BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Ugliness on the board

 
  

Page: 12(3)45

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:26 / 29.03.06
Now, Hieronymus, is that what Wonderstarr said? It wasn't. Six's best chance of becoming a more socially able and self-aware person is to start to understand not just why people are taking him to school, but how. Lula said on the previous page:

Okay Mr Six. Then one way to end hostilities is to say that you realise saying the whole cinema audience were 'dumb animals' was basically a/impossible for you to know and b/quite rude and maybe make some reference to understanding why people felt the need to engage with you on that particular point.

I'm sure that would work, and it might make you feel better in the long run. Currently what seems to be happening is that you are still saying the debate shouldn't have happened, but people are just not going to agree with you on that one, because actually it should.


Now, what's interesting there is that Six apparently agreed that that was "fine", but at the moment he doesn't actually have the ability to do so - as Ganesh said, his attempt was Blairite in its attempt to close down without actually admitting a mistake or reaching out to others. right now he's missing a whole tranche of skills which will be vital for him in the future. Unless you're saying that all thin-skinned and socially inept members should head for the lifeboats until the bushfires of feminist egalitarianism have been extinguished and it is safe to return, in which case... well, how would that help them?
 
 
+#'s, - names
16:27 / 29.03.06
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

And the dance continues....
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:29 / 29.03.06
Math: Please to follow the narrative of this particular little flare-up. Miss Wonderstarr or G for Gundetta can help you with the timeline.

Right now, I'm trying to help Six, as I think are we all. Feel free to join in, but you ought to brush up on the context, first. Kthxbye.
 
 
Ganesh
16:32 / 29.03.06
Not helpful, Math. Or Haus, now. Or me, probably. Nonetheless, can I be the pious, dove-like creature who suggests we all give this one a chance to cool a little?
 
 
Hieronymus
16:36 / 29.03.06
Haus, my post was in reference to the following from wonderstarr, directed at Six:

If I were you I would leave it now and perhaps come back in a couple of days when the blood has cooled to give a calmer explanation of what you meant, if you still feel like it.

And no, Ganesh. You're not alone in that sentiment.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:42 / 29.03.06
Works for me. If Six hasn't taken any of the preceding 70-odd posts from concerned citizens on board in a few days' time, the rest of us suffer little. 48-hour break, everyone? Reconvene some time over the weekend, if not busy?
 
 
miss wonderstarr
16:46 / 29.03.06
Yes, I did mean that, Hieronymus. I think Six has chosen the ground, asked for a duel (disguised as peace talks), attracted the audience, got a little bloodied, is now unable to back down because of his pride.

This saddens me a little because I witnessed him able to back down to me and not stand on his pride; in fact, I think you can certainly be dignified in apology, and retain a lot more easily that way than you can by prolonging a long, tiring scrap that by the end may have more to do with scoring personal points than it does with the original issue.

I think that's because of the context and the opponent, which (again) he chose.

But in my suggestion that Six went away and cooled down was the hope that he might, with time and distance, understand and appreciate why some of those people were saying some of those things to him.

I have found the suggestion that I think about people's motivation and try to find a positive, generous motivation behind what they post (even if I don't initially like its content or tone) quite helpful.
 
 
The Falcon
16:46 / 29.03.06
Yeah. Last Sunday was rub on Barbelith.
 
 
Char Aina
16:53 / 29.03.06
Christ on a bike... one last time.

The point is to end hostilities... read it a few times.

You're 'helping me' by calling me a fucking idiot, psychic anus, etc.

I didn't tell anyone to do anything. I asked.

...

So to close the thread:

Don't say anything that might offend anyone... ever.

Anyone who does this opens themselves to public ridicule and personal attacks.

This is fine as long as enough people say it is fine.



way to whinge, dude.

while i appreciate some of the subtler nuances of AAARGH that can come with being haused and rehaused, it does seem like you being a complete arse precipitated it.
that wouldnt excuse him being out of line, no, and yes, i did just say you were being a complete arse.
i expect you will make an assessment of character based upon my comments, much as i made one based upon your slamming of your fellow humans based upon their status as underenlightened dumb animals(and on geography it seems).

feel free to ridicule me and badger me as per the ridicule and badgering you have experienced, even if you have stopped being an arse.

for one thing, it would help to demonstrate just what the rule is.
we've already heard that you think haus is allowed to do what he likes as long as he does it with wit, let's see where the boundary is for you.

just to recap:
1.i described what you were doing as whinging.
2.i called you a complete arse.
 
