Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Perrie Juran

New Law Would Make Violating A TOS A Criminal Act

Recommended Posts


Sy Beck wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:

.  And it is not up to the criminal law Judge as a rule to decide the constitutionality of a law, only to enforce it.  The constitutionality is for the Appeals Courts to decide.  

 

No, it is up to jury to decide whether a person is guilty or not based on the reasonableness of evidence presented to them before a judge can enforce the law.  Therefore, you are supposing that the American public would consider that as actual evidence to find someone guilty...?

You are right as far as how the system goes.  Hopefully a jury would see the lunacy in this. However a Judge would instruct a Jury that they were responsible to carry out the letter of the law. It is part of the Judge's job to make sure the Jury understands the law.  Then the Jury is (in a perfect world) supposed to decide guilt based on whether or not you broke that law, not whether they agree with it.  (I know I am summarizing greatly here).

The whole subject of Jury nullification is still being debated  and I am not aware that there is a 'final word' on the subject.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Mayalily wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:

"The U.S. Department of Justice is defending computer hacking laws that make it a crime to use a fake name on Facebook or lie about your weight in an online dating profile at a site like Match.com.

In a statement obtained by CNET that's scheduled to be delivered tomorrow, the Justice Department argues that it must be able to prosecute violations of Web sites' often-ignored, always-unintelligible "terms of service" policies.

The law must allow "prosecutions based upon a violation of terms of service or similar contractual agreement with an employer or provider," Richard Downing, the Justice Department's deputy computer crime chief, will tell the U.S. Congress tomorrow."

The serious implication of all this is the potential destruction of anonymity on the Internet and how it can become a tool the government could use to silence or prosecute dissenting voices.  A service provider such as Facebook or Second Life should and does have the right to enforce their TOS as a matter of Civil Law, but to make it a criminal act could potentially make millions of people criminals who could arbitrarily be targeted for prosecution.

_____________________________________________________

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in it that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted-and you create a nation of lawbreakers-and then you cash in on guilt.

 

-Holden Caulfield,
The Grapes of Wrath

 

A crime to lie about your weight?  How silly.  LOL 

As far as stopping deliberate premeditated murder on some websites, such as Facebook, I think it's a good idea.

The last case I heard about the mother of the neighbor's teenage daughter deliberating cyberbullied her to the point of the girl's suicide.  It was deliberate and all the mother of the neighbor's daughter got for cyberbullying the girl to the point of her death was a $5,000 dollar fine.  I felt she should have been jailed for deliberate premeditated murder.  The young girl is dead. 

Problem is it probably wouldn't have stopped it.  The mother was intent on harassing the girl.  So at best it may have laid an additional charge on her.

 

Mayalily wrote:

A crime to lie about your weight?  How silly.  LOL

As far as weight, I don't think anyone will really take that seriously.  It just sounds so absurd to me for some reason.

How about if you are a prosecutor or other LEO convinced a person has committed Crime A but you can't find the proof?  Because in reality the person hasn't committed the crime.  But you are still convinced they were the one who did it.  So in your investigation you discover this little lie. They jump on those opportunities.

You don't  think similar things  haven't  happened?  They have, can & do.  And it is not up to the criminal law Judge as a rule to decide the constitutionality of a law, only to enforce it.  The constitutionality is for the Appeals Courts to decide.  Have you ever heard of a Judge saying he disagreed with a law but his job was to carry it out?  Again, it has and can happen.  No matter how ridiculous the law may sound.

True, the mother admitted she was intent on doing this to this girl.  However, it could deter someone from doing that in future....?

As far as weight though, if the person didn't like the date, just give them compensation for their gas money.  LOL  This still sounds silly to me. I guess we will see how it plays out in the coming years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mayalily wrote:

However, it could deter someone from doing that in future....

As far as weight though, if the person didn't like the date, just give them compensation for their gas.  LOL  This still sounds silly to me. I guess we will see how it plays out in the coming years. 

Remotely possible it might deter someone but I think unlikey.

