caroljane Posted May 27, 2021 Share Posted May 27, 2021 On 5/3/2021 at 2:49 PM, william.scherk said: Have you been defamed? (135) Project Veritas - OLIGARCHY (Official Video) - YouTube OKeefe is a one-man lawsuit factory! as he has never lost a lawsuit, is there any record of lawsuits he has withdrawn, or settled out of court or otherwise not litigated? Has he ever been sued himself? Enquiring minds.... Go Leafs! Go Isles, the lhomeless team that could! Beat unspeakably despicable Boston! On Dasher, onDeker, on Slasher.....no, not so fast Slasher.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 27, 2021 Author Share Posted May 27, 2021 2 hours ago, caroljane said: OKeefe is a one-man lawsuit factory! as he has never lost a lawsuit, is there any record of lawsuits he has withdrawn, or settled out of court or otherwise not litigated? Has he ever been sued himself? Enquiring minds.... Carol, Are you truly interested, or merely wish to throw shade? For example, are you interested in why James has such a pristine track record? Just a little curious? I bet not. I bet, since James belongs to the "other side" in your world, you see his legal record as a gotcha to be got (kinda on a crossword puzzle level), not an issue that deals with the lives and damage of real people in the real world. I recommend looking beyond the headlines and opinions in The Big Bubble... You might see something... After all, you own two eyes and two ears and a working brain that can process the input... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted May 28, 2021 Share Posted May 28, 2021 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, Are you truly interested, or merely wish to throw shade? For example, are you interested in why James has such a pristine track record? Just a little curious? I bet not. I bet, since James belongs to the "other side" in your world, you see his legal record as a gotcha to be got (kinda on a crossword puzzle level), not an issue that deals with the lives and damage of real people in the real world. I recommend looking beyond the headlines and opinions in The Big Bubble... You might see something... After all, you own two eyes and two ears and a working brain that can process the input... Michael Ok. the headlines and the opinions in the big bubble have never given me any indication of the guy,s legal record. I get most of my alt media news from here , pretty much all of it since I mostly indulge in my local news here. So in the interest of amity I am looking beyond, and I don,t see anything new about OKeefe, which is fine by me. If you have anytIng new for my eyes and ears to process, let me know. I still come here for the reason I originally did, you know, to talk to people and argue (amiably, for choice) and understand what other people who are not like me know, and care about, and occasionally connect on neutral topics. If you can bet I am only interested in the background of this obscure lawyer to try to play gotcha , then I can bet you are a little bit paranoid. We are both more complex than that. As is everyone, on whatever side. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 28, 2021 Author Share Posted May 28, 2021 4 hours ago, caroljane said: ... I don,t see anything new about OKeefe, which is fine by me. Carol, What is old about O'Keefe to you? His name? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted May 28, 2021 Share Posted May 28, 2021 9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, What is old about O'Keefe to you? His name? Michael Cute one, Kelly.... and sure, O'Keefe is a grand old name.... 9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, What is old about O'Keefe to you? His name? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 28, 2021 Author Share Posted May 28, 2021 3 hours ago, caroljane said: ... O'Keefe is a grand old name. Carol, And that is about it, isn't it? All the rest about James O'Keefe to you is new. But of the stuff that is available out there to be new, you get nothing first-hand. You only get second-hand opinions that you then pop off as your own in order to sound witty or learned to your peeps. Here in O-Land, there is an archetype for this: Peter Keating. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted May 29, 2021 Share Posted May 29, 2021 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, And that is about it, isn't it? All the rest about James O'Keefe to you is new. But of the stuff that is available out there to be new, you get nothing first-hand. You only get second-hand opinions that you then pop off as your own in order to sound witty or learned to your peeps. Here in O-Land, there is an archetype for this: Peter Keating. Michael What are the first-hand sources from which you can draw on for every event or issue that we talk about, except the statements of the people concerned, and of course your own internal narrative? Can videos really be trusted, since we know they can be edited? I have never used anything second-hand (without attribution or similar acknowledgment) in order to sound witty, and I never would. Take that remark back, please. I have been defamed plenty by the oligarchy here, and I am a peaceful person, but some unfounded insults I will not abide. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 29, 2021 Author Share Posted May 29, 2021 Carol, You can keep faking it if you want, but you know you have not seen a single James O'Keefe video. As to editing videos, that is the standard reason given in the bubble for not looking. The fact is, James O'Keefe always puts up his raw footage so people can compare the edited stuff against the raw. Do any of the news organizations you get in the bubble do that? Of course not. But this habit is one of the reasons he keeps winning one lawsuit after another. The courts certainly look in the lawsuits. But fake on, woman. The simple fact is you will not look at what he does. You only get your information about him second-hand. Like I said, Peter Keating-ville. You don't have to like it that I notice this. In fact, if you don't like it and want a retraction, stop talking about your opinion of yourself and look at actual first-hand material, then talk about what you saw with your own two eyes and heard with your own two ears. I don't expect you to do that, though. I expect you to keep seeking an unearned reputation for knowing what you don't know. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted May 29, 2021 Share Posted May 29, 2021 Eric Weinstein had him on his podcast , interesting juxtaposition of views and personalities. The conversation itself and the fact of their conversation works to highlight the institutionalized bubble making infrastructure. Weinstein takes him to task for his methods but appreciates that stories that normally would not have opportunity to pierce the suppression mechanics of the modern information and communication ‘systems’ can reach escape velocity by his efforts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted May 29, 2021 Share Posted May 29, 2021 (edited) 14 hours ago, tmj said: Eric Weinstein had him on his podcast , interesting juxtaposition of views and personalities. The conversation itself and the fact of their conversation works to highlight the institutionalized bubble making infrastructure. From 2020, a lengthy encounter ... Transcript: https://moses.land/transcript-james-okeefe-and-eric-weinstein-on-the-portal-episode-26/ Edited May 29, 2021 by william.scherk Added link to discussion transcript 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 29, 2021 Author Share Posted May 29, 2021 4 hours ago, william.scherk said: From 2020, a lengthy encounter ... William, Thank you for posting that. And thanks to T for mentioning it. That was one hell of a nice conversation. And it was right up my alley--do your damnedest to identify correctly before evaluating. Both of those guys did that as their default. I had never seen Eric Weinstein speak before (that I can remember), much less seen a podcast. I know precious little about him. When I get the time, I want to dig into his stuff some more. He is FAR FAR FAR better than his brother Brett judging by this video. Maybe I will be disappointed when I look at his other stuff, but my gut is telling me I will not. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted May 30, 2021 Share Posted May 30, 2021 MSK When you get the time and if you still have the inclination , on Eric’s podcast , The Portal, he interviews Bret. What don’t you like about Bret, Ive been watching him fairly regularly for awhile , he’s a pretty cognitive first kinda guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted May 30, 2021 Share Posted May 30, 2021 On 5/28/2021 at 10:56 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, You can keep faking it if you want, but you know you have not seen a single James O'Keefe video. As to editing videos, that is the standard reason given in the bubble for not looking. The fact is, James O'Keefe always puts up his raw footage so people can compare the edited stuff against the raw. Do any of the news organizations you get in the bubble do that? Of course not. But this habit is one of the reasons he keeps winning one lawsuit after another. The courts certainly look in the lawsuits. But fake on, woman. The simple fact is you will not look at what he does. You only get your information about him second-hand. Like I said, Peter Keating-ville. You don't have to like it that I notice this. In fact, if you don't like it and want a retraction, stop talking about your opinion of yourself and look at actual first-hand material, then talk about what you saw with your own two eyes and heard with your own two ears. I don't expect you to do that, though. I expect you to keep seeking an unearned reputation for knowing what you don't know. Michael Peter Keating, if I remember correctly, was a plagiarist who passed off another person's work as his own , albeit with the connivance of the real creator. I don't live in that ville and I don't need to prove it by watching anyone else's videos. If you keep spreading that implication I will have to hire this wunderkind to sue you.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 30, 2021 Author Share Posted May 30, 2021 2 hours ago, tmj said: What don’t you like about Bret, Ive been watching him fairly regularly for awhile , he’s a pretty cognitive first kinda guy. T, He's all right, but the things I've seen by him are way too scripted. I don't know if I will be able to get across the creepiness I feel when he does it. I mean, we are surrounded by scripted things all the time and they are fine. But when he does it, it gives me an "uncanny valley" feeling. Here's an example. Have you seen him and his wife discuss and correct each other? They start discussing something important and interesting, like, say, an evolutionary aspect of humans. Then all of a sudden, they start doing a back and forth where they correct each other as if by a script. The form takes over and you know, no matter what the idea is or how in the middle of an explanation one will be, the other will interrupt at the 3 minute mark, so to speak, to make a correction on the meaning of a word. It's that kind of thing. Fortunately, Brett doesn't stay in it all the time. (And don't forget, I am only commenting on what I have seen of him, which went down once I became aware of this form-over-substance thing. So he may be different at other times.) Sometimes he will let loose and open his heart and mind (like his brother did extremely well in that video with James O'Keefe). But then, back he goes trying to cram the spirit of rock-and-roll