| |
Main
Date: 04 Feb 2009 11:04:41
From:
Subject: Three Strikes
|
It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
could get this wrong even once, but three times?
http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Feb 2009 22:18:39
From: madams
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
help bot wrote:
>
> On Feb 7, 5:59 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
> >
> > Another meatless bone for bottom feeders to chew on.
>
> Speaking of bottom-feeders, it should be apparent to
> anyone who can actually think (sorry, TK), that Mr.
> Keene did not independently commit the same exact
> error three times, but rather, he mindlessly copied the
> exact same text again and again, most likely from
> some unreliable source such as one of his own books
> or articles, or from one of the many other hacks in the
> chess-writing biz.
>
> The problem of mindless copying has long plagued
> readers. Perhaps the most famous example is the
> story regarding Paul Morphy and "women's shoes",
Oh yes! - I've always enjoyed this story, just the other day I was in
this discount/designer shoe store & noticed a charming little
high-heeled mule in soft vermilion leather. I picked it up feeling it's
weight like you would a quality chess-piece & for a few seconds imagined
the ballerina of my dreams..
My recent tactile experience with this accoutrement allows me to assert
the factual nature of the famous PM rumouroid & who can prove otherwise?
I mean, it's not as if we're talking Cinderella, ugly sisters & pumpkins
into broughams - is it?..
m.
> which has been propagated by numerous hacks in
> one form or another over the years.
>
> As for meatlessness, I scrolled down the link and
> found nothing of note until the final letter, which
> appears to have been in response to an enquiry by
> Mr. Capablanca regarding borrowing money, ala
> the roaring '20s, to invest in American stocks circa
> 1940. Now, since JC died in early 1942 this was
> not such a good idea in retrospect; nor was it such
> a good idea in 1929 or in 2008 for that matter. No,
> the best time to borrow money to invest in U.S.
> stocks was probably the year 1982.
>
> I found the commentary on U.S. presidents fairly
> interesting... the possibility of Mr. Roosevelt serving
> a third term was summarily ruled out by the letter's
> author... airplanes were dismissed as ineffectual in
> battle... perhaps the Sicilian Defense was also
> summarily dismissed as worthless by this fellow,
> along with plastics and motor cars... .
>
> -- help bot
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 12:44:42
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
On Feb 12, 9:34=A0am, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> > =A0 =A0 =A0I have never seen the film and note this point in my review.
> > Instead, I wrote a "review" based on reviewing some of the other
> > frothingly hostile reviews.
> =A0 None of the reviews at imdb.com struck me as "frothingly hostile,"
> and none of them showed the least sympathy for the Stalinist cause, as
> far as I could tell. Some people just thought it was a lousy film.
I am shocked -- SHOCKED -- to discover that after
all this time, Mr. Kingston finally recognizes the
difference between criticism of this sort, and true
"support" for communist dictatorship.
Not long ago, there was discussion in rgc of a
critical piece which skewered the "reasoning" of a
rabid anti-communist article, and many a fool mis-
took that criticism for actual /support/ of commun-
ism, dictatorship, evil, Stalin, fill-in-the-blank, as if
Plan Nine had somehow deactivated their brains!
I am relieved that the sinister Plan seems to have
finally worn off; that TK is slowly drifting back
toward reality. Nevertheless, there may be other
attacks... perhaps by other aliens, who might just
be passing through... with a few days to /kill/.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 06:34:27
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
On Feb 11, 10:12=A0pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> WHY THE BAN?
>
> =A0 =A0Taylor Kingston asks why My Son John was banned from TCM (Turner
> Classic Movies). =A0He and others should read the reviews, including my
> own, at IMDb. =A0The film particularly provoked the political left and,
> evidently, Ted Turner. =A0Lesser anti-communist vehicles with lesser
> actors than Helen Hayes, Dean Jagger, Robert Walker and a lesser
> director than Leo McCarey did not occasion such anger.
I thought you were saying your _review_ was rejected from the TCM
website. Thanks for the clarification.
Like you, Larry, I haven't seen "My Son John" (It hasn't shown on TV
in decades and was never released on VHS or DVD), but from what I can
glean from the reviewers' comments at imdb.com, and from those of
Professor Stephen J. Whitfield in "The Culture of the Cold War" (Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1991), it sounds like the sort of film that
would delight the American political left.
