Like it? Share it!

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



Misdirection... PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by James Randi   

One of my good friends in Switzerland is Michael Bloch, from whom I received this note:

Randi: I regularly receive recommendations from Amazon.com advertising esoteric books. They send these since I have bought books written by you!

Michael attached this recommendation that he'd received:

Dear Amazon.com Customer,

As someone who has purchased or rated "An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural" by James Randi, you might like to know that "Immortality And Our Employments Hereafter With What A Hundred Spirits, Good And Evil, Say Of Their Dwelling Place" is now available. You can order yours for just $29.95 by following the link below.

Michael complained to Amazon.com on May 10th with the following e-mail :

As a reader of books by James Randi I have received for some weeks such nonsensical "recommendations." I suspect some kind of piracy by someone who doesn't like Randi's books. Please take a look into the matter.

On the same day he got this reply:

Thank you for writing to us at Amazon.com. I'm sorry to hear you're unhappy with our recommendations service. I do understand your concern in this regard.

You can exclude certain purchases from affecting your recommendations; please visit this page for further instructions: [page given]  Your recommendations are based on the items you've purchased, items you've told us you own items you viewed while browsing our site, and items you've rated. Our software then compares your activity on our site with that of other customers to choose items that may interest you. Your recommendations will change regularly as you continue to browse, purchase, and rate items.

You can remove specific items from appearing in your recommendations by checking the "Not interested" box and then the "Refresh your recommendations" link at the bottom of the Your Recommendations page. If instead you want to stop your name from appearing on the site, and browse our store without our recommendations features present, you can accomplish this by logging out of our website.

On the Amazon.com home page, click the link that says "If you're not ___, click here." Then, leave the e-mail and password spaces blank and click the "Amazon.com" tab at the top of the page. This will remove your name and recommendations from all Amazon pages. The next time you sign in on our website, your personalized features will return. You can simply repeat the steps above to clear your name.

Thank you for shopping at Amazon.com.  Please let us know if this e-mail resolved your question:

If yes, click here: [given]

If not, click here: [given]

Please note: this e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail. To contact us about an unrelated issue, please visit the Help section of our web site.

Best regards, Krithika N.

Amazon.com

We're Building Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company

Since Michael was not satisfied with this reply, he wrote another email to Amazon:

I am not at all satisfied with the reply of Krithika N. of May 10th, for (s)he didn't address the matter that someone recommends books that are obviously contrary to the interest sphere of the readers of James Randi's books. You may call it a practical joke, but as a friend of James Randi's I strongly protest his being associated with books like "Linda: Our Eyes and Her Soul: Laugh, Linda, Laugh and Bring the Face of God To You," "Immortality And Our Employments Hereafter With What A Hundred Spirits, Good And Evil, Say Of Their Dwelling Place," "The Life in Your Womb: Life in the Womb," "Sad Eyes That Glorified God" and similar literature of esoteric and spiritualistic character. I kindly ask you again to look into the matter instead of sending me a model letter that misses the point.

Then he sat back to wait, writing to me:

Now I wonder if I will get an answer. I thought that this matter might be of interest to you.

Best from Switzerland - also from Katica.

Michael

PS. Next week will be the annual GWUP meeting in Hamburg.

Thank you, Michael. This makes us even more aware of the frightening fact that book publishing is approaching ever closer to a Woo-Woo-Centric industry...!  It's now the 20th of May, and no comments from Amazon.com...

For our readers' information, "GWUP" is "Die Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Unterzsuchung von Parawissenschaften" - The Society for the Scientific Examination of Parascience - as best I can translate it. In other words, the Good Guys...!

Trackback(0)
Comments (45)Add Comment
...
written by laca, May 20, 2009
I'd just like to point out that it is not *someone* who makes those recommendations, but rather a piece of software - based on previous purchased items etc., as stated in the reply by Krithika N. That software obviously has bugs that need to be fixed, however, the situation is less grim than depicted smilies/smiley.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +23
Another side of that coin.
written by stuartd, May 20, 2009
Iaca points out that it is software that makes the connections that give the recommendations.
That same software means that people who buy the "esoteric" books Michael doesn't like will get a recommendation that they read James Randi's books. That could lead to them learning how they may be targeted as dupes.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +34
...
written by JimC, May 20, 2009
Is this any different from Randi's books being on the same shelf in an actual bookstore as the ones he exposes? Booksellers are just that, sellers. If it doesn't affect their bottom line, they don't care. If they disregard their bottom line, eventually they go out of business.

