Home
 

The Life of a Raven

About Recent Entries

Dear Google, Your Search is Sucking Apr. 18th, 2009 @ 08:59 am
Dear Google,

I've been using your Search for a very long time. I left Alta Vista for you, even though you didn't have advanced operators at the time. You were that good. And you just got better. You added all those little tools like OR and the "exclusion minus" and filter operators like "site:" that enhanced my GoogleFu and let me amaze my friends and co-workers with my ability to find stuff.

Then your search got a little fuzzy, and you got even better. You found "copier" when I searched for "copy", and that was pretty useful, especially when I could say "+copy" when I knew I didn't want "copier" in the results.

But recently, you've betrayed me. Google Search has become so fuzzy that it's almost useless. You try to make "intelligent" guesses about what I want and return pages that are so far off that they don't even include all of my search terms in the first few hits, even though there are pages that do further down the list.

And the plus-operator, that used to mean "search exactly for this word", doesn't do that any more. And putting quotes around a phrase no longer means "find exactly this phrase"... instead, it starts returning hits that not only have the words of that phrase scattered all over the page, it returns pages that don't even have all the words.

Yet your "Advanced Search" form hasn't changed. If I type into the "find this exact phrase" box, I don't get "this exact phrase", I get fuzzy results that aren't what I'm looking for.

Google, you have crippled my Search. You have stolen my GoogleFu by making what used to be predictable tools very unpredictable. You try to second-guess what I really want, and you don't let me clarify when you guess wrong... you just second-guess my clarifications, too.

I never thought I'd say this, but Google, I think it's time I started seeing other search engines. You and I just aren't as compatible as we once were, and I'm afraid that we may not have a future together. I need a Search that works and can do exactly what it's told. You're just trying too hard to guess what I need, and failing to see that I'm telling you exactly what I need in clear, certain terms.

Maybe, if you work at listening to what I have to say, instead of telling me what you think I want to hear, we can save this relationship. Maybe, if you go back to being the Search I fell in love with, this might work out.

But for now, I've got a date with Yahoo! Search. I'll give you a call sometime.

Got my hands back in the mud Apr. 6th, 2009 @ 10:09 pm
I just got home just a little bit ago from my first pottery wheel-throwing class at www.wichitapottery.com, home of The Secret Gallery, at Meridian and 2nd. It was really nice.

They're conveniently less than five minutes from my house, which is a nice bonus. But the big deal for me is that they're very affordable. $40 for a four-week class, and current students get access to the studio on Friday from 1-9 at no additional charge.

I see that City Arts' fees have come down from the last time I looked a few years ago... $110 for a 10-week class, plus firing fees. So they're not much more expensive, but that ten weeks is a bigger commitment and, last I looked, studio time outside of class was extra. With a new class starting every month, it's easy to drop into the schedule.

I had emailed ahead of time to ask about availability and was told I could just show up a little early the first night; no reserving a spot or paying in advance. When I got there, Jill (the owner) had already labeled a shelf with my name and gave me a tour of the studio. It's kind of funny, but that little touch made me feel special.

I liked that the class was fairly small and informal, with only six students. Everyone in the class was at a different level, and only one of us had never thrown before. The instructor had to feel around for just how much instruction people needed, and he worked with that pretty well. (I hate to admit, but I can't remember my instructor's name.)

I haven't thrown for a few years, and only have a 10-week class under my belt. But it came back pretty quickly, and throwing pots is basically the only mechanical art form requiring dexterity that I took to naturally. I can't draw a straight line, but throwing pots just works for me. And it's a very functional art form that I enjoy owning and using.

The studio was clean, the owner, instructor and students were all friendly and fun.

I'm looking forward to Friday... I just happen to be off work, and I expect to spend some of it down at Wichita Pottery.

That's the ticket. Mar. 21st, 2009 @ 09:31 am
I took a couple days off at the beginning of the week to hang out with my family, it being spring break and my son was out of school. We hit the bookstore on Monday, as we have a bad habit of doing, but this time I had a real motive. Generally, I've got way too many books already, and the bookstore is just a tease... lots of stuff to look at, knowing I shouldn't buy anything because I have a lot to read at home. But this time, I wanted to browse the songbooks.