into the form of a minuet. I honestly don't know what he believes for real as opposed to what form he prefers to use to present a topic. Also, a beef, a minor one, I have with him--and his brother for that matter--is an undertone that submitting to an authority, irrespective of how brutal it is, is far preferable to making a stink. It's only an impression, but I sense neither likes the elites to get disrupted as much as the lay-people get disrupted habitually. To me, they seem to like being among privilege just fine as opposed to the people they claim to champion. It's subtle, but when the people they claim to champion suffer an injustice, that is an issue for them to discuss and tut-tut-tut about. When the elites or people in the elite structure suffer, that's different and out comes weapons like (in the case of Eric) the meaning of the Torah versus the spirit of the Torah in order to get the people calling them out to soften their blows. But that's not explicit--it's an undertone--and I don't want to turn my spider itch into a game of 20 meanings for the word "the," so I give it a pass. Also, from what I have seen so far, I believe Eric is far more sincere and committed to his morality than Brett is. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 30, 2021 Author Share Posted May 30, 2021 2 hours ago, caroljane said: Peter Keating, if I remember correctly, was a plagiarist who passed off another person's work as his own , albeit with the connivance of the real creator. Carol, Close. And on the surface he did that a few times in the book. He actually passes the soul of others off as his own. That's what I sense you do. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted May 30, 2021 Share Posted May 30, 2021 9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Carol, Close. And on the surface he did that a few times in the book. He actually passes the soul of others off as his own. That's what I sense you do. Michael Since your senses, and your gut, always render the only truth, I have no defence against such evidence. I must just make the best of it. Even a second-hand soul is better than no soul at all. Just off to my Ghouls Anonymous meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 On 2/22/2017 at 1:52 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Let's see if this thread gets some traction. It is dedicated to all the fake news that is fit to publish. Moral disgust often follows reading an instance of fake news, let's say. Identifying an instance of fake (or merely false) news is the horse before the cart. Who has or believes themself to have a strong ability to identify false accounts? It looks like 90% of us consumers, at least as retailed by a press release from Eureka Alerts: Overconfidence in news judgement | EurekAlert! Science News Quote New study shows that overconfidence in news judgment is associated with false news susceptibility A new study published in Proceedings of National Academics of Sciences finds that individuals who falsely believe they are able to identify false news are more likely to fall victim to it. In the article published today, Ben Lyons, assistant professor of communication at the University of Utah, and his colleagues examine the concern about the public's susceptibility to false news due to their inability to recognize their own limitations in identifying such information. "Though Americans believe confusion caused by false news is extensive, relatively few indicate having seen or shared it," said Lyons. "If people incorrectly see themselves as highly skilled at identifying false news, they may unwittingly be more likely to consume, believe and share it, especially if it conforms to their worldview." Lyons and his colleagues used two large nationally representative surveys with a total of 8,285 respondents. Individuals were asked to evaluate the accuracy of a series of Facebook headlines and then rate their own abilities to discern false news content. Lyons used these two measures to assess overconfidence among respondents and how it is related to beliefs and behaviors. "Our results paint a worrying picture. Many people are simply unaware of their own vulnerability to misinformation." The vast majority of respondents--about 90 percent--reported they are above average in their ability to discern false and legitimate news headlines. Three in four individuals overestimated their ability to distinguish between legitimate and false news headlines and respondents placed themselves 22 percentiles higher than their score warranted, on average. About 20 percent of respondents rated themselves 50 or more percentiles higher than their score warranted. [...] As a companion piece, bookend, tart frosting, or jest of the gods, a headline that also does not yet lead to proceedings of an academy, but instead to the yawning abyss of AI Hell ... Twitter May Start Labeling Your Tweets Based on How Wrong You Are "Mr Kruger, Doctor Dunning will see you now ..." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 1, 2021 Author Share Posted June 1, 2021 3 hours ago, william.scherk said: ... but instead to the yawning abyss of AI Hell... William, Here is a HUGE aside and a recommendation. Have you looked at GPT-3 AI writers? (There are other AI protocols for AI writing, too, but GPT-3 seems to be the top going by what I have read so far.) Without making anyone's eyes glaze over, GPT-3 is a part of a company called OpenAI, which Elon Musk founded. OpenAI just entered into an exclusive partnership with Microsoft to promote and exploit GPT-3 worldwide. A newer version, GPT-4, is coming (I believe) later this year and I don't know if Microsoft is also going to be in charge of that, but I bet it will be. A competitor AI company, DeepMind was bought by Google. DeepMind is behind those fantastic AI Wavenet voices in test-to-voice technology. I am sure Amazon and Facebook are doing their own things, but I haven't studied the AI world enough yet to say anything intelligent so far other than what I just did. Now to the point of the post. There is an AI writer called Nichesss that is being sold for $59 for a lifetime unrestricted license. (This is not a sales review so there is no affiliate link.) I believe Nichesss will end up being the monster of them all. The guy who wrote it, Malcolm Tyson, is a young genius. Making this post and finding the LinkedIn profile just now showed me there is a Brazil tie-in. Cool. Anyway, there is a company called Appsumo that offers cheap Life-Time Deals to software that normally goes for monthly fees. (A category of customer exists called LTD junkie and even a secondary market for expired LTD's has emerged.) Malcolm is selling Nichesss on Appsump for the time being (see here). You can see Malcolm's improvements workflow (he calls it a roadmap) here. So this is a product that will be constantly improving at no cost to those who get it now. I know you like to mess with this stuff, so I recommend this sucker. Highly. There are no restrictions on how many times you can use it a month, no credit limits or anything like that. Just one payment for life. Obviously, this will change over time. Go to the link and play with it. I think it will blow your mind. It certainly blew mine. This thing allows you to write about topics where you know absolutely nothing. If you are conscientious like I am, you will check all the facts for accuracy. If you are a faker, you can get by pretty good with the generated text as is. There is a growing number of AI writer software programs, especially GPT-3 ones, but I believe Nichesses gives you the best bang for your buck--mainly because Malcolm is so invested in improvements. Incidentally, he just released a long-form text module. It only allows you to do two sentences at a time on autocomplete due to OpenAI restrictions. So he is looking into other AI solutions from other systems to ramp up. I believe he will eventually use GPT-Neo, the open source version of GPT, to get around restrictions, but not now. GPT-Neo is still in its infancy. But I believe it will turn into a monster over time. Malcolm has already stated his fears about it being used by bad people. On a relevant tangent, here is a free (although there is a paid version) content spinner with a twist: WordTune. It only works on Chrome, but I've gotten the basics to work on Brave. It doesn't just replace words with synonyms and so on. It completely rewrites ideas. It goes one sentence at at time, but it goes. When used in conjunction with Nichesss, it's a writer's dream for getting ideas, killing writer's block, researching little known topics and editing. I haven't written anything on OL using these tools yet and I probably will not. I'm too used to writing as me. But in my planned Internet Marketing stuff, I will definitely make use of them. Especially for product reviews, Q&A's and things like that. And I want to add a program that helps you choose what to write based on SEO massaged by AI. Right now, that would be Frase, but the LTD on that is sold out and there is a workaround for free using the SEO Quake browser extension. Anyway, just an idea. If you look at it, I hope you enjoy it. If not, I enjoyed writing this. Michael EDIT: There are a lot of reviews of Nichesss online, but here is a video review from last January that gives you a pretty good idea of how it works. The only thing is there are a lot more options now than in the video since Malcolm is constantly adding things (plagiarism checker and so on). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 (edited) 18 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: 21 hours ago, william.scherk said: yawning abyss of AI Hell... Here is a HUGE aside and a recommendation. Have you looked at GPT-3 AI writers? (There are other AI protocols for AI writing, too, but GPT-3 seems to be the top going by what I have read so far.) A popular article in Nature is where I ended up. It made the Twitter AI labelling article that much more weird and problematic. The successes of GPT-3 are kinda staggering and spooky at the same time. The metaphor is a fluent idiot, or "a mouth without a brain": Quote Researchers have ideas on how to address potentially harmful biases in language models — but instilling the models with common sense, causal reasoning or moral judgement, as many would like to do, is still a huge research challenge. “What we have today”, Choi says, “is essentially a mouth without a brain.” Robo-writers: the rise and risks of language-generating AI (nature.com) -- I'll have to investigate more to see if Nichesss would lead to a better 'voice of WSS,' without funky deficits or blither-blather. It seems I can yak and blather on tap ... ... on the other hand, if one could train a tool using hundreds of OL comments and posts, it could possibly spit out topic sentences and any defective moral judgements could be repaired by diligent research. In this essay I shall call down holy fire on the insipid rantings of ___________. Blank blank blanketty blank Quote One concept that GPT-3’s creators are excited about is semantic search, in which the task is to search text not for a specific word or phrase, but for a concept. Edited June 1, 2021 by william.scherk Grammaire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 2, 2021 Author Share Posted June 2, 2021 William, If you approach these GPT-3 programs as idea generators, or quick ways to generate and vary boilerplate text, etc., they are extremely useful. Don't expect them to replace you as writer. They won't. In the Nichesss Facebook group, I see a lot of good people with some great ideas, but unfortunately, I also I see a lot of people who do