Opponent Processing in Scam Victims – Before and During the Scam

Opponent Processing – a Cognitive Function that Can Increase Scam Victim Vulnerability

Principal Category: Psychology/Neurology

Author: 
•  Tim McGuinness, Ph.D. – Anthropologist, Scientist, Director of the Society of Citizens Against Relationship Scams Inc.

Abstract: Opponent Processing and Its Role in Scam Victimization and Denial

Opponent processing is a cognitive and neurological function that regulates perception, emotion, and decision-making by balancing opposing forces. While this mechanism enhances adaptability and stability, it can also make individuals more susceptible to deception. Scammers exploit opponent processing by manipulating emotional highs and lows, suppressing rational skepticism, and inducing cognitive dissonance to keep victims engaged. The alternating cycle of emotional reward and distress creates dependency, while the suppression of risk awareness weakens critical thinking, making victims more likely to comply with fraudulent demands.

Denial and resistance to recognizing a scam are also influenced by opponent processing. Cognitive dissonance prevents victims from acknowledging inconsistencies, leading to rationalizations that reinforce their commitment to the deception. The sunk cost fallacy further entrenches victims, as the brain seeks to justify past investments rather than accept financial and emotional losses. These psychological mechanisms explain why scam victims often continue their involvement even when confronted with clear warning signs.

To aid in scam recovery, intervention strategies must disrupt opponent processing gradually rather than confront it directly. Encouraging victims to question their beliefs in small steps, providing positive emotional reinforcement outside the scam, and reframing their experience as a learning opportunity rather than a failure can help break the cycle. Understanding opponent processing allows scam recovery professionals to develop targeted approaches that facilitate awareness, acceptance, and ultimately, the ability to make clear, independent decisions.

Opponent Processing – a Cognitive Function that Can Increase Scam Victim Vulnerability

Opponent processing is a fundamental principle in psychology and neuroscience that describes how certain types of neural or cognitive functions are organized into opposing pairs to enhance perception, decision-making, and processing efficiency. It is most commonly discussed in the contexts of color vision, emotion regulation, and decision-making systems in the brain. However, it also applied to Scam Victim vulnerability.

The Basics of Opponent Processing

Opponent Processing in Perception/Vision

One of the most well-known applications of opponent processing is in color vision, as explained by Ewald Hering’s opponent-process theory of color vision. The human visual system interprets color through three opposing pairs of photoreceptor channels:

• • • Red vs. Green
    • Blue vs. Yellow
    • Black vs. White (luminance detection)

In this system, stimulation of one color in a pair inhibits the perception of the other. For example, if the red-sensitive cones in the retina are activated strongly, green perception is suppressed. This explains afterimages, such as seeing a greenish hue after staring at a red object for an extended period.

Opponent Processing in Emotion and Motivation

Richard Solomon and John Corbit expanded the concept to emotion regulation through their opponent-process theory of emotion. According to this model, emotional responses involve two opposing processes:

1. 1. • Primary (A) Process – The initial emotional reaction to a stimulus (e.g., joy after receiving good news).
      • Opponent (B) Process – A secondary, opposite emotional response that counteracts the primary process (e.g., a sense of normalcy or even sadness after the joy fades).

This theory helps explain addiction, thrill-seeking behavior, and emotional adaptation. For example:

• • • A drug that initially produces euphoria (A process) later leads to withdrawal symptoms (B process), encouraging further drug use to avoid the negative effects.
    • A skydiver initially feels fear (A process), but over time, the opponent response of excitement (B process) grows stronger, leading to a desire for repeated experiences.

Opponent Processing in Decision-Making and Neural Systems

Opponent processing is also observed in the brain’s cognitive and decision-making systems, particularly in areas responsible for conflict resolution and balancing competing choices. Some examples include:

• • • Dopaminergic vs. Serotonergic Systems – The dopamine system is associated with reward-seeking and impulsive actions, while the serotonin system is linked to inhibition and mood stabilization. Their interaction influences risk-taking behavior and impulse control.
    • Sympathetic vs. Parasympathetic Nervous System – The sympathetic system triggers “fight-or-flight” responses, while the parasympathetic system promotes “rest and digest” states. Their dynamic balance maintains homeostasis.
    • Excitatory vs. Inhibitory Neural Pathways – In brain function, excitatory signals promote neural activity (e.g., glutamate), whereas inhibitory signals reduce it (e.g., GABA), allowing for precise control of cognitive and motor functions.