As far as compensation for their gas, Civil Law would already cover it.  Compensation is really a matter of Civil Law.  Prime example is O.J. Simpson.

But again, what is happening here is the attempt to create a criminal class based on violating a T.O.S, giving the same weight to a TOS as a criminal law.  See my comment in this thread:  http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/compensation-from-LL-s/td-p/1235689

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Mayalily wrote:

However, it could deter someone from doing that in future....

As far as weight though, if the person didn't like the date, just give them compensation for their gas.  LOL  This still sounds silly to me. I guess we will see how it plays out in the coming years. 

Remotely possible it might deter someone but I think unlikey.

As far as compensation for their gas, Civil Law would already cover it.  Compensation is really a matter of Civil Law.  Prime example is O.J. Simpson.

But again, what is happening here is the attempt to create a criminal class based on violating a T.O.S, giving the same weight to a TOS as a criminal law.  See my comment in this thread: 

I see weight as civil also, as what did the person lose but traveling money?  That would civil.  How can making someone lose traveling money criminal?  No one is forcing them to seek dates on the internet rather asking a person out on a date they met in person. They lost so little in comparison to the death's from cyberbullying some people are having to go through. 

Let me have more time to read through the thread and the links as I have to do some rl things right now.  But, what a clog this seems for the court system over a date weight dispute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

except that she didn't commit murder, premeditated or otherwise... fraud, criminal mischief, abuse, slander (or libel depending on POV) and maybe you could convince a jury of wrongful death... but that's about it.

 

as far as juries and judges, a jury must decide not only if the evidence is sufficient to leave no reasonable doubt that a crime was committed, but also that the evidence describes the actual crime they're being charged with. That by itself wouldn't be considered nullification (which is a dirty word in the US judicial system, likened more to prejudice). that would be something for the judge to hash out at that level, and doesn't invoke constitutionality. nullification only happens when both are clear and affirmative but the jury refuses to convict.

as a for instance, if someone pulled a gun on a store clerk, but nothing was taken, robbery would be a stupid thing to charge the person with, and could very well be tossed out at the criminal court level, by a judge or jury, as the charge does not fit the crime... but this would be worse than a rookie mistake on the part of the prosecutor, and in practice should never happen.... the bar is pretty low for proving the application of a law and rarely comes into question at that level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea right. the us government has used the constitution as toilet paper. they will and are doing any damn thing they please. it appears they are trying to force a declaration of martial law under President Obama.

 

Do not vote for any republican or democrat. Period. Ever.

 

to discuss this further would put me at risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perrie Juran wrote:
...The constitutionality is for the Appeals Courts to decide...


Ugh.  No it's not.  A trial court can make a ruling on the Constitutionality of a law if it is not bound by precedent.  In theory it can even make a ruling that goes against precedent but it will usually result in heavy criticisim of the judge by the apellate court and remand on appeal.  In the Myspace case mentioned before it was the District Court, which is a trial court, that made the ruling setting aside the jury's misdemeanor conviction and one of the reasons Judge Wu set forth was a violation of due process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first thought is that a Violation is not a Crime.

I believe that I have the Right to defend myself, but murder or excessive use of force is against the Law.

A plaintiff must allege personal injury or a violation of a personal Right.

I have the Right to confront my acusser and demand the nature and cause of the proceeding against me. (valid cause)

The plaintiff must prove personal injury, a violation of Right, they must show the court a loss. Without standing, there is no actual or justiciable controversy, and the courts will not entertain such cases.

Believe it or not, Governments are established to protect and maintain Individual Rights, the courts have jurisdiction over this.  

Games are played in courts.

Foreign Countries are the largest Currency counterfeiters of other Countries, Cyber crime with government approval is the same and happens on a daily basis.

Common sense, common law, common unity.

If ignorance of the Law is no excuse for not obeying it; why is the Law not taught to every person? Society could benefit from an educated, well informed populace capable of critical thinking.

It is to bad that the Justice is only a Department. I sorted out my junk drawer and put all the pens on the left side, that's the Pen Department.

