Ask.fm Says Most Messages Came From Troubled Teen's Own IP Address While New Cyberbullying Law Is Widely Panned

from the a-problematic-issue-addressed-with-progressively-worse-ideas dept

The recent suicides of two teenagers, Hannah Smith and Retaeh Parsons, have prompted officials to take actions to crack down on cyberbullying. Smith committed suicide after extensive bullying on ask.fm, a social Q&A site that skews heavily towards teen users. Parsons' case is a little more troubling, as it involves an alleged rape and the extensive circulation of pictures of the attack.

UK Prime Minister David Cameron responded to Smith's suicide by calling for a boycott of "vile site" ask.fm, making the same convenient mistake many politicians do -- blaming a website for the actions of a small percentage of users. Fortunately, Cameron didn't call for any further legislation, pointing out that laws dealing with harassment (online and offline) are already on the books in the UK.

Ask.fm responded by stating it would hire more moderators and make more of an effort to track and prevent abuse. It also opened an investigation into the activity on Smith's account and returned with some very interesting findings. According to its investigation, 98% of the messages "aimed" at Hannah Smith's account came from her own IP address. Smith's father has, quite reasonably, asked the site owners to substantiate this claim. He's also asked why they haven't come forward with information on the other 2%.

While ask.fm's claim about where the abusive messages originated seems bizarre, it's not an impossibility.

Scott Freeman, founder of The Cybersmile Foundation, said: "It's very easy to get carried away in this circle of online self-abuse when you're alone in your room. [Children] check it, and keep checking, and it evolves into a kind of self-harm.

"We've seen instances where people have actually lined themselves up for abuse, posting a question like "do you think I'm pretty?" knowing that they'll get torn apart. What we're dealing with now is a completely new concept. It's the hate that's resonating through all of our social media coming through to our youth."
And what happens if the prompts are ignored, or the abusive answers are simply not coming fast enough? Or, as Hazel Robinson theorizes over at the New Statesman, what if the site becomes a vehicle to express self-hatred?
You see, I can think of maybe four or five young people I've encountered on Tumblr who I would (non-judgementally, analytically) suspect have sent themselves anonymous abuse messages in order to express their self-hatred, attack themselves through the abstraction of answering anonymous aggression. It's easy to do – just have an additional browser where you're not signed in to Tumblr and leave your inbox open to anonymous things. Cleaner than a razorblade, its simple to express your self-loathing through an avatar of external hatred.
This isn't to say that Hannah Smith attacked herself, and absent any evidence from ask.fm, there's no reason to believe she did. But the possibility remains, and it's probably not as unlikely as we parents might hope.

Parson's death, on the other hand, has prompted a huge overreaction by Nova Scotia's government, which rushed through a very terrible piece of cyerbullying legislation.The new law puts the power completely in the hands of the accuser, removes any sort of objective standard and levies harsh penalties against the accused without allowing them to defend themselves at any point.

Once again, a tragedy has resulted in legislation that makes things worse for internet users in Nova Scotia (the bill does not address regular bullying), while ignoring the laws already in place to deal with the incident that began the entire cycle.

Fortunately, the reaction to the new law has been overwhelmingly negative. Putting aside the fact that legislators often enjoy a good coattail ride, the responses from elsewhere in Canada seem to indicate no one's interested in subjecting themselves to this legislative disaster.

A National Post editorial points out just how much harm this law is capable of doing.
One might hope that the law will only be used in serious cases, but that's hardly to its credit: Legislators shouldn't be writing laws they don't want enforced. We are talking about fundamental rights and freedoms: Taking away someone's phone or banning him from the Internet represents a serious impediment to education and employment. Access to a lengthy and costly appeals process is a woefully inadequate safeguard against abuses.
The Toronto Star's editorial isn't much kinder.
Well-intentioned though it is, it unwisely defines cyberbullying in overly broad terms as “any electronic communication . . . that is intended or ought reasonably be expected to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other damage or harm to another person's health, emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation.” The Star gets letters to the editor every day whose very point is to cause humiliation and distress to people with whom the writers disagree, if not to undermine their self-esteem and reputation. Are all of these people cyberbullies? There's something called free speech in this country. The new law crowds it.
Nova Scotia's law is so unpopular finding positive editorials is nearly impossible. National Post columnist Chris Selley expresses as much towards the end of a recent article:
And Sun Media's Anthony Furey joins a growing consensus of reasonable commentators in deploring Nova Scotia's absurd new anti-cyber-bullying law. (If anyone's seen a column or editorial supporting it, we'd love a heads up.)
Well, here's one.

