Could we please reconsider the policy on "doubles"? June 30, 2013 7:56 AM   Subscribe

Could we please, as a community, revisit the notion that just because something is a "double" it should be deleted?

This is a big site with many years of history and tons of amazing content. It seems to me that the site should revisit the idea that just because something has been posted in the past, if someone posts something similar again it should be deleted.

For example, this post. It is technically a double of this post and was deleted for that reason, but (a) the original post is closed to comments so nobody can have conversation there, (b) the new post was going fine on its own, and it is clear that to all of the participants, this was a new thing to them. Therefore, a good thing to have as a post.

I understand that we don't want the same stuff posted all the time a la Reddit. But in this case, for instance, five years had passed, nobody could comment in the old thread, and the new thread was starting to brew into a conversation. Could we maybe talk about a Metafilter in which "double" does not automatically equal "deletion"?
posted by jbickers to MetaFilter-Related at 7:56 AM (76 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

Personally I'm pretty sympathetic to the the idea of allowing older FPPs to be reworked and re-presented, but I can see a few, not insignificant roadblocks.

1. I don't think it's theoretical to say there would be a very big chance that a lot of FPP mining would then occur. Which rubs me as wrong.

2. The site will then start to be pretty recursive

3. What would the new arbitrary time limit be? Doubles ok after 1 year? 5 years? ...

4. Instead of a pretty clear cut "no doubles" policy, there would then have to be a much more subjective "doubles ok as long as: [insert parameters that will cause lots of complaint and teeth gnashing]".

And that is just what I came up with in a moment's reflection, I'm sure there would be many others.

Certainly these all can be overcome, but I think it would be an awfully big hurdle creating significant amount of new work for the existing mods, and I also think it would change the site significantly. For the better, or worse I don't know.
posted by edgeways at 8:06 AM on June 30, 2013 [7 favorites]


Actually, they do permit doubles sometimes. But it's all judgement calls by the mods, not hard-and-fast rules. And I'm OK with that.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 8:22 AM on June 30, 2013 [12 favorites]


sometimes doubles are left (especially when they use the double as a previously and change the content ever so slightly). i thought the post was cool, but i was honestly fine with seeing it go because people were just shitting on the whole golden ratio thing, which, fair play, but if it were my post i'd be pretty frustrated to see that happen.
posted by nadawi at 8:25 AM on June 30, 2013


We do already have a somewhat flexible position on older doubles, and doubles where there's a significant amount of new content at the site since the previous post. So there's already an element of human judgment about whether something is enough of a double to count.

In this case, it is exactly the same article (no new content), it was five years ago but has been discussed in a couple of FPPs since (eg one in 2011 about the amen break).

To me, in cases that are borderline and maybe I can see a rationale for keeping the post even though it's a double, the "how is it being received" factor comes into play. If people are loving a post, saying a lot of "wow, I've never seen this, how great", or are digging into a good conversation about it, that puts a little more weight on the "keep it" side. But in this case it seemed like the discussion was starting off with a good deal of "this is baloney" skepticism about the premise of the article, it was already making the OP feel defensive about the post, etc. So the small extra positive weight was not there, to me.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:28 AM on June 30, 2013 [7 favorites]


I had a FPP deleted yesterday as a double. The original was a slightly different single link video (the one in the deleted post was a trimmed version of it, but with a different soundtrack), and was from 7 or 8 months ago. My own fault for not searching on cheetah or similar across MetaFilter before posting (note to self: do not rely solely on 'this link hasn't been used before in MetaFilter' message).

Am happy with the decision, even though there were some comments. There's enough going on in the world, and enough being put online on a daily, hourly, basis to surely not resort to rehashing past content, accidentally or deliberately. And for MetaFilter nostalgia, there's also the Best of MetaFilter (MetaBest?) anyway for previous content.
posted by Wordshore at 8:31 AM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


If something is more than five years old and hasn't been significantly updated since then, I can't see how it would merit new discussion. "Hey, let's talk about this some more" doesn't strike me as a good enough reason to repost something.

