|
until you get shot for walking on someones lawn  jk
i dont know, but all the children i know wouldnt even want to watch porn
and if this is such an important issue for the people why doesnt an isp exist that already has this filter and totally overtaken the market through that
but the funniest thing is that everybody knows the internet a little bit should know that this is not doing anything even in the slightest to prevent someone from watching porn 
|
Young kids have ridiculously easy access to porn. It's disturbing to me, to think of adolescents being able to access some of these sites which are full of some hardcore imagery right on its front page. As others have mentioned, my generation never saw all this crazy hardcore porn that kids are seeing now. We had to use magazines, mostly. If someone had a VHS with any kind of sex, it would be kind of a big deal, and it probably wouldn't contain the type of all-out craziness that is put on the front-page of these websites.
There's been numerous studies about how even adults become desensitized to visual sexual stimulation, and how porn becomes addictive which drives the viewers to seek more and more provocative images. This effects people's sexual lives, which obviously is a big part of life in general.
Yes, it's the parents' job to monitor their kids, and monitor the family PC. But if UK, as a society, wants to place some extra laws and measures to keep kids away from internet porn, I'm all for that. People crying "Freedom!" are being a little sensational, I think. All this is doing is making parental-filters something the parents can actually control directly with their ISP, instead of just being a browser option that any kid can simply turn off -- parental filters are simply too easy. It isn't like a child-protection on a lighter or pill-bottle -- kid hands can handle the internet and parental controls, just as easily as adult hands. This isn't the prosecution of Larry Flynt, no one is banning porn. This just seems like a good idea to me, something ISPs should've probably been doing but had no incentive to do (not just because most of them act like monopolies).
|
On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:On July 24 2013 01:52 Godwrath wrote:On July 24 2013 01:49 Yurie wrote:
[quote]
But then you get a list of porn haters. Shaming those that dislike porn.
The same points holds for the opposite view. I don't see the point to an opt in/out thing at all. Either it is forbidden by general acclaim or there is no point to having it since it just costs money.
edit,
My personal opinion is that it is another case of politicians trying what is popular with what demographics. If the right ones like it they will go through with it since it scores points. Where is the shame of blocking porn specially for parents ? I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan.
You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money.
|
On July 24 2013 08:59 ZackAttack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:On July 24 2013 01:52 Godwrath wrote:
[quote]
Where is the shame of blocking porn specially for parents ? I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan. You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money.
Yea you can...
|
On July 24 2013 08:59 ZackAttack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:On July 24 2013 01:52 Godwrath wrote:
[quote]
Where is the shame of blocking porn specially for parents ? I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan. You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money.
And when you do get a data plan, you end up paying the same ridiculous amount of money hidden over the course of your contract.
|
On July 24 2013 00:40 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 00:14 xM(Z wrote:
how would this work for downloaded files (torrents/p2p)? It won't. It a nice thing for UK. But we all have been teenagers and we all find a way to watch some. Borrowing from friends, asking the big brother, or outright downloading it. So it's just nothing. A political fuss that won't change the majority of things. Maybe you will get less spyware :p Anyway i think this has nice intentions, but it's just useless. Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 00:28 archonOOid wrote:
First they came for the porn, then they'll come for "piracy" and later they'll come for your freedom. I love those statements... so completly theoritical. For me i think that's a paranoid statement. Also piracy is not something that can be put into quotes. It is what it is
Must be nice to live in that bubble of yours. You must have missed the Snowden leaks on NSA, PRISM, spying on allies and citizenry. And here in Asia we have political/news blogs filtered for "undesirable content".
Please come down from your magnificent ivory tower, your highness and mingle with the common people.
|
Such a terrible idea couched in the usual "Think of the children!" Trojan Horse. If Cameron really gave a rat's ass about protecting children, he'd set up a tax benefit for Net Nanny and similar companies. He's creating a heavy-handed solution to a problem that's already adequately solved by good parenting and the market. It's not hard to install a filter for your kids. What IS hard is getting the government to give up data and power, both of which it is conveniently adding to here, with the bonus that it's an in-road into a previously unregulatable area.
|
This seems like an attempt at regulating people who can't control either themselves or their children (nanny state anyone?). Coming from a conservative prime minister is kind of hypocritical, though definitely not unheard of.
But if UK, as a society, wants to place some extra laws and measures to keep kids away from internet porn, I'm all for that.