 
Char Aina
16:55 / 29.03.06
x-posted wit h the 48hr warning there.
sorry for that.
 
 
Olulabelle
17:30 / 29.03.06
Here is what Veve said about positivity, because I think it's helpful and relevant:

Something I was musing on yesterday is the NLP idea that all behaviour has a positive intent behind it, and it's important to try and engage with that positive intent. Now, this may not be literally true, but heuristically, when negotiating with people, it's sometimes useful to pretend like it is. Maybe if we reframe (ugh!) debates with people we think are stupid to try and show we take into account the positive intents that lie behind their behaviour, that might help?

It was the Matrix Warrior thread and, to be honest, Flyboy's vitriolic response to Alchymium, followed by my own toadlike decision to join in with a not entirely relevant point about evidence, which caused me to think like this, because I was suddenly brought up against the positive intent behind Alchymium's defence of Horsley: ze was defending hir friend. That's understandable, and positive, so isn't it better to engage with that (which I think people did, later in the thread) than to just reach for the snark stick?

In here, for example - in the arguments which have generated here - we can use the principle as well. TSK's positive intent is that they don't want people to be patronised on the site. The intent of those defending alas is that they want to defend hir from a misrepresentation of hir views. DM's intention is to share something someone told him which he feels is relevant. Haus' intention is to avoid threadrot and keep the thread on-topic. If we acknowledge these positive intents behind everyone's behaviour, it might keep the argument from getting too angry.

I think the main thing that leaps out from all this, though, is that we can't force people to adopt these attitudes, and that it has to be a personal decision. We have to, ahem, be the change we would like to see on Barbelith (christ I can't believe I actually said that. I'm going to punch myself in the face repeatedly for ten minutes and shout 'hippy!' at the mirror) and try to steer things in a more understanding direction through our actions in response to other peoples' posts, and to that end, I will now endeavour to adopt a less confrontational posting style when confronted with people I disagree with.
 
 
Spaniel
17:43 / 29.03.06
Thanks, Lula, I hadn't read that.

Well done, Veve.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
21:56 / 29.03.06
Ok - I wanna do some analysis, and then I'll leave for the 48 hours to.

Mister Six; Some people don't like the fact you called a bunch of people dumb animals, Then you got super defensive. People don't care what Haus said to you on a PM. Nobody really seems to agree with you. Then you start behaving like a child, and say you want to take your ball home.

Haus; You had a go at the guy for calling people a bunch of dumb animals. Then you had another go at him. Then you had a go at him in another thread. Then you had a go at him in this thread. Then you patronised him. Then you had a go at him. After several more sarcastic comments, you were patronising, then you had a go at him.

Is this close to the truth? I read the threads, so I figure I must have some idea of whats going on. I think that Six should apologise to the people he offended in this and other threads, and not worry about his hurt pride, hell Haus can be mean but you possibly (in some people's oppinion) offended a hell of a lot of people.

Haus, man, you really badgered this guy, no? Maybe we could explore this, not playing the blame game, but maybe we can discuss that perhaps this went a little too far, that the guy called the people animals, and that perhaps Haus went a little bit OTT. But probably I'll be told I'm wrong by Ganesh. If I am, tell me how.
 
 
HCE
23:44 / 29.03.06
You left out the part where this whole thread is a go at Haus.
 
 
matthew.
00:24 / 30.03.06
[The following is completely in fun and means no malice]

Ganesh: You're wrong in so many ways that it makes my head hurt.

Math: But... how exactly?

Ganesh: I'm Moderator, now. No explanations, no mercy. MWAHAAHA. And now here's a complaint about US television dramas.

Math: NOOOOOOOOO!!!!
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
03:22 / 30.03.06
You left out the part where this whole thread is a go at Haus.

Is it really, though? Six apparently feels these attacks are unfounded or at least a waste of everyone's time. Whether he is correct in those feelings or not (answer: not), he's entitled to get some answers. I don't think the thead's sole purpose was to take a shot at Haus.

