How to get rewarded for reporting litterbugs

From ‘Reward people who catch litterbugs in action, MP Lee Bee Wah proposes’, 12 Oct 15, article by Monica Kotwani, CNA

…Ms Lee said picking up litter is not enough. She is encouraging her residents to look out for those who litter habitually. She also suggested to the authorities to reward people who catch litterbugs in action. For example, after a resident takes a video of someone littering, he submits the evidence to NEA, and he gets to earn half of the summons.

She said: “In Taiwan, every resident is an enforcement officer. They can video, they can take photo of the litterbug and submit to their NEA. And if there is successful prosecution, their NEA will give the resident who reported it half of the summons collected.

…Said NEA chairman Liak Teng Lit: “I think the Government needs to think through what are the things we need to do. If you look at the equivalent of what is happening on the road, many people today have their in-vehicle cameras and not many people dare to make funny claims about accidents because there is a risk that whatever you say could be contradicting what’s on the camera in someone else’s vehicles.

“So certainly having neighbours watching over the environment and watching over each other will be very helpful. For the good citizens, there is nothing to worry about. In fact, people will be filming you doing good things and praising you rather than reprimanding you.”

The idea of a ‘litterbug vigilante’ is not a new one. In the face of weak enforcement, many have called upon concerned citizens of this ‘cleaned’ nation to rise to the occasion and publicly shame our fellow Singaporeans for their inconsiderate behaviour. NEA chairman Liak himself is the sort of guy who would tell people ‘nicely’ if they litter, citing statistics that 6 to 7  out of 20 litterbugs would give him a dirty look, while 1 out of 20 would yell at him to mind his own business. (Liak Teng Lit: 5 million, 70,000 cleaners, that is ridiculous! 16 Feb 2015, ST).

Mr Liak got one fundamental thing wrong about human psychology though; NO ONE will ever bother to take a video of you volunteering to clean someone else’s crap and give you a thumbs up. If you have followed STOMP long enough, you’ll realise that people are more interested in taking pictures of flaming cars, dead insects in food, catfights, exposed buttcracks, people washing boots in food court sinks, or if you’re lucky enough, someone shitting outside an MRT station.

Good Samaritans doing everyday niceties, without risking their lives or losing limbs saving strangers from total disaster, often go unnoticed. If you defend a helpless teenager from a crazy abusive angmo, you’re recognised as a hero. If you escort an old lady cross the road, you’ll be praised as an angel sent from heaven. If you, however, wag your finger and tut-tut at someone for leaving a mess in public, people will start asking: ‘What are you, Captain Planet?’ Which explains why now an MP is suggesting that we need to instill paranoia into litterbugs so that they think twice before launching that filthy booger out of the car window. And that by throwing money at you, hopefully that would encourage you to grow some spine and snitch on your fellow man.

Just last year, the NEA mooted the idea of recruiting volunteer enforcers to go around catching nuisance litterers. It’s a thankless job and no wonder we haven’t heard anything about this project since. It’s slightly worse than being one of those library attendants who go around shushing noisy children. As for filming someone red-handed, it’s practically impossible to whip out your phone and catch someone just at the instant they’re flicking their cigarette butt into the drain or throwing their Old Chang Kee fishball stick by the road. You’d have to start filming people secretly from behind a bush, and who has the time for such undercover stakeouts, half-summons cut or not? You’re more likely to be the one reported to the cops instead because of your suspicious loitering around trying to help the NEA raise their miserable KPIs.

Lee Bee Wah’s idea would probably work, provided you’re in the Old West looking for Billy the one-armed bandit, except that you’re armed with a crappy phone instead of a lasso to round up fugitives. It’s a sad state of affairs when the authorities need to pay amateur mercenaries to do the dirty work for them. Such a move is backward cowboy thinking and should be duly, well, trashed. Then do I have a better solution, you ask? Well, one word: Drones. Yes, flying surveillance machines designed to catch these no-good scum of the earth from way up high. It sure beats clumsy spywork and none of the scuffles or vendettas when things turn ugly. It’s like Robocop with wings.

We’re supposed to be a SMART nation now, MP Lee. Let’s live up to that, shall we.