The "Editorial Staff" at the Moose Jaw Times Herald has offered its support of Nova Scotia's law in one of the weakest editorials I've ever read. Fortunately, it's also very short. The editorial doesn't address any of the issues inherent with the bill, spending most of its time telling us how tragic suicide is and that bullying, especially cyberbullying, is bad and needs to stop.

When it's done spoon-feeding readers the obvious, it wraps up its non-argument with this.
It's time the governments of Canada go to bat for their youth, and place legal barriers into the mix, as [Wayne] MacKay suggests. Such legislation could help prevent further suicides in the same ilk as Parsons, Todd, and Hubley.
The Wayne MacKay quoted here is a law professor at Dalhousie University and is heading up a push for this legislation to be enacted across Canada. One would think a law professor would know the difference between good laws and bad laws and not actively pursue enacting such a problematic piece of legislation. (Then again, we have a president with a background in constitutional law, and that clearly hasn't resulted in constitutional rights being protected.)

The op-ed is finally put out of its misery by the final sentence, an insipid cluster of words that can barely muster the enthusiasm to get to the ending punctuation.
It certainly couldn't hurt.
Yeah, actually it could. For several examples, see nearly every other editorial written about the new cyberbullying bill. Anything recommended by the half-hearted phrase "It certainly couldn't hurt" is something obviously devoid of positive attributes. When you have to resort to using negative statements in order to "praise" something, it's time to reconsider your support.



Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 4:51pm

    And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    But ask.fm seems still intent on dodging all responsibility. -- Even the minion isn't buying their claims...

    A big problem with internet forums is that owners are solely intent on monetary gain without recognizing civil responsibilities in a complex society; they write TOS pages saying exactly that they'll monetize users any way can but users have no rights or recourse whatsoever. -- But that's balloney! It's just not the way civil society works, and that's why/symptom of it falling apart.

    Needs be made explicit in law that an internet forum is very little different in its rules from a bulletin board in what can be posted, nor much different from most social settings in other aspects. -- That means explicitly that the proposed law goes way too far, -- Definitely "on teh internets" must not give corporations getting money from those forums ANY special immunity.

    Law is too important to be left to politicians. -- That's why civil enforcement in terms of owners moderating forums must be done, so that politicians have no excuse for their tyranny. -- OH, and you kids have a certain duty to limit your own excesses TOO.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    Mason Wheeler (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 5:10pm

    Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    As with a lot of your posts, I get the feeling that there are some good ideas lurking in there, but they're so crowded by the way you go off in five directions at once that it's hard to get a clear view of the points you're trying to make...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 5:25pm

    Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    Interesting take from Nina Funell:

    So what motivates this phenomenon and why have we heard so little about it?

    According to [danah boyd], online self-harassment like that observed on Formspring or Ask.fm may represent a cry for help, a grab for attention, an opportunity to demonstrate toughness and resilience or a way of fishing for compliments from friends who jump in to defend against the abuse. Boyd also describes the behaviour as a form of ''digital self-harming'', stressing that teens who are in pain do not always lash out at others; very often they lash out at themselves. And occasionally they invite an audience to watch on.

    For the ''digital self-harmer'' the presence of an audience appears to serve other purposes too. Anonymously calling oneself a ''loser'' online allows them to test out other people's attitudes: do other people see me this way too? Is my perception of myself shared universally?