   

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

. I sorted out my junk drawer and put all the pens on the left side, that's the Pen Department.

 

 

You heretic!  All pens go on the right hand side as any OCD will tell you.  Unless you are left handed of course, in which case we'll burn you ya witch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if a new webcam chat site insists in its TOS that all participants must wear yellow hats, someone would risk prosecution if they used that site wearing a blue hat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My concern is companies that put illegal wording into their ToS. We've all seen it. "We can do whatever we want to you and you're not allowed to sue us if we violate your rights" type clauses they try to stick in there. I think Sony just put one of those into their PS3 agreement.

How will situations like that play out? It'd be illegal to take them to court for doing something illegal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dagmar Heideman wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:
...The constitutionality is for the Appeals Courts to decide...


Ugh.  No it's not.  A trial court can make a ruling on the Constitutionality of a law if it is not bound by precedent.  In theory it can even make a ruling that goes against precedent but it will usually result in heavy criticisim of the judge by the apellate court and remand on appeal.  In the Myspace case mentioned before it was the District Court, which is a trial court, that made the ruling setting aside the jury's misdemeanor conviction and one of the reasons Judge Wu set forth was a violation of due process.

You are correct.  I should have been more accurate.  What I understood from the attorneys I have spoken with in the past, generally Trial Judges stick to admissibility of evidence, application of the law, etc.  They said Trial Judges usually leave the Constitutionality of a law to the Appeals Courts.  One of them told me he had two speficific incidents with different Judges where he was told to 'take it to the Appeals Court.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the reason the trial judge doesn't generally deal with the validty of a law is because it screws with the appeals process... and they catch a lot of crap for not focusing on "the issue at hand".... things like that can break break careers if that judge wants to move up the food chain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see it now the police storm your house... in the middle of the night... two have shot guns... The other semi autos... They kick in your bedroom door at 2 30 am... YOUR UNDER ARREST ON THE FLOOR NOW... We have been watching you for days we KNOW about you... YOU ACTUALLY WEIGHT 260 on your facebook page it said 150... NOOOOOOOOO so sorry ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Happy Toshi wrote:

I see it now the police storm your house... in the middle of the night... two have shot guns... The other semi autos... They kick in your bedroom door at 2 30 am... YOUR UNDER ARREST ON THE FLOOR NOW... We have been watching you for days we KNOW about you... YOU ACTUALLY WEIGHT 260 on your facebook page it said 150... NOOOOOOOOO so sorry ....

if someone kicks my door in at that time of night..there is gonna be a shootout LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that this is unconstitutional because a person should be required to sign the agreement in Real Life, there should be no such thing as a digital agreement and a simple I accept/IDecline button as no one knows who clicked it, if the agreement was ever fully trasmitted or read and such.

Rewrite Cyber Security Laws?

Okay lets talk for a moment about something are we talking about a game companies TOS/CS such as Linden Lab, or a players Second Life MMORPG, TOS, because there is this group of simulators I know in Second Life who writes this very long TOS in their covenant, and I will spare everyone of the drama here and keep this short, but their Owner Threatend me in SL called me a Domestic Terroirst, Threatend the FBI on me, then their manager disclosed IP addresses without consent of all parties to my email that was signed up on their forums erased the message so others wouldn't see it, it wasn't my IP so I dont care, but still that email also contained private Chatlogs where they accused me to another well known user of being a griefer on their regions with no proof of anything, talked to two of my so called Undercover friends  who were checking into this for me, and accused me of being a griefer, and defamed my avatar without reason at all.

They have the right to do what they want on their own land, they do not have the right to try to send around false rumors without any type of evidence, or ask others and their friends to send out false notices in their Gorean groups to create drama, these notices accused me of being an account of a griefer, and a CopyBot, but they refused to give names and public the evidence they had simply because they have nothing other than rumors or accusations, yet on the other hand I have way more evidence I have collected on this group of people which would make them Cyber Bullies, and talk about cyber bullying and cyber crime when it comes down to it they are the ones guilty of this as I have multiple documents, Logs of attacks recorded, spam mail sent to me using their estates in SL where they clearly didn't even care about it, and did nothing this went on for almost a week.