There's lots of old "new-to-me" stuff out there; "well, I didn't see it before" is valid for a personal blog or social media feed. But for here? I'd like it if the criteria to revisit something old to be a little less inward-looking, you know?
posted by mcwetboy at 8:40 AM on June 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


Holy shit 2008 was five years ago. I have nothing else to add
posted by Blasdelb at 8:41 AM on June 30, 2013 [16 favorites]


Holy shit 2008 was five years ago. I have nothing else to add

Next year there will be teenagers who were born after 9/11.
posted by Wordshore at 8:48 AM on June 30, 2013 [27 favorites]


"Hey, let's talk about this some more" doesn't strike me as a good enough reason to repost something.

As LM said above we're really flexible about double-ish stuff but we're a little more hardline about things that are basically identical posts only done later. That is, if there's a new thing written about the thing in the old post and this is a post about that, even though the conversation may be similar, it's a totally valid reason for a post. However, yeah, just "Hey lets talk some more about the thing we liked talking about last time" is maybe not where we're as lenient. It is sort of weird being in a place where there is almost 15 years of cultural memory and links and whatnot, but it's always been our assertion that there's enough interesting stuff to look at and talk about that it's okay to be a bit more rigid about "This was posted in the last few years" stuff, although count me in the category of people who were a little boggled that 2008 was so long ago.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:51 AM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Last night, while watching a movie set in the 50s, I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

I cried myself to sleep.
posted by Frayed Knot at 9:08 AM on June 30, 2013 [12 favorites]


I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

if it's any consolation, the 80s were pretty much the 50s ... in different clothing, with shinier gadgets. The same default conservatism (rule-of-conformity-suspicion-of-the-new-FEAR-of-nuclear-oblivion-mostly-lame-pop-music) ruling the status quo.

Which gets me wondering suddenly. Is big hair back?
posted by philip-random at 9:18 AM on June 30, 2013


Last night, while watching a movie set in the 50s, I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

This is also the premise of the first act of Back to the Future II. (Pepsi, you've got until 2015 to get Pepsi Perfect out on the shelves. Just rebrand Pepsi Max, it's a no-brainer.)


On another note, this meta's a double.
posted by radwolf76 at 9:19 AM on June 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


Pony request : can we somehow stop the terrible March of Time?
posted by The Whelk at 9:32 AM on June 30, 2013 [66 favorites]


if it's any consolation, the 80s were pretty much the 50s

no - there was a lot more cultural freedom and non-conformity in the 80s and a lot more pushback against the status quo - there was also a lot more concern that economically, politically and socially, the u s had seen its peak and was on a slow decline

i was born in 57, in a small midwestern city, where the 50s lingered on for longer than it did in other parts of the country

we have more in common with the 80s than the 80s did with the 50s
posted by pyramid termite at 9:42 AM on June 30, 2013 [10 favorites]


I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

The older I get the more I realize how events that once seemed impossibly long ago, were actually quite recent in the grand scheme of things.

As I get older, past events should seem more removed as I move past them in time, yet in my experience things that happened a long time ago feel more and more recent.

Even things that happened before I was born, I start thinking, "Oh, I'm the age now than my parent, or grandparent or great grandparent was when these things happened", and somehow that makes them seem so much more recent and relevant, whereas these things seemed so impossibly long ago as a child that they felt almost mythic and incomprehensible and unrelatable.

I'm probably also lucky to have been born in a time when it was quite common for children to have living great grandparents.
posted by marsha56 at 9:45 AM on June 30, 2013 [6 favorites]


Next year there will be teenagers who were born after 9/11.

Will they say that it is not "relevant"?
Maybe just once that would be a good thing
posted by thelonius at 10:04 AM on June 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


Deleting doubles is one of the things that makes MetaFilter what it is. The current policy is working very well.
posted by grouse at 10:06 AM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm all for the current flexible policy. (I had an FPP deleted even though the comments were very interesting and from different group of MeFites than in the previous thread. (I googled MetaFilter for the FPP content and failed to parse the search results.))
posted by hat_eater at 10:08 AM on June 30, 2013


can we somehow stop the terrible March of Time?