    Second, by inflicting harm on themselves before an audience, it makes their pain visible and therefore more'' 'real' ''. Finally, by giving others the impression that they are ''under attack'', the afflicted individual is able to communicate to others exactly what they are feeling: overwhelmed and under siege. And they can achieve this without ever having to risk saying the words: ''I'm in pain, I need your help.''

    What this means is that while the abusive comments might be manufactured, the feelings they speak to are very much real.
    Excerpt from http://www.theage.com.au/comment/digital-selfharm-teens-tap-out-an-online-cry-for-help-20130819-2s7a v.html

    Which suggests to me mental health professionals ought to consider teen self-bullying as something akin to cutting or similar self-harm.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 5:39pm

    Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    I think you are a far more serious symptom of the decline of society.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 5:46pm

    will say it again...

    It's the war against anonymity.

    Ideas should not be as important than the entity saying them.
    What if an Idea was widely accepted even tho the rulers oppose it?
    Can't have that now, can we.
    Only the powerful and "influential" have good ideas because they said them, and the "influence" or "media" validates their ideas as legit and of course, the best. That status quo must be maintained.
    For too long have ideas been allowed to form and grow without any person to blame or discredit. The internet is the breeding ground.

    If no one is anonymous then ideas can be discredited because of WHO created them.
    The status quo will be maintained.



    Who am I ?
    I am nothing more than a voice.
    If Obama replied to this comment anonymously then his ideas would be equal to mine.

    That's what makes anonymity so threatening to the established powers. Can't have us all being of equal stature now, can we.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 5:58pm

    Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    Not sure how far you want to take that 'site owners should be made responsible for moderating posts' angle, as considering how vitriolic, aggressive, and filled with trollish content your posts are a lot of the times, that means you'd very quickly find yourself 'moderated' out of existence on sites like this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 6:05pm

    Re: will say it again...

    Sometimes the good nyms win. ex: Prenda

    But there was much ado made about trying to kill the messenger to stop the message or distract from it, but you can carry the message forward.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 6:06pm

    You need a thick skin when it comes to posting on the internet. Especially if post using your true identity.

    The internet is full of strangers, and most of them aren't warm and fuzzy on the inside.

    I feel sorry for all these warm and bubbly people who log onto the internet, expecting to share the love with strangers.

    Best piece of advice for these misguided individuals, is to log back off the internet as soon as your feelings start to get hurt.

    Second best piece of advice is to stay anonymous. That way you're posts can't be 'made fun of' offline in school.

    I have great respect for people who post using their real names online. I don't think I could deal with the insults being thrown at me, without getting my feelings hurt or becoming angry.

    Hence, I probably don't have a thick enough skin to deal with it, so I just stay an anonymous coward. :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    horse with no name, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 6:23pm

    Wait

    " 98% of the messages "aimed" at Hannah Smith's account came from her own IP address. "

    So now IP address is absolute proof of something? You don't think that his bully friends could have either spoofed the IP or had a rootkit or similar on the kids computer to send their hateful messages from there?

    Come on guys... if you are going to argue that IP address doesn't mean anything in copyright cases, you need to stay on the same side of the argument the rest of the time too.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    BentFranklin (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 7:03pm

    I predict: Some teens get caught and prosecuted for cyberbullying and kill themselves.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 7:21pm

    Re: Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    While a single IP Address might seems to conclude that it was from herself, this could easily be from a IP NAT Pool used by school computers, a popular teenage hangout, library, or any other public access point. I.E. from a technical perspective, I would at least hold off at least until more facts are known.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 9:25pm

    Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    In many ways humans are dumber than wild animals. At least wild animals don't engage in self destructive behavior like smoking and drinking. Even many great kings of the past, like Alexander the great, have fallen due to self destructive behavior.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 9:30pm

    "He's also asked why they haven't come forward with information on the other 2%. "

    Because... no disrespect to the dead- whom can't defend themselves- ever intented, your daughter was playing for attention.