I'm struggling with learning the guitar. I want to play, but I'm getting bored... I want to play all kinds of styles, but my chord changes come too danged slow, and rhythm guitar solo is kind of dull. I can't play well, let alone sing and play, and you pretty much have to sing to get melody, or you have to be really good at strumming and picking out a melody at the same time.

But part of the problem I've been having is that I'm not playing any music that interests me. I like folk music, but it gets old... sixty songs, three chords. Woo. So having browsed online for simple arrangements of popular acoustic tunes, I wanted to browse the actual music. And I ended up with "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Acoustic Guitar Songs." I like the Dummies and Idiots books in general, but this one was coincidence... it's a beginner book from Alfred Publishing with the Idiots label on it, and Alfred is the exclusive publisher of sheet music for several big artists.

But this book was exactly what I was looking for. Some great songs, some of them with simplified arrangements (Classical Gas, anyone?), and intros to each song with a guide and tips for playing the song (plus background information on the song and artist). Tablature (fingering diagrams for individual notes), because although I know how to read music, it's painfully slow... I have to pencil in all the fingerings until I learn it anyway, so I might as well get a book that lays out the TAB for me. And it had a nice mix of rhythm and fingerstyle songs.

And this finally did it. I can hardly put the guitar down, and I find myself at work looking forward to heading home so I can race past my family and into the basement to play my guitar.

I poked at "Classical Gas" a bit, and I can see that one coming but it's a little complicated. I took a look at "Layla" and put that one on the back shelf... Clapton earned his reputation. Tried a little of "Cats in the Cradle" and I want to learn that one, but it's got a few too many multi-note finger-plucks right now. But it's Simon and Garfunkel's "Scarborough Fair / Canticle" that's got me hooked. I love their music and it's acoustic guitar feel... and this turns out to be the song that convinced me I can play fingerstyle. The right-hand finger pattern rarely changes, so the right hand can get into a groove while the left manages the mostly simple chord changes.

It's coming along after just a couple days, and if I can get to changing chords smoothly without skipping a beat on the right hand, I'll be ready to sing along in no time. Problem is, it's a duet... one singer sings Scarborough Fair while the other sings Canticle on top of it. That'll be tricky to do solo. :)

Dear DNS administrators Feb. 10th, 2009 @ 03:18 pm
If you administer a DNS server, please... know the rules and follow them!

NS records must be a valid, fully-qualified domain name (FQDN). They should (I think "must," but I haven't taken the time to be sure) match the nameservers listed in your whois/root-delegate record.

Your SOA record must point to a valid, FQDN nameserver that is the primary authority for the domain's records. That's what start-of-authority means.

These aren't just courtesy... using invalid information in your NS or SOA records will cause problems for caching name servers, and will result in users who cannot reliably reach your site. And they don't have to run a "broken" caching DNS server themselves... BIND9 gets confused by caching invalid NS records, returning a valid response on early attempts, but later returning "host not found" responses because it can't reach the invalid NS server. (Because it cached the NS record, not the root-delegate information.... your broken DNS record told it that record was authoritative, after all.)

If you are the DNS admin for a hosting service and you publish broken DNS records for your customers, and then argue with the person who points it out to you that "everything works fine"... you deserve to be fired. I will suggest that your customers find a more reliable hosting service.

Oh... and your SOA record better have a valid, properly-formatted contact in it. And keep your primary and secondary in sync... they shouldn't return conflicting information for days and days.

Long story short, if you don't understand DNS, keep your paws off of it, and don't you dare put "DNS administration" on your resume. Find a mentor who can review your work before you commit it to a public server. Set up a private server and practice on it. Read "DNS & BIND" for gosh sakes. It wouldn't hurt you to skim the relevant RFCs.

And never forget: Just because your DNS server _lets_ you do it does not mean that it is safe or valid to do it. Your DNS server is stupid (even BIND9, yes) about the rules and will let you do many evil things without a hint of complaint.

If you're using BIND9, use named-checkconf and named-checkzone. Get dnswalk and run it against your nameserver.

I'm not a DNS expert. There are a lot of little nooks and crannies that I've not explored or needed to use. But dammit, NS, MX, SOA, A, and CNAME records.... these are the basics, folks. If you can't play by the rules, please don't play at all.

Because you have wasted far too much of my day.

This has been a public service announcement. Thank you for listening.

A Guitar Center experience, with a happy ending. Dec. 28th, 2008 @ 08:41 pm
Thanks to a little Christmas money, I just bought a "real" guitar... something a step above the rock-bottom basic models, with a solid-wood top. A Yamaha FG730S, if you must know, but that's not terribly important. This story isn't about the guitar, it's about the Guitar Center in Wichita, KS.

Now, before I even asked for GC gift cards, I had picked out three models I knew I was interested in. Something around $300, solid-wood top, quality construction. (A Seagull, a Yamaha and a Takamine, if you must know.) Something that wouldn't give me fits like my $80 used Harmony that just couldn't be adjusted to suit me.

So, armed with my gift card, I headed down to Guitar Center with the intent to play all three, maybe couple others in stock, and probably pick one. Little did I know that today was the last day of their extended holiday hours, and it was a popular day to be there. At any given time, there were at least five people in the acoustic room playing... at least two different guys who were playing loudly and SINGING, one of them for nearly half-an-hour. One guy was having a jam session with his girlfriend and her little brother (I guess). I picked up a guitar, but I couldn't even hear it clearly. I wandered off to look at books, and wandered back every so often... the people playing rotated, but there were several people who walked in, looked at how many people were in there, and promptly walked back out.

Thing is, I'm pretty sure that the people who were in there the longest and playing the loudest had no intention of actually buying a guitar. Certainly the trio jamming away weren't planning on buying three. And I get that Guitar Center is about hands-on, getting to play the guitar before you buy, but this was too much.

After about 45 minutes I gave up and went home, figuring I'd either go back on Monday during the day (I have the week off) or maybe I'd run down there later tonight around 6... they normally close at 6 on Sundays, but were open until 7 for the holiday. So figuring most people won't know they're open, or are dealing with dinner or whatnot, I got impatient and headed back down to arrive at 6. And it paid off... I had the acoustic room all to myself for close to an hour.

Now here's where it got even better. I had checked the web and knew they should have all three models I wanted to try in stock. I tried the Takamine first and it just didn't live up to all the rave I've heard about it... I was disappointed and I easily knocked that one out of the running. So I started looking around for the other two models and couldn't find them, just as an employee walked in... the first that had spoken to me.

Now, I have to disclose, it turns out I know the guy. Will used to play guitar at a church I attended for several years, and he's a pretty cool guy. I hadn't seen him around GC for awhile, but he remembered me. So he hunted down the two guitars I wanted and I set to comparing them.

So, giving them both a shot, it was a much better experience than with the Takamine. I wanted to like the Seagull better... even though it was most expensive, it was also the most beautiful, had a slightly wider than standard neck which I liked, and it's made in Canada instead of Asia. (Though both Yamaha and Takamine are very respectable guitar makers, I'm trying to spend my money closer to home if I can.) But I couldn't... it was just too brassy and not as clear when strummed with a fingernail or pick compared to the Yamaha. And Will even unpacked a second identical Seagull out of the back room and let me try that, since, being made of wood, each guitar is unique and may sound different. (I'll note that this model was, at sticker, a hundred bucks more than the Yamaha, so I'm sure he'd like to make the higher dollar sale.) And the second one did sound better, but it still didn't sound as good as the Yamaha. And, dollar value not withstanding, Will agreed.

I sat there with the two guitars on stands on front of me, alternating between them... playing something on one, then the same on the other. I wanted to prefer the Seagull, but I was having a hard time making up my mind. It wasn't bad, and it was brighter than the Yamaha, just a little too bright when played even a little aggressively.

At the crucial decision point, a couple teens (maybe early twenties) came in and started playing. They weren't terribly loud, but they did make the process harder. But after a few minutes, they realized I was trying to make a real purchasing choice, and they kept it quiet for the five minutes or so that I needed to make up my mind. Thank you, who ever you were, for not being Guitar Center wankers. I appreciated the gesture, and I'm sorry I didn't get a chance to actually thank you while I was there.

I gave in and choose the Yamaha. It really did sound better to me, and it didn't hurt that it was the cheaper of the two... and when I looked at the tag, it turned out to be discounted even lower than the website price.

My thanks to Will, who was very helpful, and stayed after 7 on a Sunday, at the end of a nine-hour busy holiday shift when Sunday is normally six hours, without pressuring me to make a decision or giving me any kind of attitude about it.

Sometimes Guitar Center is noisier than I like, and sometimes the customers make it difficult to talk to the sales people or to hear the instrument you're demoing, but I've been very pleased with the service I've received in the several times I've been in the store. I started with buying microphones a couple years ago, looked at buying my son and myself guitars over a year ago, looked at digital pianos for my son, bought harmonicas, strings, picks, capos and so on. Every time, the staff has been helpful and courteous, no matter how many tattoos or piercings they had. I'm kind of a straight-laced 40-year-old, and I don't really feel like I "fit in" at Guitar Center, but no staff member has ever made me feel like I don't belong there.

That isn't the story I typically hear about Guitar Center elsewhere, so I thought it worth sharing.
Other entries
» Microcredit... an alternative to a hand-out

I make a reasonable living, and I share a portion of my income with those in need, both through my church and through Heifer International. I like Heifer because they do more than just give aid... they provide livestock (cows, goats, chickens and so on) and training to the poor in third-world countries, with a requirement that the first female offspring be given to someone else in the community. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, give a family a cow and pretty soon everyone in the village has their own cow. (Well, assuming there's a bull around.)

Now I think this is great... my money doesn't feed a family for a couple days, it helps provide the seed that can pull an entire family or even community out of poverty by giving them an long-term advantage.

A few months ago, I learned of another organization that I like for similar reasons... Kiva. Kiva is a microcredit (Wikipedia) organization. Microcredit is the extension of very small loans to the poor who are unable to get a loan at a traditional bank. In Kiva's case, these loans are to small businesses in poor countries. (Made through local microfinance banks in the borrower's country.)

And the really fun thing about Kiva is that you're not giving your money away... you're just loaning it. You receive no interest, and it's always possible that you may lose the money if a borrower defaults on a loan. Barring a default, eventually your loaned money gets credited back to your account. Then you can loan it out again, or even (easily) request Kiva return your money. Out of the eight nine loans (just re-loaned another $25) I've made starting seven months ago, not one borrower has missed a payment.

One of the other fun things about Kiva is that you actually get to pick which entrepreneur you want to support. You can loan as little as $25, and your money gets pooled with other loaners to meet the amount being asked for. You can view photographs and summaries of what each business is involved in or starting up, how much money they want to borrow, and why they want to borrow it. It might be a farmer needing $300 to buy seed for this year's planting. Or a shop keeper wanting to expand her inventory. Or a taxi driver who needs to repair his car to say in business.

"It takes money to make money," as they say, and Kiva gives the poor entrepreneur the financial leverage necessary to get their business off the ground, take it to the next level, or get through a rough spot. It's not a hand-out... the entrepreneur pays back the loan plus interest, just like any other small business. The big difference here is that traditional banks won't extend credit to these businesses. The amounts are too small (sometimes only a few hundred dollars), and the return on investment too low. The microfinance banks are often non-profit and run to help this specific class of business. Kiva loaners help the microfinance bank stay afloat and able to help these businesses by providing interest-free capital to invest in helping small businesses.

If you're looking for a non-cluttering Christmas gift for someone this year, a Kiva gift certificate is a worthy choice. Unlike just donating money in someone's name and giving them a card, the recipient of this gift gets to choose how to disburse the funds, and when the loan is paid back, can loan it out again. Instead of a card pinned to a bulletin board, it's an ongoing involvement with an organization that helps change people's lives.

(For the record: I have never received paper mail from Kiva. Heifer sends me catalogs and regular requests for money, which can be kind of annoying. Kiva doesn't do that.)

Kiva - loans that change lives
» Social media etiquette?
So I've been trying to use Facebook and figure out how I can make it useful to me. But I'm starting to wonder about the etiquette I'm seeing... things that have been socially unacceptable on other social media for years. (Usenet and mailing lists and forums were "social" long before this so-called "social media" came about.)

Facebook seems to have the idea of "socially acceptable" turned around... you are encouraged to inundate your "friends" with all kinds of crap (invites, gifts, pets, etc) and it's up to your friend to filter you. It takes discretion out of the equation because it's no longer the sender's responsibility to decide what's appropriate, it's the recipient's.

And the thing I find really weird about this is... how is this "social"? On a mailing list, my friends and I talk to each other. On Facebook, I have friends who never actually write anything at me, but shower me with gizmo after gizmo. They aren't being social with me... they are interacting with an application, which in turn bugs me with some generic bit of fluff. If I don't like the fluff, I just block it... I don't have to tell my friend I didn't like it.

I don't like having to block every danged application that people use to send me crap... it's very much like having to delete spam from my mailbox. But I don't want to entirely block the people I'm connected with so they can't send me anything.

In many ways, people seem to be interacting with Facebook as if it were a game and not as a tool to stay connected with people. And that can make it pretty useless to me. Not giving up just yet, but the inability to get most of the information I want by RSS or email is a huge strike against them. (I can't get anything out of the Groups application, apparently... even as group owner, it won't email me when someone joins or posts.)
» Social media when you're not "social"

I segment my personal life, and I segment my online life. At one time, I ran seven different blogs, all more or less about me. Blogs about my Netflix experience, model rocketry, my religious views, roleplaying games, photography and writing. I have trouble following a catch-all blog... someone who writes about every aspect of his life all in one spot. I may want to read about his roleplaying experiences, but I don't care about his personal life... what he had for dinner, how his date went, what's happening in World of Warcraft, why his job sucks, etc. I just want to know how that roleplaying game he's developing is coming.

Kind of like this... imagine that you pick up the newspaper to read reviews about the latest movies. But along with the reviews, you get all kinds of details about the reviewer's personal life, his opinions on politics and religion, a recipe for chicken pot pie. That's not why you went to the reviews column... you went for reviews, not for the reviewer. And sure, you can skip all that stuff, but it takes some time to determine which parts you actually want to read.

When I write a blog post, I am working under the assumption that I have something worth reading. (Egotistical, I know.) That my signal to noise ratio is high... if you want to read about a novice working through the process of learning photography, then my photography blog should be interesting to you. And it's focused... it's just about photography and doesn't have a lick of religious thought in it. But were you to read my religion blog... well, you'll see a totally different side of me. (That blog was short-lived and is no longer on the net, btw.)

Thing is, this new "social media," specifically Facebook and Twitter are on my mind, are confusing that. They assume that all of my "friends" are equal, and everything I have to say is equally applicable to all of my "friends." There's no "family only" setting on Twitter. No "roleplayers only" tag on Facebook. If you "friend" or "follow" me, you get it all, and pretty much the only way to not get it all is to completely disconnect from me.

To me, that's entirely broken. Not everyone I want to converse with wants to converse with me at the same level and about the same things. Twitter's driving me crazy with status updates about who's eating what for dinner and with whom. I really don't care. I might care for two or three people, but not the majority of the people I'm following.

And it's seriously affecting what I say. I always write for an audience... a roleplayer audience, or a family audience, or a close friends audience. My "audience" on Twitter doesn't fit a clear-cut category by which I can filter my thoughts. I don't know who I'm writing for, because I don't even know most of them, and I don't know what their interests are.

To properly use Facebook or Twitter, I feel like I need three or four accounts on each... my "Wichita network" account, my "roleplaying network" account, my "local tech people" account, and so on.

Maybe it's because I'm from the world of Usenet and mailing lists... I seek out people based on their activities. Not based on geographic location alone (just because we live in the same city doesn't mean we have anything meaningful in common). So I blog based on what I do, I seek people out based on what they do, and I look for real-life friends who are involved in the same activities I am. And using Twitter does not count as an activity.

I suppose I'm looking for relationships, both online and offline, with people who will enrich my life... I'm busy "doing things" (important things!) and I'm not a big socializer. I'm the type of person who wants one or two good friends and that's all I need in terms of socialization. I'd much rather have coffee with one good friend than coffee with a crowd of people I barely know. But I do want to participate in larger communities of people who are involved in my hobbies. I like to "talk shop".

So where do we, the old guard of Usenet and mailing lists, fit into all this new "socialness" in which being connected seems to be more important than to whom I'm connected or why?

I'm not really sure. I don't actually use Facebook. I have an account because I wanted to be connected to certain people, but I've never really even figured out how to use it in a way that's beneficial to me.

I use Twitter quite a bit, but I haven't seen a return on the investment of time... it's like an all-day chat about nothing important. As I've used Twitter, I've noticed that the people I'm most interested in getting to know better are people who have the same interests.

I'm right on the verge of taking an axe to my friends lists on both services, politely but firmly cutting myself off from people who are just "social fluff" on my radar, and keeping those people who I find really worth the time. But then I'm afraid that my "follow" list on Twitter will be so sparse that there's no reason to be using Twitter at all. Which might not be a bad thing.


» Social media and businesses

Shea Sylvia talks about social media douchebags. (She uses mildly foul language, but it's okay, 'cause she misspells it.)

As a consumer, and a long-time player in online community (since 1986), think the real value in social media to a business is in being real with your customers. And real isn't about this new product, or that new sale... real is about what's going on in your head, what you're doing to make the world a better place for somebody. Why you and your business make a difference. Being real gives people a chance to care about you and your business beyond "what can your business do for me?", and when they care, they're more likely to be good customers.

Social media is social... if you're not being social, then you're not doing it right. You have to stop thinking about marketing and promotion and think about interacting with people. That's the big game-changer that the internet has brought to marketing... interaction. It's not a billboard, it's not radio or television. It's not one-way, it's two-way. And if you can't enter into a two-way relationship with your potential and existing customers, then social media isn't for you.

They need to tweet more, but I think Bamboo Stix has a good start... they talk about trying to find their signature dessert, their struggles with slow business on Mondays, dealing with their sushi chef injuring his hand. Yeah, they throw in their lunch specials and stuff, too. But they feel like real people. Because they are.


» What is the purpose of primary education?
So, this is an interesting question that was asked of school board candidates by the local paper.

"Should the board incorporate career and technical education courses into the state’s graduation requirements?"

One candidate said that they should be an option, and the other candidate said something that calls into question my assumptions of what primary education is about:

Kansas schools must teach employable skills to each K-12 student. After graduation, each student should be prepared to earn a living wage with skills which employers need.


Should it? I've always viewed primary education as providing fundamental skills required for life... reading, writing, math, a reasonable understanding of our geography, history and government, and exposure to the arts. Students may acquire experience with shop, home ec, foreign language, business writing, and so on, but I've always considered these to be introductory experiences, not real vocational training. If a graduate doesn't go on to formal secondary education, I expect that they're going to learn on-the-job.

I think it comes down to this for me: If a high school graduate declines to seek formal secondary training, whether it be college, technical school or an apprentice program, that graduate is 18 years old and responsible for themselves. Just because 75% of students fail to seek secondary education (is it really that high?) doesn't mean the primary education system is failing them and needs to prepare them to live with their decision. If they are satisfied with a high school education, why should we make an effort to give them more?

And I think that's the big thing for me... it's not the government's job to legislate away bad decision making. People are always going to make bad life decisions, and we can't stop them from doing so. If somehow 18 years old has become "too young to know better," whose fault is that? That's the parents' responsibility, not the school system's. And then, there are things that you just have to learn by experience... I didn't go to college right away and regretted it, later entering college in my early twenties. (And in my thirties, earning to degrees to make up for lost time. :)

Here's the thing. We will always need garbage haulers, fast food clerks and big-box store stockers. If that is all a high school graduate wants to aspire to, that's not the school's fault. It's sad that they don't aspire to more, yes, but ultimately the state is not responsible for aspirations.

Here's another thing. By the time a student graduates from high school, they ought to already have some job experience. In grade school, I sold greeting cards door to door. In middle school, I delivered newspapers. In high school, I worked at a fast food restaurant. Every one of those was a valuable experience. As sucky as working fast food was, I learned a lot about customer service, teamwork, and simply working under management.

If I were looking to hire someone and had the resume of a recent high school graduate in my hands, I wouldn't be asking what he learned in school, I'd be looking at what job experience he has. Heck, when I was part of an interview team that interviewed a lot of college graduates for a programming position, we didn't look at their school work, we looked at their job experience... the candidates who worked pizza delivery or waiting tables while in college didn't impress us nearly as much as those who worked in computer tech support or other jobs related to their intended careers.

Nothing prepares a person for working a job like actual job experience. You start at the bottom and work your way into better positions and jobs as you gain experience. Changing primary education can't fix that. It's already providing the skills necessary to work minimum-wage jobs, and I think that's all it should be responsible for. If a graduate wants better than minimum wage and doesn't want secondary education, then that graduate should expect to start at the bottom and work their way into a better job.

Primary education needs to concentrate on primary education, not job training.

Advertisement

Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com