Very good. Now please apologise to me, G for Gundetta and Miss Wonderstarr for isnulting us when we tried to deal with your threadrot, and to everyone else for rotting the thread, and we'll say no more about it.

Were you serious? Are you saying that the only way you could have moved past this was to get an apology from Six? Are apologies from faceless, moderately rude posters on a message board really that important to you?
 
 
*
03:55 / 30.03.06
Are 48 hours up already? Jeez, where does the time go?
 
 
HCE
04:51 / 30.03.06
Tuna Ghost, you have your opinion. I am of the opinion that the purpose of this whole thread was to get everybody mad at how Haus is

One - Hostile to Mr 6
Two - Badgering Mr 6
Three - Ugly

and I consider that to be "having a go at" Haus. I don't doubt that Mr 6 sincerely believes himself to be a victim. I just don't care.

Who knows? Maybe his future posts will be different. Maybe his posts will reflect a deep respect for other people, in which case there's nothing stopping me or anybody else from treating him with an equally deep respect.
 
 
Ganesh
04:56 / 30.03.06
But probably I'll be told I'm wrong by Ganesh. If I am, tell me how.

Because sweeping generalisations tend to irritate rather than offend people. I'm not sure that anyone's feeling particularly offended by anything Six said - unless they happened to be watching V for Vendetta with him.

As for Haus being "OTT", I suppose it rather depends what's considered "TT". Ditto the line between "badgering" and repeatedly trying to get someone to acknowledge the stupidity of something they've said. If Six hadn't made the comment, or if he'd taken Wonderstarr's reasoned comments on board within the thread itself, arguably there would've been no Haus with his big pointy snarkstick. Same with creating this thread: build the duelling pitch (ostensibly to end hostilities) and Haus will come.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
06:00 / 30.03.06
Is this close to the truth? I read the threads, so I figure I must have some idea of whats going on.

In most cases one would figure that, but it is clearly not the case here. You are misrepresenting what took place in the V For Vendetta thread.

As has been said already, the immediate reaction to Six's comment about the audience not getting the film's message was perfectly civil questioning/critical engagement, from miss wonderstar most notably. In response, Six escalated his view of the audience to "dumb-faced animals" and "anuses", and expressed shock and disapproval that people were responding even with polite engagement:

I posted my experience and for some reason it's being argued??

At which point Haus stepped in.

You are not only giving the impression that you have not read the V for Vendetta thread, Math, but also this one. Again, it has been said already, but you obviously need it repeating: many different posters of different stripes (who do not all agree all the time, far from it) have come to the same conclusions in this thread, that conclusion being, in short and mildly, that Mister Six needs to calm the fuck down.

Your contribution was to trot out the boring old "you must be looking for things to be offended by!" cod-psychology:

Becuase it seems like you've tried really hard to get angry about some pretty fucking innocuous comment.

...And add on a taunt:

Are you getting tired little one?

It's very difficult, Math, not to start to suspect that you have become one of those people who sees following Haus around looking for an excuse to complain about him as a worthwhile way to spend your time. Not to mention that your views about what sort of place Barbelith should be are still plain ol' fucked-up.
 
 
*
06:18 / 30.03.06
I guess if the break is over, I should say what I wanted to say earlier.

It seems like no one ever addressed why it might be valid to get upset when Mr. Six called a group of people "dumb animals." Maybe this happened in PMs. But it's extremely upsetting, because dehumanization of a person or a group of people is a major thing which leads to violence towards those people being seen as okay. This is a personal issue for me, because of the number of times I've had to hear things like "What is that? Is it a dude or a chick? Maybe it's just some kind of freak" etc. when I'm just out walking in public, and because of the inseparable connection between this kind of attitude and violence. People like me are attacked, beaten, raped, killed all the time by people who see us as inhuman, freakish, or some kind of dumb animal.

The way I see it— and I'm going on my memory of the themes of the comic— V for Vendetta is a violent narrative about people who dehumanize and torture others, in the process "losing their own humanity" and becoming animals that it is then okay for V to kill. If you watch that movie and then look around at a bunch of your fellow humans and think "these people are just dumb animals" then I am deeply disturbed by your response, and I feel justified in that feeling. I don't think I can live with just letting that go as a throwaway comment. For my own peace of mind I need to know that you get the point, really and truly. That you understand why dehumanizing other people, especially casually, is a very worrying sign about what might be going on in your psyche.