not even want to revise. They just want to copy-paste generated text that looks like it makes sense and is long enough to rank in the search engines so they can make money with ads. The long form option, which was recently released, has been severely hampered by the GPT-3 gods at Microsoft. If it doesn't like the original text you feed it, it comes back with a refusal to work and says your text is too "sensitive." In the Nichesss group, there is a lot of complaining that the text they are using has nothing to do with sensitive issues. For example, a couple of people using it to help write fiction (spy thrillers and fantasy) are complaining because it chokes when they mention guns and swords. Woke assholes on the top of Big Tech are even spoiling their own research in using their tools. Malcolm is looking at some other technologies to use in conjunction with GPT-3 for improving the long form text option. In my opinion, for a real writer to spit out outlines, brain dumps, boilerplate, educational text on simple matters, and so on, I think this is a Godsend. Once I understand GPT-Neo, I might let it train on OL and see what happens. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 Here is a very interesting way James O'Keefe managed to cut through the noise. One of the local weather reporters on Fox announced live that she was going to be in a James O'Keefe video blowing the whistle on Fox censorship. And, of course, it is now all over Twitter where O'Keefe is banned. Hecker will probably lose her job, but she was probably going to lose it after the Veritas release anyway. So why not use the free publicity before she was axed? James is one creative dude. In a weird way, this reminds me of the campaign Alex Jones did with "Bill Clinton is a rapist." Michael 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turkeyfoot Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 11 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Here is a very interesting way James O'Keefe managed to cut through the noise. One of the local weather reporters on Fox announced live that she was going to be in a James O'Keefe video blowing the whistle on Fox censorship. And, of course, it is now all over Twitter where O'Keefe is banned. Hecker will probably lose her job, but she was probably going to lose it after the Veritas release anyway. So why not use the free publicity before she was axed? James is one creative dude. In a weird way, this reminds me of the campaign Alex Jones did with "Bill Clinton is a rapist." Michael Probably will lose her job whether it was advertising her Craig List for sale items or asking single males to contact her FB page going rogue has a price. Same for the network guy who didn't cut the line after 5 seconds. Makes for a great bloopers moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 16, 2021 Author Share Posted June 16, 2021 On 6/15/2021 at 1:37 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Hecker will probably lose her job, but she was probably going to lose it after the Veritas release anyway. So why not use the free publicity before she was axed? Here is the story and you get to meet Hecker in a little more depth. The link goes to the Project Veritas site. BREAKING: Fox 26 Reporter Releases tape of ‘Corruption,’ ‘Censorship.’ Fox Corp Boss told Hecker “cease & desist” posting on Hydroxychloroquine & ‘Poor African-Americans’ don’t care about Bitcoin. “Viewers being Deceived” The video is in the article and at a place where it will not be taken down by the censorship gang. The stories she refers to are a bit older, but the important point is that Fox's throttling of the Hydroxychloriquine story (in addition to the throttling by other news agencies) probably cost a lot of people their lives. Real live, not just stats. Human beings dead. And why? To cater to the pharmaceutical industry's sponsorship of TV news. And let's not forget, the pharmaceutical industry is in like Flynn with the globalist oligarchy trying to turn the world into a technocratic dictatorship enforced by nanoparticles (and altered DNA and God knows what else) inside the bodies of the people it rules. As to Ivory Hecker's future in the news industry, I have a feeling she will land on her feet with the nascent and emerging media giants. I think she's done as far as the old guard is concerned. They live and die by the pharmaceutical ad. But the newcomers are hungry. She looks like a great fit. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted August 13, 2021 Author Share Posted August 13, 2021 Pure fake news that is so fake, even the fake news media calls it fake. The Cofounder Of The Fact-Checking Site Snopes Was Writing Plagiarized Articles Under A Fake Name WWW.BUZZFEEDNEWS.COM “You can always take an existing article and rewrite it just enough to avoid copyright infringement." Snopes. Read it for entertainment if you have time. Culturally and politically, it's not very important. But it is amusing. Don't forget, this is all mainstream. A horseshit person faked some horseshit writing at a horseshit company to get a horseshit audience. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Pure fake news that is so fake, even the fake news media calls it fake. The Cofounder Of The Fact-Checking Site Snopes Was Writing Plagiarized Articles Under A Fake Name WWW.BUZZFEEDNEWS.COM “You can always take an existing article and rewrite it just enough to avoid copyright infringement." Snopes. Read it for entertainment if you have time. Culturally and politically, it's not very important. But it is amusing. Don't forget, this is all mainstream. A horseshit person faked some horseshit writing at a horseshit company to get a horseshit audience. Michael Fact-checkers are calling this one "mostly false"...mostly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now