integrating views & feedback of audiences/customers

Background & Collaborative consumer profile

The collaborative consumers' profile are those who have been termed in the industry as customer/consumer evangelists (Wiki Blog). These are individuals who are so passionate about a brand that they will spread the message for you, and indeed feel rewarded if invited to co-develop services.
In this instance we are examining the "gap" in existing online "feedback" systems as seen in many corporate websites, for a robust online program & system that facilitates the process of "eliciting on-going cusomter insights" into firm's existing eCommerce platforms.
The reader should therefore bring to this article the re-contextualisation of Toyota's "continuous improvement" (Wiki PDF summary)...but with a difference. Rather than adopting the standard approach "firm centric" & where the customer fulfills the role of "target" & object of analysis, the reader should consider looking beyond the usual suspects and approaches. What if part of the catalyst to enhance the firm's value ad trhough thier competencies and capabilites was the continuos integration of customer feedback as a driving force?
There are plenty of willing and engaged customer evnagelists who are more than ready to be embraced and endoctrinated with the firm's robust online continuous improvement system...for the firm's eCommerce platforms and online services.
A final caveat to keep in mind is that these observations fall outside the standard industry practice and ciclic "time-tabled", scheduled and procedural approach of "user centric" systems development and design. The life-cycle is no longer available to fit the firm's resource needs, the customer wants improvements ASAP...hence the need for a Darwinistic system!

If you don't develop faster responsive systems that embrace customer assisted eCommerce darwinism, then someone else will!

Executive Summary
Firm controlled affiliate program platforms have been developed to varying degrees of sophistication. For example Amazon's affiliate program is quite robust and supportive. It cleverly enables amazon and firms alike to play to particular consumers' second-life styles in the digital realm. Firms' eMarketers are fully aware of how consumers' influence and participation on the web involves opinion and/or consumer generated media via web2.0 (Wiki O'reilly) platforms, and therefore how to leverage this behaviour towards their sales efforts.

For those who dabble in affiliate programmes, the amazon affiliate back-end infrastructure speaks volumes with regards to how well the means of producing a mutual benefit has been identified, designed, planned, and integrated within the corresponding eCommerce platform.

...But mechanisms for providing feedback on the very collaborative eCommerce platforms/Service are still at very primitive stages. This is very, very good news as it spells out: opportunity.

Under-developed feedback platform for Collaborative eCommerce platform Co-creation Space Available...
Firms that seize underdeveloped primitive feedback mechanisms co-develop these platforms with their customers in a mutually beneficial manner will be in a competitive position to optimize their eCommerce activities.

Therefore co-creation and that motivates and spells out benefits are likely to increase their impact on the bottom line.

The pieces of the puzzle are there, and the beauty is that we can re-purpose and re-contextualize robust methodologies and procedures from various disciplines such as:

>production design & development, their corresponding interaction design disciplines
>psychology (behaviour-motivation)
>Software Development
>Human Resources

Consumers want a piece of the action and are rolling their sleeves to shape the web...
Consumers are no longer passive cash-cows to be milked till the bulls come home. Thanks to broadband's facilitation of rich web platforms, consumers have been empowered to collaborate in shaping the new web in many ways. To increase sales, increase awareness and decrease the likelihood of failure (in commercial cases, product/service), smart firms have latched onto the behaviour of prolific citizen journalists /"mini-preneurs", and consumer evangelists. The move toward brining in customers as both partners and consumers started way, way before the citizen journalism buzz-word did the rounds. And this was possible thanks to firms' development of collaborative tools. By appealing to consumers' newtworks of interests, their network of influences and by ensuring that their customers' kudos could be put on steroids, firms have ensured that consumers have come on board. As unpaid sales-forces, collaborators and co-developers; consumers are helping the bottom line in the following common ways:

>Virtual Sales forces - commission based (affiliate programmes - amazon)
>Self Publishers - cost plus percentage (Books, Calendars, Prints, CDs, DVDs)>
>Micro Design Boutique owners - cost plus percentage (Bags, T-shirts, Polo's, bibs, underwear, etc.)
>Shop Aggregators - commission (amazon)
>Ad Sponsored consumer generated content - bloggers, personal websites
>Human filters & human robots (tagging, reviews -folksonomy)
>Web Advocacy & participants - interest groups, grid-computing (web-based)
>Web Philanthropists - Virtual Volunteering

But Many eCommerce organization are still missing a collaborative trick...
Providing clear incentive programs for consumers to further the development of the very collaborative eCommerce platforms which firms utilize to engage their consumers and enhance their bottom lines is an area that requires much attention.