> =A0 =A0 =A0I have never seen the film and note this point in my review.
> Instead, I wrote a "review" based on reviewing some of the other
> frothingly hostile reviews.
None of the reviews at imdb.com struck me as "frothingly hostile,"
and none of them showed the least sympathy for the Stalinist cause, as
far as I could tell. Some people just thought it was a lousy film.
The HUAC's investigation of supposed Communist influence in the film
industry induced a panic-stricken drive in some directors and
screenwriters to show their loyalty, resulting in some rather ham-
fisted films that bore about as much relation to political reality as
"Reefer Madness" did to biochemical reality.
Not having seen "My Son John," I can't say if it fits that
description, but in general I suspect that such films did about as
much to protect us from the Red Menace as Ed Wood's "Plan Nine from
Outer Space" protected us from hostile extraterrestrials.
|
| |
Date: 12 Feb 2009 01:42:38
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 7, 5:59=A0pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
>
> Another meatless bone for bottom feeders to chew on.
Speaking of bottom-feeders, it should be apparent to
anyone who can actually think (sorry, TK), that Mr.
Keene did not independently commit the same exact
error three times, but rather, he mindlessly copied the
exact same text again and again, most likely from
some unreliable source such as one of his own books
or articles, or from one of the many other hacks in the
chess-writing biz.
The problem of mindless copying has long plagued
readers. Perhaps the most famous example is the
story regarding Paul Morphy and "women's shoes",
which has been propagated by numerous hacks in
one form or another over the years.
As for meatlessness, I scrolled down the link and
found nothing of note until the final letter, which
appears to have been in response to an enquiry by
Mr. Capablanca regarding borrowing money, ala
the roaring '20s, to invest in American stocks circa
1940. Now, since JC died in early 1942 this was
not such a good idea in retrospect; nor was it such
a good idea in 1929 or in 2008 for that matter. No,
the best time to borrow money to invest in U.S.
stocks was probably the year 1982.
I found the commentary on U.S. presidents fairly
interesting... the possibility of Mr. Roosevelt serving
a third term was summarily ruled out by the letter's
author... airplanes were dismissed as ineffectual in
battle... perhaps the Sicilian Defense was also
summarily dismissed as worthless by this fellow,
along with plastics and motor cars... .
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 19:12:02
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
WHY THE BAN?
Taylor Kingston asks why My Son John was banned from TCM (Turner
Classic Movies). He and others should read the reviews, including my
own, at IMDb. The film particularly provoked the political left and,
evidently, Ted Turner. Lesser anti-communist vehicles with lesser
actors than Helen Hayes, Dean Jagger, Robert Walker and a lesser
director than Leo McCarey did not occasion such anger.
I have never seen the film and note this point in my review.
Instead, I wrote a "review" based on reviewing some of the other
frothingly hostile reviews.
Yours, Larry Parr
Taylor Kingston wrote:
> On Feb 8, 12:11 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I once asked Arnold about Herman's movie "acting." By "bit part" he
> > meant walk-on and off and double in distance shots as a stand-in for
> > the main actor. In a very few of the better listings at imdb (see
> > that site for a review I wrote of "My Son John" which is banned from
> > TCM)
>
> I read your review, Larry (www.imdb.com/title/tt0044941/usercomments?
> start=10). You say it was "banned from TCM." Why was that?
>
> > there will be listings of extras and possibly even stand-ins.
> > But that is rare.
> >
> > After the Denker-Parr book appeared, Arnold mentioned that Herman
> > worked as a substitute in distance shots in his roles. It was
> > makework for X-bucks a day arranged by Humphrey Bogart and, I gather,
> > on two occasions by George Raft. I once asked Arnold how much Herman
> > got per day, but he did not know.
> >
> >
> >
> > Taylor Kingston wrote:
> > > Hey, Larry, got a question for you. In "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and
> > > Other Stories," which you co-wrote with Arnold Denker, it says on page
> > > 241 that IM Herman Steiner's Hollywood friends would get him bit parts
> > > in films now and then, and that he once played Adolf Hitler.
> > > However, checkingwww.imdb.com, a site that lists just about every
> > > movie ever made and everyone who played in them, there is no mention
> > > of Steiner at all, playing Hitler or anyone else. Did Denker ever
> > > mention any specific films Steiner was supposed to have been in, in
> > > particular the one where he supposedly played Hitler?
