Pony - filter out semi-committed-participants July 20, 2001 1:14 PM Subscribe
Obnoxious feature request: A user preference that allows me to avoid seeing all contributions by people who don't provide an email address or home page address in their profile.
Was that "wierd" or "word"?
And what's with this "Word!" thing anyway? is it just a sort of generic statement?
posted by Grangousier at 2:20 PM on July 20, 2001
And what's with this "Word!" thing anyway? is it just a sort of generic statement?
posted by Grangousier at 2:20 PM on July 20, 2001
It's a statement of agreement. And for what it's worth, I'd like to chip in a werd as well.
posted by disarray at 2:29 PM on July 20, 2001
posted by disarray at 2:29 PM on July 20, 2001
Word booty, rcade. I like it!
posted by capt.crackpipe at 2:35 PM on July 20, 2001
posted by capt.crackpipe at 2:35 PM on July 20, 2001
Werd is how a nerd pronounces word.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:36 PM on July 20, 2001
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:36 PM on July 20, 2001
To the sound of repetative chanting:
Go MeFi premium, Go MeFi premium.
Ad nauseum.
posted by nedrichards at 3:36 PM on July 20, 2001
Go MeFi premium, Go MeFi premium.
Ad nauseum.
posted by nedrichards at 3:36 PM on July 20, 2001
I already described why I don't like this because of SPAM Bots in another thread. I know Spam Bots aren't currently harvesting from this site, but as a matter of policy I just don't provide an e-mail address to sites where that will be publicly available. Beside I come to MetaFilter to be part of the community. I'd prefer that all interaction happen within that community.
Now let me tell you why this filtering solution will not work. As soon as MetaFilter wants to validate my address, I'll just go out and get a web mail account like say this one:
illonlycheckthisoncetovalidatetomefi@hotmail.com
I'll get the secret password or link that tells MetaFilter it's real, then I'll never go back (by the way if anybody wants that account, I've already forgotten the password, but the secret question is "What Site Is This For" and the answer is "MetaFilter".
Any troll you want to filter will either be a newbie lamer that will give you a working address anyway, or if they don't want to give it to you, they'll be sophisticated enough to defeat this in about 3 seconds.
Bozo filters, maybe even something like SlashDot's rating system would work a lot better than trying to enforce people using something approaching valid contact information.
posted by willnot at 9:57 AM on July 21, 2001
Now let me tell you why this filtering solution will not work. As soon as MetaFilter wants to validate my address, I'll just go out and get a web mail account like say this one:
illonlycheckthisoncetovalidatetomefi@hotmail.com
I'll get the secret password or link that tells MetaFilter it's real, then I'll never go back (by the way if anybody wants that account, I've already forgotten the password, but the secret question is "What Site Is This For" and the answer is "MetaFilter".
Any troll you want to filter will either be a newbie lamer that will give you a working address anyway, or if they don't want to give it to you, they'll be sophisticated enough to defeat this in about 3 seconds.
Bozo filters, maybe even something like SlashDot's rating system would work a lot better than trying to enforce people using something approaching valid contact information.
posted by willnot at 9:57 AM on July 21, 2001
I dislike the bozo filter idea because (1) then you get conversations with gaps in them.; (2) because bozos aren't consistent enough--sometimes they post material you might want to see; (3) sometimes bozos can be "rehabilitated."
I just think it should be a community norm that members be contactable "offline", however that's implemented. If email to your contact address bounces, or if you don't respond to some official-type email, your account gets deactivated until you correct it. If you don't want people pestering you via email, you resign your membership or convince Matt that you have a special reason for needing anonymity. No bots, bops or deities. Exception for DoublePostGuy cuz he's my hero.
posted by rodii at 10:56 AM on July 21, 2001
I just think it should be a community norm that members be contactable "offline", however that's implemented. If email to your contact address bounces, or if you don't respond to some official-type email, your account gets deactivated until you correct it. If you don't want people pestering you via email, you resign your membership or convince Matt that you have a special reason for needing anonymity. No bots, bops or deities. Exception for DoublePostGuy cuz he's my hero.
posted by rodii at 10:56 AM on July 21, 2001
this newbie thought matt had said right to yank the "bozos". create a blogflog, and take a vote. but if matt wants to yank someone, he should have the right. A person should have the forbearance to walk away from a community if other members object and give reason why. this blogflog will address those who have no means of matt or others to contact directly. or use metatalk, like it was intended.
posted by clavdivs at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2001
posted by clavdivs at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2001
Willnot: If spam harvesting is a concern, put the address of your homepage up instead of a e-mail address. At this point, so many of MetaFilter's lamest members leave no contact information I'm ready to stop reading the entire crowd.
posted by rcade at 11:32 AM on July 21, 2001
posted by rcade at 11:32 AM on July 21, 2001
What would a feature like this be intended to accomplish?