Consumers as Innovators: From Specialist Experts to Consumer Experts
Peer-production within the web as a means of driving innovation has been going on for quite a while within the software industry. Movements such as open-source have ensured the democratization of the tools of production and business, only formally available to the elite and deep pocketed.

Putting aside the philosophical motivations,world views, and challenges to the various industries, what is of interest here is the robustness of the collaboration process.

If firms could harness collaboration for the development of their eCommerce platforms in a structured and robust way that motivated and incentivated collaborators, then Innovation could perhaps move much faster.

Collaboration Personas & what they could bring to the table
Being on the receiving end of continuous product & service offers and their corresponding interactions have made many consumers experts in their own rights. We all have in our lives and within our network of influencers - individuals who can enlighten us about products or services in many ways...

Take those wonderful "recommenders" in the real world...
...their area of expertise seems to be always spot-on, even when they come with their caveats!

...Whether it's that wonderful pizzeria where you should only stick to the gorgeous thin-based crispy pizza experience, followed by a coffee or dessert - elsewhere (because the pizzeria doesn't have strength in that department), or that cut-prize electronic store that has every gadget imaginable, but whose price tag comes with moody service...

...What about the graceful moaners?
This bunch have many times made admirable observations and highlighted insights that have made us nod in acknowledgment, you must know some?

...such as a colleague who once mentioned, "why doesn't my online banking account have a big clear button that says "log-out" or "log-off"...that would make me feel more secure...


..."Why am I left to struggle on web-forms with no visible cues or means to gain some assistance except by getting on a phone..."

Participatory fruitfulness for the development of eCommerce collaboration platforms?
Sophisticated and robust eCommerce collaboration platforms & programs have been mainly oriented towards the aggregation of opinion, and expertise, to narrow to two main areas. The dominating rewards for contributors are either psychological, in terms of reputation rewards, or mutually beneficial by driving interest to the author's affiliate related content (provided by the same supplier, who also benefits from this free labour). Positive reputation has been deployed as a motivator and catalyst. This has been well thought out; the means of producing a mutual benefit has been identified, designed, planned, and integrated within the corresponding eCommerce platform.

...But feedback and collaboration on eCommerce platform development currently appears to encompass an asymmetrical relationship - with the benefits being stacked-up on the side of the firm. Trawling through google, form based feedback appeared to be the norm with rewards such as T-shirts and free software beyond the beta phaze.

The author would like to invite others to trawl through Google to identify robust consumer/customer feedback programs that engage and apply innovations from their very consumers.

The experience
My experience of as an affiliate is amazingly rich. But a clear visual cue regarding feedback was text based and this took you to a form. The Associate blog had posts referring to feedback on specific updates on the portfolio of associate tools. The forums are generally an exchange between users.

The experience
Etsy is like the "ebay" for people specifically involved in arts & crafts. Again, amazing tools but no robust feedback mechanism as described here was identified.

The membrane between the customer and the organization is being changed thanks to what we have observed. And organisations such as lego are taking full advantage and embracing customers as product co-creators...but again there is opportunity at developing the very eCommerce platforms via robust eFeedback processes and procedures.

Related Content & references...
Innovation Briefing: customer centred innovation

Activity in human reward-sensitive brain areas is strongly context dependent

Evolution of the New Economy Business Model
William Lazonick, UMass Lowell and INSEAD,

The Impact of the Internet on Business Model Evolution within the News and Music Sectors

Business model design & evolution;filename=IAMOT05.pdf

The New Darwinism
Corporate survival demands synchronized business and IT changes

Customers as Innovators: A New Way to Create Value (HBR OnPoint Enhanced Edition)

check out Open Source models of working...