Although the people who sent these notices  did give me enough Evidence in the logs where they clearly told me who made these accusations, and lets just say that I did not stay quiet about it due to their accusations and refusing to look into the issue, what more can I say as I have already said some people and ignorance I hate to say it but its not directed to anyone so I will. However I did give them a fair warning and a chance to resolve the issue nicely they all refused so I refuse to shut my mouth and allow these rumors unless they actually have the skills or knowledge to at least back it up and willing to send out the actual evidence connecting me with names of who said what other than rumors but SL is known for its rumors espically in RP simulators, and yes it is a violation of the TOS/CS to be spreading such but people do it all the time, I really try to avoid such, and rarely actually get problems, and most my problems I have ever had have occur in RP regions with ignorant GM's who refuse to listen to anything even common sense. What more can I say other than in a gaming community thats why we got MMO debate blogs where people debate their opinions and fights over games all the time, and if it doesn't occur in SL, or SL Service they can't and wont get involved in the dispute.

Linden Lab's Mistake.

Linden Lab made a big mistake back in the day when they made the claim, Your World, Your Imagination, and they also made me believe that I owned License rights to content I purchased, and to the land I owned, that in other words I would always have access to that content.

A game Companies TOS, How to enforce it.

In a game like Second Life, how do you enforce a TOS when other people are allowed to break the TOS/CS in big ways and nothing gets done because LL doesn't get involved in any type of residentual disputes. In a game where someone could create a massive vendor network like sale vendors, and take all of a persons virtual money from them and quickly launder it out or cash it out where is the security for such issues.

Most actual MMORPG games like world of warcraft require Real Life information SL does not collect any RL information OR ID on registeration.

Second Lfie itself uses display names therefore for example my SL name could be created with a name such as GGoth, and used the display name to look exactly like mine for griefers to grief in my name or anyone elses without any type of reason defaming us and ruining us from places we have never been in SL.

The way to correctly enforce the TOS is to require payment information to sign up on future accounts, Require Actual ID Verification to get into Adult Areas dont expose people under 18 to explicit content, and Require a RL First and Last name, enhance security more and a lot of these griefer things wouldn't happen.

I really wish more people were Truthful, and Honest about things.

Really I find it sad to say, but in a virtual world, game, or service Like Second Life, I am always expecting a dagger in the back no matter what who or even if it is a friend and that reason is simple, I trust no one at all, I am Anti social, I have learned not to put any trust into anyone I talk to on the internet where it be SL, a Dating Site, or anything else, Sure I can talk like I trust the person if I like them, Sure I am friends with my enemies, I dont actually ranomly ban griefers off my lands or people for personal reasons unless they are actually doing something on my land, but over all I will always expect that dagger in the back even if it seems I trust them and yes it does hurt to be backstabbed by your own friends and people you have trusted, I Refuse to do with Evil people in SL, I refuse to be part of a group of people knowingly that supports or does anything to bring harm to our community as a whole in any way, and if my RP group or anyone is going to do it simply do not involve me into it because I want our grid to be peaceful not full of hatred and war like it is right now.

Sure RP Wars are fun, playing with Tanks, or Guns I can respect, Using a nuke on a simulator for fun, well honestly sometimes things get out of hand people do lulzy things that are fun like this instance a group of people I know took a bunch of tanks into this RP sim that didnt allow it and started shooting everyone for fun there with combat meters on sure they broke the rules, but it was just for the fun of it and done once they all got banned but were removed from the ban list like a month later I believe it was and hey I am glad to see some people don't take things so serious.

