Defendant failed to preserve her contention that the trial court erred in allowing a Violence Protection Prevention proceeding to be conducted by Zoom with the plaintiffs and their witnesses seen by the court while defendant could only access the Zoom hearing by telephone.  Defendant didn’t object on that ground in the trial court and so is barred from doing so on appeal.  However, the judgment is reversed to the extent it imposed restrictions on defendant’s husband who was not named in the petition and appeared at the hearing only as a witness.