measuring success based solely on attendance, the number of people in the room. Just getting people together is not a meaningful purpose at all. And it just isn't right. So we have to dig deeper on the attendance goals like why are we trying to why do we have an attendance goal? Right? In did we attract the people who really needed to be in the room, whether that's a fundraiser or whether it's a recognition event? Having certain people in the room will make a difference in whether or not we accomplish our goals. So segmentation is important. Target messaging and marketing is important. Measuring like, not just the number, but what's behind And the number. That's the KPI that matters. And then this is where I wanted to talk about the non attendee experience, we got to go beyond the people who are in the room or on the screen in our in our online events world. How well did we do with the non attendee experience? That's a measurement we should be looking at every single time and sort of aggregate overall, for our events programs, there always, always will be a large segment of the target audience who doesn't attend, right? What are we doing to extend the experience and the story to them? It's not as though they no longer matter if they have a conflict, or maybe they just don't like events, or, you know, the newest streaming, whatever, I don't know what the latest rage is, right? And we watch mostly kid shows, but apparently something that keeps people from going places, you know, but are we aspiring or non attendees with a call to action? Are they taking action, what like, we send out often we send out an invitation, you know, 20% of the people respond to it, and we spend all the rest of our time focused on them. And like the 80%, just disappeared, and vanished. They were important enough to be included and invited, they are important enough, their relationship with our organization is important enough that we spend an equal amount of time focused on what their experience is going to be like, how are they going to be moved? How are they going to care about something that we want them to care about? So that is that's just a performance indicator that I feel like has been largely ignored, um, throughout the history of time and continues to today? And you know, most importantly, how, what did we accomplish the intended outcome, that's the thing we need to be looking at, we should measure this on an individual basis, but also on an aggregate, like rating for all the events that we produce in one year. In, in my previous role, we set a goal that every event experience should result in donors feeling more connected to the organization. So we just asked that question, you know, how well did this experience strengthen your connection? And then we measure our team's performance on that, and when it was not? When it you know, when it was low score? You don't? That's what that's where the questions begin, like, then you go deeper, then you look at the narrative feedback, you're getting around. Okay, why was this off the mark? Right? Was it was it a parking challenge, that helped them not not experience, what we wanted them to experience was our storytelling off, these things are going to happen? Right. Um, so those are things that we need to look at. And I think ultimately, while it's not causing effect, we also have to look at whether event activity is making a difference in giving. So kind of looking at the trajectory of different types of attendees, you have your like, your diehard folks that are at every single, I mean, Anytime you open the door, they show up. And you've got people who never come to event experiences, you have people who come once in a while to certain types of like, you can start to create almost profiles of different types of attendees and see what their event activity is and what their giving activity is, and see if there's any correlation between those two.