Why? You already said the parents should be the ones in charge, not someone else. If people want to ban things from their computer I'm sure there's a company or free software they can download. This is nothing but political pandering.
|
On July 24 2013 02:45 ref4 wrote:
oh good another step towards fascism in the guise of "protecting the children"
because we all know people that play FPS all end up as serial shooters and gunmen!
Oh they will. As long as there's a clueless trusting population of followers, once they're with porn they'll find another social cause that mothers and fathers to worry about their little darlings.
Soon.
|
On July 24 2013 12:23 Roe wrote:This seems like an attempt at regulating people who can't control either themselves or their children (nanny state anyone?). Coming from a conservative prime minister is kind of hypocritical, though definitely not unheard of. Show nested quote +But if UK, as a society, wants to place some extra laws and measures to keep kids away from internet porn, I'm all for that. Why? You already said the parents should be the ones in charge, not someone else. If people want to ban things from their computer I'm sure there's a company or free software they can download. This is nothing but political pandering.
The intent seems pretty irrelevant since it's pretty transparent it will never succeed and will do nothing but drain money during a slumping economy.
|
This topic is actually good, the thing with internet is that porn is not only in the 50 main sites like redtubes or xvideo, if they were it would be damn easy to simply use the damn browser filters...
You can find porn in like any site, in the daily mail site that this news was original posted you can find pictures of a lot of subcelebrities near naked
The damage is so much done that you hear once or twice per month about kids on school sending erotic video to each other ...
I think they are a little too late to start this law and it will be only a waste of taxes...
|
On July 24 2013 08:46 Leporello wrote:
Young kids have ridiculously easy access to porn. It's disturbing to me, to think of adolescents being able to access some of these sites which are full of some hardcore imagery right on its front page. As others have mentioned, my generation never saw all this crazy hardcore porn that kids are seeing now. We had to use magazines, mostly. If someone had a VHS with any kind of sex, it would be kind of a big deal, and it probably wouldn't contain the type of all-out craziness that is put on the front-page of these websites.
There's been numerous studies about how even adults become desensitized to visual sexual stimulation, and how porn becomes addictive which drives the viewers to seek more and more provocative images. This effects people's sexual lives, which obviously is a big part of life in general.
Yes, it's the parents' job to monitor their kids, and monitor the family PC. But if UK, as a society, wants to place some extra laws and measures to keep kids away from internet porn, I'm all for that. People crying "Freedom!" are being a little sensational, I think. All this is doing is making parental-filters something the parents can actually control directly with their ISP, instead of just being a browser option that any kid can simply turn off -- parental filters are simply too easy. It isn't like a child-protection on a lighter or pill-bottle -- kid hands can handle the internet and parental controls, just as easily as adult hands. This isn't the prosecution of Larry Flynt, no one is banning porn. This just seems like a good idea to me, something ISPs should've probably been doing but had no incentive to do (not just because most of them act like monopolies).
So what's your opinion on pot? booze and cigars? Candy? mm.. Cars going over 100km/h on highways?
They are all more dangerous than porn. Next time you know, you will need a special permit to put your kids in your car, or will only be aloud to buy XXX/month amount of red meat or candy or wathever this nutjobs think "is bad for you"
People should opose this kind of bullshit on principle; more expenditure, more taxes, more taxes for our children (government debt). Not to mention less freedom.
|
On July 24 2013 08:59 ZackAttack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:On July 24 2013 01:52 Godwrath wrote:
[quote]
Where is the shame of blocking porn specially for parents ? I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan. You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money.
In the US you can get a plan with unlimited calls, texts, and data for $50/month, that's not a lot of money.
But as for the topic itself what are you doing David Cameron, seems a big privacy issue for there to be a record of people who tell their ISPs to let the porn come through. Also I thought the Victorian Era died when Queen Victoria did...
|
On July 24 2013 13:42 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 08:59 ZackAttack wrote:On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:
[quote]
I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan. You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money. In the US you can get a plan with unlimited calls, texts, and data for $50/month, that's not a lot of money. But as for the topic itself what are you doing David Cameron, seems a big privacy issue for there to be a record of people who tell their ISPs to let the porn come through. Also I thought the Victorian Era died when Queen Victoria did...