    When your daughter goes on a website and bashes herself with sockpuppet accounts, she has some severe mental health concerns. Why didn't he, as her father, come forward with information on THAT?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:15pm

    Re: Re: Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    While a single IP Address might seems to conclude that it was from herself, this could easily be from a IP NAT Pool used by school computers, a popular teenage hangout, library, or any other public access point.

    One hopes that is not what ask.fm means by "her own IP address". That would be near NSA-level doublespeak. Unless they're pretty much making stuff up (which is possible) that should mean an IP address connected to her home ISP account. Of course, the linked article doesn't even use the phrase "IP address" so who knows?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:16pm

    So dumb

    It certainly couldn't hurt.

    The stupid... it burns!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:19pm

    Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    You would be wrong there.

    Lots of animals drink alcohol.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:22pm

    Re: Re: Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    Since it was from her home, and that home is serviced by cable, you got about a thousand homes linked to that node with the same IP.

    Now that would be sad, because it meant all of her neighbors where doing the bullying.

    Her own community was abusing her.
    That is the danger of communities, maybe that is how ootb's and AJ's are born.

    Or even more sad is the thought that her familiars where the ones doing the abuse to toughen her up, or maybe she did it to herself for some reason.

    And of course she will not be the last soon others will follow believing that this is the way to go, maybe societies response to such things may be a catalyst to more of it happening.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:30pm

    Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    You be wrong on that, a lot of animals love booze to the point that you can find a lot of them dead for drinking too much, is just they don't know how to manufacture it, others go after they preferred food no matter what it takes, like Honey Badgers found dead inside bee hives.

    But in nature those are the ones that don't make it and don't procreate so although it happens they become less frequent in numbers as they succumb by themselves and can't pass that behavior ahead.

    But for humans we don't have that, all those natural selection tools are abhorrent to our sense of survival, so how do we prevent that kind of outcome without natural tools? or should we prevent it at all?

    hard questions to be answered and I don't have good answers for them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    miatajim (profile), Aug 20th, 2013 @ 10:32pm

    Re: Re: Re: Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    "Since it was from her home, and that home is serviced by cable, you got about a thousand homes linked to that node with the same IP."

    Sorry that is not how cable nodes work.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 21st, 2013 @ 2:09am

    what is just as sad as the terrible even that took place in Canada is the desire of certain politicians to be 'on the front page' introducing a new law to stop the cyber bullying. the desire is to be on the front page, not to stop the bullying at all! that is the main reason these type of bills are so ridiculous! they end up, as stated, making the whole issue worse than it already was, which was bad enough to begin with! instead of worrying about how they will look for doing something to 'protect the children', politicians need to stop, think seriously about the aim and consult with people who know what they are talking about! the 'porn filter' in the UK is another prime example of talking about doing something 'for the children' when no notice is taken of the experts before mouth is open far enough to get a van in it, let alone a foot!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    Ninja (profile), Aug 21st, 2013 @ 3:35am

    Even if it was real bullying we must not forget that it's all about stupid teens. And boy they are stupid. I was stupid. They think they know everything and that they are the prime example of human beings. Lets not fool ourselves as it is the norm to a greater or lesser degree.

    So, are we really ready to throw privacy, freedom of speech under the bus and stupid teenagers in jail just because of some broad term that really has its origin in teen stupidity? Why not do the most basic investigative job (you know, teens are stupid, they usually won't cover their tracks even if they know how) and give the bully a good, hard wrist slap (and possibly deprive him of his gaming) and offer support to the bullied instead?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Thinker, Aug 21st, 2013 @ 3:56am

    Kids

    Kids and those you consider abdult kill themself becouse =
    - self hatred
    - revenge
    - brainwashing

    See, that was not difficult at all.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    martyburns (profile), Aug 21st, 2013 @ 4:30am

    Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    But ask.fm seems still intent on dodging all responsibility.

    But parents seem still intent on dodging all responsibility.