Why Opponent Processing Matters

Opponent processing provides efficiency, balance, and adaptability in perception, cognition, and behavior. It helps prevent overstimulation, allows for contrast enhancement, and enables the brain to maintain homeostasis across various functions.

This model applies broadly across psychological and neurological domains, offering insights into sensory perception, emotional adaptation, addiction, motivation, and even artificial intelligence in decision-making algorithms.

Opponent Processing and Scams

Opponent Processing and Its Role in Scam Susceptibility and Denial

Opponent processing is a fundamental principle in psychology and neuroscience that describes how opposing forces within the brain regulate emotions, perceptions, and decision-making. This dynamic system allows for balance and adaptability, but it can also be exploited—especially in situations where deception and manipulation are involved. In the context of scams, opponent processing plays a crucial role in both susceptibility to being scammed and resistance to recognizing the scam, ultimately delaying a victim’s ability to break free from the deception.

Opponent Processing and Susceptibility to Being Scammed

Scammers exploit natural cognitive and emotional balancing mechanisms to manipulate victims into compliance. By carefully structuring their schemes, they override skepticism, distort risk assessment, and create emotional dependencies that make their deception more effective.

Opponent processing in cognitive and emotional systems may create vulnerabilities that scammers exploit. Some key ways it contributes to being deceived include:

Emotional Opponent Processing: The Hook of Highs and Lows

• • • • Scammers manipulate emotions using high-arousal rewards followed by uncertainty or distress, creating an opponent process that keeps victims engaged.
      • For example, in romance scams, a scammer may initially shower the victim with affection and grand promises (A process: euphoria, love, trust). However, they soon introduce distressing elements, such as an urgent financial crisis or an unexpected threat (B process: fear, anxiety, urgency).
      • The victim’s brain, accustomed to the emotional highs, begins to seek relief from the distress by complying with the scammer’s demands to restore the initial positive state.

Scammers frequently manipulate emotions by creating cycles of intense positivity followed by stress or fear, which mirrors the brain’s opponent emotional response system. In romance scams, for example, the scammer initially showers the victim with affection, attention, and grand declarations of love (A process: euphoria, trust, attachment). This emotional high reinforces the idea that the relationship is real and worth investing in. However, after this honeymoon phase, the scammer suddenly introduces distressing scenarios—such as an emergency, financial crisis, or an unexpected setback (B process: anxiety, fear, urgency). The victim, now conditioned to associate the scammer with positive feelings, seeks relief from the distress by complying with their demands. This cycle of alternating pleasure and pain creates dependency, making it more difficult for the victim to detach from the scam. The victim’s brain, craving the return of emotional highs, begins justifying actions that would normally seem irrational—such as sending money, keeping secrets, or ignoring warning signs.

Decision-Making Opponent Processing: Risk vs. Reward

• • • • The brain’s reward system (dopamine-driven, impulsive) and inhibitory system (serotonin-driven, cautious) exist in opposition.
      • Scammers exploit reward-seeking behavior, overriding the victim’s cautious reasoning. If the initial “reward” (e.g., the promise of financial gain, a romantic connection, or an exclusive opportunity) is strong enough, the opponent inhibition process (skepticism, caution, analytical thinking) may be suppressed.
      • This imbalance causes rational skepticism to weaken, making victims more likely to accept the scammer’s lies without thorough evaluation.

Opponent processing also influences how victims assess risk and reward, particularly in high-pressure situations. The brain’s reward system, driven by dopamine, encourages impulsive decision-making based on perceived gains, while the inhibitory system, driven by serotonin and rational thinking, acts as a safeguard to encourage caution and skepticism. Scammers exploit this natural opposition by amplifying the excitement of potential rewards, whether it’s a too-good-to-be-true financial opportunity, an exclusive job offer, or a romantic connection. At the same time, they suppress the brain’s natural caution by applying urgency, secrecy, and emotional manipulation. The promise of a big payoff, love, or a life-changing opportunity activates the reward system so strongly that it overrides rational skepticism. This is why many scam victims ignore red flags—because their brain is focused on potential rewards rather than realistic risks. Since opponent processing adapts over time, victims become increasingly committed to chasing the “reward” while downplaying warning signs.