If it is meant as a way to filter out annoying people, then a better solution would be a bozo filter, which wouldn't block anonymous but non-annoying people, and would block annoying people with email addresses.
If it's meant to ensure that it's possible to contact a user privately, perhaps a better solution would be some sort of system for sending a private comment to someone through Metafilter. This would be harder to implement than a filter, but could be quite useful.
If it's meant to make people more accountable, by making sure that each MeFi user is associated with a real person, I'd suggest that a technical solution really isn't possible, as people will always be able to work around it with things like single user hotmail accounts. We could try to convince Matt to personally verify each new user, but I doubt this would be possible without some advances in cloning technology.
posted by moss at 5:01 PM on July 21, 2001
If it is meant as a way to filter out annoying people, then a better solution would be a bozo filter, which wouldn't block anonymous but non-annoying people, and would block annoying people with email addresses.
If it's meant to ensure that it's possible to contact a user privately, perhaps a better solution would be some sort of system for sending a private comment to someone through Metafilter. This would be harder to implement than a filter, but could be quite useful.
If it's meant to make people more accountable, by making sure that each MeFi user is associated with a real person, I'd suggest that a technical solution really isn't possible, as people will always be able to work around it with things like single user hotmail accounts. We could try to convince Matt to personally verify each new user, but I doubt this would be possible without some advances in cloning technology.
posted by moss at 5:01 PM on July 21, 2001
What would a feature like this be intended to accomplish?
It would encourage people to put some kind of contact information in their profile, which discourages a lot of the worst behavior here.
I haven't suggested killfiles, because I'm hoping at some point Matt offers an XML version of MetaFilter so that killfiles (and the reverse, user-specific highlighting) can be handled as a feature of client-side software that reads MetaFilter. I get the impression that server-side killfiles would be a nightmare to implement.
posted by rcade at 6:08 PM on July 21, 2001
It would encourage people to put some kind of contact information in their profile, which discourages a lot of the worst behavior here.
I haven't suggested killfiles, because I'm hoping at some point Matt offers an XML version of MetaFilter so that killfiles (and the reverse, user-specific highlighting) can be handled as a feature of client-side software that reads MetaFilter. I get the impression that server-side killfiles would be a nightmare to implement.
posted by rcade at 6:08 PM on July 21, 2001
I haven't suggested killfiles, because I'm hoping at some point Matt offers an XML version of MetaFilter so that killfiles (and the reverse, user-specific highlighting) can be handled as a feature of client-side software that reads MetaFilter. I get the impression that server-side killfiles would be a nightmare to implement.
Oooooooh.... I've mentioned killfiles before but I hadn't thought of syndication a la weblogs.com...
posted by fooljay at 9:40 PM on July 21, 2001
Oooooooh.... I've mentioned killfiles before but I hadn't thought of syndication a la weblogs.com...
posted by fooljay at 9:40 PM on July 21, 2001
It would encourage people to put some kind of contact information in their profile, which discourages a lot of the worst behavior here.
Requiring an e-addy will assuredly discourage many of the most interesting people in the world from joining. Not to infer that I number among them, but had the "whoBU" rule been in place when I joined, my web genie would never have decanted here. If Matt chooses to make the rule retro, which he has every right to do, I will say my preemptive goodbyes now.
posted by Opus Dark at 1:42 AM on July 22, 2001
Requiring an e-addy will assuredly discourage many of the most interesting people in the world from joining. Not to infer that I number among them, but had the "whoBU" rule been in place when I joined, my web genie would never have decanted here. If Matt chooses to make the rule retro, which he has every right to do, I will say my preemptive goodbyes now.
posted by Opus Dark at 1:42 AM on July 22, 2001
Requiring an e-addy will assuredly discourage many of the most interesting people in the world from joining.