Could Haus have made this point better? Probably. But I think what he was trying to bring out is more or less what I've just said— even if you think most of the people in the audience didn't get the movie, saying they're "dumb animals" for that reason is a sign of real trouble. Even if you don't think you meant it like that, it would be worth thinking about why you expressed yourself that way instead of just saying "I think most of the audience didn't get the message." Could the theme of dehumanization in the movie have affected you and brought that out?

Thinking about people in a way which negates their humanity is one of those things which leads to violence. Not inevitably, of course, but this chain is worryingly frequent. And I feel strongly enough about that that I feel as if I have a responsibility to challenge people who exhibit that kind of thought process, even though my usual instinct is to avoid conflict. That's my positive motivation— to break the cycle of thought which runs "some people aren't like me— I'm human— people who aren't like me/don't think like me aren't properly human— those creatures which aren't properly human are fair game for ridicule— for discrimination— for violence— for death and torture."

Do you think I'm taking your comment too seriously? Maybe so. But the way I see it, the only way to end that cycle is to challenge it at every single step, wherever it occurs. Even if it's casual and unexamined— in fact especially if it's casual and unexamined, because to me that means it's internalized to a degree that it is just accepted as natural and unassailable. Probably you don't actually feel you're at any place on that cycle; I'm sure you weren't harboring any violent thoughts toward your fellow moviegoers. Maybe you wanted to smack some sense into them, at most. But at least you could think about why you came across that way to others, and why it might be disturbing.

In saying this to you I feel vulnerable for bringing this thing that's actually upsetting me to a point of contact where you might choose to attack me through it. I would feel safer just being snarky about it. I also wonder if in saying these things directly, I might actually be obscuring my message— that stated this bluntly it might seem trivial to you, when it's not trivial to me or to many other people who have posted here. If Haus's or anyone else's way of expressing this point is more effective I'd like to know how so I can improve my own communication style. But most of all I'd just like you to take some time to absorb this and see if there's anything in this post you can take to heart.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
06:54 / 30.03.06
The way I see it— and I'm going on my memory of the themes of the comic— V for Vendetta is a violent narrative about people who dehumanize and torture others, in the process "losing their own humanity" and becoming animals that it is then okay for V to kill. If you watch that movie and then look around at a bunch of your fellow humans and think "these people are just dumb animals" then I am deeply disturbed by your response, and I feel justified in that feeling. I don't think I can live with just letting that go as a throwaway comment. For my own peace of mind I need to know that you get the point, really and truly. That you understand why dehumanizing other people, especially casually, is a very worrying sign about what might be going on in your psyche.

Id: Thank you. I think that we are in danger of not seeing the wood for the treego here. The idea that looking down on the sheeple is attacked on Barbelith as a sort of lack of social grace - that is, a question of taste - is too easy to fall back on, when the point is that attitudes of contempt for those around you make it easier to dehumanise them (as "dumb animals" or "cattle" - no idea what was going on in Sixy's mind when he got onto open anuses, but I'm sure it was a beautiful snowflake of a thought) and thus to cease to care about their wellbeing. Having said which, both Wonderstarr _and_ I made that point in the thread.

Math: Sorry, but no. Part of this is lack of timeline - in particular, as far as I can tell you made up your second step from whole cloth. You also fail to note that between steps two (if step two there be) and three, Six had both PMed me demanding that I cease to say anything more about him in the thread, as it was not ontopic, while at the same time commenting about me in the thread:

No, thread rot is not contributing to the discussion... or baiting me for an argument as Haus is which is his MO.

This is what we call hypocrisy, and it frankly rather undermines claims of victimhood. The post to Barbannoy was made about an hour after that, according to Barbelith time, so does not seem a disproportionate response - and it was outside the V for Vendetta thread, as Six requested. This was covered at the start of this thread. As near as I can tell, that's one post which was not a direct response to an attack by Mr Six. Your badgers must be tiny small.