No, we cant. Because time flies like an arrow.

And fruit flies like a banana.

I can't believe I finally got to use that one!
posted by Curious Artificer at 10:09 AM on June 30, 2013 [18 favorites]


I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

I tend to think of it in terms of music:

New music I listened to in high school (like, say, The Head on the Door) is the same age as the music on the "good-times-great-oldies" radio station was at the time.

90's alternateen dreck like Gin Blossoms, Smashmouth and Deep Blue Something is the same age now as most of what was played on classic rock radio in the 80s, which is in turn the same age as, say, Benny Goodman or the Andrews Sisters were then.

So, yeah, 80's music is oldies and 90's music is classic rock.

That shit makes me feel old as fuck.
posted by dersins at 10:11 AM on June 30, 2013 [10 favorites]


we have more in common with the 80s than the 80s did with the 50s
posted by pyramid termite


Thank you for saying that. I cringe any time I hear someone call the 80s rigidly conformist, as if we all grew up in a gulag because people hadn't yet discovered the liberating power of tattoos and PBR.

And the same is true for every decade. Life isn't a cartoon. Reminds me of one my uncles who said, "Do you idiots think you invented sex, drugs and rock n' roll?"
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 10:23 AM on June 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


I realized we are now as far from the 80s as the 80s are from the 50s.

In the same vein, the halfway / as far away point between the end of World War Two and now would be 1979. Here's the number one singles in the USA and UK from that year, if anyone else remembers, or bought, any of them.

Hmmm {surprised} apart from Cliff Richard the number 1 records from the UK weren't that bad.
posted by Wordshore at 10:39 AM on June 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


I did invent Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll. It's a drink, it involves tequila and some other ingredients I can't say publicly. Well, I can mention the fresh squeezed lime juice, but after that, the intoxication goes up to eleven.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:44 AM on June 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


I cringe any time I hear someone call the 80s rigidly conformist, as if we all grew up in a gulag because people hadn't yet discovered the liberating power of tattoos and PBR.

to be clear, the 80s mainstream was rigidly conformist in comparison to the 60s and 70s. Ronald Reagan, yuppiedom, Tom Cruise in his underwear dancing to Old Time Rock And Roll, Marty McFly teaching Chuck Berry all the hip guitar moves that would make him an ikon.

Meanwhile, the underground was where it belonged -- underground.

Come the 90s, all this was shifting. indie-alternative-underground all got capital letters attached, became marketable genres, which was all kinds of annoying. But I'll still take the likes of Nirvana and Soundgarden (Pearl Jam even) over Van Halen, Motley Crue, etc.
posted by philip-random at 11:01 AM on June 30, 2013


There's plenty of stuff on the interwebs that will be new to some, but I'm not seeing why FFPs have to re-introduce cute kitties or whatever to readers. The comments on the deleted thread weren't really discussing anything.
posted by Ideefixe at 11:11 AM on June 30, 2013


For the sake of the Overton Window I will mention that I am militantly anti-double and would happily see the policy be even less flexible. I don't know, it's just the way my brain works.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 11:18 AM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


The comments on the deleted thread weren't really discussing anything.

It was only up for what, a little more than a half hour? How much discussing would you normally expect in that brief amount of time?
posted by radwolf76 at 11:18 AM on June 30, 2013


Hmmm {surprised} apart from Cliff Richard the number 1 records from the UK weren't that bad.


What do you mean "apart from Cliff Richard"?

God! You'd think Devil Woman had never been written!
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 12:03 PM on June 30, 2013 [7 favorites]


I think the policy is working pretty well. If anything, perhaps if posters did a little deeper research as far as the subject matter in previous posts, and referred back to them in their FPP?

For example, I have made FPPs, checked em twice, nothing is caught in the previous links stage, but then the second comment is a "previously/double" sort of thing. Same exact subject...just newer/different links.

There's no reason to not refer back to previous posts as the researched resource they are, as long as the new post is bringing a fresh take on it to the table.