> > > This is not a trick question, just a straightforward request for
> > > information.
|
| |
Date: 11 Feb 2009 08:25:31
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
On Feb 8, 12:11=A0am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> I once asked Arnold about Herman's movie "acting." By "bit part" he
> meant walk-on and off and double in distance shots as a stand-in for
> the main actor. =A0In a very few of the better listings at imdb (see
> that site for a review I wrote of "My Son John" which is banned from
> TCM)
I read your review, Larry (www.imdb.com/title/tt0044941/usercomments?
start=3D10). You say it was "banned from TCM." Why was that?
> there will be listings of extras and possibly even stand-ins.
> But that is rare.
>
> After the Denker-Parr book appeared, Arnold mentioned that Herman
> worked as a substitute in distance shots in his roles. =A0It was
> makework for X-bucks a day arranged by Humphrey Bogart and, I gather,
> on two occasions by George Raft. =A0I once asked Arnold how much Herman
> got per day, but he did not know.
>
>
>
> Taylor Kingston wrote:
> > Hey, Larry, got a question for you. In "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and
> > Other Stories," which you co-wrote with Arnold Denker, it says on page
> > 241 that IM Herman Steiner's Hollywood friends would get him bit parts
> > in films now and then, and that he once played Adolf Hitler.
> > =A0 However, checkingwww.imdb.com, a site that lists just about every
> > movie ever made and everyone who played in them, there is no mention
> > of Steiner at all, playing Hitler or anyone else. Did Denker ever
> > mention any specific films Steiner was supposed to have been in, in
> > particular the one where he supposedly played Hitler?
> > =A0 This is not a trick question, just a straightforward request for
> > information.
|
| |
Date: 08 Feb 2009 06:02:04
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
On Feb 8, 12:11=A0am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> STEINER'S MOVIE "CAREER"
>
> There is a picture -- I was about to write "well-known picture" but I
> don't suppose it is -- of Herman Steiner on a movie set of Cass
> Timberlane coaching Spencer Tracer and Lana Turner at chess. He was a
> technical adviser. =A0I doubt that he was listed for that either.
>
> I once asked Arnold about Herman's movie "acting." By "bit part" he
> meant walk-on and off and double in distance shots as a stand-in for
> the main actor. =A0In a very few of the better listings at imdb (see
> that site for a review I wrote of "My Son John" which is banned from
> TCM) there will be listings of extras and possibly even stand-ins.
> But that is rare.
>
> After the Denker-Parr book appeared, Arnold mentioned that Herman
> worked as a substitute in distance shots in his roles. =A0It was
> makework for X-bucks a day arranged by Humphrey Bogart and, I gather,
> on two occasions by George Raft. =A0I once asked Arnold how much Herman
> got per day, but he did not know.
Thanks, Larry.
> Taylor Kingston wrote:
> > Hey, Larry, got a question for you. In "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and
> > Other Stories," which you co-wrote with Arnold Denker, it says on page
> > 241 that IM Herman Steiner's Hollywood friends would get him bit parts
> > in films now and then, and that he once played Adolf Hitler.
> > =A0 However, checkingwww.imdb.com, a site that lists just about every
> > movie ever made and everyone who played in them, there is no mention
> > of Steiner at all, playing Hitler or anyone else. Did Denker ever
> > mention any specific films Steiner was supposed to have been in, in
> > particular the one where he supposedly played Hitler?
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2009 21:11:11
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
STEINER'S MOVIE "CAREER"
There is a picture -- I was about to write "well-known picture" but I
don't suppose it is -- of Herman Steiner on a movie set of Cass
Timberlane coaching Spencer Tracer and Lana Turner at chess. He was a
technical adviser. I doubt that he was listed for that either.
I once asked Arnold about Herman's movie "acting." By "bit part" he
meant walk-on and off and double in distance shots as a stand-in for
the main actor. In a very few of the better listings at imdb (see
that site for a review I wrote of "My Son John" which is banned from
TCM) there will be listings of extras and possibly even stand-ins.
But that is rare.
After the Denker-Parr book appeared, Arnold mentioned that Herman
worked as a substitute in distance shots in his roles. It was
makework for X-bucks a day arranged by Humphrey Bogart and, I gather,
on two occasions by George Raft. I once asked Arnold how much Herman
got per day, but he did not know.
