True or untrue is not for debate. If there is evidence in black and white that people said or done things in their post history why would there be need of opinion if you can observe clearly they did or said something. People seem to think the earth being flat or not is up for a debate regardless of the objective truth. Surely it's also up for debate on whether someone is an idiot or a troll or not? Unstable how? what defines unstable.... do they stop presenting facts and start stating unsubstantiated claims with no corroborating evidence or events at alll? or just talk total nonsense? or unstable how? Are you actually going to ask me to define every single word? How many times do I need to use the word subjective (or does that need defining now). Do you actually expect me to list every possible instance or scenario there might possibly be of somebody falling under the banner of being unstable? Acting like a fool depends on what you mean. If they can provide observable fact for their claims and they are important then the manner of presentation is funny or even if it is extreme (still fact based) due to prior behaviour toward them by to others then no of course I would not think they will scam me. Then that's your opinion. Others may agree or disagree. You can present facts whilst still acting like a fool. If someone is stating facts but kicking and screaming and swearing whilst they're doing it then you can still choose not to trust them due to their erratic behaviour. You could be the most factual person on the planet but if you can't share or explain facts in a suitable manner then people are probably going to lose respect for you. If you can just re read and answer clearly on my prior important questions that would be very helpful. That broad answer does not really provide any insight to what your opinions are.
Can you define 'clearly' and 'important'?  Regardless of what I tell you I don't think you'll accept anything I say so it's probably pointless even continuing the debate. |
|
|
|
|
Would you trust someone who is erratic, unstable and acts like a fool? Some people call that trolling and sometimes it's just their natural immature behaviour. Either way that's up to the individual as to whether they trust them or not. Sometimes people don't trust others if they spread what they believe to be lies or misinformation about them or others. The person or troll may or may not believe the info is untruthful and it may or may not be. That's why issues need to be taken on a case by case basis.
Liking lemons or not is subjective taste and irrelevant to whether you're trustworthy or not. Someone who acts like a buffoon is different matter, but it's down that individual person whether they don't trust them or not. I think some trolls likely do deserve negative trust and some don't, but that depends on the specific behaviour. If someone acts like a buffoon 99% of the time then I would be less likely to trust that person. As to whether you want to leave feedback for that is entirely down to the individual.
|
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_trollIn Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses[2] and normalizing tangential discussion,[3] whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain. Asking what the definition of a trolling post is is like asking what is constructive. Purely subjective. Sometimes people come across as trolls when in fact they're just idiots, just like sometimes people think they're making substantial posts when they're really not. Does trolling automatically make you a scammer? No, but I would be less likely to trust a troll, especially if it's their full time job here. Would you trust someone in real life who just acts like an immature jackass all the time and never takes anything seriously? Probably not.
|
|
|
|
|
This would only work if campaign managers were going through everybody's posts and checking what threads they've posted in and discounting the ones with no signature displayed. For most spam campaigns they won't be doing any thorough checking and as long as they've made the posts then they'll get their share. 99% of campaigns don't care what you post or where, especially the problem ones, hence this would do largely nothing about spam other than at best move spam into other threads that aren't 'de-sigged', and there are plenty of those about.
|
|
|
|
The general condition of this forum seems quite BAD. Is it nothing but hawks and scammers in here? I see NOTHING that leads me to believe otherwise.
Apparently with the market being on its ass... the sane experienced people don't even bother coming in here?
It's looking like the crypto community would be better off WITHOUT this forum.
It's quite pathetic honestly.
This is a forum about money, specifically an irreversible money, so of course there's going to be scammers here. Bitcoin is a paradise for them. The forum is far from perfect but if people don't like it they can vote with their feet and leave. Meta should be hide from newbie. Theymos should create a new Child Board for "Account Recover & Ban Appeal". Seems lots of spam post on Meta lately. Or should at least require activity like more then 250 activity can post on meta. I know it has been suggested multiple times but really need it. Few important post and discussion going lower due to newbie spamming. I am wondering Meta might be become like Bitcoin Discussion board after few days.