The only downside I see, is that some folks might start referring back to a comment from a previous post, in the new thread, and that will create some frickin echo chamber comment wise that will be impossible to follow.
posted by timsteil at 12:17 PM on June 30, 2013


Quick question for the mods: I was tempted to post some links on Anthony Howe's kinetic sculptures, which have been doing the rounds lately, but there was a post about Howe in 2009. OTOH, several of these pieces were created after that post. Would it be okay to post this?
posted by homunculus at 12:23 PM on June 30, 2013


Somebody needs to write a script to scrape Metafilter and generate a "on this day 10 years ago on Metafilter" RSS feed.
posted by jcreigh at 12:46 PM on June 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


if it's any consolation, the 80s were pretty much the 50s ... in different clothing, with shinier gadgets. The same default conservatism (rule-of-conformity-suspicion-of-the-new-FEAR-of-nuclear-oblivion-mostly-lame-pop-music) ruling the status quo.

I WILL CUT YOU
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:59 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


If you want me to post them, give me no sign.
posted by homunculus at 1:00 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


There exists daily.mefi.
posted by de at 1:00 PM on June 30, 2013


Thy will be done.
posted by homunculus at 1:00 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Oh god that ten years ago link is like some horrible searing reminder that the 00s ACTUALLY HAPPENED THAT MAN WAS ACTUALLY PRESIDENT PEOPLE SAID THESE THINGS OUT LOUD TO EACH OTHER it wasn't just background for Arrested Development plots!
posted by The Whelk at 1:22 PM on June 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


OTOH, several of these pieces were created after that post. Would it be okay to post this?

Maybe? I mean this would be one of those judgment calls for me where if people were flagging the hell out of it as a double, I might delete it and if it didn't really cross our desk otherwise, I wouldn't. It's too bad sometimes when someone makes a thinner post than you would like which seems like it might eclipse making a more fleshed out post later. My best advice is that if you go that route, be explicit that there was a previous post, be clear about what's new and make a different sort of post [i.e. instead of a general "This guy does great art" have it be about some specific aspect about what he does, or more personally about him and make it more about that] and it's likely to go as well as it could.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 1:42 PM on June 30, 2013


Ah, well, I actually posted it about 45 minutes ago, and it's a pretty much just a simple "this guy does great art" post. If you decide to delete it, I have no problem with that.
posted by homunculus at 1:46 PM on June 30, 2013


Just so we're clear: mullets have never been cool, unless you're thinking about what's for dinner.
posted by arcticseal at 1:47 PM on June 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


No- even then, mackerel is much nicer.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 2:16 PM on June 30, 2013


to be clear, the 80s mainstream was rigidly conformist in comparison to the 60s and 70s. Ronald Reagan...

Because when I think of non-conformity, presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter immediately leap to mind. Those guys were all about breaking norms and taking chances.

Pfft.

I think the point you're trying to make is vastly oversimplified, and based largely on one thing -- movies. I would agree that 80s movies focused on segmentation marketing. Blockbuster action movies, rom-coms, soundtrack tie-ins and holiday releases focused on winning awards led to the death of auteur-driven films.

So, if that's your only lens, one can see how you arrive at a simplified view.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 2:24 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Ah, well, I actually posted it about 45 minutes ago, ]

If my mod name were TheGreatSantini, I would bounce a basketball right off your forehead for that.

WTH? Dive into a MeTa to say would this be cool? Then say Meh...already posted it anyway?

Don't be that guy.
posted by timsteil at 3:12 PM on June 30, 2013


Dive into a MeTa to say would this be cool? Then say Meh...already posted it anyway?

16:00 Ask for "no sign", and get "no sign". Make post, and come back before the minute's out to update everyone that you made the post.

16:46: Remind people that you're not a Republic Serial Villain.
posted by radwolf76 at 3:24 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Count me among those who would like to see more flexibility regarding doubles, but I also understand the obstacles that greater flexibility would create.
posted by Rock Steady at 3:42 PM on June 30, 2013


> WTH? Dive into a MeTa to say would this be cool? Then say Meh...already posted it anyway?