I didn't like the "recommendations" Amazon was giving me (in other unrelated subject areas), so now I just ignore them.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +8
...
written by pervel, May 20, 2009
It doesn't really matter how or why Amazon recommends certain books. The quality of any recommendation system should be measured by how often it recommends books that the customer might be interested in actually buying. Clearly the recommendation system has not worked as intended in this specific case.

As for the response to the complaint. That's more of a customer service issue. In my opinion, sending a "model response" to a complaining customer is often worse than no response at all. Chances are low that such a response will satisfy the customer.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
...
written by kaivulagi, May 20, 2009
Me thinks that correspondence with Katica is analogous to having a conversation with the automated operator at the bank.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
...
written by laca, May 20, 2009
The correspondence with Katica might be a model response, but it clearly answered the question and explained a solution.

Michael suspected "piracy by someone who doesn't like Randi's books" and asked the matter to be looked into. The reply stated that in fact it was a software that sent out those recommendations, thereby assuring Michalel that there was no "piracy" and also that the matter has been looked into. The email also explained how to get rid of those recommendations, without being asked to.

Was the reply helpful? Yup.
Was it a model response? Does it really matter? Michael missed the point in the reply, and not the other way around.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +15
Ah, the joys of computer software
written by That Guy, May 20, 2009
As a software engineer myself, I can (almost completely) assure you there is not malice going on here. Amazon Recommendations are actually not too bad. In this case, I would think it would be more of an outlier than anything else. The number of books Amazon moves in the Woo-Woo category are, I have to believe, much fewer than those in, say, the Cheap Romance Novel with a Hunk on the Cover category. So the software is going to group more Woo-Woo books together because it is a smaller category.

As stuartd pointed out, this should have the positive effect of getting more people, especially the people who need them, familiar, and possible even buying, Randi's books. And as the response stated,
Our software then compares your activity on our site with that of other customers to choose items that may interest you.
This may actually mean that people who have purchased Woo-Woo books have purchased Randi's Anti-Woo-Woo books, and possibly even the other way around. After all, JREF needs to get the books for the library from somewhere, why not Amazon?

Because this is a small category, and run by software, it is not really likely to change. It would not really be worth Amazon's time to have a programmer go in and modify the software specifically for this case. However, as it is software, it may be set up to take the "Not Interested" responses into account. If we flag these books when we get "recommendations" which do not really fit into the James Randi book buyer profile, it just might make a difference.

Note: I am not familiar with the specifics of Amazon's recommendation software. The above are just guesses (educated, tho they may be) based on my rather high familiarity with software practices in general.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +19
"Know your enemy"
written by medains, May 20, 2009
There are many reasons why the software might have drawn inferences between Randi's books and woo-woo ones.

The most obvious is that people who buy Randi's books also buy woo-woo ones in order to better know what to expose. Randi himself has an enormous library of such woo-woo books.

If this mechanism can lead those who buy and believe woo-woo books to read "Flim Flam" and other such books then it can only be a good thing - despite being slightly annoying to us - it's only one click to mark books as "I'm not interested in this book".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +8
...
written by Cian, May 20, 2009
i'd imagine even the email was created by software. A friend of mine had a long correspondence with amazon over a delayed order ... he decided to save the mails and put them up in a blog. Each reply was from someone new with suspiciously random looking names. Eventually he recieved what seemed like genuine replies when he would not let the matter lie (after a few months of generated replies).

http://mynewfriendsatamazon.blogspot.com/2008_06_01_archive.html


report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
...
written by latsot, May 21, 2009
As some people have said, there's no malice going on here. Don't forget that recommendations are based partly on the behaviour of other people. I for one don't buy woo books, but I've been known to check them out on Amazon (for example, if they or their authors are mentioned in a Swift story). Since I have bought books by Randi and other skeptics from Amazon, my browsing history will slightly increase the correlation between the two categories of books. So it's partly my fault.

It may also be related to the classifications that publishers give their books. If some of the categories of a woo book and a Randi book happen to overlap (which doesn't seem unlikely), that's not Amazon's fault. The match is most likely done

Plus, who's to say that the recommendations are wrong? They reflect browsing and buying behaviour in a predictable (to whoever designed the system) ways.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by latsot, May 21, 2009
Oops, ignore the "The match is most likely done" in my previous message.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by latsot, May 21, 2009
suspiciously random looking names.


Suspiciously random looking names? Are you serious?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
Oh no, |-|erc is out "in the real world" again...
written by Michael K Gray, May 21, 2009
I implore you to seek immediate professional mental health care Herc, as many caring folk, (including moi), have advised you to so do over the years that you have been stating your incoherent claims, (with ZERO factual support for those that can actually be rationally understood).
Please actually take the medications that have been prescribed by your doctors, as advised.
As to the "thousands in Townsville" who "know" that you are paranormal, I ask you once again:
who are they? How can one contact them?
From our previous multitudinous interactions, you have yet to identify as SINGLE one of them.