GrabTaxi’s sexist ‘Love Boobs?’ campaign

From ‘Grabtaxi apologise for ‘insensitive’ breast cancer awareness campaign’, 8 Oct 2015, article by Xabryna Kek, CNA

Car-hailing app GrabTaxi has issued an apology on Thursday (Oct 8), following backlash over its breast cancer awareness campaign. Since the launch of the #GrabitBeatit campaign, GrabTaxi customers have received app notifications with the message “LOVE BOOBS? So does cancer.” The slogan has also been plastered on cars running the GrabCar services.

Some netizens did not take kindly to the tagline. “It’s unfortunate that your Breast Cancer campaign is communicated in a sexist way that objectifies women,” Twitter user Faizal Hamssin wrote.

Boob, I mean book, a GrabTaxi cab now!

Boob, I mean book, a GrabTaxi cab now! (pic:Sunday Times, 11 oct 15)

The hashtag for the campaign reads #GrabItBeatIt, which sounds like the jingle for a bongo drumset than breast cancer. An SMU Associate Professor of Marketing lashed out at the use of the word ‘boobs’ (Grabtaxi’s cheeky campaign on cancer awareness backfires, 11 Oct 15, Sunday Times), as if  changing the slogan to ‘love BREASTS’ would make much of a difference. Besides, the ‘breast’ pun is already taken, by a famous fast food burger chain with a history of ‘objectifying’ parts of the female anatomy.

We love your buns too

In 2012, The Singapore Cancer Society launched the cringeworthy ‘Treasure the Breast Things in Life’ campaign, so GrabTaxi isn’t the only one capitalising on our affection for ‘breasty’ things. ‘Breast’ puns are a tad overused. Cue ‘derogatory’ terms instead.

I guess ‘LOVE B(.)(.)BS?’ is deemed offensive to some women because it’s the kind of porny clickbait that is designed to draw horny men. If there’s anything wrong with the ad it’s that the target audience (males) seems questionable, as most females who chance upon a ‘love boobs?’ ad is likely to dismiss it as one of those spam links to online sex shops selling dodgy bust-enhancement creams. It should also be more inclusive, since breast cancer affects men too, and renamed as ‘LOVE BOOBS AND MOOBS?’, though I’m sure a lot more people love the former than the latter.

As for the physical act of ‘grabbing’, there is, in fact, some grabbing involved when it comes to breast cancer screening, whether it’s done gently via self-examination in the mirror, or by a mammogram that literally clamps your tits together like a medieval torture rack used by misogynistic zealots to force confessions out of women accused of witchcraft. If you’re disturbed (or worse, tickled) by the phrase ‘Beat It’, it just means you’ve descended too far into the darkest realms of S&M.

There’s no shame in admitting that the vast majority of guys love breasts. It’s a shame, however, that people who accuse such ads of being sexist and ‘insensitive’ ignore all the dick jokes done at our expense and other campaigns that mock the male anatomy, like this ‘Clean Your Balls’ ad for example. Making fun of testicles – now THAT’S really hitting below the belt.

Like breast cancer, testicular cancer is no joke of course. But if you had a ‘Love Balls?’ campaign instead, I doubt social media would go all ‘tits-up’ over GrabTaxi’s ad. Somehow ‘Loving boobs’ is offensive, but ‘Playing with balls’ is hilarious. No wonder Ikea never considered raising a meatball charity event to draw our attention to the scourge of testicular cancer. Yes, cancer loves your balls too. Cancer is a sneaky bi-pervert, goddamit!

Allow me jog your mammary-I mean- memory: Some years back, we had a ‘Lift Your Skirt’ campaign for cervical cancer, which had some folks shaking their heads all the way home after spotting the ads at bus stops, because they can’t imagine anything beyond the message than a call for women to expose their panties to men. Naughtiness seems to be the norm if you want Singaporeans to, well, keep abreast of killer diseases. Whatever works to grab your attention, I say, whether it affects the health of your boob, your cervix or your dangling balls.

Then there’s this fun way of raising funds for AIDS in Japan especially for people who ‘love boobs’. I suppose the reason why people don’t complain that this ‘objectifies women’ is because the recipients of the groping work as sex objects for a living.

Well, thanks to GrabTaxi, I’m forced to interpret the lyrics to the Black Eyed Peas’ ‘My Humps (my lovely lady lumps)’ in a totally different light. Slogan theme song, anyone?

ASEAN Para athletes taking the MRT to venues

From ‘Para-athletes voice support for ASEAN Para Games transport option’, 8 Oct 2015, article by Justin Ong and Wendy Wong, CNA.

As organisers of the ASEAN Para Games sought to assuage concerns that para-athletes competing in December’s Games in Singapore would be travelling to venues via MRT trains, local athletes have voiced both support and concern for the move.

Speaking to Channel NewsAsia on Thursday (Oct 8), para-swimmer Theresa Goh said that those competing in the Para Games have not yet been officially briefed on the transport arrangements, but said that the option to take the train was “not a bad idea”.

…The Singapore ASEAN Para Games Organising Committee (SAPGOC) said in a hastily called news conference on Thursday afternoon that the MRT is just one option available, and that shuttle buses will be used to ferry competitors to venues.

SAPGOC chairman Lim Teck Yin stressed that their first priority was the “well-being and care of the athletes”. He also said that the train arrangement was a means “to bring the ASEAN Para Games closer to the people” and that athletes would have the option to choose whichever mode of transport they are most comfortable with.

However, able-bodied national racewalker Edmund Sim said he was puzzled by initial reports suggesting the MRT would be the main transport arrangement for para-athletes. “In major Games, there are higher priorities such as managing competition stress to fret over. As much as possible, I am sure the athletes will prefer little fuss over logistical matters.”

As for organisers’ point that taking the MRT could promote “inclusivity”, Sim said there are “other ways to showcase social acceptance”. “Public transport to ferry (athletes) during a major event is a bad move. You must remember there will be spectators taking the same train or bus too.” The reputation of Singapore as host in the international arena is at stake as well, he added.

Able-bodied rower Nadzrie Hyckell, a SEA Games silver medallist, said the MRT could be a faster mode of transport, but questioned why it was not used for competitors during the SEA Games in June.

“Did they test this method? Like whether it is easier for the athletes?” he asked.

In a paper written by Jorain Ng from the Disabled People’s Association titled ‘Achieving Inclusion in Transport‘, numerous barriers of accessibility to those with special needs were identified. We have oblivious commuters hooked to their devices standing on tactile indicators, frequent breakdown of lifts and escalators (not to mention the trains themselves) and clueless MRT wardens. One Forum writer complained of able-bodied people using the disabled MRT toilets as dressing rooms. (Limit use of toilets for the disabled at MRT stations, 2 Sep 15, ST Forum).

Although Stadium station is only 3 stops away from where the Para athletes are staying, one has to wonder if our infrastructure and MRT staff are up to par when it comes to accommodating even a couple of blind commuters, not to mention entire contingents of people with various disabilities. Getting on board is one thing, being compromised by a train delay, by an ugly commuter, or someone using the disabled toilet for hanky-panky while the whole world is watching (including new Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan), is quite another.

As for ‘promoting inclusiveness’, what does chairman Lim Teck Yin expect of Singaporeans when they see Para athletes waiting for the train? Give them hugs of encouragement, assuming Singaporeans even KNOW about the Games? Will there be ‘priority lines’ for ASEAN Para teams just like how vehicles are expected to give way to SEA games buses? If not, are we telling the world that it’s OK to give able-bodied sportsmen and women traffic privileges but not those on wheelchairs and walking sticks?

If I were an athlete, disabled or otherwise’, I’d probably be more concerned about getting to my venue on time instead of mingling with the local population. These people are here to win medals, not your sympathy. They could have gotten SEA games marathon runners to jog directly to their venues and mingle with our local joggers, but noooo, they had to hide and ferry them around in air-con buses, with not even an open top deck for us locals to wave, cheer and toss bouquets of flowers at. I suppose those are reserved for PAP victory parades once every 5 years.

Alternatively, if cost was really the issue, the organising committee could have looked into chartering trains en masse, like what ACS did to bring their boys to a rugby final. And considering that people tend to behave better when they see imposing men in uniform with weapons, up the kiasu level and activate the SAF (for free, too) to make sure things go according to schedule.

NEA not providing the public with hourly PSI readings

From ‘Hourly PSI readings would allow for better decision-making’, 28 Sep 15, Voices, Today

(Tan Zhi Rui): Amid the annual haze, I would like to again strongly make the case for the National Environment Agency (NEA) to provide hourly Pollutant Standards Index (PSI) readings instead of three-hour averages.

Singapore is a small country and a slight shift in prevailing winds can cause sudden significant changes in air quality. With a three-hour-average PSI, lower PSI levels for the earlier two hours can lower the reading when the haze has already reached a hazardous level in the third hour.

The NEA’s FAQs on PSI webpage states that its health advisory is based on the 24-hour PSI as it is a “better reflection of the total exposure”, and health effects have been mostly studied based on this measure. In comparison, the three-hour PSI is only “an indicative measure” that the public may use “to make adjustments to their daily activities if they wish to do so”.

I understand that public health planning is more effectively done on a daily, 24-hour basis. However, logically and given a choice, most people would refer to a shorter time frame to avoid exposure to the worst hours of the haze.

While the use of three-hour averages may moderate PSI readings and prevent undue panic, it is irresponsible not to provide a more accurate hourly measure for Singaporeans to protect themselves, especially when the NEA has the data.

This is particularly incongruous given that the hourly PM2.5 readings are available on the NEA website, which are equally “highly variable when the wind drives smoke haze from place to place” as stated by the NEA.

In NEA director Fong Peng Keong’s response, he cited ‘insufficient evidence’ from recent studies of sub-daily or shorter PM2.5 exposure for the ‘development of a 1-hour PSI based on exposure to PM2.5 for a 1 hour period’. In 2013, Minister Grace Fu urged the public  to pay more attention to the 24 hour reading instead of the fluctuating 3-hourly average. Ng Eng Hen said giving 3 separate readings would ‘confuse’ the public. You’re talking about people who’re accustomed to dealing with all sorts of national health coverage schemes. So nope, we won’t be ‘confused’. We’re a smart nation. We voted the PAP back into power, for God’s sake.

The Government’s argument is that 24 hour readings are ‘backed by long-term epidemiological studies’, and are internationally accepted methods of assessing the health impact of air quality, but doesn’t explain whether these studies take into account tiny nations like ours when the 3 hour average can fluctuate from low 200’s in the afternoon and drop to 80 by late evening (like yesterday 3 Oct 2015, for example).

There was a time in 2006 when the NEA didn’t even promote 3 hourly readings, citing ‘unnecessary alarm‘ if these were published instead of the 24 hour readings. These days, you don’t even need to check the actual PSI to get ‘alarmed’ by the haze. Simply looking out of the window and taking a sniff would do (though the NEA later clarified that low visibility may not mean a high PSI). Or you could check out this ‘no bullshit PSI readings’ website if you really want to know what the one-hourly PSI is. But honestly, aside from statisticians and academics, how many of us actually care about the 24-hour PSI? Since 2006, we’ve complained that it has no practical use, and only serves as ‘post-mortem’ data for the good folks at NEA to crunch before the next haze comes around. It’s probably as useful a gauge as today’s weather if you’re wondering whether to bring the brolly out tomorrow. Even if you had exposed yourself to what’s considered a ‘very unhealthy’ 24 hour PSI for just one day, nobody will be able to tell you for certain your risk of getting lung or heart disease in 5 years.

There’s no reason why our top scientists in NEA would not be able to derive one-hour PSIs on the back of a napkin. So my guess is that they’re afraid of people overreacting to spot PSI levels and neglecting the supposedly more trustworthy 24 hour ones. Which means panic buying of N95 masks, people suddenly taking an interest in library books (to hide from the haze), conspiracy theories about cloud-seeding or hoaxers sending mass SMSes about fake holidays and office shutdowns. Oh wait, all that’s already happened, hourly PSI or not.

State of emergency as a Call of Duty publicity stunt

From ‘Singapore under attack:Imaginary war a Call of Duty marketing ploy’, 30 Sep 15, article in CNA

Popular first-person shooter video game “Call of Duty” posted a series of tweets about a fictional attack on Singapore as part of their online campaign to promote its new game, on Wednesday (Sep 30).

The new game was Call of Duty: Black Ops 3. At 1.03am on Wednesday, the Twitter page belonging to @CallofDuty posted a tweet that said: “BREAKING NEWS: Unconfirmed reports are coming in of an explosion on the North bank of the Singapore Marina.”

When that tweet was sent out, its user name was “Current Events Agg.” and had a illustration of a globe as its profile picture.

…More tweets were sent out subsequently describing “large plumes of dark smoke”, “shots fired at newly established blockades” and riot police dispersing rioting mobs. It also named “James Chung” as the fictional “commander of the Singapore Armed Forces”.

A tweet sent out at 3.35am said: “A state of Martial Law has been declared and will remain in place until the incident is firmly understood.”

The next tweet sent out at 5.37am revealed that the earlier ones were part of an online campaign for Call of Duty: Black Ops 3.

The makers of Call of Duty could get in trouble here for committing the offence of transmitting a false message. If police reports have been filed for hoax tweets declaring public holidays for the World Cup or ‘Voluntary Non-Work’ days due to the haze,  there’s no reason why you shouldn’t go after someone fabricating an explosion in the ‘north bank’ of Singapore Marina, as unlikely as that may seem. Even 13 year old boys have been arrested for making up stories about bombing MBS. Still, the only things exploding in this country, thank God, seem to be cars or hotpots.

Risk of unnecessary alarm aside, it’s probably the first time that Singapore has been featured in a first-shooter video game, which is almost as cool as our cameo in the Simpsons. It’s also likely that the video game disaster scenes would be more realistic than what was portrayed in Jack Neo’s first foray into Michael Bay-esque destruction porn in the first Ah Boys To Men movie. Who knows, maybe the SAF may be interested in buying the game themselves for battle simulation if the haze situation gets any worse, at the risk of our NSmen being tempted into lobbing grenades at base of the redundant Singapore Flyer to see where it would roll.

The game itself is set in 2065, and it’s comforting to note that the CoD makers have faith that Chinatown would still exist 50 years from now. It also happens to be our #SG100 year. CHOI!

Thank Goodness it wasn’t Little India, in which case the ‘Singapore Authorities’ would surely ban the shit out of this. Let’s hope for fans’ sake that none of the Singapore missions include ‘overthrowing a ruthless dictatorial regime’ too.

Voting for the Opposition goes against human nature

From ‘PM to actively push for succession in new Cabinet lineup’, 19 Sep 15, article by Charissa Yong, ST

…PM Lee was also asked whether he was surprised, relieved or vindicated by the election results, which saw the PAP win 83 out of 89 seats and get 69.9 per cent of the popular vote, a near-10 percentage point swing from the 2011 elections.

He said he was surprised and relieved. But he would not use words like vindicated, as “you only know you’re vindicated after 100 years have passed”.

As for what led to the election outcome, he said the PAP will study it but it was hard to say for sure. But it seemed that voters approved of what the PAP Government had done over its past term and wanted them to continue on the same track, he said.

The opposition’s storyline, he noted, was “the Government is doing good; you vote for us, the Government will work even harder”.

“That’s a very dangerous approach and it goes against human nature,” he said. “If you have a friend and your friend is nice to you, you’re nice to him or her.

If the Opposition were a terminal patient rendered comatose by the election trouncing, then PM Lee is following up the defeat not by buying flowers and fruit baskets as a sporting victor should, but putting a pillow over his face.

The analogy here seems to be ‘you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’, that since the Government had done well, says our PM, it is only ‘human’ for Singaporeans to show some damn gratitude and appreciation by voting for them. If you don’t, then well, pay the price and repent for your choice. Politicians comment on hindsight that Singapore has voted ‘rationally’, which implies that the remaining 30% cast their votes on base animal instincts, biting the hand that feeds them. If the Opposition’s share were higher, they either call it a fluke, or sugarcoat the result as a ‘new normal’.

I’m no evolutionary psychologist, but I believe returning favours isn’t a uniquely human trait. Primates groom each other for sex, for example. In the same way, we put a cross next to the PAP box not just as a ‘reward’ for the party’s efforts, but because we expect something in return; 5 years of them doing their damn job. Alas, simple reciprocation is merely one aspect of this ‘human nature’ that PM speaks of. It’s also typically human to be swayed by sentiment. Cue SG50 and the death of LKY.

Conversely one could argue that it’s ‘against human nature’ to vote for the PAP too. By doing so, you’re endorsing arrogant oppression, which goes against the human quest to be ‘free’. You’re endorsing the generous slapping of litigation on critics including 16 year old bloggers, which goes against the human trait of compassion. You’re saying yes to opening floodgates to foreigners, which goes against the human ‘territorial’ instinct to reject invaders who want a share of your pie.

The PAP has displayed the entire range of human traits, altruistic and kind on one hand, devastatingly ruthless on another, bold then fearful, humble then pompous. So to single out an undesirable, supposedly dangerous, action such as Opposition voting based on the ‘make the Government work harder’ premise as ‘unnatural’ is falling into the very human trap of cherry picking. ‘Dangerous’ to who, exactly?

If our leaders continue to congratulate themselves and saying that voting for the PAP is a ‘no-brainer’, many will be wondering if they made a terrible mistake giving them the mandate. But it’s OK, to err is human after all.

Amos Yee parody sketch cut from Chestnuts 50 show

From ‘MDA on cuts to Chestnuts 50: script was sent in late’, 20 Sep 15, article by Akshita Nanda, ST

The Media Development Authority Singapore says the script for Chestnuts 50 was sent in late so “several problematic segments concerning an ongoing court case” could not be processed in time. It was responding to writer-director Jonathan Lim’s sketch parody show showing at the Drama Centre Theatre until Sept 27.

Last Friday, the show ended with Lim saying his team was told just hours before the opening show a day earlier to remove about 40 minutes of a central sketch inspired by the case of teen blogger Amos Yee, or forfeit their arts entertainment licence.

…Speaking to Life, Lim says he was surprised by the reason MDA gave to cut the Yee sketch, since another segment referencing an ongoing court case was passed. The current Chestnuts 50 performance includes a part inspired by the City Harvest mega-church case, where its founder and five others are alleged to have misused church funds.

*Warning: spoilers ahead*

I was fortunate enough to catch Chestnuts’ second performance last Friday. When Jonathan Lim made his announcement near the finale about the last minute change requested by MDA, I wasn’t sure if it was yet another of the many ‘meta’ gags made at the MDA’s expense. It turned out that he was serious and the Amos Yee gag was snipped, which I was looking forward to based on what I saw in their teaser materials online. If MDA had also decided to tone down the fiery ‘bromance’ between LKY and Lim Chin Siong in another major sketch, it would be a case of Chestnuts being ‘roasted on an open fire’, and the only thing left watching would be Jonathan channeling Kit Chan in drag.

According to Lim’s Facebook page, MDA’s reason given then was that it was an ‘ongoing legal case’. As for the City Harvest sketch, the slightest of changes were made to characters’ names, but everything else about the plot was rib-ticklingly obvious. Even Mediacorp’s The Noose managed to get away with mocking Sun Ho’s music career. And they’re probably itching to do an Amos one too, pending MDA’s green light.

The question would be: Legal case, SO WHAT? Has a gag order been imposed like how the AGC told the public to ‘refrain from commenting’ about last year’s Thaipusam incident? Furthermore, it seems a different set of standards apply to social media, where it’s a Amos Yee lampoon free-for-all. Even Amos himself managed to get his Facebook posts updated while he was in remand. Then there’s this Tumblr blog about Amos’ fashion sense.

Not to mention Youtube. Here’s examples of Amos parody videos which MDA apparently decided is OK for general viewing, ongoing legal case or not.

MDA also beat their personal record of late notification. Last year they issued a NC-16 advisory and licence to the Dim Sum Dollies just 3 days before the opening show. In their press release, they said that conducted the script review ‘expeditiously’, claiming that they received the script on 1 Dec 2014, 10 days before opening. Not so lucky for Elangovan’s ‘Stoma’ though, which was banned completely.

To be fair, maybe the MDA is indeed overburdened by regulatory duties, though some would say they brought it upon themselves, having to nanny not just films, radio, plays, video games and books but political videos and ‘sociopolitical’ websites as well. A previous attempt to introduce a ‘self-regulation’ scheme for arts groups to classify their own productions turned out to be an abject failure. So this last-minute censorship and its excuses about late submissions is like the MDA giving the arts community a retaliatory shrug: “We gave you a chance to regulate ‘ownself’ and cut the red tape, but you didn’t want to, so this is what you get’.

Maybe there is still hope for the Amos Yee sketch if Chestnuts decides to launch an exclusive on Youtube instead. The show is otherwise still worth catching without Amos inside. Hopefully this piece of news doesn’t make the ‘gao lak’ experience a ‘gao wei’ one.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 375 other followers