    FYFY

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 21st, 2013 @ 5:02am

    His computer was prob hacked so the abuser couldn't be traced by IP address. My comp has been hacmed similarly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    torzir, Aug 21st, 2013 @ 5:16am

    Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    Wrote a shitty blog post saying why it's incredibly difficult and time consuming to fully moderate a site such as ask.fm.
    http://torziruk.wordpress.com/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 21st, 2013 @ 6:16am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Self-cyberbullying is a form of self-harm

    Really depends, CGN, Carrier Grade Network Address Translation is definitely possible. wikipedia Last company that I remember announcing it was Verizon DSL: link

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 7:57am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    I said wild animals with the intent of excluding humans giving them anything (ie: domestic animals). I already know that animals, when given alcohol by humans, would drink it. At least the animal is unaware of the fact that the alcohol is detrimental to their health. Humans willfully engage in self destructive behavior knowing its self destructive whereas wild animals, with no human intervention, do not.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 7:58am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    "a lot of animals love booze"

    Indeed, the key word here is 'wild' animals. Beer does not exist outside of humans creating it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 8:11am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    I said wild animals with the intent of excluding humans giving them anything (ie: domestic animals). I already know that animals, when given alcohol by humans, would drink it.

    Wild animals eat fruit that has fermented and contains alcohol. Whether they're just trying to eat fruit or they enjoy the alcohol I have no idea.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 7:47pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    Even red wine in moderation can be good for you. Coffee, in moderation, can be good for you. Too much of anything is bad for you. Doubtful animals get drunk in nature and if the fruit is bad for them it's doubtful the animals know that before eating it.

    Your argument is basically that you don't like the way I worded my sentence. Grammar Nazi arguments aside my argument stands.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 7:58pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    If you want to be technical an animal could accidentally wind up in the wrong place at the wrong time and be attacked by a lion. Likewise, a human could accidentally wind up in the wrong place at the wrong time and have something bad happen to them. While this is technically self destructive that's clearly not what I meant by self destructive behavior. I meant engaging in behavior one knows is self destructive ahead of time.

    I don't see animals jumping off cliffs very often (though I've heard of stories of animals that are practically tortured or at least given a very miserable life, by humans, committing suicide. Heck I had a friend that had a cat that seemed to be sick, after eating a pigeon (not sure if that's what caused the alleged sickness), trying to sit directly behind a parked car tire several times as if wanting the car to kill it upon backing out of the driveway). If a cat accidentally falls out a tree that's technically self destructive behavior. but that's not what I'm referring to, such a reference would be ridiculous and I shouldn't have to be that specific to thwart off grammar Nazis.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 9:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    Doubtful animals get drunk in nature and if the fruit is bad for them it's doubtful the animals know that before eating it.

    They absolutely do get drunk. Obviously they don't know if it's bad for them. I don't know if they even realize it's not just normal fruit.

    Your argument is basically that you don't like the way I worded my sentence.

    I wasn't making an argument, I was just stating a fact you were apparently not aware of. However, I think your argument, that humans are "dumber" than wild animals, is not supported by the fact that humans engage in self destructive behavior more frequently than animals. The fact that a behavior is self destructive does not imply that it does not require intelligence to carry it out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 23rd, 2013 @ 9:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And the solution is/was for sites to do some moderating.

    No one said beer. They said booze. Alcohol. Alcohol occurs naturally in nature. Then there are certain wild monkeys that are known to steal drinks at resorts...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Enough already, Sep 17th, 2013 @ 8:58pm

    Turn it off

    I am so sick of people complaining about Internet bulling, it is the easiest thing to stop. Just turn the bloody thing off. If your kid keeps sneaking on then disconnect the connection to your home. To all you who say u "need" the Internet, stop bs-ing.. It may not be as easy but there are ways to live without it.
    Maybe teach your kids to defend themselves, and monitor their use, it's easy coz the services aren't in the kids names so if you want to see activity and what not call ur provider and check. Step up and parent ur kids, I would rather my kid hate me for disconnecting the Internet and phones then be dead or in a mental hospital. Parents need to do their job and be parents.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This