Taylor Kingston wrote:
> Hey, Larry, got a question for you. In "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and
> Other Stories," which you co-wrote with Arnold Denker, it says on page
> 241 that IM Herman Steiner's Hollywood friends would get him bit parts
> in films now and then, and that he once played Adolf Hitler.
> However, checking www.imdb.com, a site that lists just about every
> movie ever made and everyone who played in them, there is no mention
> of Steiner at all, playing Hitler or anyone else. Did Denker ever
> mention any specific films Steiner was supposed to have been in, in
> particular the one where he supposedly played Hitler?
> This is not a trick question, just a straightforward request for
> information.
>
> On Feb 7, 5:59 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
> >
> > Another meatless bone for bottom feeders to chew on.
> >
> >
> >
> > chessparrot wrote:
> > > On Feb 4, 7:40 pm, Offramp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 4, 7:04 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > > It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> > > > > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
> >
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
> >
> > > > That is funny. The CN directly above it is also funny, number 5986. I
> > > > am starting another thread about that.
> >
> > > Keene uses Jacobs as his scribe, dictating his words over the phone.
> > > His problem is trying to do too many things at once. He's careless, or
> > > seemingly so, those others accuse him of other crimes. I don't.
> >
> > > James Pratt (Basingstoke!)- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2009 15:14:19
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Herman Steiner Playing Hitler? (was: Three Strikes)
|
Hey, Larry, got a question for you. In "The Bobby Fischer I Knew and
Other Stories," which you co-wrote with Arnold Denker, it says on page
241 that IM Herman Steiner's Hollywood friends would get him bit parts
in films now and then, and that he once played Adolf Hitler.
However, checking www.imdb.com, a site that lists just about every
movie ever made and everyone who played in them, there is no mention
of Steiner at all, playing Hitler or anyone else. Did Denker ever
mention any specific films Steiner was supposed to have been in, in
particular the one where he supposedly played Hitler?
This is not a trick question, just a straightforward request for
information.
On Feb 7, 5:59=A0pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
>
> Another meatless bone for bottom feeders to chew on.
>
>
>
> chessparrot wrote:
> > On Feb 4, 7:40 pm, Offramp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Feb 4, 7:04 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess his=
tory
> > > > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> > > > =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
>
> > > That is funny. The CN directly above it is also funny, number 5986. I
> > > am starting another thread about that.
>
> > Keene uses Jacobs as his scribe, dictating his words over the phone.
> > His problem is trying to do too many things at once. He's careless, or
> > seemingly so, those others accuse him of other crimes. I don't.
>
> > James Pratt (Basingstoke!)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| |
MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING
Another meatless bone for bottom feeders to chew on.
chessparrot wrote:
> On Feb 4, 7:40 pm, Offramp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Feb 4, 7:04 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> > > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
> >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
> >
> > That is funny. The CN directly above it is also funny, number 5986. I
> > am starting another thread about that.
>
> Keene uses Jacobs as his scribe, dictating his words over the phone.
> His problem is trying to do too many things at once. He's careless, or
> seemingly so, those others accuse him of other crimes. I don't.
>
> James Pratt (Basingstoke!)
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2009 01:27:01
From: chessparrot
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 4, 7:40=A0pm, Offramp <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Feb 4, 7:04=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> > =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
>
> That is funny. The CN directly above it is also funny, number 5986. I
> am starting another thread about that.
Keene uses Jacobs as his scribe, dictating his words over the phone.
His problem is trying to do too many things at once. He's careless, or
seemingly so, those others accuse him of other crimes. I don't.
James Pratt (Basingstoke!)
|
| |
Date: 06 Feb 2009 12:50:29
From: William Hyde
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 5, 11:30=A0am, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Feb 4, 8:43=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 4, 7:38=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > On 4 Feb, 19:04, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess his=
tory
> > > > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> > > > =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
>
> > > To be fair to Keene, it was supposed to be a six-player quadruple
> > > round-robin until Fine opted out.
>
> > > No, I don't think that's any excuse either :-)
>
> > =A0 If Keene was actually unaware that Hague-Moscow 1948 was a 5-man
> > event, not 6-man, then he is guilty of gross negligence. And I find it
> > virtually inconceivable that nobody informed Keene of his mistake
> > after the 2004 book appeared. That the same gaffe would appear in
> > Keene books from 2007 and 2008 indicates he just lets his mistakes
> > continue on auto-pilot.