But often Newbies are those who need to get answers and if they're about the forum then they belong here. |
|
|
|
I give up guys. I'm switching to Lawro mode. Lol. I'll just be copying his weekly predictions from here on out. Good luck to everybody in the top 10.  I've been dropping further down the table week by week and doubt I'll be getting many points from this round. Seem to have got 2 out of 2 correct scores so far on Cloudbet's Euro-wide predictor so far so hoping I'll win that one as it's the last round this week and I'm already up in second place. Palace are currently 2-1 up against City following 2 goals in 3 minutes and absolute BANGER of a goal from Townsend: https://streamja.com/LoPv. Did you see that? He must have a foot like a traction engine. If it stays like this, Liverpool will go 4 points clear at the top of the table. LFC_Bitcoin currently praying to every god in existence.  No on in our league predicted a Palace win. Fucks sake . City along with Chelsea were my bankers on the Sky Bet price boost this week and Chelski are 0-0 at half time. City will probably bounce back though, but at least if they don't there's a plus in that it gives Liverpool a further lead. Liverpool really can't afford to drop any points as it'll be rare that City do and I still think they're a stronger team so this would give them a huge boost. City and Liverpool are playing each other in January as well. Will be a right game and could end up being the title decider further down the line. If Liverpool can grab the win at the Etihad then that would be huge for the title race. |
|
|
|
their should be a statute of limitations agreed upon for plagiarism
Banning someone for a post made years ago would probably be quite harsh, especially if they've since changed their ways. In these sorts of cases I would much prefer a sig ban. if you are motivated enough to go through the many years and thousands of posts on my legendary account
Not sure how to break this to you gently but you're not really a Legendary. Is this cryptohunter? Seems the votes are pretty much evenly split between all options minus the fee one. Theymos PMd me and said permabans for plagiarism don't have to be set in stone as there are no hard rules and we can use our own initiative on whether to ban certain users or not but I think there needs to be some consistency across staff so it doesn't look like we're giving certain favours to people as it will just lead to people whinging and bugging staff members that x was unbanned by y and therefore so should they. Theymos has already implemented facilities to sig ban people and personally I think this is something we should be doing for those cases of users where they deserve a second chance, so hopefully he can roll out that feature to Globals so we can give them in appropriate cases. Maybe the sigs can be 'earned' back automatically after x amount of time/merit/contributions or after manual staff review, but at least those who are here to genuinely contribute something can still do so regardless. Two cases that would probably be deserving of unbans/signature bans are ChiBitCTy & Roboabhishek. Appeal threads: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3432369.msg35819856#msg35819856https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5079217.msg48408455#msg48408455I'm not sure I buy either of their excuses (though they are plausible) but I'd be willing to give them a second chance as they were both active and somewhat appreciated members and have vouches from other respected members, but I think some sort of sig ban would be appropriate here given they were both essentially doing it for payment. They both seem to care more about just getting their accounts back and even suggested they're fine with a sig ban so I think this is something we should consider for review: For 8 months I’ve watched many opportunities pass by where I feel I could have added value to the forum. My post history is pretty telling of what kind of forum member I believe I mostly was. My topics are either detailed posts to really try and add value here or for collectibles purposes.
Hilarious and Theymos…I respect you guys and I fully understand where you’re coming from. However, you’ve both stated you’d be willing to let a member back who you feel would contribute positively moving forward (likely with stipulations). Besides my lapse in common sense one day..I’ve done nothing but try and contribute positively here. Plenty of it being pre-signature days too. So..put me to the test!! Fuck my signature, hell ban me from it for good. Give me a chance and I will still be here, still contributing, whether now or a year from now. Easy promise I can make/keep.
I don't care about the signature as much as I care about my alias.
If it's possible, then I'll gladly accept it and obviously mistake as this one will never occur from my side ever again.
|
|
|
|
I think there are several levels of severity in plagiarism and not all are equal and in some cases a permanent ban forever can be a little harsh (especially if it was just one silly mistake) How do we determine it's a single case of a copy and paste? Let's say user X has 5000 posts and he is caught and reported for just 1. How do we know that there are no other plagiarized posts? Who will audit these many messages and prove that it's "just one silly mistake"? Note that different plag. checkers give different results. What you get with plagium and seotools may differ from a quick custom google search. Then there are the spinning tools which are very hard to catch, let alone many other ways to fool detection. It's probably not possible to determine how many they have in fact copied, but you can usually tell between the serial plagiarisers and the ones who have done it once or twice. Either way, they can still all be treated the same: One copy and paste = one signature ban. Either earn the merit or pay the fee or whatever. I can't believe that there are five people who voted "Pay some sort of fine". That is some bullshit! It's not that bad. For anyone who has fallen foul of being banned for a silly one-time mistake I'm sure they'd happily pay the price. It's a small price to pay instead of being banished for life. But who will determine whether a person deserves a permanent ban or not? Staff? DT member?