Another thing I really do not like is giving into Griefers, You give into a griefer and they reach their goal they are just going to come back in the future for more revenge or others, or to push others around, hey its common sense that if I were a griefer myself I would not ever use my own SL name, or anything linking back to me I would take my IPad, or my Laptop and go over to Burger King or something to grief/troll, but never would I expsoe myself and it is just common sense because after all I may not be a big expert in software, but I know about IP tracking, MAC Address  bans, How to avoid such and the security/loop holes in many games because not only do I build computers but I am a gamer who beta tests games, even some games in Alpha Testing before they ever went into beta, and my job as such mostly in Alpha is not to disclose anything, and to report bugs to the developers.

So to draw the line with the Law & Breaking the TOS/CS.

Unless everyone is actually going to be bound to this CFAA act, and everything is going to be 100% peaceful in Second Life, or any other virtual service, I really do not support such and think that for the most part it is unlawful that such an act be placed in a service such as Second Life, as hey I have been bullied by the owner of these RP simulators, and their Lead GM, and nothing was ever done about it by Linden Lab. In real Life I am also a person who has thought about Suicide as well no kidding, or trolling either, so when stuff occurs like this where do they become held accountable for their defaming, and threats, and most of all I know my legal rights so they would have to obtain a search warrent and need evidence before one could actually be obtained, and these logs would have to also match up with the servers aka Linden Lab in which they would only have maybe a year to do such if they even could, and besides I have the logs of all their threats stored on my PC, and false accusations so I know for a fact they wouldn't rat themselves out.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57324779-281/doj-lying-on-match.com-needs-to-be-a-crime/

I myself am more of a supporter of the EFF, I support the Constitutional Law, I don't like how police can place a tracker on a person, or their Car just because they want to, they should be required to have a warrent before doing such, but as we have seen on the news they don't need one, and I consider such to be a violation of our privacy as U.S citizens.

Internet Censorship

I support Freedom of speech always will, but there is a time when Drama becomes harassment, defaming avatars, and that can turn into RL threats, or internet crime. I have never used a service to threaten a person espically RL threats. Lets say YouTube for example the entire gaming community is filled full of Cheater Videos such as people using Aimbot in certain games, or in other words someone griefs me in Second Life do not expect me to lay down shut my mouth up when someone thinks its fun to try to defame my avatar, because hey it might be illegal in the SL TOS/CS to disclose that information here, names, or logs, but I do actively monitor all data sent from my PC, my entire home network,  I record when and what I want in a virtual world like it or not where it be SL or another service, usually I never turn on Fraps, or an audio recorder unless someone starts to grief or do harassment to me in SL for example, but in other games I do use these, and I will not again lay down and let people try to run all over me, if someone wants to start a war with me then there will be a war, I am not saying a war as in Griefing, but I will expose the truth, or in other words my public opinion, and I will make sure that I try to help others avoid the same problems I have with those particualr simulators or people if I can at least until they come to their senses and deal with issues that were clearly for the most part their fault and their mistakes. * While in SL this wouldn't be legal to do for example, I have other ways  to make sure word gets out, and the truth, and I use my first rights to do such.

In other words if someone wants to file a complaint on my YouTube for defaming an avatar, then they can go right ahead call the Police, get the FBI involved I don't care because really most gamers don't take things seriously when it comes to cheater videos, but in a service like SL, if someone did decide to take actions on a video posted about them for example they are more than welcome to because I have more than enough evidence on my PC to get myself off the hook about anything I have posted, and hey I have been threatend once in 2009/2010 nothing ever came of it, and in 2011 I was threatend again by another corrupt group of people Nothing has came of that yet and I still await.

1. One of my YouTube videos was Falsely DMCA reported once simply because I used a snapshot of the guys picture/CDS system or ban relay in my video agaisnt his system accusing people without proof, it was there for like less than 30 seconds which means it is considered Fair Use under the DMCA, and the DMCA reports were falsely filed on multiple videos by Griefers, well guess what, I counter Filed that DMCA, I was never taken to court over it, but I removed it anyways and found other ways to spread the truth.

2. I used this persons SL griefer profile information to match it with another griefer their alt when it was publically exposed they reported my video simply because it had a snapshot of their picture they claimed was them RL in the video, but who knows if it was or not they were a hardcore griefer someone who I can't stand to be around people ive known longer than them, and they are the ones responsible for griefing in my SL name at least once that I know of and failed.