Executive Summary
Efficient trouble free website interactions and transactions have been shown to have psychological/emotional impact on prospective customers' cognition, brand recall, and brand association. What eCommerce websites cannot control though is where within the portfolio of consumer choices the firm falls. The consumers initial emotional mind-set prior to their entering an evaluation process is also outside the control of eMarketers and the eCommerce site at the initial stage. This means that the product/service to be purchased will be influenced by the frame of mind and hence be totally dependent on how the mood derived from these emotions affect and the decision making process itself.

Barry Schwartz (in The Paradox of Choice, Why more is less) cites the growing stress of consumer decision making within the current scenario of an ever growing multiplicity of choice. The consumer has to face and factor the growth of time invested in assessing product/service alternatives. Areas of activity such as corresponding trade-offs and their associated opportunity cost have to be taken into account within the constrains of our genetically in-built "loss aversion" behavioral response. Our psychological wiring therefore helps us cope better with gains rather than with losses. An implication of current consumer choices is that complexity of the purchasing process is growing and correspondingly the degree of involvement within the purchasing process and its associated emotional investment. Research has again demonstrated that these very factors affect the quality of evaluation and decisions themselves (pp. 131).

Negative States of emotion and the consumer purchasing & decision making process
Negative emotional states are said to narrow the decision making focus. Instead of examining all the contributing factors only a few will be considered at times ignoring aspects that would be pivotal to the final decision. The impact of a situation, event or interaction which renders a negative state of mind is known to have an impact on visual memory & its recall. The symptoms of a negative frame of mind creates tunnel vision (affecting peripheral vision), and can interrupt the natural flow and performance of established tasks. This is one of the reasons that the practice of drills are set-up, as drills serve as rehearsals that will condition our behaviour over time in case of emergency, where are frame of mind would not allow us to act rationally and within our full faculties. Drills are carried out regularly to socialize us within the context and cues derived from these rehearsed situations.

Positive states of emotion and the consumer purchasing & decision making process
A positive frame of mind has been shown to have the completely opposite impact enhancing creativity and opening up avenues of thought which would not even materialize under a negative state of mind. Therefore consumers are more likely to make decisions that are in their best interests within a positive state of mind.

Frames of mind: impact on eCommerce pole-position & decision making
But as marketers we cannot determine the frame of mind our prospective customers will bring to our eCommerce websites, let alone what position we hold within the customers' decision making process.

Under such circumstances it may be beneficial to translate and map our understanding of the impact of consumers' frames of mind onto the site's persuasive architecture elements and corresponding eMarketer controlled factors (functional, psychological, and content related). The symbiotic relationship of these factors should provide an indication on the degree of engagement, consumers' cognition and the overall efficacy of the consumer's web-experience - as designed and controlled by the firm. Indeed given the strong uncertainty of the consumers' "emotional-frame-of-arrival" at an eCommerce site it would be wise to adopt a "reactio-nary" framework from the consumer perspective as a counter perspective to the designed web-experience. This can be approached in terms of Visceral (perceptually-induced), Behavioural (expectation-induced), and Reflective (intellectually induced). The proposition of this consumer reaction-ary perspective has been borrowed from "product design", specifically showcased by Norman D. A. author of "The design of everyday things", re-issued as The psychology of everyday things, and "Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things".

The overall understanding of the web experience and its definition has been described as:

"...the consumer’s total impression about the online company (Watchfire Whitepaper Series, 2000) resulting from his/her exposure to a combination of virtual marketing tools . . .under the marketer’s direct control, likely to influence the buying behavior of the online consumer (Constantinides, 2002, p. 60). The virtual customer’s total impression and actions are influenced by design, events, emotions, atmosphere and other elements experienced during interaction with a given web-site, elements meant to induce customer goodwill and affect the final outcome of the online interaction."

[Constantinides, Internet Research, Volume 14 • Number 2 • 2004, pp. 112
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1066-2243]

The Ying-Yang of Web interactions at Lufthansa's eCommerce site an A-typical Experience
The research as far as I have been able to uncover has not actually covered my A-typical experience, which I wonder how many others have faced.

The particular A-typical and unique circumstances are that the consumer has identified the preferred supplier and wants to purchase their goods/services even though functionally the site has created barriers, transactional dead-ends (form related) and limitations due to the mismatch of the consumer's preferred choice of browser and the firm's functional support for a preferred set of browsers.