As I have said to you before, "put up, shut up, or take your medications, PLEASE!"

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +10
Is It Krithika or Katica?
written by bosshog, May 21, 2009
If you resent people trying to sell BS to you then you came to the wro-ong planet, Brother.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by bosshog, May 21, 2009
It's pretty obvious that the software homed in on the words "occult" and "supernatural" in Randi's book title and went with that because both are popular subjects and hence money makers.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by StarTrekLivz, May 21, 2009
I used Amazon to buy books by Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, and Harris (the Famous 4 atheists).

To my astonishment, my recommendations thereafter included the "Left Behind" series (even when I believed in god, I knew those books were a false and ludicrous misrepresentation of "Revelation to John"), Jim Hagee, Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, etc. It struck me as ridiculous as expressing an interest in Quantum Physics and being referred to the works of Jane Austen (which are fine, but not exactly science -- just like the bible).
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Karl_Withakay, May 21, 2009
But why aren't you buying Randi's books from the JREF store rather than Amazon? Doesn't JFER sees more of the money if you buy direct?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
:3
written by Quakeulf, May 21, 2009
I've seen recommendations for Randi's books when people I know buy woo-woo books at Amazon. It works both ways, and is rather amusing, but also unfortunate.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
A few points on automated rankings
written by Ganymede Ceriaptrix, May 21, 2009
As an AI developer, indeed, I would like to reassure Michael and Randi that there is indeed no malice. There are two possibilities as to a cause, both of which are fairly probable and indeed could well have occurred in tandem.

Theory 1 - Keyword/Thesaurus: The recommendations system merely computes probability scores based on keywords (potentially when no related purchase data can be found), despite being advertised as being more "intelligent". If you compare the keywords present for the store items across the two pages, automated comparison via similarity and thesaurus look-up would yield a high Bayesian probability score. This is a number between 0.0 and 1.0 which refers to mathematical likelihood of a given condition; in this case, this would be whether two books are related. This may indeed be triggered by a customer buying both books with his or her account.

Theory 2 - Purchase Patterns: Skeptics are likely to be collectors of woo-woo books for the purposes of research, criticism, documentation and interest. I should indeed suspect that many skeptics and researchers into paranormal claims own many volumes of the nature suggested to Michael. It should also be said that if skeptics are honest enquirers into the paranormal, which I've no doubt many of Randi's readers are, it is in fact mandatory they study the claims made and evaluate them on their own terms.

QED. smilies/cheesy.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
...
written by Ganymede Ceriaptrix, May 21, 2009
Sorry, please excuse accidental underlines above.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@Ganymede Ceriaptrix
written by mazyloron, May 21, 2009
That's a little more technical than I'd have gone, but yeah, you and several others have pretty much hit the nail on the head.

It's software that matches based on keywords and purchase data. So, two books named, just for the sake of example: "Change Your Life With Telekinesis!" & "There's No Such Thing as Telekinesis" would show up as related to one another. And, furthermore, they kind of ARE. Both discuss telekinesis, they just take opposing views on it. But all the software knows is that you are interested in books about "telekinesis," it's not going to be able to evaluate the overall position each author takes on the subject. It's just software, it's not sentient.

There's nothing malicious going on there. No one's hacked into Amazon and started recommending parapsychology books to fans of James Randi in order to convert us. That's beyond preposterous.

I think the purchase side of it also has some merit, but I think some people overestimate how many pro-woo books skeptics tend to buy. Do that many people really shell out $75 to buy several books supporting and criticising every position? I doubt it. (I know I don't want to give any money to those snake oil salesmen.) The library is for that sort of thing. Read up for free, then spend your money on the people you want to support, that's my view.

Also, I would be very surprised if there weren't FAR more books supporting each and every kind of woo than there are debunking them. New age, self-help, spritual, alternate-religion type books are a dime a, well...gross. Think about it: their audience consists of some of the most credulous people on the planet. They'll buy anything that mentions "alternative healing" or whatnot. So there's also a FAR greater number of pro-woo books out there for Amazon to recommend than anti-woo ones, increasing the odds that a random selection from said pool of books will be pro-woo.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
...
written by Kuroyume, May 21, 2009
I was going to go neural network on a supercomputer involving genetic algorithms and multi-dimensional strategies. Darn! smilies/wink.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Book Idea
written by GusGus, May 21, 2009
New age, self-help, spritual, alternate-religion type books are a dime a, well...gross. Think about it: their audience consists of some of the most credulous people on the planet. They'll buy anything that mentions "alternative healing" or whatnot.