The stakes are so low...
posted by planetesimal at 3:52 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Next year there will be teenagers who were born after 9/11.

Will they say that it is not "relevant"?


For them, we have always been at war with Eastasia
posted by ActingTheGoat at 3:55 PM on June 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


WTH? Dive into a MeTa to say would this be cool? Then say Meh...already posted it anyway?

I hadn't already posted it when I asked the question; I posted the FPP (and the joke here) a little over half an hour after I asked the question. I figured the mods were busy and it was most likely okay since all the links had new content, so I probably needn't have asked the question in the first place. Worst case scenario it would've been deleted, no big deal.
posted by homunculus at 4:01 PM on June 30, 2013



I'm all for the current flexible policy. (I had an FPP deleted even though the comments were very interesting and from different group of MeFites than in the previous thread. (I googled MetaFilter for the FPP content and failed to parse the search results.))


I thought that was a bit odd, actually. Its a link to a discrete thing that was posted previously, and nothing about it has changed. The disucssion has evolved, a bit, but otherwise its the exact same link that was posted in 2008.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 4:45 PM on June 30, 2013


"So, if that's your only lens, one can see how you arrive at a simplified view."

Music, TV and fashion in the '80s were more conformist than the '60s or '70s too.

So, if your only argument against the mainstream '80s being more conformist than the '70s is that the small-c conservative institution of the presidency was pretty conservative, you're going to have a simplified view.
posted by klangklangston at 5:03 PM on June 30, 2013


jcreigh: "Somebody needs to write a script to scrape Metafilter and generate a "on this day 10 years ago on Metafilter" RSS feed."

There's a link in the sidebar to 10 years ago.
posted by hoyland at 5:06 PM on June 30, 2013


In 2002, my earliest iteration posted a double of my own previous post. In the first comment I acknowledged that it was a double, but the linked site had been updated significantly that very day. Even though it was a double it was allowed to stand. The site was a model of content and presentation.

I'm glad there's discretion at play in these decisions. Sometimes discretion means we get to see the fabled best of the web.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 5:14 PM on June 30, 2013


If we allow doubles; then we will never be finished with our important work here.
posted by humanfont at 5:18 PM on June 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


de: There exists daily.mefi.

hoyland: There's a link in the sidebar to 10 years ago.

Wow, thanks guys, I had somehow totally forgotten that that was A Thing. Lots of 404s from 2003. Although amusingly the MSN search for "Linux" correctly redirects to Bing.
posted by jcreigh at 5:20 PM on June 30, 2013


we have more in common with the 80s than the 80s did with the 50s

Yes. In the real world, not the sitcom version.
posted by bongo_x at 5:30 PM on June 30, 2013


I thought that was a bit odd, actually.

It shows the flexibility nicely.
posted by hat_eater at 5:52 PM on June 30, 2013


I find that adding "previously" links helps avoid deletion.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:12 PM on June 30, 2013


I find that adding "previously" links helps avoid deletion.

It definitely makes it clear that you're aware there was previous content and have consciously structured your post to add new angles or information rather than just rehashing an existing post. Depending on the context, that may or may not be enough to sway the verdict but it is useful for everyone.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 6:43 PM on June 30, 2013


If someone were to do a Fourier transform on the Amen break and then graph that against peak amplitude, now THAT wouldn't be a double! (I'm pretty sure it would also show that the golden ratio was much closer to 1.5 / 0.6666 than previously thought but that's my own pet peeve with most golden ratio woo out there.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 10:46 PM on June 30, 2013


Actually, they do permit doubles sometimes. But it's all judgement calls by the mods, not hard-and-fast rules. And I'm OK with that.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 2:25 AM on July 1, 2013


Double.
posted by Eideteker at 4:08 AM on July 1, 2013


I'm content with the policy as it stands.
posted by tommasz at 5:38 AM on July 1, 2013


So am I, but I would also not oppose a loosening of the standard.
posted by cjorgensen at 6:19 AM on July 1, 2013


There's no such thing as a non-conformist decade, because if everyone is non-conformist, then that's the new conformist. In any case, there was all kinds of counter-culture shit going on in the 80s. It was just of a distinctly different kind than the counter-culture of the 60s -- the 80s counter-culture was phreakers and hackers and programmers and people playing D&D in their basements in the suburbs and listening to heavy metal, or hip-hop kids in the bronx and people inventing techno and house in Detroit and Chicago or gay scenes basically everywhere.