Some persistent customers will bite the bullet like I did...Why? Because Lufthansa had the cheapest deal I could get based on the hours of research I had invested and my usual truck-load of associated travel requirements, constraints and trade-offs. Instead of three simple steps, I was put through the paces and forced to become involved in ten, as the following adventure illustrates:

(1) Search Transaction
(2) Form Processing
(3) Browser dead end/error
(4) Browser refresh reaction (conditioned)
(5) Browser Switch - Firefox-to-IE
(6) Recall/Refer to flight search details as in (1)
(7) Anger/resentment tipping point (think about cheap flight mantra!)
(8) Re-start Search again as in (1)
(9) Process forms/credit card - await results
(10) Completed Transaction/Confirmation

Lufthansa's eBusiness team could have tested the flight booking process across multiple browsers. But as an outsider I'm not aware whether Lufthansa deemed that the trade-off relating to the associated costs of ensuring compatibility with Firefox far outweighed the potential revenue from prospective customers using Firefox. If this was the case, a simple visual sign-post could alert potential Firefox users that the site's web-forms do not support Firefox.

Jumping through these hoops and functional limitations I had to overcome in order to get hold of my ticket, inspired me to turn this experience into a visual representation which I have termed the Ying-Yang of emotion while browser switching during an eCommerce transaction.

The Ying & Yang of online interactions-dont make me angryWill your company ensure that you do not build negative word of mouth by ensuring that you build a positive website experience?

Conclusion and implications
Standard practice can be applied in addressing the usual eCommmerce short-comings. These generally accepted bread-and-butter building blocks of eCommerce that can pre-empt patchy or poor web experiences including but not limited to: Functional, Psychological.

Within the functional aspect for example, cross-browser testing usually avoids many eCommerce transactional related challenges. But limiting activities to the usual suspects does not address how the human mind, emotion, cognition and decision all blend into a thick broth of complexity.

Here lies the opportunity that research, psychology and understanding of the workings of the human brain can bring bottom line benefits currently addressed by very few.

Research has shown that decision making within the purchasing process is not as completely rational as it was once thought to have been. I have substantiated the impact of emotion and the mood it creates and its knock-on effect on the process of evaluation and decision making. Accordingly consumer surveys and research that attempt to address consumer purchasing intent and satisfaction without addressing the emotional side of purchasing will sell itself short. Gerald Zaltman (How Customers think) has developed a methodology of methodology that facilitates the elicitation process of unconscious emotional cues and perceptions that shape consumer purchasing intent and experiences.

In addition customer profiling needs to embrace the influential and corresponding impact of emotion and mood within the decision making process. There are a multitude of wholly rational means of profiling customers and their related behaviour. Fortunately I have discovered through my reading and research that Mr. Schwartz's (The Paradox of Choice - Why more is less) has cited attractive, compelling and relevant emotion related profiles that fit within the aforementioned paradigm of consumer decision making. These consumer profiles were identified as being Maximizers and Satisficers. The former group usually have a deep degree of involvement and emotionally invest quite heavily as maximizers are seen to be perfectionists - who only settle for what they perceive and are influenced to perceive is the best choice. Consequently when the wrong choice is made they are said to be the ones who suffer the most and have an inability of letting go of the associated emotions. Satisficers can be summed up as pragmatists who will make a purchase decision based on various constraints without obsessing over things. Consequently they are likely to get over wrong choice much more easily than Maximizers.

Useful & Recommended Reading (amazon-through tinyurl)
Barry Schwartz (2005), The Paradox of Choice, Why more is less

Donald A. Norman (2002). The design of everyday things. The re-issue, with a new preface, was apparently re-titled The psychology of everyday things.

Donald A. Norman (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things.

Gerald Zaltman (2003), How Customers Think: Essential Insights into the Mind of the Market

Lazarus, R. S. (1994). Emotion and adaptation.

Related Research
Constantinides, E. (2004), "Influencing the online consumer’s behavior: the Web experience", Internet Research, Volume 14 • Number 2, pp. 112, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1066-2243.

Constantinides, E (2002), “The 4S Web-marketing mix model,e-commerce research and applications”, Elsevier Science,Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 57-76.

Dennis, C., Harris, I. and Sandhu, B. (2002), “From bricks to clicks: understanding the e-consumer”, Qualitative Marketing Research, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 281-90.

ESSLER, U and WHITAKER, R. (2001), "Re-thinking E-commerce Business Modelling in Terms of Interactivity", Electronic Markets Volume 11 (1): 10-16.

Fogg, B.G., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D., Marable, L., Stanford, J. and Tauber, E. (2002), “How do people evaluate a Web site’s credibility? Results from a large study”, Persuasive Technology Lab, Stanford University, available at:

Grabner-Krauter, S. and Kaluscha, A.E. (2003), “Empirical research in online trust: a review and critical assessment”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 58 No. 6, pp. 783-812.

Interactive Bureau (IAB) (2003), “FTSE-100’s Web sites are still ‘wallowing in mediocrity’”, available at:

Koufaris, M., Kambil, A. and LaBarbera, A. (2002), “Consumer behavior in Web-based commerce: an empirical study”,International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 6 No. 2,pp. 115-38.

Lee, P-M. (2002), “Behavioral model of online purchasers in e-commerce environment”, Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 2, pp. 75-85.

Liang, T.-P. and Lai, H.-J. (2002), “Effect of store design on consumer purchases: an empirical study of online bookstores”, Information & Management, Vol. 39, pp. 431-44.

Lightner, N.J. and Eastman, C. (2002), “User preference for product information in remote purchase environments”,Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 3 No. 3,pp. 174-86.

Loebbecke, C. (2003), “E-business trust concepts based on seals and insurance solutions”, Information Systems and E-Business Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 55-72.

McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V. and Kacmar, C. (2002), “The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a Web site: a trust-building model”, The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 11 No. 3-4, pp. 297-323.

Nantel, J.-HEC Montréal, Sénécal, S.-HEC Montréal and Berrada, A. M.-HEC Montréal (2005), "THE INFLUENCE OF « DEAD-ENDS » ON PERCEIVED WEBSITE USABILITY", Cahier de recherche N° 05-08-02, ISSN : 1714-6194.

Scheffelmaieer, G., Vinsonhaler, J., and Paper, D. (2004), "Purchase Time and User Satisfaction as Effected by Website Convenience", Issues in Information Systems, Volume V, No 1, 294-300

Silverman, B.G, Mintu Bachann,M., Al-Akharas,K., Dept. of Systems Engineering, University of Pennsylvania (2001), "Implications of Buyer Decision Theory for Design of eCommerce Websites". Possibly working paper as found on the web and no reference was made to a journal.

Vrechopoulos, A., O’Keefe, R.M. and Doukidis, G.I. (2000),“Virtual store atmosphere in Internet retailing”, Proceedings of the 13th International Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Bled, Slovenia, 19-21 June.

Wikstrom, S., Carlell, C. and Frostling-Henningsson, M. (2002),“From real world to mirror world representation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 8, pp. 647-54.

Wong, A., "The role of emotional satisfaction in service encounters", Managing Service Quality Volume 14 · Number 5 · 2004 · pp. 365–376, Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0960-4529.

A fortnight ago, Monday’s Media Guardian (25.06.07) carried a special supplement on “outdoor media” with a subtitle, “Digital Vs Poster – The transformation of Outside Advertising”.

According to this supplement, the vitality of the outdoor advertising echo-system is allegedly being fuelled by several factors such as:

  • the number of individuals spending more time out-door during the day has increased over 51% over the last 10years (Belinda Archer)
  • the fragmentation of television audiences (Catlin Ftizsimmons) and,
  • the integration digital & mobile enabled technologies to create more engaging and interactive experiences (Catlin Ftizsimmons)

Although the face of advertising has changed over the decades, the general mind-set of the advertising industry remains the same: “interruption based advertising”.

traditional advertising is striking out big time
There was no editorial with regards to consumers’ lifestyles, long working hours, work pressure, fatigue and the work-life balance, and how these have an impact on energy levels and attention.

The experience of sitting in an underground train, be it in New York City, London, or Caracas (Venezuela) is no different from any other. How many “zombies” have you seen sitting either plugged into their music-systems, reading, dozing off, or simply on “standby” waiting for their particular stop? How would you divided the ecology of an “underground wagon”, and the relationship to a potentially attentive advertising audience?…I have had first hand experience, and it’s amazing to see the similarities.

Now fit advertising within this consumer centred life-work context and the fact that according to sources we are exposed to between 1500-10,000 a day, and what do you think is going to happen to attention and recall?

That’s not all though. Continuing a little longer with human factors, advertisements have become messengers to a new phenomenon, too much choice, which according to “Barry Schwartz”, author of “The Paradox of Choice, Why more is less", is creating a lot of stress within the decision making process – that ultimately is to culminate in a purchase. Evidence can be seen on British TV advertisements of website aggregators / comparison websites that have sprung-up to assist prospective consumers with making a final choice.

In this environment where creative meets technological advertisement delivery vehicles, and channel integration, the following observations made on new products and services will definite ring true within advertising: “To exploit new opportunities, managers must know significantly more than they currently do about how customers think and act”
(source: speech delivered to the marketing science institute, Boston MA, 25 April 2002, by George S. Day, The Geoffrey T. Boisi Professor of Marketing and the director of the Mack Center for the Management of Technological Innovation at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania).

To increase advertising effectiveness, the industry will have to put the consumer at the centre of the experience by appealing to their values, reward systems, and the way the brain is wired.

If the advertising industry does not get its act right with regards to understanding how consumers are wired, then 80% of the new product offerings will continue to fail. The persistence of market research with the use of tools such as focus groups that continue to dig into consumer opinion by appealing to the conscious and rational part of the brain, which only forms part of 5% of our cognition, will continue to waste vast amounts of resources. The other 95% of the unconscious part of the brain is where real insight can be gathered about how customers really think, according to Gerald Zaltman, Professor of Marketing at Harvard Business School, Fellow at Harvard University’s interdisciplinary Mind, Brain, Behaviour initiative, and co-founder of the research consultancy Olson Zaltman Associates. His customers include: coca-cola, Microsoft, Bank of America, Motorola, Procter & Gamble and IBM. And these insights can be seen in his book tilted, “how customers think, Essential Insights into the mind of the market”.

“Something’s in the air”, whether it be on broadcast or on WIFI, consumers have embraced technologies to block advertising. Will the advertising industry wait for the two ad-blocked channels/mediums to transform into the three apocalyptic ad-blocking channels/mediums?...will the industry strike out three times?

The bell has tolled already with ad-blocking technologies such as the first incarnations of TiVo, as a forewarning that consumers will embrace technologies to block annoying ads. It has tolled for the second time with ad-blocking technologies and software (explored within a paper which is available on request from Tracy Osterle a colleague at my former employer TechnoPhobia) on the web. Will this resistance come to outside media for the third?

There are two active social movements whose remit is to deride and undermine corporate advertising: Adbusters, and Space Hijackers.

Adbusters tackles advertising with spoofs that undermine the advertisers’ claims and uncovers either “corporate skeletons from their closets” or highlights health/environmental issues related to the brand and the product/service. Space Hijackers have been described as “…a group of urban high jinksers using extremely creative methods to reclaim some public spaces from corporate noise…” (source: Computer Arts Projects Issue 99. pp. 29-32). Clashes have been documented, including corporate advertising incursions into fake “Urban street Style” advertising.

To conclude, it is un-arguable that advertising outdoors will continue to obtain what the industry deems as reasonable results and ROI. The interruption-based advertising paradigm can’t let go of clever memorable advertising as exposed by agencies such as Fallon, the branding and campaign advertising agency, which has created good ROI for its clients. But this approach will continue to delivery bottom line peaks and troughs, which are producing marginal results. And who knows we may even go too far, such as the invasiveness showcased by the New York Times article, “Anywhere the Eye Can See, It’s Likely to See an Ad”, January 15, 2007 (By Louise Story). From advertising on eggs to “small Big Mac burgers flying past; when people stepped on the Ad, the burgers bounced away from their feet”. And elsewhere advertising is being put on flocks of sheep, and sinking all the way to the bottom with “Ass-vertisement”…


Creative Commons 2007 to William Doust| Blogger Templates by GeckoandFly.