200 mins, limited texting within Canada, 1GB data = $75 month with Telus
|
I hope he doesn't get re-elected.
|
I do not even understand why people think Porn is "evil".
Why is it something you should hide? Isn't that just another natural part of human and animals?
Just teach the kids starting from Kindergarten and stop this "childish" approach.
|
On July 24 2013 13:42 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 08:59 ZackAttack wrote:On July 24 2013 03:30 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:28 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:19 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 24 2013 03:10 Plansix wrote:On July 24 2013 02:57 Shiori wrote:On July 24 2013 01:57 Yurie wrote:
[quote]
I would look askance to anybody opting in to a block. I would still talk to them but come into a conversation with a negative initial impression. I am probably biased but I honestly would count it against them. That's like holding it against someone if they put a password on the adult TV channels so that their six year-old doesn't flick by them... The effects of getting hooked on porn when very young are almost certainly very negative.
Is there any real data on this? It's not like porn is cocaine, or that young kids (pre-pubescent) even care about porn. There are a lot of reports of bdsm porn having a negative effect on some youth relationships and that it is warping the expectations of some teens. There are no studies at this point, but experts have said it that kids between ages 13-16 are very impressionable during that time. With Iphones, it has created ways for them to have unrestricted access and the parental controls on all smart phones are very limited. These were radio reports on local public radio, so I don't have links, sadly. Yeah. Adults know there's a huge difference between porn and real sex. If you've never had sex before and you don't understand that porn stars really are actors, I can see a teenager expecting things from sex that just don't happen. Hell, when I first started having sex it was kinda a shock at how different it was than porn. But I managed to survive without abusing or murdering anyone and I'm not scarred so I don't think there's really a reason to be worried. Stil the lack of parental controls on smartphones and the fact that you have to block sites on a machine by machine basis is a bit silly. There should be a router or ISP level blocking service for parents. If the goverment wants to make a law to assure they have the option, I'm ok with that. To be clear, with an opt in system, rather than opt out. You can block stuff at the router level. That's what schools do. And when you're talking about the average home...how many computers are there? One or two? Is a machine by machine basis that hard? And I know all parents are different and all kids are different, but if you're kid is old enough to have their own computer (and smartphones are computers now) complete with internet access...then I think their old enough to look at porn. If parents haven't given them proper sex ed by that time, that's a problem. Its smartphones that have made it more of an issue, rather than just PCs. And parental controls at the router level are super hard to use. I don't think smartphones are an issue. They basically are computers. If you wouldn't trust your kid with their own computer, you shouldn't trust them with a smartphone. Hell, you can get them a phone without a data plan. You can't get a phone without a data plan without paying ridiculous amounts of money. In the US you can get a plan with unlimited calls, texts, and data for $50/month, that's not a lot of money. But as for the topic itself what are you doing David Cameron, seems a big privacy issue for there to be a record of people who tell their ISPs to let the porn come through. Also I thought the Victorian Era died when Queen Victoria did...
How about we all take a deep breathe and actually read what the others write before posting nonsense? He was referring to the prize you would have to pay for a phone without a plan which you would have to do if you wanted to give your kids a phone without data, as pretty much any plan includes data.
|
On July 24 2013 16:38 DarkwindHK wrote:
I do not even understand why people think Porn is "evil".
Why is it something you should hide? Isn't that just another natural part of human and animals?
Just teach the kids starting from Kindergarten and stop this "childish" approach.
Kindergarten is a tad early...
|
On July 24 2013 19:31 Maxie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2013 16:38 DarkwindHK wrote:
I do not even understand why people think Porn is "evil".
Why is it something you should hide? Isn't that just another natural part of human and animals?
Just teach the kids starting from Kindergarten and stop this "childish" approach. Kindergarten is a tad early...
I agree, sex is evil. Society would be much better off without sex....wait what?
|
On July 24 2013 13:53 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I hope he doesn't get re-elected.
Unfortunately we have only useless alternatives because the unions went completely against the candidate the public/everybody else wanted to lead the Labour party. The current government is also a coalition between our Conservative party and our "liberal" party who, as it turns out, are liberal in name only and have abandoned all their moral values since 2010. This government should have collapsed years ago but the Liberal Democrats didn't have the backbone to stand up for their own policies. But Labour is led by the wrong person too. So we have 3 parties with simply bad leaders. This is what despair feels like, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4461
1529
381
139
EPT