The Illusion of Control and Opponent Biases

• • • • Many scams prey on the illusion of control, where people believe they are making rational choices, even when manipulated.
      • Opponent processing in self-perception vs. external reality creates a cognitive tug-of-war. The victim’s self-image as a smart, competent person conflicts with warning signs of deception, leading them to resolve the conflict in favor of their self-image rather than admit vulnerability.

A scam victim’s perception of control is another key vulnerability manipulated through opponent processing. Humans have a deep-seated need to believe they are in control of their choices, even when external forces are manipulating them. Scammers take advantage of this by providing false choices and staged decision-making, which make victims feel as if they are actively participating in the process. For example, in investment scams, the scammer might allow the victim to make small initial “decisions” that appear to yield positive results, reinforcing the illusion of control. However, these staged wins are designed to hook the victim into larger financial commitments. Opponent processing creates a tug-of-war between self-perception and external reality—if a victim believes they are smart and careful, then acknowledging they’ve been manipulated feels like an attack on their self-image. To resolve this internal conflict, victims often rationalize their actions rather than accept they were deceived.

Opponent Processing and Resistance to Recognizing a Scam (Denial)

Opponent processing also plays a key role in why victims struggle to accept they have been scammed, even when presented with evidence.

Once a victim is deep in a scam, opponent processing mechanisms can also delay or prevent the recognition of deception, even when clear evidence is presented. The brain’s tendency to seek stability and avoid distress leads to denial, self-justification, and emotional attachment to the scam.

Cognitive Dissonance and Opponent Thought Processes

• • • • When reality contradicts deeply held beliefs (e.g., “This person loves me” or “This is a legitimate business deal”), opposing mental forces create tension.
      • The A process (belief in the scam) has been reinforced repeatedly, making the B process (accepting deception) painful and difficult to integrate.
      • The brain protects itself by downplaying or ignoring evidence that contradicts the initial belief, delaying recognition of the scam.

Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two conflicting beliefs at the same time, creating mental discomfort. In a scam, the victim has invested emotionally and sometimes financially in the belief that their situation is legitimate. When new information challenges this belief, such as a friend pointing out inconsistencies or news of similar scams, opponent processing activates to reduce psychological distress. Instead of immediately accepting the uncomfortable truth, the brain tries to preserve stability by rejecting contradictory evidence. This leads to mental gymnastics, where the victim might explain away red flags, believe the scammer’s excuses, or dismiss warnings from loved ones. The longer a victim remains in a scam, the stronger the cognitive dissonance becomes, making it even harder to acknowledge reality.

Emotional Opponent Processing: Avoiding Pain

• • • • Admitting to being scammed elicits shame, anger, and guilt, which the brain sees as psychologically harmful.
      • To counteract this distress, the opponent process produces rationalizations:
        • “I haven’t lost that much money yet.”
        • “Maybe they really do care about me.”
        • “I can turn this around.”
      • This emotional self-protection mechanism suppresses painful realizations, keeping the victim in denial.

Accepting that one has been scammed is emotionally painful, as it often comes with feelings of shame, betrayal, and anger. The opponent emotional system reacts to this by seeking to protect the victim from distress. Instead of confronting the painful reality, the brain generates rationalizations and avoidance mechanisms:

• • • • “Maybe they really do care about me, and I just don’t understand their situation.”
      • “This investment is just taking longer than expected to pay off.”
      • “I haven’t lost that much money yet, so I’ll wait and see.” These justifications allow the victim to delay emotional suffering, but they also keep them trapped in the scam. The fear of facing reality becomes more overwhelming than the scam itself, making it easier to continue believing the deception rather than breaking free from it.

The Sunken Cost Fallacy and Opponent Adaptation

• • • • The longer someone remains in a scam, the more emotionally and financially invested they become.
      • The brain processes past efforts and resources as valuable, making it harder to walk away.
      • Opponent processing in loss aversion vs. rational assessment causes victims to double down instead of cut their losses, believing that if they continue, they might “win” in the end.