One of Mr. Six's problems is that he does not remember who has said what when, and does not check to refresh his memory - he simply recounts events as he misremembers them. This is not a good example to follow for a new member, as might be becoming clear here.

Tuna: You misunderstand. The apology isn't about me. It's about Six. Lula said above:

Okay Mr Six. Then one way to end hostilities is to say that you realise saying the whole cinema audience were 'dumb animals' was basically a/impossible for you to know and b/quite rude and maybe make some reference to understanding why people felt the need to engage with you on that particular point.

I'm sure that would work, and it might make you feel better in the long run. Currently what seems to be happening is that you are still saying the debate shouldn't have happened, but people are just not going to agree with you on that one, because actually it should.


This seems to be good advice, and Six himself agreed that it was - way back here. However, he has so far proved unable to manage it, and is now demanding that we ban him, so hard is it for him to take responsibility for his actions. By suggesting a way for him to do so, I'm trying to help him. As are we all.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
07:19 / 30.03.06
Flyboy, I PM'd Haus an apology about my first comment on this thread, as while I was trying to come off as funny, it nwas actually very confrontational. So maybe I'll post it here as well so that we can move on from that first comment.

As said before I have asked Haus about a comment he's made. If you look at the pattern of my posts on these types of board it goes 1) Sarcastic 2) Thought about. I usually say something flippent first, then have to get my point across in further posts. Again, having to do this here which is entirely my fault.

I have read the threads, and if you've read my post to Mr Six you'll see that I do call him up on his reaction to comments. But while everyone seems to be dancing round the actual idea behind this thread - that Haus has pissed a guy off by going OTT on him for a comment which has offended, no, irratated 10 people, I thought maybe I could turn the discusion back onto that, what with that being the idea and all.

Again, this is not a personal attack on Haus, and if it feels that way then again I'm sorry. But, and I love buts in apologies, does it not feel to anybody else, am I entirely on my own in this thinking, that Haus can be OTT in the way he cuts people down, and all we as a board do is stop and cheer. Maybe his reaction isn't always the best way? My point.

Now I've said that what Six said hasn't really bothered me. It's not my place to call him up on a slightly myopic world view. It reads super arrogant in the thread, but so what. If someone wants to call him up on it fine, but is the way Haus did it the right way?

As for Haus being "OTT", I suppose it rather depends what's considered "TT".

I notice this alot on the boards, and I perhaps feel it could be a double standard. I do consider the way in which Haus has responded to be OTT, as I said he's pretty much badgered the guy.

If Six hadn't made the comment, or if he'd taken Wonderstarr's reasoned comments on board within the thread itself, arguably there would've been no Haus with his big pointy snarkstick. Same with creating this thread: build the duelling pitch (ostensibly to end hostilities) and Haus will come.

But seriously - who asked him too? Was in needed?

Your contribution was to trot out the boring old "you must be looking for things to be offended by!" cod-psychology:

You're right about this, and it was a bullshit throwaway remark. Sorry.

t's very difficult, Math, not to start to suspect that you have become one of those people who sees following Haus around looking for an excuse to complain about him

Well, its not so much following him around, more that this stuff just appears on the boards and I comment. I have no problems with Haus, just a small problem with the way he sometimes handles his business.

And flyboy, if you read the entire thread you posted, you might notice a change in my thinking, that I came to understand the reasons behind that. So please don't make out I'm some kind of rape apologist or whatever you're trying to put across, becuase that's quite fucked up.

Id - you're post as beautiful, becuase you completely explained your position in a heartfelt way. I agree that the dehumanising of groups is wrong, and often a way of allowing people to then attack said group. I don't feel this was Six's intention, I believe his comment was an arrogant throwawy line that completely backfired.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:32 / 30.03.06
I assume you haven't had time to read my post, Math. I suggest you do so.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:34 / 30.03.06
id: agree with all that, but what I've noticed about this thread and the one that triggered it is that "What was it about them that made you think this?" often produces the same reaction as "You are wrong to think this, and here is why". This is one of several reasons why the "always go out of your way to engage with the person saying the things you find offensive" approach, whilst entirely noble and laudable in intent, isn't always entirely successful in application: a polite question can be enough to trigger that defensiveness.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
07:39 / 30.03.06
but haus, you are baiting him. do you not see that? You think this is much needed, I disagree. That's what this boils down too. Perhaps if he apologised for the comment, you'd be willing to apologise for the wya you told him off? Would that be appropriate?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:44 / 30.03.06
Where am I baiting him? As I said, one post that was not a direct response to a dismissive or insulting action by Mister Six, and that in response to his dismissal of what he claimed were offtopic responses (despite their connection to the theme of V for Vendetta, as id explains above) to his offtopic psychic ruminations on his audience.