> > =A0 Amazingly, Keene had it right in his book on Kasparov-Kramnik 2000.
> > Page 19 clearly says "After Alexander Alekhine's death [as World
> > Champion] in 1948, the World Chess Federaton (FIDE) stepped in and
> > organized a five-player tournament (won by Botvinnik) to determine the
> > new champion."
> > =A0 So one wonders, has Keene forgotten what he once knew, or is he
> > letting incompetent ghost-writers handle his books now?
>
> =A0 I checked another Keene book, "Karpov-Korchnoi: Massacre in
> Merano" (1981). There he has the full crosstable for Hague-Moscow
> 1948, clearly and correctly showing that it was a 5-man tournament. So
> it seems that Keene had it right for at least 19 years.
He also had it right in his 1978 book on the earlier Karpov-Kortchnoi
match.
How the heck
> did he start getting it wrong?
Truth, it turns out, is not the daughter of time.
William Hyde
|
| |
Date: 05 Feb 2009 08:30:17
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 4, 8:43=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Feb 4, 7:38=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > On 4 Feb, 19:04, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess histo=
ry
> > > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> > > =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
>
> > To be fair to Keene, it was supposed to be a six-player quadruple
> > round-robin until Fine opted out.
>
> > No, I don't think that's any excuse either :-)
>
> =A0 If Keene was actually unaware that Hague-Moscow 1948 was a 5-man
> event, not 6-man, then he is guilty of gross negligence. And I find it
> virtually inconceivable that nobody informed Keene of his mistake
> after the 2004 book appeared. That the same gaffe would appear in
> Keene books from 2007 and 2008 indicates he just lets his mistakes
> continue on auto-pilot.
> =A0 Amazingly, Keene had it right in his book on Kasparov-Kramnik 2000.
> Page 19 clearly says "After Alexander Alekhine's death [as World
> Champion] in 1948, the World Chess Federaton (FIDE) stepped in and
> organized a five-player tournament (won by Botvinnik) to determine the
> new champion."
> =A0 So one wonders, has Keene forgotten what he once knew, or is he
> letting incompetent ghost-writers handle his books now?
I checked another Keene book, "Karpov-Korchnoi: Massacre in
Merano" (1981). There he has the full crosstable for Hague-Moscow
1948, clearly and correctly showing that it was a 5-man tournament. So
it seems that Keene had it right for at least 19 years. How the heck
did he start getting it wrong?
|
| |
Date: 04 Feb 2009 17:43:28
From:
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 4, 7:38=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On 4 Feb, 19:04, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> > could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> > =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
>
> To be fair to Keene, it was supposed to be a six-player quadruple
> round-robin until Fine opted out.
>
> No, I don't think that's any excuse either :-)
If Keene was actually unaware that Hague-Moscow 1948 was a 5-man
event, not 6-man, then he is guilty of gross negligence. And I find it
virtually inconceivable that nobody informed Keene of his mistake
after the 2004 book appeared. That the same gaffe would appear in
Keene books from 2007 and 2008 indicates he just lets his mistakes
continue on auto-pilot.
Amazingly, Keene had it right in his book on Kasparov-Kramnik 2000.
Page 19 clearly says "After Alexander Alekhine's death [as World
Champion] in 1948, the World Chess Federaton (FIDE) stepped in and
organized a five-player tournament (won by Botvinnik) to determine the
new champion."
So one wonders, has Keene forgotten what he once knew, or is he
letting incompetent ghost-writers handle his books now?
|
| |
Date: 04 Feb 2009 16:38:24
From:
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On 4 Feb, 19:04, [email protected] wrote:
> =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
To be fair to Keene, it was supposed to be a six-player quadruple
round-robin until Fine opted out.
No, I don't think that's any excuse either :-)
|
| |
Date: 04 Feb 2009 11:40:17
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Three Strikes
|
On Feb 4, 7:04=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> =A0 It's hard to see how anyone supposedly well-versed in chess history
> could get this wrong even once, but three times?
>
> =A0http://tinyurl.com/cjhhnc
That is funny. The CN directly above it is also funny, number 5986. I
am starting another thread about that.
|
|