Opponent processing also explains why many scam victims continue investing time, money, or emotional energy even after suspecting something is wrong. This is closely related to the sunken cost fallacy, where people struggle to walk away from a bad investment because they’ve already put so much into it. The victim’s brain frames the situation as a choice between accepting total loss (which feels like failure) or continuing to pursue potential “recovery” (which provides hope). This opponent adaptation mechanism encourages commitment to a failing course of action rather than admitting defeat. This is why some scam victims will continue sending money, defending the scammer, or waiting for promised returns even when all evidence suggests they are being deceived.

Breaking the Opponent Processing Cycle in Scam Victims

Since opponent processing can create deep-seated resistance to recognizing a scam, intervention strategies must be designed to gently disrupt these cognitive and emotional traps rather than force immediate recognition.

To help scam victims recognize deception, intervention strategies must target opponent processing mechanisms:

• • • Introduce an opposing perspective gradually – Instead of directly confronting the victim’s belief (which triggers cognitive resistance), guide them toward small realizations that disrupt the scam’s control.
    • Encourage emotional rebalancing – Help victims experience positive emotions from non-scam sources, weakening the grip of the scammer’s emotional conditioning.
    • Rebuild a rational baseline – Teach scam victims to reframe their past choices as lessons rather than failures, so that their opponent process no longer fights against self-acceptance.

Introduce an Opposing Perspective Gradually

When confronting a scam victim, directly challenging their beliefs often backfires because it triggers psychological resistance. Instead of outright telling someone they’ve been scammed, introduce doubts subtly by asking questions that force small, incremental realizations. Encouraging them to analyze their own experiences can gradually shift their perception without triggering an extreme defensive reaction.

Encourage Emotional Rebalancing

Since scammers manipulate emotions to control victims, it’s important to help victims experience positive emotional engagement from sources outside the scam. Encouraging new social connections, hobbies, or supportive communities can weaken the scam’s hold. By restoring emotional balance, the victim regains the ability to evaluate their situation without the intense highs and lows that the scammer induced.

Rebuild a Rational Baseline

One of the most damaging aspects of a scam is how it distorts a victim’s ability to trust their own judgment. Recovery requires teaching victims to reframe their experience as a lesson rather than a failure. If they see their experience as part of a learning process, their opponent processing will no longer fight to preserve their previous belief in the scam. Instead, they can shift toward self-acceptance and forward movement.

Final Thought

By understanding opponent processing, scam recovery professionals can develop strategies to break cognitive traps, help victims escape deception, and restore their ability to make clear, independent decisions.

Summary

Opponent processing is a fundamental psychological and neurological function that helps the brain regulate opposing forces, such as perception, emotion, and decision-making. While this mechanism allows for balance and adaptability in many areas of life, it can also make individuals more vulnerable to deception. Scammers exploit opponent processing by manipulating emotional highs and lows, overriding logical risk assessment, and creating cognitive dissonance that makes victims resistant to recognizing the fraud.

One of the key ways opponent processing contributes to scam victimization is through emotional manipulation. By creating cycles of intense positivity followed by distress—such as in romance scams where love and trust are quickly followed by urgent financial crises—scammers exploit the brain’s natural response to seek equilibrium. Victims become trapped in a cycle where they comply with demands to regain emotional stability, reinforcing the scammer’s control. Similarly, opponent processing in decision-making can suppress rational skepticism. The brain’s reward system, driven by dopamine, entices individuals to chase perceived gains, while the inhibition system, which would normally trigger caution, becomes subdued due to urgency and emotional pressure.

Denial and resistance to recognizing a scam are also driven by opponent processing. Cognitive dissonance arises when a victim’s belief in the scam conflicts with evidence of deception, leading the brain to suppress contradictory information to avoid psychological distress. Victims rationalize red flags, make excuses for the scammer, and justify further investment to avoid admitting they were deceived. The sunk cost fallacy further reinforces this pattern, as opponent processing causes victims to cling to past investments, believing they can still turn things around rather than accepting loss.