The only bait, as far as I can tell, that has cropped up recently was the bait he dangled by starting this thread. He assumed that it would attract lots of people who would uncritically accept and endorse his factually incorrect and self-deceiving view of events. As it happens, he got the wrong kind of bait, or rather (I am very glad to say) the wrong kind of board.

Simply saying things does not make them so. Six is having problems here because of this, and I think you may be too.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:47 / 30.03.06
Math, perhaps you need to amend this:

I agree that the dehumanising of groups is wrong, and often a way of allowing people to then attack said group.

To this:

I agree that the dehumanising of groups is wrong, and often a way of allowing people to then attack said group, however I don't believe it's so wrong that anything should ever be said or done to discourage or oppose this kind of attitude.

...In order to more accurately reflect your position?
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
07:54 / 30.03.06
sure flyboy, or perhaps I can change it too;

I agree with dehumanising people is wrong, but I don't really feel that this is the case in terms of this comment.

Instead of trying to make me out to be a nazi? Would that be ok?
 
 
*
07:55 / 30.03.06
Maths: And of course you saw my point about how the fact that it was a throwaway line makes me feel it's more important to challenge it, right? I mean, if Six had said "And I know it's problematic to say this, because of these reasons, but I truly do think that the people in the theatre were (comparable to) dumb animals, and here's why..." that would indicate he at least knew what he was saying had problems attached.

Haus: I'm sure you both made those points, and I apologize for asserting that I was saying something new. I've only been skimming the relevant thread because I haven't actually seen the film yet. I imagine we made the relevant points in different ways. I'm still hoping I get some feedback about which ways are most effective, so I can generally be more successful at getting things across to people.
 
 
*
08:02 / 30.03.06
Agree with all that, but what I've noticed about this thread and the one that triggered it is that "What was it about them that made you think this?" often produces the same reaction as "You are wrong to think this, and here is why". This is one of several reasons why the "always go out of your way to engage with the person saying the things you find offensive" approach, whilst entirely noble and laudable in intent, isn't always entirely successful in application: a polite question can be enough to trigger that defensiveness.

This is useful to me, Flyboy... what do you think can be done to short-circuit this, if anything? Just because engagement produces the same effect as stabbing with the relevant point repeatedly until death, doesn't mean that the latter is actually better, I think. It may be more satisfying and less exposing, though. Maybe there are other advantages I'm missing.
 
 
Ganesh
18:20 / 30.03.06
I notice this alot on the boards, and I perhaps feel it could be a double standard. I do consider the way in which Haus has responded to be OTT, as I said he's pretty much badgered the guy.

I think Haus has kept challenging him, and kept challenging him in a taking-the-piss kinda way. I don't consider it to be OTT at least partly because I consider Six's inability/unwillingness to seriously acknowledge what was problematic about his generalisation to be UTT. I don't see it as "badgering" because I think Six needed prodding to understand what's wrong with dismissing masses of people as animals or anuses.

But seriously - who asked him too? Was in needed?

No-one asks any of us to post. Was it needed? Something was needed, and Wonderstarr's comments were ignored. Haus is Haus is Haus is Haus. One can take issue with his style but, in this circumstance, I think his intervention was necessary.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:44 / 13.06.06
I'd like to be the first to welcome Mister Six back to the board. However, I think it would be useful, if he's planning to stick around, for him to revisit some of the discussion here, in particular after his departure. I think that would really help.
 
 
matthew.
18:44 / 13.06.06
Why? Why bring this up? Why can't we move on? What exactly are you looking for, Haus?
 
 
Char Aina
18:56 / 13.06.06
i think it seems only sensible to reflect on what went so wrong before, if only to avoid it in future.

sorta 'lest we forget' without the nazis.
 
  

Page: 12(3)45

 
  
Add Your Reply