Jump to content

Insults Compounded by More Insults


Recommended Posts

Cluttermagnet
Senate Bill Attacks Content, VOIP, Analog TVsMore DRM and DRM-like crap here. It doesn't get much uglier than what we've been seeing this past year. Barbarians at the gates? Heck, they're inside already, and they're cutting up the furniture and selling it for firewood. Your furniture. Thieves in broad daylight, ripping you off for everything they can lay their hands on. I am sooooooooooo not buying their products and services. TV is such a vast wasteland. Cell phones are so overpriced. A ball and chain. I don't want them. OK, I'll settle for being a voice in the wilderness. "Stand still, little sheep, to be shorn..." I'm apparently a late-blooming, economically and politically-motivated Luddite. So be it. I'm not anti-tech. I've been a geek for years. I'm anti-ripoff and I'm firmly for putting the control freaks out with the morning garbage. Ship of fools.Oh, yeah- they're gonna revive the broadcast flag, among other horrors. Surprised? Perfectly happy with your present TV? Too bad. They can't control it, so it's gotta go. Et cetera. Rights? Forget it! Privacy? Forget it. What have you done with my country, dudes?! :P
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I'm finding less and less use for TV these days. There are basically two shows I watch, and that's pretty much it. If I decide not to ever get another TV, so be it. It's probably better for me anyway. They can't restrict what I don't have.About the VOIP though, that's a bit scary.I wonder how much of these rights-stripping laws would even be introduced if corporate money was disallowed in politics and if politicians knew more about technology than the average chiwawa.

Edited by epp_b
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

And the network neutrality thing too. Don't forget that.It's all a big mess and corporate interests seem like they win at every turn these days. :thumbsdown:You know the old saying ... Follow the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

Network neutrality? How could I forget that? My congress critter voted 'wrong' on both votes recently. I made a rare (for me) phone call and registered my strong disapproval. I only got to talk to a functionary, of course. He seems as resolute as the present admin is on many of their issues. I doubt I can move him. This means I may not be able to support him in any future re-election bids. Too bad, as the guy is a Dem, and substantially aligned with my interests. Hrrrrumph! They are even getting to the Dems. Money talks.A small victory, just a skirmish won: Court Skeptical of FCC on Broadband Wiretap Access.

Edited by Cluttermagnet
Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

voip is hated because telco is all about per-minute.there are millions of miles of "dark fiber" that telcos will not lease to "us" because they do not control the swithes, hence cannot charge per-minute.telcos love isdn, because it ~is~ per-minute.voip takes away from their profit, as it's free (no additional cost after your isp.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
voip is hated because telco is all about per-minute.
Yup, they're in the same boat as RIAA, MPAA and all those other green-faced corporations with jurassic business models. Too stupid/lazy/blinded by greed to realize that market topology actually changes (what a concept, huh?!) and that businesses need to change with it.Don't get me wrong, telephones are still needed now, but VOIP is a better tool for many tasks and will only get more common. It's completely wrong and unfair for telcos to prioritize communication lines according to which ones make them the most money instead of adjusting their businesses to to properly reflect the market.
Link to post
Share on other sites
They are in the business to make money, just like any other.
That's too bad. Businesses should be in the business of people and happen to specialize in a particular field.I know that sounds cliche, but how much better off would we be if this is actually how businesses worked?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

if a business does not help people, but only makes money, is scr*ws people.two doctors, one makes money, one loves people. at the end of the day, both go home with a couple of thousand $'s. but which doctor's patients do better in the long run?

Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
if a business does not help people, but only makes money, is scr*ws people.two doctors, one makes money, one loves people. at the end of the day, both go home with a couple of thousand $'s. but which doctor's patients do better in the long run?
The one's who knows what he is doing. I've never heard of a doctor curing cancer with love.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

I think that both doctors in Temmu's example would have done the same/similar medical treatment, but the love/caring was what differentiated their overall care of the patient. (Temmu correct me if I misread you on that).Certainly love can't cure cancer by itself, but combined with PMA (positive mental attitude) and some laughter, hope, and medical treatments and care .. it can make all the difference in the world. There are no guarantees on anything in the medical field, particularly with cancer.I think the point here is that a free market is not a bad thing. It's the implementation; the lack of honest ethical behavior that makes the deciding difference in so many cases.If all one can think of in business is how they make their next buck without thought on the impact to their customers ... that's a problem.If they don't care about the customers, at least remember that there is still a lesson to be learned from an old nursery rhyme about killing the golden goose. :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

There are parallels, no doubt. The telco situation reminds me of the turn of the 20th century. A lot of lawsuits going on, a lot of suppression or theft of emerging technology. Review the sad case of how David Sarnoff and evil RCA ripped off Major Edwin Armstrong, inventor of the superheterodyne receiver (still in use today) and FM radio. FM was a perceived threat to the AM broadcast industry of the time, so it was effectively suppressed for decades and didn't really emerge until about the late 1940's. See any parallels to POTS (plain old telephone service) and VoIP? I sure do!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

attitude is everything.a mechanic, a doctor, may 'go the extra mile' to help, because s/he want's to. the other may not; oh, it's 4 o'clock, time to go home.i say again, two go to med school, one because they dream of money, the other dreams of helping others.again i say, whose patients fair better?the response above was for lewmur / lilbambi...cluttermagnet's post hit before mine! :)but i agree with that!

Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
I think that both doctors in Temmu's example would have done the same/similar medical treatment, but the love/caring was what differentiated their overall care of the patient. (Temmu correct me if I misread you on that).Certainly love can't cure cancer by itself, but combined with PMA (positive mental attitude) and some laughter, hope, and medical treatments and care .. it can make all the difference in the world. There are no guarantees on anything in the medical field, particularly with cancer.I think the point here is that a free market is not a bad thing. It's the implementation; the lack of honest ethical behavior that makes the deciding difference in so many cases.If all one can think of in business is how they make their next buck without thought on the impact to their customers ... that's a problem.If they don't care about the customers, at least remember that there is still a lesson to be learned from an old nursery rhyme about killing the golden goose. :thumbsup:
IMO, ethical behavior is a necessary component of good mental health. But "Enlightened Self-Interest" is in no way unethical. Businesses which practice ESI seem to thrive over the "long-haul," where those who's only concern is "bottom line," don't. Taking care of customers and treating them fairly is part of ESI. But it doesn't require that one "love" one's customers.The same thing holds true for doctors. Helping patients maintain a PMA is part of a doctor's ESI. But it doesn't require the doctors to "love" their patients. In fact, too much "caring" can be detremental to both the patient and the doctor. It can lead to a loss of objectivity, which can harm the patient. And it can lead to "burnout" of the doctor. A doctor is a scientist and not a priest.`In closing, I think that "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is sound advice. Whereas "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is pure poppycock. Edited by lewmur
Link to post
Share on other sites
The same thing holds true for doctors. Helping patients maintain a PMA is part of a doctor's ESI. But it doesn't require the doctors to "love" their patients. In fact, too much "caring" can be detremental to both the patient and the doctor. It can lead to a loss of objectivity, which can harm the patient. And it can lead to "burnout" of the doctor.
Speaking as someone who's been in the hosptial probably more in the last 20 years than most of you have been in your life, "by-the-book" workers in the medical field who aren't there for the patients are the most frustrating because, as a patient, it makes you feel very uncomfortable and mentally disconnected from your illness (trust me, when someone is poking needles in you and stuffing six feet of cotton up your honker, it's more than just nice to have a friendly person).But, anyway, that's not the issue at hand here...the point is that a business's customers should be their friends more than their profits are. Edited by epp_b
Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
IMO, ethical behavior is a necessary component of good mental health. But "Enlightened Self-Interest" is in no way unethical. (snip)In closing, I think that "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is sound advice. Whereas "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is pure poppycock.
Lewmur-Good points all, but in the closing paragraph you differentiate between two things that are essentially the same. At least in my mind they are. "Do unto others" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" are mutual restatements of each other. And BTW they are a very tall order, quite spiritually advanced. For some reason, "...as thyself..." does sound harder, doesn't it? I agree with you, there. Funny thing, language. But not poppycock, these ideas. Not hardly. Advanced, yes.The world is essentially value-neutral. We decide, individually and collectively, whether to make it heaven or ****. It's a bit of both, don't you think? :thumbsup:
ethical behavior is a necessary component of good mental health
Yes, yes! Edited by Cluttermagnet
Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
Lewmur-Good points all, but in the closing paragraph you differentiate between two things that are essentially the same. At least in my mind they are. "Do unto others" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" are mutual restatements of each other. And BTW they are a very tall order, quite spiritually advanced. For some reason, "...as thyself..." does sound harder, doesn't it? I agree with you, there. Funny thing, language. But not poppycock, these ideas. Not hardly. Advanced, yes.
I don't find language to be a funny thing at all. Not if you examine it closely. The first statement has to do with my actions and the latter with my emotions. Not the same thing by a long shot. My neighbor is an obnoxious SOB whom I don't like, much less love. But that doesn't mean I can't treat him politely. I think it is a waste of time telling people how they must feel. What counts is how they act.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi

I don't know ... I have seen many people get burned out:Burned out by burning both ends of the candle at the same time (for many reasons, some entertainment, some thirst for knowledge and need for school expenses, some for wanting to gain monetary possessions, some for giving of themselves till it literally hurts them) ... no matter what, there still wasn't much left in the middle to thrive on. Burned out by doing to much in too little time; whether that was self motivated or selfless motivated.Those who find time to keep in touch with themselves and/or their maker (whoever they perceive that to be), can accomplish much more and for longer than those who just run on and on, without taking time to replenish what's inside them. It is not an endless flow, it must be replenished by some means.Even if one takes the time to replenish, if they have allowed anger, hate and bitterness to flower in their lives, the replenishing time doesn't seem to have it's intended benefit and even if it benefits some, it doesn't seem to last as long.But getting back to the doctors Temmu was talking about.I have great respect for the amount of time dedicated doctors have spent and invested in pursuit of their chosen calling. And I know many very good and dedicated doctors who truly do have a love for mankind. It has made all the difference in the world to members of our family.But I have also seen a gravitation, especially since 'specialties' started where even this mighty calling is being affected by the desire to make use of their calling as just a lifetime means to acquire and maintain wealth. There will always be a need for a doctor, right? And they make good money, in most cases. Some have even gone into medicine solely because they can make very good money in this career or business.If a doctor does all they can, given knowledge gained through education and experience, yet they still somehow miss out on realizing they need love for their fellow 'man' (meaning mankind), one patient at a time ... or in the case of any career (the goose that laid the golden egg for that profession) ... they will often do only what is necessary from that standpoint alone.They may be very good at what they do, but what if the problem the patient is experiencing is not a standard problem with standard answers. Some doctors, even then, are very, very good at diagnostics and could get by regardless especially if they at least have a good bedside manner. (being nice and not condescending doesn't hurt).But, I have seen many people who have had problems that were not part of the statistics, some were even really painful problems that no one seemed to have an answer for, so they kept trying to find a doctor who would actually take the time to figure it out.Sure maybe a doctor gets wealthy by specializing in one area and shoving more and more patients into his schedule till he physically spends a whole 2-4 minutes with a given patient ...but the overall care can degrade with some of the health puzzles that can be faced by patients.And in some cases, even if the doctor has good intentions to begin with, the service may ultimately degrade further if the doctor finds they can still make money by giving less of themselves; not taking the time to really get to know their patients, not going that extra mile for that patient unless they have the money to make it beneficial, maybe not even realizing they are making mistakes along the way because they make assumptions on past experience and education, or prior diagnostics alone.Maybe not really taking the time to find out what's fully going on, assess the problem on limited information, and make a judgment call for treatment and hope for the best. There are no guarantees anyway, right? And they are helping lots of people.Just get as many of those patients in and out, and collect the ever inflated rates for visits and tests, hospital stays and treatment. They become wealthy on the medical treatment they 'practice' on others. And God forbid anyone question them or their ethics. They may even justify this thinking .. no one can fault the motivation because they paid their dues in medical school (which they have) and now they can live the good life (which they should) but not at the expense of the calling they took on by becoming a doctor. There seems to be something way wrong with that rationalization that slowly seems to take root in so many in business. But patients have a right to expect more than a business relationship with their doctor. They put the trust of their very lives in their hands.Sure, this might work for cosmetology or cosmetic surgery or some other non-life-threatening fields, but it doesn't work well with debilitating or obscure problems that many patients may face.Here's where the added element of love for their fellow 'man' (meaning mankind) helps the doctor in his assessment and treatment. Knowing more about the person, not just the body. The illnesses that humans face are not always strictly body problems, they are often affected by many outside forces. If the doctor doesn't take the time to really know what is going on in a person's life, they may miss an important element to that person's recovery. Medicine alone doesn't always make one well, or keep one well.There is the added benefit to both the doctor, and the patient, of understanding more than just the past experience with previous patients and education or even being a good diagnostician, but knowledge on various levels about *this* patient. Taking the time to learn more than the obvious.Maybe this patient has symptoms and it's not something that is conclusive with test results (which both doctors could likely do just in diagnosing such as a well known and defined treatment for infection based on the problem and the person's medical history including possible allergies to some antibiotics). This particular problem may resemble very closely one thing, but may in fact be something entirely different, or maybe something similar but a different treatment might be more effective, and based on things they may not be able to glean from the 'medical' records. In these types of cases based on knowing more about the patient; their life, their belief system, their desire to live even - their mental, physical and emotional condition as a whole could make all the difference. I am talking about everyday people with real problems in their lives that stress their systems in ways that can cause or aid the progress of many diseases/conditions.By putting the patient's needs above the need to fit more patients in the schedule in a day, they actually do more good overall to 'mankind as a whole. They treat the whole person, not just the obvious symptoms. This is not a cookie cutter medical practice.I would say that either doctor with excellent training and experience will do pretty well for their patients, but the doctor who couples that with love for their fellow 'man' (meaning mankind) will give their patients the best care overall.Side note: Membes of our family, as far back as my grandfather on my Dad's side has had Charcot Marie Tooth disease (an hereditary debilitating and often very painful disease where the nerves and muscles deteriorate over many years). This disease is now one of many included in an array of conditions/diseases known as CMT, and they have only now - in the last 10 years or so - really begun to unravel these dreaded diseases/conditions with such a wide variety of symptoms that appear to be many things or nothing in the early stages. There was a time when initial symptoms were regarded as being in people's mind because very few doctors understood what these poor people were going through. So a physician with a love for mankind makes all the difference in the world, believe me.This of course, is just my two cents, your mileage may vary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
I don't know ... I have seen many people get burned out:This of course, is just my two cents, your mileage may vary.
I still maintain that one can choose to act in a loving manner but on cannot choose to love. I think one of the silliest statements ever is when one marital partner tells the other "You don't love me anymore." As if it were a concious choice.
Link to post
Share on other sites
ross549
This of course, is just my two cents, your mileage may vary.
Two cents....? I think that may be worth $3.50! :devil::DAdam
Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

lilbambi - wow, quite an essay. i have a friend that has been to multiple doctors, as you've said, simply looking for someone who will take the time to hear it out and work with him. (over a 20 year period, i might add; which brings me to...)and edp i agree, someone who's at least friendly definitly makes a difference.as adam said, def. worht more than 2 cents!love is giving of yourself to others. could be time, talent, money. is there emotional reward? to you, sure. from someone that you've loved? maybe, or not. doesn't mean you didn't love. love doesn't look for a return on an investment. i disagree with lewmur's thought about love being a choice; me thinks it is. some people love to get; but that's not love. it's a con. but i agree with the other point, i too don't care for many people, but i do my best to not react to their ill-mannered 'behaviour'.and no, i didn't say it's wrong to recieve in return for what you do. that should be natrural, normal.which goes back to the mechanic or the doctor. they provide a good service and you reciprocate by provicing a good fee. and you don't mind. you got your money's worth.which takes us to the opening of this thread, that's why we despise the way so many huge corporations treat us, it's as if they don't need us. individually. which is true, they need all of us, and in so doing they ignore each of us & still be vastly wealthy, and we all hate that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
lilbambi - wow, quite an essay. as adam said, def. worht more than 2 cents!love is giving of yourself to others. could be time, talent, money. is there emotional reward? to you, sure. from someone that you've loved? maybe, or not. doesn't mean you didn't love. love doesn't look for a return on an investment. i disagree with lewmur's thought about love being a choice;
What you are saying falls under the heading of "acting in a loving manner." I stated that that was a choice. What isn't a choice is actually *feeling love* for my obnoxious neighbor.And I think what LilBambi is describing is compassion and not love. Some people are naturally more compassionate than others. And that is a good quality to have in some medical professions. But I don't think it counts for much in, say, a surgeon. My "primary care" doctor is a "nice guy." And if he wasn't, I'd find one who was. But I really don't care whether my proctologist is nice or not. Edited by lewmur
Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