Could I be called an Internet Griefer, OR Troll?

Technically I know the gaming community very well, I have connections around, I also know my legal rights, and yes I do know how to grief a person where this be in SL, or another game such as DumpTruck griefing in All Points Bulletin, or MineCraft griefing and such, but this really doesn't make me a bad person. Ask yourself was the person of the Atom bomb a bad person, the people who make guns are they bad or evil? To answer this with my own opinion I would say no, because one day an Atom Bomb, may save lives, Nuclear Power for example, and Fusion has came a long ways with research, and gun makers did not ask others to kill other people with them. Now if you compare this to a CopyBot, the Copybot, or LibSL to me was not made for stealing work from other creators, the people who make such illicit viewers don't ask others to steal work from others, they do it out of their own free will, and when it comes down to the bottom line, Guns don't kill people people kill people, and its the choices we make that determine if we are good or evil, or do with evil.

*Now but not Least lets talk about justice.*

I believe in Justice, and Truth, I guess if you played the heroes side on DC Universe, or a similar game you would understand how I operate what I believe in, and how I keep an open mind all sides, and speaking of such lets talk about Sony.

Sony in 2011, went after George Hotz, simply for modifying his own PS3, and helping others do such, they made claims that he was doing it to support piracy, but yet I believe he was not because PS3 users simply wanted the ability to Play Burned Disks in their PS3's that they can't, and run Linux if they wanted to and such, but instead this kid who isn't even that old a Good Cracker, or Hacker gets Lawsuited by Sony without reason false DMCA claims simply because he modified firmware on his own PS3, he never signed an agreement when he bought his PS3 that he couldn't modify his own stuff, but sony violated Hundreds if not thousands of peoples privacy first by getting a court order because they were rich and powerful to get disclosure of information from anyone who visited his site for the PS3 mod. Then Sony got hacked, and if you ask me I say Justice was served well, who did it remains unknown to anyone other than the rumors going around about it all, but hey I hope they learned from their mistake, and below I will give some resources on such that are commonly shared around the internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hotz (George Hotz)

   (Ps3 Users)

(HB Gary) Yes thats rite He lost a great paying Job.

(Credit Card/Visa Companies)

Okay so allow me to say that I believe in Justice, and it will be served big times when people think its funny to mess with the wrong people they have no idea who they are messing with. Let alone we are all just Users of a virtual world called Second Life, yet Sony is a million Dollar company, Visa, and HB gary worked with the government, not even they could protect themselves, my point being that I believe in justice, or Karma, and will support it, and hey I admit I rage I get very upset I bite and I think others do too sometimes, but the only time I usually ever become a furious kitten is if someone tries to bring harm first.

As far as being afraid to speak about anything I am not because I do not believe in censorship, and I do not believe in these false Criminal Acts, people will lie all the time, people will break the TOS, but does and can a company actually completely enforce their TOS, the answer to this is waiting to be seen.

I really do not support the Government on the following, and really do not like what they are doing.

1. I do not like the laws they are posting about digital agreements.

2. I do not like the fact they have the right to search me anywhere I go for reason or no reason at all RL.

3. I do not like the fact they can place a GPS devide on me, or my car without my knowledge or a warrent.

5. Let me make myself very clear on this too, I support being Anonymous on the internet, no im not talking about Anonymous the hackers group or any of that, Anonymous isn't really a hacker group I dont beleive Anonymous is everyone and no one, Anyone who doesn't want to be known thats my view of it, the only thing I do not support is the griefing, but if someone wants to use their Facebook name as their SL name or something, then let them, but require their First & Last name for company use only and that information is never to be stored in database where it can be hacked, or disclosed to anyone else at all.

I also support the EFF, and ACLU fully, and often read what is going on as I am sometimes into politics.

5. The Question is why Occupy Wallstreet is going on, well I support it because I support Freedom and rights for all U.S Citizens www.anonops.blogspot.com for full details and videos on politics.





Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...