This gives me an idea for a book or series of books to be written by someone with far more skill and talent in writing than I have: The title of the book should be woo-woo looking without actually being woo-woo, we want to have truth in advertising after all. The title would cause one to infer woo-woo without actually implying woo-woo. The author would lead the reader slowly but surely and logically through arguments starting from a woo-woo standpoint and ending squarely at a skeptical standpoint.
.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by mazyloron, May 21, 2009
This gives me an idea for a book or series of books to be written by someone with far more skill and talent in writing than I have: The title of the book should be woo-woo looking without actually being woo-woo, we want to have truth in advertising after all. The title would cause one to infer woo-woo without actually implying woo-woo. The author would lead the reader slowly but surely and logically through arguments starting from a woo-woo standpoint and ending squarely at a skeptical standpoint.

I fully support this idea.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by Diverted Chrome, May 21, 2009
Sorry Michael, but you're coming off as a reflexive crank, hassling Amazon because their automated computer recommendation algorithm doesn't work well.

Amazon has already very publicly announced that the algorithm doesn't work and that they would like to be at the forefront of this next-step technology.

tinyurl.com/qa7qjw

Like the James Randi Foundation's $1mil, you can win $1mil for creating a recommendation algorithm that works, sponsored by Netflix. It's a Grail/Rosetta Stone for an entire community of programmers.

netflixprize.com/leaderboard
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
OMG!
written by BillyJoe, May 21, 2009
If I had received that second email I would have read it and then immediately flushed it down the toilet and not wasted any more time on this idiot.
Honestly, some people just have no idea.

BJ
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by Kuroyume, May 21, 2009
My recommendations from Amazon have always been a bit beturbed. I continually get recommendations for books which I've already purchased...from Amazon yet! Maybe part of their update to the algorithm could be to check previous purchases and any books already marked as 'owned' (I've done many of those as well - from recommendations). There is probably a need for a more indepth categorization scheme but don't ask me how that would be accomplished.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Oh dear...
written by Andycal, May 21, 2009
Like many here, I've worked in neural network search and as has already been pointed out, it 'aint that good. But by far the most important thing to ask oneself is "who cares?". Amazon send out a gazillion of these things every day and they make money from it, I guess that's the only justification they need.

This sort of complaint just shows what a stuffy bunch of no-it-alls we are. Can we hide it before my 'woo' friends read it? It's embarrassing...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
Andy, yes, that's it...IT'S EMBARRASSING...
written by BillyJoe, May 22, 2009
But by far the most important thing to ask oneself is "who cares?"...This sort of complaint just shows what a stuffy bunch of no-it-alls we are. Can we hide it before my 'woo' friends read it? It's embarrassing...

Please, let's stop commenting on this article and let it descend to the bottom of the pile where it belongs.

BJ
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by Caller X, May 22, 2009
Clearly Michael Bloch, who wrote the TWO emails is not the only skeptic with far too much time on his hands.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
Yeah, that evil software...
written by Brookston John, May 22, 2009
I looked for some books on the Life and Times of Bettie page once. The Bot still recommends "How to" books on BDSM to me.
Not that that's a particularly BAD thing, just not *MY* "thing"...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Yes, Billy Joe...
written by Brookston John, May 22, 2009
I know "page" should be capitalized as "Page". What can i say? ITS won't buy us new keyboards...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
x
written by BillyJoe, May 22, 2009
smilies/grin.gif

Good one.

I was going to give you an up vote for that, but I know you always give yourself one so make that a legit one now.

smilies/wink.gif

BJ
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -3
...
written by BillyJoe, May 22, 2009
...and don't worry, I've already given myself a negative one.

smilies/grin.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by knitwit, May 23, 2009
Very interesting comments--and enlightening to the non-techies among us! I think part of this is the general insult older people feel at getting absurd form (model) letters that don't really address (directly anyway) the original question. I know we have to "get over it", but it's not always easy to give up the basic things one has spent a lifetime cultivating. I would recommend Netflix's system over Amazon, though because when you call them, you get a person (a polite, intelligent local resident of Portland, Oregon) right away! Their recommendations are pretty good, in my case anyway although I find it amusing that they label any decent film "cerebral".