To help scam victims break free, intervention strategies must account for opponent processing mechanisms. Instead of directly challenging a victim’s beliefs—triggering resistance—introducing doubts gradually can help them reach realizations on their own. Emotional rebalancing, through positive interactions outside the scam, can weaken the scammer’s hold. Lastly, reframing the experience as a learning opportunity rather than a personal failure allows the brain to process the scam without defensiveness, enabling recovery. By understanding opponent processing, scam recovery professionals can develop effective strategies to help victims escape deception and rebuild their decision-making confidence.

References

• Opponent-process theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opponent-process_theory
• An Anatomical Basis for Opponent Process Mechanisms https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3114886/
• Colm P. Murphy, Joshua D. Hinde, André Roca, A. M. Williams, & Jamie S. North. (2024). The effect of domain-specific exercise on high- and low-level cognitive processing during anticipation. In International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/100d604e8fb5421749f0c973a6ee63b4bf447ad2
• Yongsheng Zhu, Yunpeng Wang, J. Lai, Shuguang Wei, Hongbo Zhang, Peng Yan, Yunxiao Li, Xiaomeng Qiao, & Fangyuan Yin. (2016). Dopamine D1 and D3 Receptors Modulate Heroin-Induced Cognitive Impairment through Opponent Actions in Mice. In International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a447e805c73c42406d696fdcf744eac6f4c2a3b4
• L. Faget, Vivien Zell, Elizabeth A. Souter, Adam McPherson, Reed L. Ressler, Navarre Gutierrez‐Reed, J. Yoo, D. Dulcis, & T. Hnasko. (2018). Opponent control of behavioral reinforcement by inhibitory and excitatory projections from the ventral pallidum. In Nature Communications. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c778668c2268b5d967b5769835ea46ac2431a754
• J. Franklin, Elenda T. Hessel, R. Aaron, Michael S. Arthur, Nicole Heilbron, & M. Prinstein. (2010). The functions of nonsuicidal self-injury: support for cognitive-affective regulation and opponent processes from a novel psychophysiological paradigm. In Journal of abnormal psychology. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1c5ae25457f69c2bd30b71ea17263ef69b4d15e2
• Jacquelyn Cafasso. (2017). Opponent Process Theory – Healthline. https://www.healthline.com/health/opponent-process-theory
• What Is Opponent Process Theory? – BetterHelp. (2024). https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/general/what-is-opponent-process-theory/
• Opponent-Process Theory – (AP Psychology) – Fiveable. (2024). https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/ap-psych/opponent-process-theory
• Administrator. (2023). Opponent Process Theory: Concept and Explanation. https://www.mentesabiertaspsicologia.com/blog-psicologia/opponent-process-theory-concept-and-explanation
• The dynamic opponent relativity model: an integration and extension … (2015). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4501341/

Please Leave Us Your Comment
Also, tell us of any topics we might have missed.

Thank you for your comment. You may receive an email to follow up. We never share your data with marketers.

Recent Reader Comments

• on Trauma: The Relationship Between Psychological Trauma, PTSD, and Physical Pain – 2024: “I have often wondered why my pain tolerance seems to be so high. Maybe it is normal but PTSD makes…” Mar 1, 15:47
• on What Is PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) – An Introduction – 2024: “I understand this is not to be used as a diagnostic tool, however, I see many of the symptoms of…” Mar 1, 15:31
• on Opponent Processing in Scam Victims – Before and During the Scam – 2025: “There is a world of knowledge that I know little to nothing about. This article helped me to learn what…” Feb 19, 05:45
• on The Amygdala Hijack Effect And The Neurology Of Scam Victims – 2024: “This article helped me to understand that in a sense amygdala hijacking wasn’t “created” in me so to speak during…” Feb 15, 09:13
• on Cognitive Bias: Stereotyping – 2024: “For me, my scammer impersonated a trusted celebrity, someone old enough to be my father. This celebrity has a long…” Feb 9, 15:13

Important Information for New Scam Victims

Please visit www.ScamVictimsSupport.org – a SCARS Website for New Scam Victims Enroll in SCARS Scam Survivor’s School for FREE – visit www.SCARSeducation.org to register – FREE for scam victims/survivors If you are looking for local trauma counselors please visit counseling.AgainstScams.org or join SCARS for our counseling/therapy benefit: membership.AgainstScams.org If you need to speak with someone now, you can dial 988 in the U.S. or Canada, or find phone numbers for crisis hotlines all around the world here: www.opencounseling.com/suicide-hotlines

A Question of Trust

At the SCARS Institute, we invite you to do your own research on the topics we speak about and publish, Our team investigates the subject being discussed, especially when it comes to understanding the scam victims-survivors experience. You can do Google searches but in many cases, you will have to wade through scientific papers and studies. However, remember that biases and perspectives matter and influence the outcome. Regardless, we encourage you to explore these topics as thoroughly as you can for your own awareness.