Two questions:
1) What part of "or home page address" are people not getting?
2) Even if I concede the point that you are one of the most interesting people in the world, what other anonymous raconteurs would be driven off by an e-mail or URL requirement?
posted by rcade at 7:25 AM on July 22, 2001
Two questions:
1) What part of "or home page address" are people not getting?
2) Even if I concede the point that you are one of the most interesting people in the world, what other anonymous raconteurs would be driven off by an e-mail or URL requirement?
posted by rcade at 7:25 AM on July 22, 2001
you're kidding me, opus. people would not want to participate on metafilter if it requires their email address? that sounds like hyperbole to me. it might give a few people pause, but you make the requirement to be far more draconian than i think it really is to most people.
posted by moz at 2:57 PM on July 22, 2001
posted by moz at 2:57 PM on July 22, 2001
What good does it really do you to be all brilliant an' shit if nobody knows who you are?
posted by kindall at 9:55 PM on July 22, 2001
posted by kindall at 9:55 PM on July 22, 2001
What part of "or home page address" are people not getting?
I used (coined?) the term 'e-addy' to describe any requirement which might compromise anonymity.
[...]what other anonymous raconteurs would be driven off by an e-mail or URL requirement?
Who knows? Who knows how much interesting input we all miss out on due to the Internet's preoccupation with Dataveillance?
Personally,
I dislike the concept of gated communities. They are typically inhabited by people who prefer cleanliness to life. They make me cheerlead the apocalypse. They turn me into Snake Plissken.
And I bet there are quite a few like me.
Web community (why do I hate this term?)
Any community is a set of relationships. That's it. Community purpose defines the minimum depth of those relationships. To be honest, the necessary depth of a MeFi relationship is about a millimeter. We are not here to sustain each other, to feed each other, to support each other, to raise each other's young, to hunt food together, to get jiggly with...well, you get my point.
MeFi is (majorly gag) edutainment.
So why try to pretzel this place into some sort of circumscribed imitation of a neighborly neighborhood? Who needs accountability? Who needs a fukkin valid ID? Dislocation and detachment are good here, not bad. Anonymity, feeble as it is, is just varnish remover. I don't need any real-world sense of my peers on MeFi to enjoy the place, or to define my relationships within it.
Bad manners
I like 'em. Abusive. Off-the-wall. Insane. Illiterate. Ad hominem. Yup - I like 'em all.
Because, MeFi is a thought farm - the comments are seeds - some of them grow and some don't, but they all contribute. It fits the way my brain works. Filtering - personal or collaborative - would damage the mandala. I come here for a cosmopolitan jolt, I like the flotsam and jetsam bobbling around - I don't come here to read a bunch of polished essays from people I know and trust - there are infinitely cooler scenes for that sort of thing.
But won't the Philistines dirty our burg?
No.Every community has a kind of 'conformity imperative' - and this place, Mefi, has way more than most - Hell, MeFi is a high-efficiency compliance appliance. Lots of unspoken, subtle disdain permeates the polished mahogany around this high-toned club. There is a definite sense of decorum - and it is surprisingly effective. People either rise to the acceptable conversational level, or they shut-up and leave. Discussions ebb and flow as if on cue from a stern collective consciousness.
Frankly, it's kind of weird...
But why mess with a good thing?
We don't need no virtual nanny
I gotta say that complaints and/or concerns about attribution, accountability, moderated or voted wrist-slaps - they all seem like fussbudgety fidgets from frustrated finikins. (Did I really say that?) Mefi works astoundingly well just the way it is. Why let a virtual nanny, virtual arms akimbo, virtual foot tapping, ruin any of the magic?
I sure don't want any NetNanny emails scolding me for a provocative post, and I sure as hell don't want to send any. As for doing a thumbs up/down vote thing - geez, what's more Starchamber than that?
PS (Yes, I lack organizational skills)
Long ago, I read a column in a computer mag - it might have been by that Dvorak guy, and it may have been a MacWorld - anyway, I don't remember what the column was about, but he mentioned an online encounter, I think in a chat room, where a girl he was 'talking' with asked him how old he was, and when he asked her why she wanted to know, she replied "I want to know whether you're worth talking to".
One of the best things about the Internet is its anonymity. It forces everyone to think for themselves, to make value judgements unclouded by traditional preconception - to fly by wit and reason, and to TRUSTNO1. It's tantalizingly close to what freedom should feel like.
Let me ruin a little of that for you. I am 28 years old. I have a degree in Computer Science, which I try not to use. An intense interest in graphic design and fine art keeps me working on website frontends. If bullied, I'll do some of the backend stuff. 6'1", 164 lbs. Born Oregon, live Texas. German/Irish. Divorced twice, not presently married, got a girlfriend who curls my toes.
So, is Opus Dark worth talking to? Do ya know me? Does Opus Dark really have any valid connection to the real-worlder I've just described? I'll tell you this: my avatar master has never used the word 'finikin' in a conversation. Draw your own conclusions.
posted by Opus Dark at 5:12 AM on July 23, 2001
I used (coined?) the term 'e-addy' to describe any requirement which might compromise anonymity.
[...]what other anonymous raconteurs would be driven off by an e-mail or URL requirement?
Who knows? Who knows how much interesting input we all miss out on due to the Internet's preoccupation with Dataveillance?
Personally,
I dislike the concept of gated communities. They are typically inhabited by people who prefer cleanliness to life. They make me cheerlead the apocalypse. They turn me into Snake Plissken.
And I bet there are quite a few like me.
Web community (why do I hate this term?)
Any community is a set of relationships. That's it. Community purpose defines the minimum depth of those relationships. To be honest, the necessary depth of a MeFi relationship is about a millimeter. We are not here to sustain each other, to feed each other, to support each other, to raise each other's young, to hunt food together, to get jiggly with...well, you get my point.
MeFi is (majorly gag) edutainment.
So why try to pretzel this place into some sort of circumscribed imitation of a neighborly neighborhood? Who needs accountability? Who needs a fukkin valid ID? Dislocation and detachment are good here, not bad. Anonymity, feeble as it is, is just varnish remover. I don't need any real-world sense of my peers on MeFi to enjoy the place, or to define my relationships within it.
Bad manners
I like 'em. Abusive. Off-the-wall. Insane. Illiterate. Ad hominem. Yup - I like 'em all.
Because, MeFi is a thought farm - the comments are seeds - some of them grow and some don't, but they all contribute. It fits the way my brain works. Filtering - personal or collaborative - would damage the mandala. I come here for a cosmopolitan jolt, I like the flotsam and jetsam bobbling around - I don't come here to read a bunch of polished essays from people I know and trust - there are infinitely cooler scenes for that sort of thing.
But won't the Philistines dirty our burg?
No.Every community has a kind of 'conformity imperative' - and this place, Mefi, has way more than most - Hell, MeFi is a high-efficiency compliance appliance. Lots of unspoken, subtle disdain permeates the polished mahogany around this high-toned club. There is a definite sense of decorum - and it is surprisingly effective. People either rise to the acceptable conversational level, or they shut-up and leave. Discussions ebb and flow as if on cue from a stern collective consciousness.
Frankly, it's kind of weird...
But why mess with a good thing?
We don't need no virtual nanny
I gotta say that complaints and/or concerns about attribution, accountability, moderated or voted wrist-slaps - they all seem like fussbudgety fidgets from frustrated finikins. (Did I really say that?) Mefi works astoundingly well just the way it is. Why let a virtual nanny, virtual arms akimbo, virtual foot tapping, ruin any of the magic?
I sure don't want any NetNanny emails scolding me for a provocative post, and I sure as hell don't want to send any. As for doing a thumbs up/down vote thing - geez, what's more Starchamber than that?
PS (Yes, I lack organizational skills)
Long ago, I read a column in a computer mag - it might have been by that Dvorak guy, and it may have been a MacWorld - anyway, I don't remember what the column was about, but he mentioned an online encounter, I think in a chat room, where a girl he was 'talking' with asked him how old he was, and when he asked her why she wanted to know, she replied "I want to know whether you're worth talking to".
One of the best things about the Internet is its anonymity. It forces everyone to think for themselves, to make value judgements unclouded by traditional preconception - to fly by wit and reason, and to TRUSTNO1. It's tantalizingly close to what freedom should feel like.
Let me ruin a little of that for you. I am 28 years old. I have a degree in Computer Science, which I try not to use. An intense interest in graphic design and fine art keeps me working on website frontends. If bullied, I'll do some of the backend stuff. 6'1", 164 lbs. Born Oregon, live Texas. German/Irish. Divorced twice, not presently married, got a girlfriend who curls my toes.
So, is Opus Dark worth talking to? Do ya know me? Does Opus Dark really have any valid connection to the real-worlder I've just described? I'll tell you this: my avatar master has never used the word 'finikin' in a conversation. Draw your own conclusions.
posted by Opus Dark at 5:12 AM on July 23, 2001
[...]it might give a few people pause, but you make the requirement to be far more draconian than i think it really is to most people.
'Most people' is the wad I care least about disenfranchising. See the above wind-bagger. Really, my contributions to MeFi don't give me enough cachet to be blathering about its architecture - I'm done.
posted by Opus Dark at 5:14 AM on July 23, 2001
'Most people' is the wad I care least about disenfranchising. See the above wind-bagger. Really, my contributions to MeFi don't give me enough cachet to be blathering about its architecture - I'm done.
posted by Opus Dark at 5:14 AM on July 23, 2001
I'm happy you have a vision of MetaFilter, Opus. Personally I find it a bit nauseating--I'm more interested in the community thing than you (parse that any way you like)--but I get the feeling you and your infinitely-cooler-scene radar don't actually give a fuck what we little people think.
posted by rodii at 6:13 PM on July 23, 2001
posted by rodii at 6:13 PM on July 23, 2001
Does Opus Dark really have any valid connection to the real-worlder I've just described? I'll tell you this: my avatar master has never used the word 'finikin' in a conversation. Draw your own conclusions.
The conclusion I'm drawing is that "Opus Dark" is some kind of roleplaying game character for you, and we're not cool enough on MetaFilter to deserve a chance to know the real you.
What level and class are you, Opus? Do you have any magic weapons?
posted by rcade at 6:43 PM on July 23, 2001
The conclusion I'm drawing is that "Opus Dark" is some kind of roleplaying game character for you, and we're not cool enough on MetaFilter to deserve a chance to know the real you.
What level and class are you, Opus? Do you have any magic weapons?
posted by rcade at 6:43 PM on July 23, 2001
[...]Personally I find [Opus's view of Metafilter] a bit nauseating--I'm more interested in the community thing than you[...]
Great! Campaign for it, work toward it - maybe it'll be apex.
but I get the feeling you and your infinitely-cooler-scene radar don't actually give a fuck what we little people think.
Wow.
The ol' trick phrase. (When did you stop beating your wife?)
If I just answer "I do care what you think.", I'll remain guilty of having infinitely-cooler-scene radar that picks you up as 'little people' sub-blips.
So, I'd have to say "I don't think of you as 'little people' (which magically makes me sound as if I do) and I care what you think". But that would still leave the cooler-scene radar thing...and of course, saying "I care what you think" implies that there was, at some point, some reason to believe I might not, so it sounds inescapably patronizing...
So let's try "I am not a self-aggrandizing scenery-chewing cool fool who feels he is in any meaningful way better than anyone else and there was never any reason for anyone to believe that I might not care what they think".
Best I can do on short notice...
posted by Opus Dark at 8:04 PM on July 23, 2001
Great! Campaign for it, work toward it - maybe it'll be apex.
but I get the feeling you and your infinitely-cooler-scene radar don't actually give a fuck what we little people think.
Wow.
The ol' trick phrase. (When did you stop beating your wife?)
If I just answer "I do care what you think.", I'll remain guilty of having infinitely-cooler-scene radar that picks you up as 'little people' sub-blips.
So, I'd have to say "I don't think of you as 'little people' (which magically makes me sound as if I do) and I care what you think". But that would still leave the cooler-scene radar thing...and of course, saying "I care what you think" implies that there was, at some point, some reason to believe I might not, so it sounds inescapably patronizing...
So let's try "I am not a self-aggrandizing scenery-chewing cool fool who feels he is in any meaningful way better than anyone else and there was never any reason for anyone to believe that I might not care what they think".
Best I can do on short notice...
posted by Opus Dark at 8:04 PM on July 23, 2001
The conclusion I'm drawing is that "Opus Dark" is some kind of roleplaying game character for you[...]
Opus Dark, meet rcade. rcade, meet Opus Dark. We are all roleplaying avatars. It's disheatening to watch everyone thrash against this simple inevitability.