Probably staff, just like they do with current bans. As LoyceV said, merit can be received through abuse and it can't be a solution (Although I have voted for that option too before reading the discussion). I think the current rule should be continued since copy/paste is really a bad practice.
It's going to be very hard to abuse 100+ merit without being spotted. If there's any shenanigans going on they can either be just banned or left negative feedback (which is as good as a sig ban in most cases). I think there's a big difference in someone quoting something from Wikipedia to answer someone's question, and those that purposefully copy someone else's post here or 'text-spin' it just to earn from signatures
If the member isn't citing Wikipedia as the source, then I don't see any difference at all between those two cases. I've seen a lot of cases where people are copying stuff from all over the internet in order to answer questions and passing it off as their own original answer. That's plagiarism. It's still technically plagiarism but it's hardly a capital offence that deserves a death sentence. Sometimes it's just down to naivety more than being malicious. Imagine if you've made years worth of contributions without a single copy and paste, and then someone asks a question and you help them out by getting the answer from Wikipedia or somewhere else but don't properly attributive it. This is a web forum not a test for a degree in English Language and people don't expect to be banned for such a thing. This probably wouldn't get you a ban on any other forum but this board is obviously unique in that there's a real issue with plagiarism due to signature campaigns and hence why it's treated so harshly, but not all copy and pasters are the same. We really need more awareness of the rules and that's why they should be told about them upon sign up or have reminders. Hoping that new users just randomly stumble upon the long and complicated list of rules in Meta really isn't enough. The text spinning stuff is more devious, but we're talking about the difference between a criminal who leaves his fingerprints all over the doorknob vs. one that tries to clean up the crime scene--the offense is the same. I'd say it's more like giving the death sentence to both a murderer and someone who goes 1 mile over the speed limit. Both are crimes but don't deserve the same punishment. However, I have no sympathy for the people who text spin and maybe they shouldn't be given another chance, but then again I wouldn't be against them be able to get their account back if they prove they're here to contribute and earning a ridiculous amount of merit might be a good enough penance for that. I don't think there's a problem with the way things are now, except that not all plagiarizers are created equal and there are two that I know of that I wish had gotten some leniency--but I also understand how important it is to be consistent with rule enforcement. Well that's the problem right there. There really is quite a big difference between a one-time offence and someone who's only here to copy and paste but at the moment everyone is treated the same, but I also want there to be some consistency because we can't be giving special favours to certain people whilst others are banished for life. Hilariousandco, you know that when people get permabanned, they go right back to doing it with a new account. Then what does it matter if they're still going to be here? Doesn't make a difference either way. Hell, you've even suggested it a few times and I've begged you not to give that kind of example to people. So I don't think a signature restriction would work at all--they'll just abandon the account. The merit solution has problems, too, unless it's a very high amount. We know merit gets traded and sold.
Newbies might abandon their account but what about Senior or Heroes? It's incredibly difficult to achieve those ranks now so most aren't just going to do a drake and start from the bottom, but if they are then again, it doesn't matter because they're still here just under a different name. |
|
|
|
As I mentioned in the other thread, I'm against fines because it is discriminatory. If we are setting a new a rule, it should be the same rule for everyone, regardless of wealth. There shouldn't be an option that allows those more well off to buy themselves out of a punishment. I probably wouldn't be for it if it was just the fine by itself, but if there's two options: you can either pay the fine or earn the merit then I see no issue in that. If you have a problem with the fine for whatever reason then just earn the merit instead. Another possibility to earn their signature back would to be make x good reports - this would need to have an additional requirement of >x% accuracy to prevent spamming the report button. Say 5000 reports with >95%?
I think this would be too easy. It would be quite easy to rack up reports given the amount of spam there is here. If they have been banned signature temporary until they have earned X merit then they can continue to plagiarize and earn that needed merit to lift the ban of signature so this should be moved from the suggestion.
Then they would just be permabanned if they're caught doing the same thing. This is an attempt to give them a second chance. There wouldn't be a third. What is the difference of a temporary signature ban to an amount of merit they should earn?
Not sure what you mean here. To be honest, removal of their signature to signature spammers might as well be a permanent ban and most will probably just give up immediately if they can't earn here...
What about spammers who are paid for posting? They are often stealing posts from other users to bump topics, I doubt that signature ban will stop them. This is just about plagiarisers really. Other spammers can be dealt in other/the usual ways. Wasn't aware that was happening. Maybe it should be rolled out officially or give Globals the ability to do it since it's probably not something theymos would have time for. Temporary signature bans will never work.
They will just create an army of bot accounts that will make the job impossible for moderators, you can ban let's say 1000 accounts a day for 90 or 60 days, they will just create 91000 and once you're done with them the first ones will come back online.
Permanently removing the signature will probably mean for 99.999% the same as a ban.
If this was true then the same would be true for permbans, even more so. There's no other option to pay for your sins here once caught for plagiarising so most will just create a new account anyway. At least they've got the option of earning their signature back or paying a fine for it. |
|
|
|
|
I'd like to get the community's thoughts on possible alternatives to permabans for things like copy and pasting/plagiarism. One that seems to have the support of quite a few people is instead of a permanent ban a user has a signature ban instead (IE the signature is removed so they can no longer earn here). The signature ban could be permanent, temporary, or indefinite until the user has proven their worth over time and then it's reinstated. We could even make it so after the user has received x amount of merit then their signature is possibly reinstated (it would have to be a lot - at least one hundred in my opinion). I think there are several levels of severity in plagiarism and not all are equal and in some cases a permanent ban forever can be a little harsh (especially if it was just one silly mistake). I think there's a big difference in someone quoting something from Wikipedia to answer someone's question, and those that purposefully copy someone else's post here or 'text-spin' it just to earn from signatures (I'm really not sure if those users deserve a second chance, but good luck to them trying to get hundreds of merit to get it back). To be honest, removal of their signature to signature spammers might as well be a permanent ban and most will probably just give up immediately if they can't earn here, but for others it would be shame if there's no chance of forgiveness especially if they've been an active or helpful member of the community and just screwed up one time. Theymos has mentioned before signature bans and blacklists and was something that was supposed to happen with the signature campaign guidelines but maybe he could make this his next priority after the account recovery tool.
Alternatively, what do people think about paying some sort of fine to get their account back? The money probably wouldn't go to the forum or staff but to a bitcoin-accepting charity instead. That way at least a good cause benefits and they're still paying a financial penalty.
You could maybe give people two options for those that are banned for plagiarism: You can either have a sig ban indefinitely but are allowed to post, or possibly even allowed to earn the signature back by getting a sufficient amount of merit (say maybe at least 100), or just pay a substantial fine (at least $100). As I've mentioned before I'm strongly in favour of more donator ranks that give you a bigger signature and maybe they could get their signature back by purchasing one of them. I think we should also give them the option of earning it back via merit so at least they have two options and if they don't want to pay anything then they can try earn their signature back by contributing something worthwhile.
You can vote for two options on the poll just in case you are for both a sig ban and paying a fine. If you have any other alternatives or issues with the current options then please state so. You can also discuss how much a fine should be or how much merit a user should earn before they get their signature back.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, no. There's an art to trolling, but not to shitposting. The latter is just a lame attempt at earning money through writing, somewhere between those awful self-published ghetto novels on Amazon and a bunch of monkeys pounding their keyboards and hitting "Post" at the end. Some of them incidentally come out in an amusing way, which is why we have that thread in Meta for shitposts so bad they're almost good--but those are rare.
You mean like this one:  That's an actual "book" by the way. I was tempted to get the audiobook from audible just for a laugh. My personal favourite though:  The Flat Earth thread in off-topic is worth checking out, the pinnacle of shitposting. You will be entertained without a doubt Once you start asking for proof, their arguments fall apart pretty quickly. I think 99% of flat-earthers online are just trolls. It's easy bait for them to rile people up. |
|
|
|
What's up with all those users asking for proof every fucking time even with them knowing that there is enough proof (which is why they got banned in the first place)? It's annoying.
I'm gonna sound like a broken record now (don't ban me for self-plagiarism LOL) but I'm quite certain a lot of these "I NEED PROOF NOW!@@#!!!" demands are attempts to figure out how to avoid getting banned on their other account(s). So they might try to spin the words differently next time or something. Nah, I don't think it's that. They almost certainly know what they've done 99% of the time but are really hoping we don't and have made a mistake or at least can't provide them with proof. Until they see concrete evidence they're not gonna let their cash cow be culled and will kick and scream hoping that it'll be reinstated because they've certainly got nothing to lose. It's only natural I suppose. If you were called into the managers office and told you were fired for gross misconduct without a specific reason given wouldn't you want to know why? They're probably like criminals who get arrested for a crime but think there's no (or not enough) evidence on them to be charged, so they play dumb and smug because they think they've got away with it and will be released shortly. Then they get shown the CCTV with them committing the crime on it and are like ohshiiii - you got me. Also, a lot of these ones that have word spun might claim something like parallel thinking aka we had the same thoughts if the posts are significantly jumbled up. |
|
|
|
Nobody is going to pay 0.5btc to get their account back. It'd have to be a reasonable fine relative to what their account is worth. Somewhere between $100-$500 maybe. I possibly wouldn't be against some sort of fine but not sure it going to staff or the forum would be a good idea. People will just whine we're banning people for the money. We could tell them to donate it to charity which at least then some good would come of their behaviour and nobody but a good cause benefits. You could maybe give people two options: You can either have a sig ban indefinitely and earn your signature back by getting sufficient merit (say maybe at least 100) or pay a fine (that goes to charity). As I've mentioned before I'm strongly in favour of more donator ranks that give you a bigger signature and maybe they could get their signature back by purchasing one of them. I think we should also give them the option or earning it back via merit so at least they have two options and if they don't want to pay anything then they can earn their signature back by contributing something worthwhile. Wouldn't the sensible solution be to NOT COPY AND PASTE?
This. I would personally prefer that users just stop doing the plagiarism then we wouldn't have anything to worry about. I think theymos should probably link to the rules somewhere so new users are made aware of them or even better constantly reminded of them somehow. I think some bright red warnings when they go to submit a post like DO NOT COPY AND PASTE/PLAGIARISE CONTENT OR POST REF LINKS would also help. |
|
|
|
|
I'm all for badges for things like reports or high amounts of merit, but I don't think we need them for everything and not just for setting a trust list. People should be able to do that without a badge. Also, I think if we we're going to change the trust system we should probably just get rid of it and just have a basic feedback system where you can leave feedback and it doesn't effect your score. No trust system is perfect and whatever we do people will complain. I think the current one works fairly well in 99% of cases but obviously when people get negative feedback they kick up an extreme fuss about it. Sometimes people leave feedback for silly or incorrect reasons but I think those should just be dealt with on a case by case basis and maybe some users inclusion on DT should be reviewed.
|
|
|
|
1. It is my own account and I raised it from newbie.
2. By January 2015 2016 [1] when I was heavily sick and was into crypto-games campaign, for the reason of not missing out the slot, I decided to BUY POSTS from one of my old colleague. (He voluntarily asked me to give posts as he was aware of I was into BTT camp and not in position to write posts).
3. I bought some 20 posts from him but used less than 5, other posts were written by my wife (when I was sick). I guess all those 5 posts were plagiarized.
4. I lost my job in late 2016 but managed my life's need just from the earning from my beloved bitsler campaign. But do not know how to lead a life now, feeling like committing suicide for the situation I am facing right now. It is kind of feeling like betrayed due to heavy jealous, that too from a colleague.
5. I have proof for buying the posts. I can show email of posts with date. But, I believed for the sin of plagiarism, there will be no second chance here hence I did not ask.
It seems the 'outsourcing' posts is becoming a new favourite excuse here. Blaming someone else whether true or not isn't going to be an acceptable excuse. Imagine if you're employed by someone, and instead you pass off that work to someone else who probably isn't qualified and they screw up. The onus would be on you and it's you who would face punishment. Imagine if a moderator here was ill or too lazy to do the work and got someone else to do it, and instead they removed threads they didn't like and banned the users. Would the excuse well I outsourced the work be acceptable? Nope. feeling like committing suicide for the situation I am facing right now. It is kind of feeling like betrayed due to heavy jealous, that too from a colleague.
I have some sympathy for you, but being suicidal about being banned from a discussion forum is a bit over the top. Nobody ought to be this dependent on signature campaigns for their living, because they could easily become a thing of the past. Look at how few of them there are now compared to 2015. What would you do if the campaign you were in suddenly just ended? This is just another extreme excuse made out of desperation. People hope they'll have some sympathy and just give him his account back to "spare" his life. You see it with begging often: I'm going to kill myself if someone doesn't send me money. I'm sure op has another account or could just buy one. Losing an account here is likely rarely the end of their time here and I'm sure they'll be smart enough to work around whatever restrictions has been put in place for them. |
|
|
|
|
No. We don't need a sub board for every faucet of existence. It would just be spammed in by sig spammers anyway just like Gambling Discussion is. In fact, people used to post about sports quite a bit in Off Topic but they soon found a loophole in that they could talk about sports in Gambling so that board became filled with threads for every possible sport and league in the world because most campaigns won't pay for posts in off topic but will in gambling and it's easy to chat shit about sports all day. It got so bad that we had to create the Gambling Discussion board for that express purpose because genuine businesses couldn't promote themselves amongst all the spam, but very little gambling discussion actually goes on in there. It's either threads just talking about sports that half of the people posting in there probably don't even care about and the rest is just spam shit threads like is gambling good, can you make money from gambling, does gambling annoy your wife/gf/family/dog etc etc.
|
|
|
|
Hey mate. I guess you did not read my answer completely. I did not ignore that I did plagiarism. But I really do not remember that post. No need amnesia or cocaine for that. It is clear that 1 post among 500 is very low rate to ban an account although rules say so. I mean instead of banning such people, admins could use some other punishments, restriction of participating bounties, 1-month suspension etc. Nevermind. I know my fault and you are all right.
I just ask a second chance if it is possible. If not that's ok. Good day all.
You people remember, you just hope we forget or can't find the one you copied or more. Believe me, it's hardly ever just the one post: yes it seems good project and will have nice hype in cryptomarket.
it seems good project and will have nice hype in cryptomarket
Interestingly enough that rohitsoni9893 account is also doing the same: What a nice initiative!! Very impressive and has huge potential!!
I make sure I will follow you closely!
great project Very impressive and has huge potential
He is copying post from the same day like you and also registered the same month as you but a few days apart: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1801790 rohitsoni9893 February 05, 2018 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1820152 mistersehmuz February 10, 2018 I'm guessing there's many more you have that are doing this. |
|
|
|
Struggling with English won't have you use "9" instead of O, You was spelled correctly once, and misspelled twice in the same sentence. 9f cpurse you have not as it is not the choice of yours it is how the fate made ypu do and ypu can find good things even now
Spelled "Catastrophic" (which is the right the adjective to use) with ease , I would have expected "catastrophy" if he/she was indeed struggling with english, and had an issue spelling "world" in my opinion ee will not see some catastrophic event as everyting can be restores in the cryptocurrency workd if we really need it
Whether he struggles with English or not is debatable, but what isn't debatable is he struggles with typing accurately or proofreading as he is almost certainly just bashing out nonsense as quickly as he can hence all the mistakes, and most people would make mistakes if they were trying to barf out one-liners over multiple accounts as fast as possible. He only used the 9 instead of the O because the 9 is right above the O and he's obviously smashing away at his keyboard so fast that accuracy is the least of his worries. I mean, why should he even bother proofreading or writing more than a sentence when he's going to get paid for them regardless of content. |
|
|
|
|
Well that's the beauty of the internet isn't it? It's truly worldwide hence the name the world wide web. I think a more current issue and pressing stat we need right now is how many genders are represented here? theymos should implement more gender options in our profile fields so we can see how many of the 24 genders* there are here so we truly can be diverse and also less triggering.
*Figure correct at the time of writing but new genders are being discovered every couple of months.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