SCARS Resources:

♦ Enroll in SCARS Scam Survivor’s School now at www.SCARSeducation.org

♦ To report criminals visit reporting.AgainstScams.org – we will NEVER give your data to money recovery companies like some do!

♦ If you are a victim of scams go to ScamVictimsSupport.org for real knowledge and help

♦ Come and join our kinder, safer, no-hate, anti-scam education and discussion group: support.AgainstScams.org

♦ Sign up for our free support & recovery help by support.AgainstScams.org

♦ Join our WhatsApp Chat Group at: https://chat.whatsapp.com/BPDSYlkdHBbDBg8gfTGb02

♦ Follow us on X: x.com/RomanceScamsNow

♦ Follow us and find our podcasts, webinars, and helpful videos on YouTube at: www.youtube.com/@RomancescamsNowcom

♦ See SCARS Institute Scam Victim Self-Help Books at shop.AgainstScams.org

♦ Learn about the Psychology of Scams at www.ScamPsychology.org

♦ Dig deeper into the reality of scams, fraud, and cybercrime at www.ScamsNOW.com and www.RomanceScamsNOW.com

♦ Become a SCARS Institute Member – Help Us Help Others – learn more at membership.AgainstScams.org

♦ See more scammer photos on ScammerPhotos.com

You can also find the SCARS Institute on Facebook, WhatsApp, X, LinkedIn, and TruthSocial

A Note About Labeling!

We often use the term ‘scam victim’ in our articles, but this is a convenience to help those searching for information in search engines like Google. It is just a convenience and has no deeper meaning. If you have come through such an experience, YOU are a Survivor! It was not your fault. You are not alone! Axios!

Statement About Victim Blaming

Some of our articles discuss various aspects of victims. This is both about better understanding victims (the science of victimology) and their behaviors and psychology. This helps us to educate victims/survivors about why these crimes happened and to not blame themselves, better develop recovery programs, and to help victims avoid scams in the future. At times this may sound like blaming the victim, but it does not blame scam victims, we are simply explaining the hows and whys of the experience victims have.

These articles, about the Psychology of Scams or Victim Psychology – meaning that all humans have psychological or cognitive characteristics in common that can either be exploited or work against us – help us all to understand the unique challenges victims face before, during, and after scams, fraud, or cybercrimes. These sometimes talk about some of the vulnerabilities the scammers exploit. Victims rarely have control of them or are even aware of them, until something like a scam happens and then they can learn how their mind works and how to overcome these mechanisms.

Articles like these help victims and others understand these processes and how to help prevent them from being exploited again or to help them recover more easily by understanding their post-scam behaviors. Learn more about the Psychology of Scams at www.ScamPsychology.org

Psychology Disclaimer:

All articles about psychology, neurology, and the human brain on this website are for information & education only

The information provided in these articles is intended for educational and self-help purposes only and should not be construed as a substitute for professional therapy or counseling.

While any self-help techniques outlined herein may be beneficial for scam victims seeking to recover from their experience and move towards recovery, it is important to consult with a qualified mental health professional before initiating any course of action. Each individual’s experience and needs are unique, and what works for one person may not be suitable for another.

Additionally, any approach may not be appropriate for individuals with certain pre-existing mental health conditions or trauma histories. It is advisable to seek guidance from a licensed therapist or counselor who can provide personalized support, guidance, and treatment tailored to your specific needs.

If you are experiencing significant distress or emotional difficulties related to a scam or other traumatic event, please consult your doctor or mental health provider for appropriate care and support.

Also, please read our SCARS Institute Statement About Professional Care for Scam Victims – here

If you are in crisis, feeling desperate, or in despair please call 988 or your local crisis hotline.

-/ 30 /-

What do you think about this?

Please share your thoughts in a comment below!