[...]and we're not cool enough on MetaFilter to deserve a chance to know the real you.
My Mom doesn't know the real me, and she's cool as hell. Cool quotients have nothing to do with anything. How did my post unleash that adjective, anyway?
What level and class are you, Opus? Do you have any magic weapons?
Next time you're riding the subway, see if this isn't, basically, what you are wondering as you appraise every solid-mostly-space real-world person you see.
posted by Opus Dark at 8:05 PM on July 23, 2001
Opus Dark, meet rcade. rcade, meet Opus Dark. We are all roleplaying avatars. It's disheatening to watch everyone thrash against this simple inevitability.
[...]and we're not cool enough on MetaFilter to deserve a chance to know the real you.
My Mom doesn't know the real me, and she's cool as hell. Cool quotients have nothing to do with anything. How did my post unleash that adjective, anyway?
What level and class are you, Opus? Do you have any magic weapons?
Next time you're riding the subway, see if this isn't, basically, what you are wondering as you appraise every solid-mostly-space real-world person you see.
posted by Opus Dark at 8:05 PM on July 23, 2001
Well, truthfully, I've always suspected it. It's your virtual breath...
posted by Opus Dark at 10:05 PM on July 23, 2001
posted by Opus Dark at 10:05 PM on July 23, 2001
Nice touch, Clavdivs. Now I don't need to make the point that total anonymity emboldens some people to make personal attacks.
Are you a roleplaying character too?
posted by rcade at 7:00 AM on July 24, 2001
Are you a roleplaying character too?
posted by rcade at 7:00 AM on July 24, 2001
What's up my ass, clavdivs? Well, one, I don't particularly like being talked down to by visitors from the infinitely cooler planes. I guess I'm also tired of caring about Metafilter, that's up there too. Oh, and clavdivs? There's a big fat turd up there too. Here, have a snack.
I'm out.
posted by rodii at 5:56 PM on July 24, 2001
I'm out.
posted by rodii at 5:56 PM on July 24, 2001
"Metafilter can kick me off, but i will go into crush mode, egocentric? DAMN STRAIGHT, for this us a GREAT site. Few people i know are getting little concerned with the thinking on this site. So keep up the soloptic, regenerix, goofy with no point rhetorical babble and next thing you know BUTTLOVE69 or some damn certain will start squirting his polluted fingers all over the place." -- clavdivs
This is why I like communities that require some level of identification, even if it's just an e-mail address or home page address.
posted by rcade at 1:36 PM on July 25, 2001
This is why I like communities that require some level of identification, even if it's just an e-mail address or home page address.
posted by rcade at 1:36 PM on July 25, 2001
While I support anonymity, I'd now like to go on record as distancing myself from clavdivs who seems to have jumped into flame mode and stopped making sense to me several comments back. While I know that rcade will take that as proof that anonymity is bad, I hope others won't make assumptions based on that.
posted by willnot at 2:38 PM on July 25, 2001
posted by willnot at 2:38 PM on July 25, 2001
clavdivs stopped making sense a long time ago
posted by Big Fat Tycoon at 9:20 PM on July 25, 2001
posted by Big Fat Tycoon at 9:20 PM on July 25, 2001
"While I support anonymity, I'd now like to go on record as distancing" stand over here?, or here?, how about here?
why state the need if you treasure your anonymity. really, whos going to care."clavdivs stopped making sense a long time ago"-never claimed to make sense. "on the record", your rich. rcade-your little search engine mode sickens me more then anything, your THE example why i would not tell anyone here who i am. I may be rude and loud and "wacky", but i dont barrel into peoples lives. No flaming here, any such previous posts were not meant to flame. (which does tell me to make my self clearer, but not to you, to my self)
posted by clavdivs at 7:44 AM on July 26, 2001
why state the need if you treasure your anonymity. really, whos going to care."clavdivs stopped making sense a long time ago"-never claimed to make sense. "on the record", your rich. rcade-your little search engine mode sickens me more then anything, your THE example why i would not tell anyone here who i am. I may be rude and loud and "wacky", but i dont barrel into peoples lives. No flaming here, any such previous posts were not meant to flame. (which does tell me to make my self clearer, but not to you, to my self)
posted by clavdivs at 7:44 AM on July 26, 2001
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by rodii at 2:05 PM on July 20, 2001