Wow, have you guys ever hijacked my thread- and I love that! (Which is a choice). Er, ah- OK, I have an affinity for that, lewmur. Heh! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
"Do unto others" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself" are mutual restatements of each other. And BTW they are a very tall order, quite spiritually advanced. For some reason, "...as thyself..." does sound harder, doesn't it? I agree with you, there. Funny thing, language.
"Thought precedes action". There is rarely, if ever, a thing done by man which is not first imagined by man- because we are mainly thinking, reasoning creatures. We are not closer to automatons, say like carnivorous hunter-killers, who function much more from instinct ('programming') and less from conscious decision. Unless one is defective (dysfunctional) in their self-love, "do unto others" is a very tall order indeed, because it is a spiritual imperative which implores us to act towards others in no less a loving way than we would act towards ourselves. It's an ideal, to be sure, but that's what it's asking of us. We'll only rarely live up to it, but that is what it asks. If you want to 'look at trees', you can take a linguistic approach and correctly conclude that one statement is about thought, the other about action. If you prefer to 'see the (entire) forest', you'll have to allow they might have both moral and functional equivalence. At least that's how I see it. "You pays your money, and you takes your choice". "Do unto others" isn't letting us off with merely being civil with ugly neighbors, it is demanding that we actually love our neighbors. OK, so we usually don't manage that, but let's not cheapen the concept, because it is one of the two major takeways that even outsiders can see from a study of the Christian tradition, from which these values, in part, spring.OK, now I don't want to open that entire can of worms about religion, because this is my thread and I did not start a thread about religion. Feel free to start such a thread elsewhere, you guys. Yet I find a need to make brief reference to religion to tease out the concepts which illuminate my own thinking. My thread is actually about greedy corporations 'killing the golden goose', as Fran correctly zoned in on. But let me say this. Putting aside the salvation and perhaps the trinity teachings of that religion, which are both political and were both added many years after the time of Jesus, the main takeaway you have from the prophet himself is the following:when pressed by angry clergy who felt threatened by his teachings, demanding that Jesus recite the law, Jesus told them that they should (1.) love their God with all their hearts and minds, and (2.) love their neighbor as themselves, and that that was the entirety of the law. Simple, direct, and highly challenging advice. In that spirit, and in that light, the two phrases are functionally equivalent.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LilBambi
Senate Bill Attacks Content, VOIP, Analog TVsMore DRM and DRM-like crap here. It doesn't get much uglier than what we've been seeing this past year. Barbarians at the gates? Heck, they're inside already, and they're cutting up the furniture and selling it for firewood. Your furniture. Thieves in broad daylight, ripping you off for everything they can lay their hands on. I am sooooooooooo not buying their products and services. TV is such a vast wasteland. Cell phones are so overpriced. A ball and chain. I don't want them. OK, I'll settle for being a voice in the wilderness. "Stand still, little sheep, to be shorn..." I'm apparently a late-blooming, economically and politically-motivated Luddite. So be it. I'm not anti-tech. I've been a geek for years. I'm anti-ripoff and I'm firmly for putting the control freaks out with the morning garbage. Ship of fools.Oh, yeah- they're gonna revive the broadcast flag, among other horrors. Surprised? Perfectly happy with your present TV? Too bad. They can't control it, so it's gotta go. Et cetera. Rights? Forget it! Privacy? Forget it. What have you done with my country, dudes?! :thumbsup:
Network neutrality? How could I forget that? My congress critter voted 'wrong' on both votes recently. I made a rare (for me) phone call and registered my strong disapproval. I only got to talk to a functionary, of course. He seems as resolute as the present admin is on many of their issues. I doubt I can move him. This means I may not be able to support him in any future re-election bids. Too bad, as the guy is a Dem, and substantially aligned with my interests. Hrrrrumph! They are even getting to the Dems. Money talks.A small victory, just a skirmish won: Court Skeptical of FCC on Broadband Wiretap Access.
One thought would be to help the battle abit.SaveTheInternet.comI posted a couple items about this subject on my blog here and here.Temmu was right when he said that they don't need us individually, they need us as a whole ... paying their monthy bills -- otherwise we can't be their 'golden goose.'I don't know how much good it would do individually ... but I do know that there's not much water in a drop of water, but a LOT of drops of water can make a flood.
Link to post
Share on other sites
BoardFlak