I think there is a much larger concern than Amazon's recommendations on this topic. After all, as has been mentioned, you can simply click "not interested" or log out, etc. What bothers me is the library which shelves science and pseudoscience side-by-side. Now, don't get me wrong (as the librarian invariably does); I am not saying the library should not have woo books, just that they should have their own, clearly marked section. The librarian says "people can make their own judgements". This is irresponsible in my view--many, many people simply do not have the education and experience to make this judgement. Someone who has just been diagnosed with diabetes (type II), for instance, might go the library to read up and pick up (right next to a bona fide medical source) a book by some quack whose name I forget, telling you that it's all caused by (fill in the blank) and all you need to do is eat this or swallow that supplement, which is for sale at the author's website, of course. It all sounds very scientific on the surface and there may even be a reference section, but as the reader has no means to evaluate any of it, well...anyway, I think this is a real problem that has nothing to do with algorithms or even profit motive, but is just bad (junk) library science.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
knitwit
written by BillyJoe, May 23, 2009
The librarian says "people can make their own judgements".

She may be telling you that she is not prepared, or have the required knowledge or expertise, to make that decision.

BJ
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Is the Moon full Downunda?
written by Brookston John, May 23, 2009
"Hercules" tells us:
"...like thousands in this town already know I am paranormal. "

If we include "Abnormal, not-Normal" in the definition of "Paranormal", I'm sure thousands in his town agree.
Hundreds of Telly-Vangelists think they're gawd's "chosen messenger", Herk just takes it one step further...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Maybe this is a good thing
written by Kalen, May 23, 2009
If woo-woo books and Randi's books are lumped together in Amazon's categorizing system, then this means people who have purchased woo-woo books are getting recommendations for Randi's books.

And that would not be a bad thing.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by BillyJoe, May 23, 2009
Is the Moon full Downunda?

Actually it's a mere slither at the moment, rising in the east just before the sun, but I'm not sure that it ever dawns on Hercules.

BJ
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by LuigiNovi, May 24, 2009
This is a non-issue, as Michael Bloch was clearly just being a bit self-righteous. First, the books that were recommended to him were recommended because books that touch upon pseudoscience are naturally grouped together--regardless of whether the books take a creduluous or skeptical approach to them. Bloch's apparent offense would seem to suggest that he expects companies like Amazon.com to distinguish books on such topics by virtue of said acceptance or skepticism of the topic. Obviously, companies are not going to do this, since it's unnecessary. Indeed, what right does Bloch have to tell Amazon what other books to "associate" with Randi's, especially given that Bloch is not authorized to speak on behalf of Randi. Does Bloch seriously expect Amazon to change the way they group their books based on what one fan of one of the books' authors says?

Further hurting Bloch's case is the fact that he didn't even read the response Amazon sent him, which was that such groups are determined by computer based on the books that he purchases or browses--which is a perfectly understandable practice. What precisely is it about this that Bloch objects to? Does he see this as an implied statement that Randi's position on these topics and those of their advocates is somehow being equated by this? Does he feel that one interested in books that approach these topics skeptically would not be interested in those that do not? Why not? Don't skeptics themselves read these books--- mustn't they---in order to critique them? Doesn't the JREF have its own library of non-skeptical materials on those topics for this precise reason, as Randi has mentioned in his various Commentaries? I certainly accumulated a number of credulous programs on tape during the years before I discovered skepticism, and I certainly didn't chuck them in the garbage after I became one. Referring to them is often necessary, after all, when I debate those topics online with friends.

Michael needs to lighten up.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
Basil Threatening his car.
written by Raindoggy, May 25, 2009
Yes, those recomendations are generated not given. I would assume the email was a form of some kind as well. Just sit back and enjoy the irony of the crappy recomendations for you. It's a riot!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Maybe Amazon are more perceptive than Michael thinks...
written by jcwept, May 26, 2009
...after all, if he's going to attempt correspondence with a software application and then report it as a real conversation, then maybe his skeptical radar is a little off kilter. smilies/grin.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
I'm really not sure who to balk at here...
written by T. Noel, May 28, 2009
The reason you get ads for those books is pretty clear. Randi's book concerns the occult, the supernatural, etc. It concerns the other side, yes, but it does concern them.

So, through contextual advertisement, you are going to get ads for books about the supernatural. If you don't like that they unfortunately have the majority of them written About their merits, instead of their flaws, go write more books.

In the meantime, what you are saying essentially balks at free speech, in that both sides are presented. You have the right to delete emails, and you have been told by Amazon how to avoid recieving ads based on your purchases, and have chosen not to take those avenues. By doing so, you forfeit your right to complain about this situation. So basically, quit whining. You got a contextual ad in your email box, oddly one that had a Higher chance of appealing to you than most you may normally recieve, and you're complaining about it. You subscribed to those emails when you made that order and checked the box to subscribe.

Don't turn this into more than it is, because frankly, this is a simple incident of overreaction. Focus on things that are way more important, and quit jumping at shadows.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy