Previous  |  Next

Mon

03.26.07

Brady Forrest

Brady Forrest

Support for Kathy

Kathy Sierra, a Foo and speaker at many of our conferences, has had to cancel her appearance at ETech today. Unfortunately, it's not the usual travel or calendar mishap that typically befalls speakers. Kathy has been threatened and is handling the situation from her home. I have some trepidation about giving the offenders in Kathy's post any more attention -- but I have no trepidation about supporting Kathy in this. She absolutely deserves to never be treated this way. She has posted her story on her blog.
Best of luck Kathy. You have our support. We all hope that you post again, that we'll see you soon and that you'll be able to make next year's ETech.



tags:   | comments: 47   | Sphere It
submit:

 

0 TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://orm3.managed.sonic.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1916

Comments: 47

Cityzenjane   [03.26.07 03:18 PM]

Sadly, this behavior is not at all unique. I feel terrible for Ms Sierra - but this is very common - spend a day on youtube reading comments on women's blogs - and otehrs of course - to see what 'trolling for lolz" has become.

Maarten   [03.26.07 05:05 PM]

It appears that Kathy Sierra has just awoken from some fantasy where people only use blog-comments to express well-worded opinions and Photoshop users only employ the software to make rounded Web 2.0 corners. Unfortunately this doesn't reflect the real world. Her last line, "I have no idea if I'll ever post again. I suspect I will. But for now, I have a lot to rethink.", almost made me laugh. She speaks at conferences. She's a public figure. She's a prominent blogger. Did she honestly never consider that this sort of thing might happen?

The first commenter is right, the internet is full of this stuff. How did Sierra make it this far in the Blogosphere without realizing that there are nutcases out there who will write/Photoshop anything and proceed to post it?

I feel bad for Kathy Sierra, and wish that her life return to normal as quickly as possible, for her sake, and for the sake of the software-creating community. But I also wish that she wouldn't be so easily intimidated and scared by what most would consider par-for-the-course in bloggerland. And honestly, phrases like "I will never feel the same. I will never be the same." just seem to ooze naivety. It seems very strange to me that she would be so shaken by something like this.

In any case, I guess this is a reality check that she had coming sooner or later, and it's nice to see so many people being supportive.

Maarten

Not Maarten   [03.26.07 05:32 PM]

Whats wrong with you Maarten? We're talking about death threats. Illustrated.

In what sense is this to be expected?

If it were just some bored teenagers then that would be bad enough.

But it's not. It's the A-list, the cream of the crop in the blogger world. Adults and professionals. And they've created a site where violent death threats are to-be-expected.

I guess they're to be congratulated. I mean, as you say, she had it coming to her. Better sooner than later.

TDavid   [03.26.07 05:37 PM]

Maarten - anybody who has been around, including Kathy, has seen this type of behavior before and that still doesn't make it right. We've also seen bank robberies, murders and other illegal activity reported on the news. This isn't a time to wave fingers at the victim, it's time to rally and show support.

Ian Muir   [03.26.07 05:41 PM]

Wow Maarten, that's pretty darn insensitive. While I've said some negative things and had things said about me, threats of violence and rape are completely beyond acceptable. It frightens be that you not only seem ok with the comments, but seem to be surprised they don't happen more often.

PKtm   [03.26.07 07:07 PM]

Not to see, from the first two posters here, a spirit of outrage about this is especially depressing. I've already stopped participating in one community (Wikipedia) because of its unchecked (even encouraged) abusiveness. How many others will start to do the same?

LunaC   [03.26.07 07:37 PM]

I was one of those people who came to the E Tech conference specifically to gain some of the wonderful insight that Kathy loves to share.
While I am an ardent supporter of Free Speech in the US, and I am also a supporter of the hate crimes legislation which is clearly where this falls. If you have read her blog and think that the terminology used by those posts against her are acceptable in any form, you obviously have no respect for women or people in general. I am heading to the evening sessions now, and I hope that Tim O'Reilly will make some form of public statement of support and rally people to post their disgust on the blogs in question. I hope Kathy will return to her normal self soon, she is a tremendous asset to the software community.

Maarten   [03.26.07 07:52 PM]

Re: TDavid - I agree that a precedent does not condone an activity. That's fairly obvious, and I'm not in any way "ok" with what happened to Sierra. I'm accustomed to news about the killing of civilians in Irak, but not being shocked by this news, and to a certain degree even expecting it, is, you'll probably agree, in no way condoning it.

I also agree that we shouldn't blame the victim, and I don't think I do. I think Brady Forrest is right that Sierra, or anybody else for that matter, does not deserve to be treated that way. But the fact is that people are, and on a fairly regular basis at that. The essence of my reaction was simply amazement at the fact that a seasoned blogger would freak out to such a degree over something that is fairly commonplace in the Blogosphere.

That being said, I do think that she is handing whoever posted those comments an enormous amount of power over her own life if she has basically shut it down over what he/she wrote. I believe it would be better for her to be getting all the support from the community in person at ETech, instead of via email as a shut-in in her own home. Can we fault her for not choosing to do that? Of course not, but my point still stands.

Re: PKtm - If we all got outraged at every anonymous death threat posted in a blog comment then I think you'll agree we'd all develop fatal hypertension in record time. Also, habituation isn't the same as resignation. Police all over the world are accustomed to people getting mugged, but that doesn't mean that they don't try to stop it from happening.

Joey   [03.26.07 08:03 PM]

There was no threat made to Kathy. The entire thing is a misunderstanding or an intentional hoax which stems from my criticism of her books. I am the "Joey" she is referring to and I ask that you read my reply at her site; assuming she doesn't delete it.

adamsj   [03.26.07 09:04 PM]

The comments posted to Kathy Sierra's weblog are violent threats. Whoever is posting them (and I've seen nothing that sheds light on that question) is clearly committing a crime.

PKtm   [03.26.07 09:15 PM]

I am stunned by the notion that we should get habituated to the notion of anonymous death threats, Maarten. Yes, we need to get outraged. And those that aren't eager to look for solutions are very very much a part of the problem.

Bernie Goldbach   [03.26.07 10:27 PM]

I'm not surprised that a blog post about the behaviour of demented trolls attracts a troll in the comments.

Jack   [03.26.07 10:55 PM]

Sorry...but...if I took every death threat I had received (online and offline) seriously, I would be living in a bunker by now. I mean honestly, the world is a big place full of hoaxers, sickos, and fantasists. I am not saying I don't feel sorry for her, I am just saying that I would take this with a pinch of salt.

steve   [03.27.07 01:35 AM]

As someone who has been in the public eye, I used to collect death threats as a hobby... and I'm a bloke. There are some nutters out there, and I sure wish they weren't.

While the sites were in poor taste (in fact, non-existent), I really can't see any death threats here. As much as I don't want to, I have to agree with Joey that Kathy is framing the debate.

Yes, I'm aware that this is not a popular opinion to have and that I would be much more loved if I went with the tide and expressed the same outrage as everyone else. But I'm autistic enough to only focus on the facts.

I have looked at the evidence available, and it doesn't even begin to come close to the real death threats that I have received. I don't think Kathy has anything to worry about.

Gabi   [03.27.07 01:39 AM]

I think the reality is somewhere in between. What Maarten said was only an observation of facts, and the weak point is that neutrality did not win many battles. In this case you have to take sides, of course, in support of Kathy Sierra. The way she chose to act is in her rights, and I also think that Scobleizer has a good point at the end of the post in his blog, unfortunately, if wasn't the case of a woman, none of this would have happened.

peter Kennedy   [03.27.07 02:23 AM]

I've had death threats too..not from bloggers...real nasty people, and I was not amused..and I'm ex special forces. So, I entirely sympathize with kathy Sierra and am frankly amazed at some of the blase comments I've seen from the likes of Steve, Maarten, Jack et al. You must be real tough guys...but in reality I know you are not!

jeremiah foster   [03.27.07 03:17 AM]

I am shocked, quite disgusted. This sort of thing has nothing to do with the war in Iraq, it has everything to do with responsible adult behavior. Honestly, if one cannot see why the comments to Kathy's blog are reprehensible, then one needs a crash course in civility.

I join in with everyone who is condemning this behavior and agree with Tim Bray who says we should do something about this. This has to stop.

steve   [03.27.07 03:49 AM]

Peter - it has nothing to do with being tough or being ex-special forces (though I'm sure you wanted to mention that).

Everyone in the public eye gets death threats, so it's a risk assessment. The only other choice is not to be in the public eye, which means that they've won and your voice has been silenced.

I wouldn't have had that response from you if I'd gone with the tide, and part of the problem is when people like you go with an emotive argument.

Examine the evidence. Overcome your natural inclinations for a default conclusion. Note that I said I really didn't want to come to the conclusion that I did. It's so much easier to go with the flow, to be part of the mindless mass.

Stop being part of the problem. You're not that far away from threatening me by making judgements about my physical capabilities.

Jeff Licquia   [03.27.07 07:52 AM]

"...I have to agree with Joey that Kathy is framing the debate."

Whatever her intentions (which we obviously can't know), it's clear that her "debate framing" is succeeding, in ways few such attempts do. Even media-savvy folks like Doc Searls and Roger Scoble are being "taken in".

That suggests to me that there's a disconnect between the oh-no-big-deal schtick of Steve and Joey and the rest of us.

And it is a shame that they're being so taken in, given how said debate-framing is unjustly suppressing the emergent style of misogynistic, sexual-tinged death-threat art. What a pity.

"Examine the evidence." Well, OK, here's some evidence: I'd much rather read Kathy than RageBoy or his ilk. Unfortunately, thanks to the crassness of some of the instigators in this mess, I don't get that choice. Thanks a million.

Maybe you guys can do for blogs what you did for Usenet, once upon a time. Let's all look forward to that.

Ian   [03.27.07 08:09 AM]

Have anybody of you REALLY received death threats? Do you have anybody precious to you who, if you die, would be at a lost? Empathize guys, empathize.

steve   [03.27.07 08:20 AM]

Ian; yes.

Jeff; emotive, aren't you? Don't just attack me, show me factual evidence. I don't perceive any death threats. I can't see any death threats. Show me some death threats.

Until you use factual, you're part of the problem. Attacking me is the exact same thing those guys were doing to Kathy, you're just doing it for a popular cause.

That doesn't make you better than the people who attacked Kathy Sierra.

steve   [03.27.07 09:15 AM]

OK, I'll make a last posting, then I have a lot better things to do than this.

I cannot see any evidence of any death threat other than a questionable link between content on a website and what appears to be a site theme. The positioning of the head with some sort of gas mask? isn't centered like most blog sites, so it suggests an outline the same as used in http://idontlikeyouinthatway.com/ .

The person concerned has already identified himself and offered an explanation that can be verified. People interested in the matter can wait for more news on that front to satisfy their own criteria. The only person who hasn't immediately identified themselves is the poster of the most offensive text shown in the posting.

However, a reading of the offensive text shows the maximum intent is a beating of inanimate material and a wishful projection of intent. This is not a death threat. The text identified as the death threat was the questionable connection. There was no clear intent articulated the the manner of "I want to kill Kathy Sierra".

The framing of the debate is caused by Kathy's claim that there is a death threat, and I honestly believe she perceived it that way. The experience is not pleasant and no person would voluntarily go through such an ordeal. However, the disclosure of the information and the explanation of the information were within the same post, therefore the explanation frames the evidence.

My comment on the matter was made after a quick investigative check of the available evidence. No death threat was made. A death threat may have been intended, but it is not stated in a clear enough manner that a serious intent was shown, and in fact is only circumstantial based on a) site theme, and b) that there is another person called Kathy.

The explanation does seem to have a probable chance of being true as it is common for people to have handles but call each other by their real first names. So a little more time will clear up that question, and then the matter of the death threat will be clarified.

The actual matter of the debate, which is the real reason that the various bloggers are showing their support, is that people should not have to put up with that kind of behaviour. As the recipient of such myself, I can assure you that it is not a pleasant experience.

However, it is a serious accusation to make against people, and names should not have been given out until after the matter was reported and investigated by police. The truth of the situation would then have been ascertained, while Kathy could post and argue about the disgusting behaviours of those concerned... and knowing that her safety was not threatened.

steve   [03.27.07 09:23 AM]

Seriously, have a look! Where is the noose? I can't see any pictures of any nooses anywhere.

There's just that weird frilly edged bit of lace over Kathy's face, but there are no noose knots nor is it correctly positioned.

Seriously, don't you people check out information before you have an opinion?

Paul Ritchie   [03.27.07 09:45 AM]

Props to you, Steve.

I was one of the dozen or so members at both Meankids and Unclebobism.

Sierra went to Unclebob's looking for the criticism she knew would be there and latched onto the first thing she could find and a coincidental email not sent by any of us - we weren't even aware of it until she brought it up - but she goes right on ahead and blames Chris Locke who is by far a greater writer than she will ever be.

But let's not let facts get in the way of a good story.

Paul Ritchie
Melbourne, Australia
Former Meankid, never anonymous.

steve   [03.27.07 11:03 AM]

That doesn't mean the content of those posts was OK. Why set up a website like that? Why write stuff like that?

Pointing out the evidence doesn't mean that I agree with anything else that was done. The content was highly offensive.

Jeff Licquia   [03.27.07 11:46 AM]

"Jeff; emotive, aren't you? Don't just attack me, show me factual evidence."

Evidence of what? That Kathy has stopped posting, or that she cancelled ETech? That I would prefer to read Kathy over Chris? That the overwhelming majority of us are too disgusted by the whole mess to care much about the supposed injustice of the death-threat accusation? That the evidence you want is unavailable because the site operators withdrew the whole site in shame?

To me, it's about someone being treated cruelly, and then seeing her reaction parsed for the slightest inaccuracy, as if she were delivering a dissertation instead of trying to explain herself after a rather shocking emotional event. The police (none of whom are posting, I suspect) can take care of the rest easily.

So, yes, guilty: I see myself as far better than the people who posted that vile stuff about Kathy. Might I suggest that, as crazy as it might seem, questioning your motives might be a wee bit less offensive, and that you could use a little perspective?

Josef Schneider   [03.27.07 12:57 PM]

@Joey and Steve

If you people don't think that creating an image that juxtaposes a person and a hangman's noose constitutes a death threat then you are either intellectually dishonest or beyond reason.

@Jeff
Right on! thanks.

steve   [03.27.07 12:57 PM]

The accusation is serious and Kathy may end up in the slammer because of it. It has nothing to do with your opinion of me, and everything to do with the legal aspects of the case.

steve   [03.27.07 12:59 PM]

Josef; there isn't any hangman's noose.

PKtm   [03.27.07 01:33 PM]

From Steve: "there isn't any hangman's noose." Sheesh. So Kathy just made it up, eh? As a previous poster has said, you are beyond reason.

At this point, I'm not sure which is more distressing, the incident itself or the blase reactions of so many in the blogosphere.

lisainc   [03.27.07 03:11 PM]

I find the lot of this rather amazing, frankly. Until recently, I've only skirted the edges of the bogoshphere. I'm back in a tech company, and have been jumping in with both feet to catch up. Apparently, I jumped in with my eyes closed. Upon opening them, I see that I've jumped into a pool of brackish water filled with nasty creatures. How very disappointing.

Kathy Sierra is a professional. She is a public figure. As such, there are bound to be those that disagree with her, dislike her as a professional or her material, etc. There are also bound to be those who like and are supportive of her. It is acceptable to provide critique and opinion of anything in this country - however, what I find most revolting - and I do mean revolting - is the total lack of regard for common courtesy and decency among those who post the negative commentary. It's truly appalling that anyone would feel that it was acceptable on either a personal level or a professional level to post a such completely grotesque comments about an individual in a public place.

What is the matter with you? How can you be so amazingly crass? I feel that the anonymity of the internet has done much to engender the crass and jaded culture we are forced to endure today. I'm not a promoter of "if you don't have anything nice to say, then keep your mouth shut," but there are many ways to communicate thoughts that are not hurtful.

So I ask you again - what's wrong with you? Why would you think it was OK to treat anyone like that?

I'm glad to see all of the moral outrage. I had recently become fairly certain that it was gone from this country. Nice to see it still exists among some of us.

Where is the human in humane vis a vis the blogosphere? Is it simply acceptable to treat people inhumanely because we don't have to look them in the eye when we speak to or about them? How easy it is to hide behind ether walls and screen names. Even when the anonymity is removed - it is in name only. So what if I know your name? I still think you're a mannerless git for feeling it acceptable to abuse publicly abuse people online.

A great many people have spent a lot of time talking about this today. I've red the moral outrage postings. I've read the "in defense of the 'free-speech' postings. I've read a lot of postings. The very sad thing is that I haven't really seen much of an apology from the perpetrators. Listen up, folks. It doesn't matter whether or not you think you're right, or even if in fact you ARE right (on some evil planet). The one fact here that you seem to be missing is that someone has gotten hurt by your actions. For THAT you owe a sincere apology. Get to it.

K   [03.27.07 06:05 PM]

Yes we know death threats are commonplace(though in no way acceptable) but sexual threats even in "joke" form are obscene whether or not they happen all the time.

I don't believe that in comparison to women,very many men have been raped. I don't believe that very many men can understand the daily fear a woman has when she walks to her car, sleeps alone in her apartment, or has to cross through a dark patch of street.

That fear exists whether or not a woman has personally been raped previously. It is a true terror of being violated, not just beat-up but sexually violated and violently humiliated.

This situation crosses the line in that it speaks of "violation" not just "violence."

adamsj   [03.27.07 06:50 PM]

Of all the commentary I've read about this incident, this is the one I'd recommend to anyone: Anonymity, Interpellation, Truth, Ignorance, and the Stakes.

steve   [03.28.07 01:19 AM]

adamsj; that was a good article that reflects my position too. I am in no way comfortable with the contents of the site, and in no way am I defending the perpetruator's actions.

I am pointing out that I cannot see that any death threats have been made. Accusing people (or interpellating) of making a death threat is serious, and has legal consequences.

I am disappointed that people like Peter, Jeff, Joseph and PKtm would attack me for sticking to the evidence. I have nothing to do with the original situation, and I'm impartially observing that the "death threats" do not appear to exist.

The lace edged thing, which I cannot identify, does have a resemblence to a hangman's noose, but there are no noose knots nor is it correctly positioned. It also appears to be a site theme, which separates it from incidental conversation (as opposed to a specific post).

I do not think that Kathy made up any aspects of the story, but I do believe that she has interpreted events (as everyone must do). That is why a police investigation was the correct route to take, and that is what should have been done.

I have also made it repeatedly clear that I am not defending or supporting the contents posted. I invite you to go back over my posts and count the number of times I have said that it was disgusting behaviour.

I think some of you need to reflect on your actions and consider how close you come to being what you hate. I have been attacked in those messages, and all I have done is to logically and rationally observe the evidence.

adamsj   [03.28.07 05:00 AM]

steve,

The comments left on Kathy's weblog are a clear death threat, even if the one quoted uses the circumlocution "i hope someone". She's right to take that seriously and right to take it to the police.

peter renshaw   [03.28.07 05:19 AM]

'... But I also wish that she wouldn't be so easily intimidated and scared by what most would consider par-for-the-course in bloggerland ...'

Maybe you should try reading 'Angry/negative people can be bad for your brain' [0] to gain a different perspective.

Your personal 'weakspot' is not being able to see that others may react differently to yourself regardless of what you think.


Reference

[0] Kathy Sierra, 'Angry/negative people can be bad for your brain'

http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/04/angrynegative_p.html

Jens   [03.28.07 09:53 AM]

I personally wouldn't care about death threats on the internet, but that might be because I'm a body builder. I can see how a woman would get upset, though.

adamsj   [03.28.07 10:36 AM]

Jens,

Being a body builder doesn't help you one bit if someone really wants to kill or harm you. To the best of my knowledge, no one can really catch a bullet or have abs of literal steel.

(By the way, here's a thought experiment for you: If you were a female body builder, would you "get upset" by death threats? How about if you were male [which I assume you are] and not a body builder?)

Joe McCarthy   [03.28.07 04:52 PM]

Tara Hunt, in The Unsinkable Kathy Sierra included some information that I cannot find on Kathy's original post, that may have some bearing on some of the discussion here:


But that wasn't the worst of it. In the meantime, this type of swarming, heckling and sexually violent imagery was enough to egg on someone either within the group or on the periphery of it to send explicitly violent and terrifying death threats directly to Kathy. That was enough for her. She canceled her appearance at ETech and wondered if she should blog or otherwise publicly appear again.

For anyone at ETech who is interested in a F2F discussion of this issue, I've proposed a BoF on How can we support Kathy Sierra (and other women in our "community")? for tonight in Gregory A (2nd floor, around the corner from the escalator), from 9:00-10:00pm. I'd like to further propose Don Miguel Ruiz' Four Agreements as ground rules for the discussion there:

  • Be impeccable with your word
  • Don't take anything personally
  • Don't make assumptions
  • Always do your best

info   [03.30.07 10:33 AM]

Okay, so here is another unpolitically correct blog post. Get your keyboards ready, PC drones.

The objective view of the situation has the latest blog IT girl singing the victim song. She got upset about some ugly posts. Oh my. Maybe we need to pass Patriot Act III, Minority Report edition, just to make sure little Kathy is safe. You know, think of the children. Maybe little Kathy's "beautiful mind" has been spoiled for life. So sad, so sad.

No one has given any sort of reason why are we supposed to care about this over-hyped author who has forced herself on the world through her endless self-promotion, some of it focusing on her sex appeal, and her never-ending viral marketing stunts. Just what is so important about her? Does she get some sort of free pass "Get out of Karma, free" ??

So she said a while back 'Angry/negative people can be bad for your brain'. You know what? So can be reading any of those 'head flush' books, much less the official Kathy Victim Sierra 'head flush' blog.

Which brings us back to karma. It's a bitch, ain't it???

adamsj   [03.31.07 08:33 AM]

info (or are you more accurately addressed as disinfo? Hmm...anyway),

The "objective view of the situation" is that Kathy Sierra "got upset" about anonymous comments posted to her blog such as "i hope someone slits your throat".

That's a threat and she's right to treat it as a threat.

I don't happen to agree with many of her ideas, but I don't find them vile, either. The worst I can say about them is that they sometimes verge on what Chris Locke called "magical thinking". In another time and place, I'd criticize that myself (differently than he and others did in their group blogs), but I don't care to do it right now. It's neither the time nor the place for that.

I do appreciate the clarity with which you are expressing yourself, though. You focus on style and not substance. You make little sideways taunts: "unpolitically correct" "PC drones" "the latest IT girl" "little Kathy" "think of the children" "endless self-promotion" "over-hyped author" "focusing on her sex appeal". That last one is, I think, an especially revealing one.

Gordon Dickson has one of his characters say (I believe in The Final Encyclopedia) words to the effect that having a better cause is an advantage in a fight. It gives you a sounder basis for your judgments and strategic thinking. I realize that claiming "right makes might" is unpopular in the thug times in which we live. Nonetheless, he's right.

And that's why you're wrong, right down the line.

adamsj   [03.31.07 08:43 AM]

P.S. I am not a "PC drone"--this is being posted from an iBook.

adamsj   [03.31.07 08:45 AM]

(The moderation fairy seems to have sprinkled some time warp dust on me.)

adamsj   [03.31.07 08:45 AM]

info (or are you more accurately addressed as disinfo? Hmm...anyway),

The "objective view of the situation" is that Kathy Sierra "got upset" about anonymous comments posted to her blog such as "i hope someone slits your throat".

That's a threat and she's right to treat it as a threat.

I don't happen to agree with many of her ideas, but I don't find them vile, either. The worst I can say about them is that they sometimes verge on what Chris Locke called "magical thinking". In another time and place, I'd criticize that myself (differently than he and others did in their group blogs), but I don't care to do it right now. It's neither the time nor the place for that.

I do appreciate the clarity with which you are expressing yourself, though. You focus on style and not substance. You make little sideways taunts: "unpolitically correct" "PC drones" "the latest IT girl" "little Kathy" "think of the children" "endless self-promotion" "over-hyped author" "focusing on her sex appeal". That last one is, I think, an especially revealing one.

Gordon Dickson has one of his characters say (I believe in The Final Encyclopedia) words to the effect that having a better cause is an advantage in a fight. It gives you a sounder basis for your judgments and strategic thinking. I realize that claiming "right makes might" is unpopular in the thug times in which we live. Nonetheless, he's right.

And that's why you're wrong, right down the line.

steve   [04.02.07 10:36 AM]

adamsj; you really do spend a lot of time making big judgement calls from small things.

Freud went around thinking everything was a penis going into his mother's vagina.

People are more complex than that.

adamsj   [04.17.07 06:03 PM]

Words, language, tone--they all matter, steve.

Markymark   [08.05.07 10:09 AM]

Hi, im Mark and I guess im nitroducing myself!!

I came across this site using 'stumble' (Firefox) anf thought all the ideas floatjng around herfe sem really interesting! (Although I don't seem to agree with everything lol)

Well, thats me ;)!


Post A Comment:

 (please be patient, comments may take awhile to post)




Remember Me?


Subscribe to this Site

Radar RSS feed

BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE

CURRENT CONFERENCES