I barely need to chime in after that one, but I will anyway. :thumbsup: The concepts are indeed the same. Love thy neighbor as thyself is simply more concretely stated. Perhaps if the admonition were simply TREAT thy neighbor as thyself, it wouldn't be resisted as much. The idea is still the same. Consider your neighbor with the same concern you have for yourself. Be that "neighbor" an actual neighbor, a spouse, parent, child, or complete stranger, their needs and welfare is as important as your own. Humans, of course, always have the "yes, but..." response, ready to point out how this one or that one - or in the case of bigotry, this group or that group (bigotry is rarely individual) - should be excepted from that requirement. However, there are no exceptions ever stated, so no exceptions exist. "Who is my neighbor?" Everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11

This summary sounds a bit different.SummaryOn Monday May 1, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) introduced S.2686, the Communications, Consumer's Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006. The legislation, which consists of 10 separate titles, aims to reform existing communications laws to promote competition, cost savings for consumers, and the speedy deployment of broadband services to all Americans. Co-Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) co-sponsored the bill. The Committee will take up the bill during a two-step process. First, the Committee will hold two public hearings to consider the bill. Following this period of review, the Committee will hold an Executive Session after the Memorial Day recess to markup the legislation. Hearing dates and the Committee markup of the bill are to be determined. The Senate Commerce Committee has provided a title-by-title summary. The 132-page bill is available online at http://www.benton.org/benton_files/06telcom6.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
Marsden11

S.2686 I snipped this last article from the PDF.10 TITLE IX—INTERNET11 NEUTRALITY12 SEC. 901. NETWORK NEUTRALITY.13 (a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning 1 year after the date14 of enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications15 Commission shall report annually to the Senate Com16 mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the17 House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Com18 merce for 5 years regarding—19 (1) the developments in Internet traffic proc20 essing, routing, peering, transport, and interconnec21 tion;22 (2) how such developments impact the free flow23 of information over the public Internet and the con24 sumer experience using the public InternetMay 1, 2006 (12:47 p.m.)1321 (3) business relationships between broadband2 service providers and applications and online user3 services; and4 (4) the development of and services available5 over public and private Internet offerings.6 (:thumbsup: DETERMINATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.—If7 the Commission determines that there are significant8 problems with any of the matters described in subsection9 (a) the Commission shall make such recommendations in10 its next annual report under subsection (a) as it deems11 necessary and appropriate to ensure that consumers can12 access lawful content and run Internet applications and13 services over the public Internet subject to the bandwidth14 purchased and the needs of law enforcement agencies. The15 Commission shall include recommendations for appro16 priate enforcement mechanisms but may not recommend17 additional rulemaking authority for the Commission.Where is the harm in this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...