We just don't recognize it as counter-cultural now because that's the new mainstream, just like the 60s counter-culture became the mainstream of the 80s (We Built This City, and so on).
posted by empath at 6:29 AM on July 1, 2013


My oldest son is 19, which is strange because I'm pretty sure he was born last week, maybe the week before.

I think the current policy is fine. I have it on very good authority that there are some fabulous doubles.
posted by double block and bleed at 9:34 AM on July 1, 2013


Pony request : can we somehow stop the terrible March of Time?

Oh. Oh yes. We most certainly can. But it will cost you, mwahahaha! IT WILL COST YOU!

*queue lightning, thunder, other spooky stuff. Maybe a Tesla coil and something green and glowing*

Also, how do you feel about light speed and significant fractions thereof? I ask for no particular reason.
posted by quin at 10:48 AM on July 1, 2013


Also, how do you feel about light speed

We're fast friends.

and significant fractions thereof?

Poseurs late to the party.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:21 AM on July 1, 2013

jcreigh: Somebody needs to write a script to scrape Metafilter and generate a "on this day 10 years ago on Metafilter" RSS feed.
de: There exists daily.mefi.

It just needs to be sorted by favorites - oh wait, we didn't have those until 2006. Er, I mean, Mefi didn't. (I joined in 2007.)
posted by Pronoiac at 3:42 AM on July 2, 2013


Around this date in Metafilter History:
* June 24, 2010: IRL launched
* June 30, 2006: MetaFilter Music launched
* June 30, 2008: Boing Boing's "Unpublishing" of Violet Blue
* July 2, 2008: Three new sections launched for MeFi Music: Talk, Charts, Challenges
* July 6, 2007: A preview of (now defunct) TravelFilter is announced during podcast 11
* July 7, 2009: Edgar Martins photoshopping outed.
sourced from the timeline on the wiki
posted by Pronoiac at 3:49 AM on July 2, 2013


June 30, 2008: Boing Boing's "Unpublishing" of Violet Blue

The realization that this was five years ago makes me feel both old and young, both wiser and dumber.
posted by SpiffyRob at 5:12 AM on July 2, 2013


and 90's music is classic rock

Maybe, but around here they mostly play the same music on the classic rock station as they did when I was in high school.
posted by windykites at 7:38 AM on July 2, 2013 [2 favorites]


Also, I feel bad for the kids for whom "this post-9/11 world" is, and always has been, the status quo.
posted by windykites at 7:46 AM on July 2, 2013


dersins: "
So, yeah, 80's music is oldies and 90's music is classic rock.
That shit makes me feel old as fuck.
"

Wait, what? What the fuck happened to all the years? Last time I looked, classic rock was the stuff that was top 40 when I was a teenager. Anyway, I can't really see anything from the '90s being called classic anything.
posted by dg at 8:48 PM on July 2, 2013


Let me tell you about this thing called time he said after hearing Nirvana on a classic rock station, a band I associate with middle school.

( meanwhile high school I associate with glam rock and Glenn Miller! Time is werid!)
posted by The Whelk at 8:52 PM on July 2, 2013


Glam rock and Glenn Miller? You must have spent a long time in high school ;-)
posted by dg at 8:55 PM on July 2, 2013 [1 favorite]


Police box, does wonders.
posted by The Whelk at 9:06 PM on July 2, 2013


1.5/0.666 ~= (3/2)/(2/3) = 2.25

Am I missing something?
posted by maryr at 9:16 AM on July 3, 2013


« Older Thank You   |   Another FPP subject drops by to say hello Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments