Subscribe to receive Slightly Sensible blog posts by email:

Your email:

Get a catalog!

Slightly Sensible - B&B Insider

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Mike’s Social Networking Quandary

Posted by Mike Fahrion on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 @ 06:43 AM
  
Add to delicious  delicious  
  

Dear Reader,

Do you remember Metcalfe’s law? Back in 1980 (when much of the country was debating who shot JR and mourning John Lennon), Robert Metcalfe stated that the value of a network is proportionate to the square of the number of connected users of the system. While more a metaphor than an absolute, his statement is grounded in the fact that the number of connections increases at that rate, therefore the value potential increases as well.

Potential.

Ok fellow techies, geeks, nerds and general overachievers. I’m baffled and need your help.

Social networking. Particularly the world of Facebook and Twitter and those that inhabit it.

I don’t get it.

Facebook claims on the order of 500 million users. Cripes! That’s 500,000,000 networked end nodes, all presumably with at least a double digit IQ.

Twitter boasts about 65 million tweets each and every day. 65 million fresh chunks of data posted daily, much of it by living, breathing and – one would suspect - thinking bodies.

All that potential, I can’t find a decent use. Please, please tell me that I’m missing the point because this is driving me friggin’ nuts - and on two separate fronts.

First off, I agree with Metcalfe. Imagine the untold capabilities that should be lurking within - these should be the most powerful tools ever known to mankind. A cloud model database with the world’s largest network of intelligent (some more than others) end-nodes.

Second, hundreds of millions of people are investing time - real time - using these networks. Quick research reveals the average user spends about 6 hours a month. According to my napkin we’re talking about 3 Billion hours of humanity dedicated to this project every month. (The Egyptians built a pyramid in less time and 5,000 years later still have something to show for their efforts).

So we’ve got a colossal network of intelligent end nodes. It may be the biggest investment of manpower in a project in the history of our planet. And Metcalfe’s law predicts unfathomable potential.

Yet I can’t figure out the point.

I can’t even concoct a reasonable conspiracy theory. I’d feel better if someone was making uber-bucks but frankly nobody seems to be making much money either. Lemming mentality doesn’t seem to fit.

The grand result of the largest project of our lifetime?

Virtual farm animals? You know when Cousin Ed is jonesing for a double latte?

When Francis Bacon said “knowledge is power” I don’t think this is what he had in mind. I expected so much more. Am I alone in my quandary? Enlighten me please.

Imagine the potential for a moment - and allow me to take the human element out of it so we can share a rational vision.

Picture every device, every machine, every asset under your care was connected to this pervasive internet that’s rapidly becoming a staple of our world. Data at your fingertips. Sensor data tied to machines, to inventory, allowing you not only to recreate the past, measure the present, but virtually predict the future. A bearing that is about to fail, a wire that is going to overheat, energy costs that will be less expensive in an hour than right now. The gains in productivity, safety, reliability, efficiency – amazing potential. And it can be achieved with today’s technology. It’s happening all around us on an increasing scale.

It’s happening all around us. Somewhere last decade a smart marketer coined the term M2M for “Machine to Machine” communications. Catchy. It describes precisely what our customers do with the equipment that we’ve been building out here in the cornfields of Illinois for nearly 3 decades.

Ethernet Switches loaded with fiber optic ports used to communicate data in a wind turbine back to the controllers and a remote monitoring system.

A bakery integrated temps, scales, level sensors and conveyers over their Ethernet using B&B’s Vlinx Ethernet Serial Servers - increasing productivity and quality.

A coal fired power plant used Zlinx wireless 900MHz long range modems to connect PLCs to the coal conveyors, decreasing down time.

Temporary power generation is a big deal in developing countries and in disaster areas. B&B provided complete panels including our rugged Ethernet switches and serial Modbus to Ethernet Gateways to integrate data systems, enable remote monitoring and control of these portable power plants.

School crossing zone warning signs are connected wirelessly between the school and crosswalks using B&B’s Zlinx wireless radio modems.

The list goes on and on – the power of pervasive connectivity – linking sensors, devices and machines together and into local and wide area networks.

I may not get social networking, but the vision for these pervasive device networks is crystal clear.

Your thoughts?

Happy Connections,
Mike Fahrion

Tags: , , , ,

Comments

Interesting thoughts on the use of technology. 
 
Now consider...... 
 
If it were re-written from a point of view that seperates usefull tools from trinkets used solely for the entertainment of the user.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:11 AM by Don
Twitter is being used in other countries for a wide range of subversive activities. A lot of social-reformists in our midst. Can't say I blame them. God Bless America.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:14 AM by Tim OReilly
One of my customers has a facebook page. their customer service folks monitor the mage constantly.  
 
Their consumers are always posting comments and issues. Often these issues are transient and wouldn't warrent the trouble of a phone call. I can monitor the page also and get tehe feel for "how it's going" 
 
./aa
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:21 AM by Allen
You're not alone having doubts about the usefulness of "social networking". I locked out those "things" right from my router, so one less headache for me at home (for now). Once the kid is gonna be skilled enough to work around my "parental controls", I hope she's gonna be smart enough to spend her time on more useful things. 
I agree with Tim that social networking is being used for many other things, not necessarily positive ones, and I can only hope that this is gonna be the end of it, rather sooner than later.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:27 AM by Alex
Facebook is a handy way to share pictures of the kids with Grandma 13 hours away. Industrially, that can be used to take a look at an operation or piece of equipment every now and then if hooked up right (I can help you do that.)  
 
The library I worked with had a live-chat support line. I've used a chat mode with PCanywhere back 10 years ago to look at data over peoples shoulders and "discuss" it with them. I agree, most tweeting is just noise, but when I can use tools like yours to check on a machine that is acting up in the middle of the night and talk with the technician who's already on site then some of those "social networking" type tools industrial class solutions.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:07 AM by Rod
I couldn't agree more!!! I have friends and relatives that spend hours per day on facebook growing crops. I have been to concerts with them and when I looked over to see how they were enjoying the show, I saw them sending posts to their facebook pages ("I'm at the concert", "the band just came out", "they just played song x", etc.). Seriously, are these people that self-absorbed that they think other people care when they cut their grass or have a cup of coffee? Personally, Ihave better things to do with my time.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:08 AM by Bob Jones
Mike, very provocative column. Someone must have said similar things at the dawn of the TV age. So much potential, so little to show for it...  
 
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:16 AM by Skip Singer
Like me, you are old. Perhaps not like me, you may have liked CB radio. I had one in my car for a while, when I did a lot more driving over the road and thought almost all of it was stupid and found it almost useless for getting go info about the road ahead. 
One problem I see in your blog item is your repeatedly stated desire to understand "what it means". As I see it, there isn't an "it" and that is what makes the network phenomenon so attractive - everybody gets to define it for themselves. In fact, a person may have have 99 different definitions - advertising either a business or a hobby product; linking hobbies; families; activists, city news, politics, etc., etc. 
You don't expect every one of your customers to buy every one of your products - BB-Elec = Ethernet to one, Wireless modem to another, etc. So Twitter and Facebook mean different things - not a star network but a splatter graph.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:17 AM by Mike
A couple thoughts: 
 
 
 
We often hear the (somewhat specious) assertion that people only use about 10% of the potential of their brains. Now think of the Twitter-net or Facebook as a meta-brain with each user as a neuron. I'd think we're lucky if even 10% of what goes on in the meta-brain is useful. 
 
 
 
Also, China is well known for restricting the internet access of it's citizens. It has also experienced 8-9% growth of its economy over the last few years. Coincidence?
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:18 AM by Andy
When we remember we are all insane these things make sense.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:26 AM by Clyde
I only say ths because a significant portion of "cutting edge" technology is connected with the government/military ... 
 
Have you ever seen the movie "The Terminator" ??? 
 
just sayin'
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:36 AM by db
Did you say Facebook, twitter... How about blogs? Where I come from, there is a saying: "A monkey cannot pass judgement aganist a forest" Maybe some education is handy about how Blogs may not fit within social networking!
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:37 AM by Ahumuza
Gee, I thought Metcalf's law was that the IQ of a committee was the IQ of the smartest person on the committee divided by the number of members of the committee. Social networks were still called committees until about 1984.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:54 AM by jwkessel
Processing power is a poor measure of productivity. 
 
The Number of connections (end nodes) has increased geometrically) the amount of "data" transmitted per node has increased geometrically, but the VALUE of the data (in a ratio measurement) DECREASES proportional to the increase in end points. 
 
Original "batch" transaction systems focused on sparse transmissions of highly critical and productive data. We keep moving more "data" but as node/transmission costs decrease, we keep adding "data" of less value. We have arrived at a point where much of the "Packets transmitted" has little to no value at all. 
 
The old analogy of 1970's computing being a single seat byplane taking 2 days to go from New York to LA, and todays computing being a 600 seat SST that takes 5 minutes is correct, but the truth is that SST is only carrying 1 or 2 passengers of real value, the rest of the seats are loaded with last weeks tabloids. oh yeah, the 2 passengers, have to load and unload the useless tabloids on the jet, which takes 1/2 day on either end. Net gain, 1 day for 2 people.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:01 AM by Doug Bracken
I agree, Mike, there is wayy too much communication. I'm an old guy. I resent the way Linkedin seems to take e-mail addresses from wherever and then throw bunches of them at you trying to make you think they're interested in you. What a load of c#$% 
 
I can't see any value to Linkedin yet but I check once in a while.....'cause I'm an old guy!!!!
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:02 AM by Brian
I’m with Mike on this one but if I look at Facebook as a tool I guess the stumbling block becomes the misuse thereof. Just like trying to use the Crescent wrench in my tool bag to drive a nail or the screw driver to strip wire. However I must liken Facebook and other social networking sites to the Leatherman Multi-Tool, they do a little of everything and not much of anything.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:10 AM by Bill
Mike, 
I empathize with your view but consider the "social" power that Google has amassed. Google's computers record and archive every search you have ever conducted through their web site! One can be very creative with this cache of intelligence either for good or for evil? Dare I say that the CIA, Homeland Security, FBI, et al, can be envious of their achievement?
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:51 AM by Paul Caravan
As the saying goes, there is no such thing as a free lunch. So why does someone spend so much time creating services such as google and facebook? It is because they are using it for data mining - finding out everything possible about you and your browsing habits, likes and dislikes. the statistics you give show what an incredible value there is to all this information, which can and is being sold to advertisers who wish to reach targeted audiences with their product.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 11:41 AM by Klyffe
All you have to do is look at what happened during last year's Iran elections and how people there (a third world country) defied the tyrants who stole the election by using the social networks. These were the only way some news could be transmitted to the outside world. The government had to shut down internet access to control the uprising. So it does have practical uses. Remember McLuhan? He said media would joins us into a global village.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 1:35 PM by Luis Manriquez
Mike, 
 
I've read your post and the comments. Here's my two cents: 
 
Your analogy is only partially correct. The examples you've cited are good ideas and do increase the overall power of the system. However, where the analogy breaks down is in motivation. A directed and planned system works toward a goal (of some sort). This system is best optimized when the goal is singular. Increasing nodes, increases available processing of the task/ goal. In social networking (including blogs) the overall goal(s) is (are) what? With no direction (expected outcome), all directions are employed. We have increasing information entrophy. in short, with no organized goal, there is no organized usefullness to be observed. the whole system is a random information generator being processed by random nodes. 
 
You can see a complete breakdon on my blog...
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 1:37 PM by hnrbnd
Well i have to think back to what my Grandfather used to say ( Things were so much simpler when i was a kid ) and yes he was right it was much simpler back then. Think back to when we were kids ( us as people from the 60's & 70's ) we never had to worry about playing outside after dark, walking home from school, going Trick or Treating without an adult. Things have changed in this country and in some cases not for the best i believe. We all live in a world that has made us all look at things much different then we ever have before. Technology is now a tool that identifies each and every one of us in this world. 
For example i renewed my driver license last week and now you must use a fingerprint scanner to receive your license. Now i can understand the reasoning there and also i know with my credit cards uses fingerprint implanting technology and that is understandable to, but today i took my kids to a (get to know you) gathering at there school and while we where there seeing there classes, looking over the new school,...ect, we also had to sign them up for lunch cards. Well at least we thought so, Nope!! no more cards..They now use a fingerprint scanner that identifies each child. Now if this is not happening in your state it soon will be i am sure. So how much technology is to much technology? When do we draw the line with how much they get to know about us and our children? Off the Grid is sounding better all the time. Getting back to a simpler time when people trusted each other, now that would be some surprising technology.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 1:38 PM by MICHAEL
As the young strive to become part of a group, fit in, or whatever you call it, the availability of a Social Networking site has become a Godsend. When I was young, if I can remember that far back, I naturally found myself as part of a group. We shared common goals and interests and were linked by a common bond. Facebook does the same sort of thing but with less effort. In face to face interactions, people skills develop at a much faster rate than the brief, sound bite type of Social Network interactions. The young people I have hired are backward in Social Skills and lack Telephone skills entirely. My parents were well mannered professionals who worked in people intensive situations. The ability to successfully interact was a requirement for success. I had that force fed to me from diapers on. The young today are not so lucky. Their interaction skills are very different because they live in a different world. Far faster paced and full of distractions. One employee was insulted when I told him to turn off his music or get earbuds, because it disturbed his fellow workers. He left soon finding us too restrictive. Facebook is a mass of personal information easily mined for trends and interests, a marketing persons dream. What are people thinking go to Facebook or Twitter. I have a friend who has a Bookstore on Facebook. She tells that the exposure has been good for business. She posts upcoming events and her customers express why they like her store. Wonderful information for her. As far as a network goes it is not. It is a loose group with common interests where bites of information are shared. However, the value is massive.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 2:15 PM by Tom Vance
My guess for your inability to understand the utility of FaceBook and Twitter and all the rest is probably the same as mine: OFC (over fourty crowd)!
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 3:22 PM by Steve Milici
social networking is social networking. It takes no genius to work out what it is for. Social Networking.  
 
The datamining pays for the system, the users know this, they do not care, we have been data mined for years, it is nothing new. 
 
Personally I live 2000km from where i gre up, my friends & family are spread to the four points of the earth, but with fb i can maintain communications with them far quicker and easier than by any other method. all for an exchange of my time online exposed to fb ads and nothing more.
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 6:26 PM by Martin
Looking over the posts to date, demonstrates some of the Internet's real potential. The pitfalls are there, as in any global endeavor, but those are minor compared to this grand expression of our expansive mind. I’m a vibrant seventy now, and each day I fervently hope to make twenty more years just to see what is ahead of us. 
 
 
 
With communication, social networking and commercial successes innovating and growing with the Internet provides just a glimpse of an incredible tomorrow. In this form of human interaction, imagination is the only throttle. 
 
 
 
The old regime of single-source, limited-view information like mass communication and commercial televisions is fading into oblivion. The art of over lording governance is also waning. Can control by one’s peers in an effective social setting, which can be a very powerful means of social authority, build us a future of enlightened individuals coming together, ad hoc or as required, to solve a pressing problem, then they go off their merry ways to get back to business or fun? It might be like the Roman forum or the Greek Stoa of Attica of ancient days but on a global scale. 
 
 
 
Even now, we are thinking and talking more and shooting less. This can only be the result of faster and hopefully better communication. 
 
 
 
But the future is always invisible. We are the pioneers; how wide and deep the Internet will be is an unknown. But think of the possibilities: Where knowledge was power in the past, interconnection and will be the energy source that delicately drives and controls the World. 
 
Posted @ Wednesday, August 18, 2010 6:29 PM by Ron Lyons
You have some good comments here about the value-neutrality of technology. It is the use to which it is put that has value or lack thereof.  
 
 
 
That aside, as the husband of a public school teacher I can relate to similar observations about how children spend so much of their time in such activities. I'd say it is part of our culture. Entertainment is big business and it is a lot easier to sell entertainment than it is to sell study and work.
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:18 AM by George Potts
Dear Mike; 
 
I wish I could provide some insight, but I have been going nuts wondering exactly the same thing. Facebook and Twitter talk about themselves, due to the user stats, as the greatest revolution since the Internet, but I can't figure out what use they are either.  
 
Essentially, sad proof that since the Internet has gone mainstream, the general public really is as shallow and pointless as we've always suspected.  
 
The truly life-changing paradigms the Internet has brought, and which are not yet completely understood have been the creation of EMail, the Web, SSL, FTP, Cloud Computing, Google search, and even bittorrent. Remote control of devices is also starting to change the world. Twitter and Facebook are just websites, a mass of thunder and lightning, noise and hot air, signifying nothing. 
 
Leave the content-free marketing and Facebook stuff to the suits... and keep on posting your musings and product info for the hackers and engineers. 
 
 
 
 
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:30 AM by Robert Altinger
Whoa, whoa, whoa, Mike... the lemming mentality doesn't seem to fit?? The individuals of a population that make up the fat of the bell curve don't actually think for themselves. This is exactly the purpose of political institutions such as religions, governments, news/entertainment/fashion medias, educational systems, and yes, most other social networks. They serve as a forum for most people to reassure each other that not thinking for themselves is somehow gonna be just fine simply by mimicking some common behavior. The behavior does not have to make sense at all. This all while the people at the edges of the curve are actually thinking on their own and consequently control all of the valuable resources of the society (including the leveraging of the afore mentioned institutions) and pretty much do as they damn well please. This is how our system even has a chance to function at all. Is this not completely obvious?
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:27 AM by rickyjoe
You are missing nothing. 
 
Facebook, etc are wasted time and effort. 
 
Anyone can talk, talk, talk, and make noise. Demand attention, etc. 
 
It means nothing, nothing at all. 
 
Personally I've given up on the general purpose social networks. 
 
I only pay attention to, give at least some credence to, the professional forums. 
 
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 4:16 PM by osiyo53
Where did you get the idea that people who use facebook have double digit IQ's? I haven't seen any sign they are that intelligent.
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:50 PM by Ted Neff
When the younger 'XYZ' generation attains maturity, as the 'Baby Boomers' have done, then they will quietly and effectively replace news media and single point source entertainment, along with group educational systems with multi-point social interaction and communication. 
 
In college in the seventies, I wrote a paper on the philosophy of communications. This was produced during the dichotomy of either conforming to mass media social pressures or the ‘tune-out-drop-out’ hippy culture. 
 
In that paper, ‘Private Communications’, ‘Group Communications’ and ‘Mass Communications’ and their ramifications captured the field of then current social interactions. Today these processes still exist but the Internet has enabled their expansion and development beyond the ‘seventies’ wildest dreams.  
 
Try this, drop every negative connotation about the Internet, and think only in potentials. Then you might get a small glimpse of the Internet Future. Moreover, if you see something not thought about, make an ‘App’ for your mobile phone.  
 
I just bought a Droid 2 three days ago and already I came up with two apps (applications that sell for $0.99). It is phenomenal. There is an App to create Apps selling for, you guessed it, $0.99. I rest my case. 
 
Posted @ Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:21 PM by Ron Lyons
I don't use Twitter-I think it is pure noise. Facebook is faster and broader than email, I think it is easier to use for those who do not want to figure email out.
Posted @ Friday, August 20, 2010 8:24 AM by hlestringman
People use them for all kinds of reasons. I would use them for marketing purposes, but have zero personal use for them. 
They are created and marketed for the primary purpose of data-mining--commercially and government/intelligence purposes. Whether that's good or bad depends on how benevolent big business and big government are.
Posted @ Friday, August 20, 2010 1:24 PM by Walter
Interesting thoughts. It is a statement of net neutrality. The information which travels on a network has potential, much as oil contains potential energy until it is combusted. The "power" of a network is it's potential to transfer information, not to provide an application for this potential.
Posted @ Friday, August 20, 2010 8:46 PM by rharm887
Mike, Your comment goes to the very soul of many of us in business - where and how is social media not just a waste of everyone's time. Right now I'm putting finishing touches on my part of a DMA conference presentation called 'Social Media: A Promising Profitable Future Or A Time And Money Sink-Hole?'  
http://tinyurl.com/2dyd5qu 
My fellow speakers and I will try to shed light on that ever-flipping coin. But one thing that i can say without question, at least at this point in the game: when even the most famous-named business equipment manufacturers set up a place in Twitter or Facebook, the low number of 'followers' in itself shows you what a bust it is for that "world". These media are really not business media and to try to use it that way not only is a waste of time, but it also actually compromises the company's brand. There ARE places some go - for example, instructors and science leaders and such don't do any of the 'social media' that is popular, but they DO have significant blogs that are pretty ugly to look at but contain high quality exchange of ideas and information. Auto restoration catalogs have great blogs! But this is support, and does not lead to direct profit. Companies with "enthusiast" leanings are having better results. Utrecht art supplies is really doing well with it. Wine of the Month Club (the original) is brilliant — and they sell with Facebook. But it takes a lot of time and it's hard to say at what point it is really 'paying off' for most. There are tools to measure but I think it's still in its infancy at this point. Anyway YOUR use of email is actually more powerful than most of the stuff going on out there -- because you do this personally. Personal connection sells. Bravo!
Posted @ Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:49 PM by Carol Worthington-Levy
I think that Metcalfe is a victim of either over-simplification, assuming the best of the individual nodes, or the law gives an indication of what the *maximum* value a network could be, not what it is. 
 
Instead of the value=n^2, I think that the correct law would be value=n*i. Where i=Sum of the values of the information to each individual receiving node (some value between 0.0 and 1.0). Where 0.0=no value to node and 1.0=ultimate value to node. Ideally, where every node gives out information that is useful to ALL the other nodes, i=n or in other words value=n^2. 
 
i=value_of_Info_to_n1 + value_of_Info_to_n2 + value_of_Info_to_n3 + ....  
(Sorry, don't know how to write a summation equation in text) 
 
Also, 500K human nodes can't use 500K chunks of data without some kind of software that will serve up aggregate information that they can use. Also, 500K human nodes in a social network don't generate 500K chunks of useful information and even if they did, It wouldn't be useful to all 500K human nodes. 
 
Even a network of sensors that are putting out useful information doesn't approach a value=n^2. It's only after we use tools of aggregating and trending do we get predictive value from the network. And, every intelligent/controlling node on a network doesn't use the data from every sensor node on the network. 
 
I think that Doug Bracken on August 18, 2010 10:01 AM came closest to describing these effects.
Posted @ Thursday, September 16, 2010 1:48 PM by sd
You need to have a focus for your social media initiatives. A few years ago a friend asked me to sign up for Facebook so I did. But never did anything much with it. She urged me to do something with Facebook. I asked, like what? She said, "Promote your band." A light flashed and I found Facebook, MySpace and Twitter to be great platforms to build a network of fans, post our songs, create events and invite my network to attend shows, and network with many local musicians—now we're getting offers from venues who found us on MySpace and like our music. As for B2B marketing in the industrial space, here are some great articles by the Marketing Maven to help you find your focus. 
http://marketingmaven.globalspec.com/social-media 
Posted @ Friday, October 15, 2010 8:59 AM by Jim Gross
Jim Gross • I recommend reading "Social Media Use In The Industrial Sector". GlobalSpec conducted a survey of its registered user base of engineering, technical, manufacturing and industrial professionals. 36% of the survey respondents hold engineering positions, including design, consulting and process/production, 12% work in technical support/services, and 9% work in research/development. This white paper offers social media recommendations for industrial suppliers and suggests that social media is not “instead of” other marketing; it’s always “in addition to” other marketing efforts—integrated with your overall marketing strategy. 
http://bit.ly/cvd5TM
Posted @ Thursday, October 21, 2010 11:59 AM by Jim Gross
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics