Total posts: 2,799
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Your lynching statistic proves my point, not yours. During the period you referenced white people outnumbered black people by more than 7 to 1, yet nearly 3 times as many black people were lynched. That’s bad enough, but that’s still not even the point. Black people were lynched by white people for being black. White people were lynched by white people for being sympathetic towards blacks.
I am aware of disproportionalities. I see it every year in crime rate reports. You implied White people weren't lynched, I showed that it happened plenty. And no, they weren't lynching people because of their melanin or sympathy towards people with more melanin. It was mainly vigilantes hanging rapists and murderers.
Home ownership rates rose for everyone during the redlining period. The difference is that black people were not allowed to buy houses in white neighborhoods so that the value (and by extension wealth) of homes in white neighborhoods rose substantially relative to black neighborhoods, the effects of which are very prevalent today.
Why did the value rise substantially more in white neighborhoods? Does less crime lead to higher home values? And step number one is getting people housed. Housing for blacks rose quicker during the redlining period than any other period recorded.
You know damn well what I’m talking about. You know that black people are judged differently because they are black and that this works its way into policing. You know that a police officer is more likely to “fear for his life” if he’s dealing with a black person than a white person. You may not think the difference is as significant as most black people do, but please stop pretending this isn’t obvious.
More white men are shot per violent crime arrest than black men. Obviously systemic biases are leading cops to shoot white men at a disproportionate rate.
You are just factually wrong. From 2017-2020 there were 1,683 white people killed by police vs 983 black people, yet white people outnumber black people today by almost 6 to 1.
Ok, it doesn't matter what percent of the population they are. It matters how many arrests occurred. If a group was 99% of the population and had 2 arrests and one guy got shot, then a very large percent of them get killed during an arrest (50%). Conversely, if 1% of the population had 1,000 arrests and 2 got shot, they have a much lower likelihood of getting killed by cops(.2%) than the 99% group(50%) during an arrest.
Black people are on perfectly legitimate grounds to ask for their lives to be valued like everyone else given the history and current state of affairs. You can claim they are wrong in their perceptions, but that’s not what All Lives Matter does. ALM is an attempt to throw away the grievances of others without acknowledging them or doing any work to reconcile them, and to egregiously place yourself above them while doing it.
BLM is just a divisive organization. If their only goal is to stop shootings against black arrestees, then they are clearly showing that their priority is their own group. Why should a Latino devote time and money to a group that clearly couldn't care less if a young Latino man in his neighborhood is killed by cops? If he wants to make his community a better place, he wouldn't waste time joining or supporting BLM. However, a group that says that all lives matter has much broader appeal in that it doesn't only care about one small group. You're much likely to solve an issue with one large group vs 3 or 4 small ones. But I suspect it is all about the Benjamins- the victim card is quite valuable these days.
And sure, the organization is based on a complete lie, but I suppose, as you say, that is besides the point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I couldn't agree more. There are just some things that men and women respectively should not do. I remember that (mainly Democrats) in Congress opposed new fitness requirements because not enough women were in the trials.
They don't care if the new fitness requirement is a good idea. They see that less women are going to get in the military and think that is some great evil. If the primary objective of the military is not to keep us safe and is instead to meet some bureaucrat or congressperson's diversity quota that makes them feel better, guess what: we aren't going to be as safe.
Have we even won a war since the military became obsessed with diversity?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Cuba with the help of Russia almost turned America into a nuclear wasteland 60 years ago. What makes Cuba a trustworthy ally now?
How can they be bad if their cigars are so good? It is a paradox
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AddledBrain
Give it all, the property, the facilities, the prison, the prisoners, everything back to Cuba and let them handle it. I'm sure they would agree to this to get their land back.
Lmao, what? We should hand over a bunch of dangerous terrorists and foreign soldiers to a foreign nation that resembles an enemy more than an ally?
Created:
Posted in:
@RM
Despite what superhero movies show you, a tiny woman can't just take down a 200lb man because she knows karate
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, considering tasers and pepper spray are often ineffective (especially when they aren’t mistaken for guns lol).
It is very hard to detain people who are smaller than you, so her options are cap that boy or get knocked out 🤷🏼♂️
Created:
-->
@dustryder
A broken clock is right twice a day
He was the most accurate broken clock we've had in decades
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I’m sorry, were white people enslaved for 400 years
They were for hundreds of years in the North African slave trade. We just don't complain very much, so you probably weren't aware of it.
lynched
3,446 African Americans and 1,297 whites were lynched between 1882 and 1968. So yes, Whites were lynched.
redlined
Black home ownership rose very quickly during "redlining"
mass incarcerated
You know the saying: "do the crime, do the time". Well.... that
Yes white people are killed by the police also, but no white person ever got shot by the police because they were white.
When we have tens of thousands of black and Latino cops, you're telling me not one killed a white guy for being white? And how many blacks are killed for being black per decade? One? Because all the cases that BLM touts like Michael Brown end up being justified shootings when actual forensic data is shown (he was trying to steal the cop's gun)
That is the point of Black Lives Matter. No they don’t want you to only care about them, they want you to care about about little Jamal as much as you care about little Timmy.
This is all based on the lie that black men are disproportionately shot and killed by cops. If you look at data by the amount of arrests by race and fatal shootings that occur, whites are overrepresented compared to blacks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No, they only care about themselves, as evinced by them rioting every time a black guy gets shot by police, even though it is justified 9/10 times. When have they ever protested when a Latino, Asian, or White got shot?
They want us to only care about them, because when we try to make it an all-inclusive movement, they call you racist. Obviously, it is for not exclusively caring about them. If you think that everyone matters, you're a racist, apparently.
The logical conclusion is: caring about White people dying is racist. The ADL even labeled the slogan "White Lives Matter" as a "White Supremacist phrase". https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/white-lives-matter
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Plus “All lives matter” is a response to Black Lives Matter. It’s black people saying “stop killing us” and white people saying “hey, why should you being killed warrant any special attention?” It’s just plain stupid.
It is saying, 'why do you only care about yourselves'? They say black lives matter, and they only care when black people are killed. So, all lives matter would be saying "hey let's be upset when anyone unjustly is killed".
blm responds more or less with "you're racist for caring about White people dying. You should only care about us"
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I still don't understand: even if they were putting bounties on our troops, why isn't that more reason to leave? Don't we want to keep the troops safe?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Some may call me sexist, but I see this as an inherent issue when you have 120lb women who are put in dangerous situations with large men.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Perhaps those are the more common reasons for the average voter, but there is a lot more to it. I feel like a lot of voters, especially conservatives, are very skeptical of the government and expect decreases in the quality of care, and there is validity to that idea.
For instance, price fixing would occur to manage costs of the system like it does in every country with government healthcare. Less profits means less money available for R&D for new treatments.
If, like Medicare and Medicaid, hospitals are losing money on patients, they will have to cut costs all around in ways that will have spillover effects. One likely cost to cut will be labor costs (aka doctor salaries), which means less doctors.
It seems to me that these are looming issues and many people are too concerned about getting everybody some kind of coverage or only caring about taxes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
It is also weird how they are also always thinking of penises. Like trucks and guns?
"mUsT bE cOmPeNsAtInG" *loudly slurps soy latte in Prius*
Created:
Posted in:
Wait, am I the only one that brings paint swatches on first dates? 0_0
Awkward.....
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Really, the opinion polls vary largely on how the program is described. That is why lefties call it "medicare for all" even though it is a completely separate program. Medicare is popular. However, terms like "government healthcare" or describing the terms of it with "no deductible", "higher taxes to fund it", etc will make popularity go from well below half to over 80%.
So, it is unclear how many of either party really support or oppose a program based on how you want it implemented. Now, if you ask us "do you want everyone to have sufficient healthcare", the answer is going to be "yes" from the vast majority of people regardless of their party. Really, from there, it is just how you want to accomplish that. Some people think that private market reforms can solve it. Some people think that only the government should be involved.
And I'd not like to use terms like "free" if I were you because any economically literate person knows that it isn't free. It costs plenty of tax dollars. It might be "free" at point of service, but a large tax hike is inevitable to afford it.
I'd say that I would most likely support a public option. If the market is efficient, people will choose private plans for more expensive and better care. If it isn't efficient or the plans are too expensive, then they can stay on some form of basic government plan. If I'm not mistaken, it is the Australian model that I like in which there is a universal government plan, but they try to actively shift people to private plans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
But that’s not the question the jury is tasked with answering. It doesn’t matter if he would have died anyway in some hypothetical alternative reality. The question is; was Derrick Chauvin’s actions the primary cause for what did kill him? To that question, correct me if I’m wrong, but all of the expert’s who actually diagnosed him before and after his death agree they were.
Well I guess my point was that if he likely would have died anyway because of the drugs, then that would mean that Chauvin's actions weren't likely the primary reason he died.
The kneeling certainly did not help, but if he was struggling to breathe before Chauvin kneeled on him, I think that can cast a reasonable doubt.
Now, if I understand correctly, they are trying to say that Chauvin committed a felony. If someone dies because you commit a felony, you are responsible for their death. So, they might be able to get him on that if they can prove that kneeling was an assault.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
so your argument is that is was completely random chance? He happened to die at the moment a cop was crushing him? The crushing him had nothing to do with it? That is a very weak argument.
Do you always have to make the most obtuse and obviously wrong interpretation of anything that anyone says? Conversations would be a lot more efficient if you stopped willfully misinterpreting everything I said.
It was not a random chance. He had coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease. He had fentanyl (synthetic opioids are the largest cause of overdoses) and meth in his system, as well as a history of cocaine abuse. He also had COVID-19. He said he was having trouble breathing before the kneeling even began. He struggled with officers, refusing to get in the police vehicle, a stressful and strenuous event. So to say that he would very likely have died anyway because of his poor health, drugs, and stress is not at all a stretch.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
to be fair, most of their base only pretends to care about "family values" too. If they actually cared about that, then the republicans wouldn't get away with being so despicable.
I think the blatant outward parading of degeneracy of the alternative kinda forces them to vote for whatever Republican is on the ticket.
that is my point. Demcoracts say that deficits are fine, the goal is to spend the money to help the people and the country. Republicans say deficits are terrible and should be avoided. Then the second they are in power, they cut taxes and the rich and blow up the deficit and pat themselves on the back for it. Then the second they are out of power they start crying about how terrible the deficit is. Only 1 party pretends like the deficit is an important issue. They are just massive liars about it.
There are a decent chunk that care about the budget. 109 Republicans in 2019 voted against Trump's spending bill. Just not enough of them care, mixed with your admitted attitude of Democrats of not caring about deficits.
Kinda makes a veto-proof majority when half or one-third of Republicans and maybe one or two Democrats are all that care about the deficit.
there is no baby involved in this scenario. I care more about a woman's right to control her body than a fetus' life to live. Because a fetus isn't a person.
Oh it isn't a person? Guess it is a tree or a dog or perhaps a car.
one is making changes to yourself to make yourself happy. The other is endangering lives by having more deadly weapons floating around.
Cool, just stay the hell away from kids and don't pretend that "women" are women for the sake of sports, government preferential grants, keep men wearing wigs out of bathrooms that children attend, etc.
Also, Democrats' shitily-run cities are where crime occurs with less guns present. More people per capita own guns in rural areas https://www.statista.com/statistics/625196/firearm-ownership-rate-by-proximity-to-urban-centers-us/
Crime rates are also higher in urban areas. Sorry to burst your bubble, bud.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
If there is reasonable doubt that his enlarged heart/heart disease and consumption of multiple drugs killed him instead
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Perhaps they want to make life so foul for their kids that we think they'd be better off not living at all.
Tis' the anti-FASCIST way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Unless it is determined that Chauvin's actions killed Floyd, then yes, it doesn't really matter if he did anything right or wrong according to protocol.
Mainly the argument that I care about and that should be at the forefront of the case is Floyd's terrible health and the drugs present in his system/their effect on his death. I'd say those mixed with the stress of getting caught using counterfeit money probably killed him and he likely would have died regardless of any restraint used. But, I suppose that we'll have to see what the supposedly objective jury has to say about it since they are more familiar with the evidence than we are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
if by principal, you mean corruption and resentence to facts and knowledge, then sure... i guess.
No, I mean they at least they pretend to care about "family values" to court their base.
republicans were in charge. They cut taxes on the rich and ballooned the deficit. Also, again, "right wing" is an almost meaningless term. Monarchists are right wing too. They don't tend to care about deficits.
I don't think either party is in any position to say that they care about the deficit. It's either "keep spending roughly the same and lower taxes" or "raise spending a helluva lot more than taxes"
no. Banning a woman from having control of her own body is as big a government as you can get. I can't think of any more aggressive government control imaginable than their controlling your body.
You don't need to mince words here. You care more about the right to murder babies for convenience than you do about the right of that baby to live.
that's also a good example. You fascists love banning people from having control of their own body. But if it's the right to own and use weapons of mass death and carnage? well don't tread on me, right?
Yeah, the right to mutilate your genitals and chemically castrate yourself is exactly the same as the right to self-defense/protection against tyranny, amirite?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@triangle.128k
I kind of want Chauvin to be declared guilty, less so because I care about the case but more so that this won't become ammunition for another wave of BLM screeching.
I'm not particularly ready to have some guy lynched as a sacrificial lamb if he didn't do anything wrong.
And if the savages riot, they will only hurt their own party. It happened when riots helped Nixon get elected. Kenosha voted +.3% Trump in 2016 and +3.14% for Trump in 2020.
Even in the Bronx, Hillary got 86% of the vote and Biden only got 78%.
If the buffoons riot again close to the midterms, now it is "Joe Biden's America" that they occur in. They would get steamrolled when their margins are already razor thin.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I agree with the pretty common notion that when we are about ~5-7years old and college-aged are the two main points of our lives at which we develop our opinions on political matters.
The first time, we are influenced by what we see in our parents (not necessarily political talk, but maybe lessons about personal responsibility and self-reliance vs dependency) and what our religious organizations/other groups we are a part of teach us about how we should act.
When you go off to college, you are no longer around your parents as much and you make the choice of which communities you would like to join now. At that point, you think about what you were taught before. If you have positive thoughts about your upbringing, you are likely to keep your values. Otherwise, you discard them and replace them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
The republicans are really far "right"
Ah yes, the "far right" party. The one that is just about as degenerate as Democrats, but that slight bit of principle they cling onto makes them "far right".
Unless you only consider economics, then sure, when the opposition is in charge they begin caring about "fiscal responsibility" and could be considered "far right".
For example, banning abortion is government control of people's bodies. It doesn't get much more "big government" than telling you what you can do with your own body, but the right would love to be able to do that.
Banning murder of helpless babies = as big of a government as you can get. Pretty neat reality you live in.
A better example would have been banning gender transitions. We FASCISTS love restricting the ability of minors to mutilate themselves and inject themselves with wack hormones.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Democrats can't pat themselves on the back enough for being the rich elites.Those back-patting sessions must be more intense than an 1800's slave lashing.
I was assured by Jeff Bezos' Washington Post that the Democrats are, indeed, for the people and that orange men are bad.
I'm sure they have patting welts on their backs now
Created:
-->
@oromagi
This true fact is to blue counties' credit.
That's a double-edged sword. They are good places to work but abysmal, expensive, crime-ridden places to live in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I see a lot of pretty blue letters with neat little lines under them
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You're giving off commie vibes. Are you suggesting we eat the rich????
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Looks mostly peaceful to me
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
- lots of violence
"crime rates are higher in urban than in rural areas. Violent and property crime rates in our largest cities (Metropolitan Statistical Areas, or MSAs) are three to four times as high as the rates in rural communities (Barkan). These statistics hold for nearly all types of crime."
Us silly Republicans and our *checks notes* power in urban rather than rural areas? *stares at notes confusedly*
- Lots of guns
- lots of violence
- Lots of underlying racism
- Lots of religious bigotry
- Lots of excuses for why the finances and operational system of govt was failing
- Lots of unwed mothers
- Lots of welfare use
- …and SERIOUS MONEY PROBLEMS.
Honestly, I have rarely seen so many factually incorrect assertions presented in so few words. Really, you should have stopped at "guns"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
Heh, you're known to me, at least. Not sure how Undefeatable knows you.
Yes, but you're really the only person to ever finish a debate with me haha
I'm surprised my name got around to more than one person considering I have only had 6 total debates.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Undefeatable
I'm so confused. How am I known? lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Trump wanted a Muslim ban because of terrorist attacks. Very rare, but very sensationalized events are used to justify national policy, like the site below:
Do you think that saving the lives of hundreds of Americans is something that should be considered or ignored when making policies?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Ungrateful people should be flung into an active volcano.
Justification: cuz I said so
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin is the best!
Facts
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I appreciate the compliment, but I don’t feel that I deserve the praise
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
As every other claimant who came forward, then shrank back to the woodwork?
That's the drive by media for you. Come out with a head line like "White Cop Murders Black Man Who Was Holding His Hands Up". Then quietly, a month or two later, it turns out that nice gentleman was actually punching the cop and reaching for his gun.
The point is to rely on the short attention spans of the general public and slander Republicans(but it's fine since they're public officials), then quietly retract.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
Well the populist factions, the ones who care about fighting corporations, have supporters on both sides. But they generally bicker about social policies.
Like in the recent GME thing, they sided with the corporations because they didn’t want to side with “mUh NaZiS”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
I certainly agree that the corporate-run media will use whatever means necessary to divert attention from their increasing control over our lives to other, less relevant issues that don't threaten their rule or in fact strengthen their rule (ie. feminism since the 60s)
However, I think we are divided by much more than class. I don't really see how solving class conflict issues will unite traditionalists and those who wish to live in a society without social standards. We are an atomized nation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
Seems to me that Democrats use the police shootings just like they use school shootings or any other tragedy. You can easily rile people up and emotionally manipulate them easier from showing a policeman kneeling on some criminal than you can from citing academic disparity studies.
Easiest way to get power and money.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
So you think Republicans only care about illegal immigration because illegal immigrants occasionally murder people?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
yeah that was actually really funny. But to be fair, it was a stupid, stupid idea and a giant waste of money. The republican's are all for racism and xenophobia, but if they have to actually negotiate with democrats and exchange something for it, they are much happier focusing on getting more stuff for rich people instead.I'd have to disagree there. Walls work. They aren't all you need. You need patrols as well and other technology, but a wall is a crucial part of border defense. And putting up defenses to help keep unwanted individuals out of your country isn't a bad idea.Furthermore, most Republicans roll over on any issue whenever they are called "racist". They have no balls and only care about popularity.to be fair, he made no attempt whatsoever to do anything about healthcare. He didn't make one single suggestion, let alone fight for it. And he is commander in chief. He could have ordered the troops home. The problem is when the war hawks (which he put in his own cabinet) pushed back, he caved.Yeah, he did cave. I don't know why he put so many imbeciles in his cabinet that probably convinced him to work against his promises. I was always struggling to determine if he lied or is just a political idiot. I try to hope it is the latter. A lot of people blame his son-in-law Kushner. Not sure how much merit there is to that.but that means absolutely nothing. You are saying he used a tool, but didn't accomplish anything. You might as well say he used a gun to pick his nose. at least that way he wouldn't have caused a bunch of damage, as he did to millions of americans with his tarriffs.He brought China to the bargaining table. I'm not sure what happened to that bill now that Biden is in office. I was more concerned that he used it on allies and pissed them off. He used them well in terms of making Mexico keep illegal immigrants from traveling across their country to the US. He failed in other respects. He didn't really use them as part of a coherent strategy, which I again blame on him not being particularly politically competent.so far i'm not hopeful. Both because of how trump's presidency went and because of how things are going now. Trump is throwing his support behind anyone who will spread his lies and kiss his ass. People like marjorie taylor greene are being championed by trump even though she is a hateful lunatic who believes in evil jewish space lasers starting forest fires. Sadly, that is the future of trumpism. Cultish worship of trump while pushing insane conspiracies.But on the other hand, it cripples the right. No one will be able to survive on the right without kissing trump's ass and going along with his lies and insanity or they will be primaried. But the majority of americans don't want policians who are so obviously insane or evil (like greene). So it further destroys the right wing coalition. Which is good for the country.Well I'm not sure anti-business policies, mass immigration, and promotion of degeneracy are good for the country, but based on our previous discussions, I'm sure we will have to agree to disagree on that.I'm somewhat surprised by the cult worship but also not really surprised. He was really the last hope for a dying America, so people clung too hard to him. He proposed a lot of good policies, but it is seeming more and more every day that most Americans are too uninformed to stick behind a platform of ideas and really only care about one or two issues. So, we'll probably end up with the old free trade GOP and die out for the next 30-40 years.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
But once elected, he did basically none of the positive things he talked about. He basically let other people decide on all the policy while he was busy tweeting, golfing and holding rallies. So the republicans just carried on with the same horrible policies they've been pushing for decades and very little actually changed.
I think that there is certainly some merit to that. I think at least in the beginning, he had tried for some of those positions. But, regardless, it is him versus a corrupt establishment. He couldn't even get funding for a wall- his main campaign promise- when Republicans owned both houses of Congress.
So, it is quite reasonable to see that if he can't even get support on that, there was no way in hell he could replace Obamacare with anything decent or end foreign wars when both parties' politicians support foreign wars.
I think the core problem is that trump had no actual policy positions. He doesn't actually give a shit about any of the things he campaigned on because none of them actually affect him or anyone he knows. So when push comes to shove, he didn't even try to fight for things that didn't benefit him personally.
Maybe he didn't care at all. I'd like to think he did based on his EOs. It was near the end, but he did sign one that lowered Insulin costs, another that reduced troop presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. He didn't really start any new wars. He used tariffs, albeit not always wisely, to defend manufacturing.
Really, I think he was just incompetent. He always appointed people who didn't agree with any of his positions. He even had Bolton serving him for a hot second. He didn't coordinate tariffs with allies against China to stop IP theft. There were plenty of things he couldn't have done and a lot of things he could do that he didn't.
If a republican were able to actually run on those issues and actually fight for them, that would be interesting. but the only lesson republicans took from trump is that being a crazy asshole works.
I'm hoping they actually take the right message. They need to realize that just shilling for low taxes, mass immigration, and free trade for the rich is a losing strategy. Using tariffs, low immigration, and low taxes to raise wages can definitely work well and it would resonate with the working and middle class a lot more. Having a socially conservative party that helps the poor would be viable for decades to come. The Bush/Romney/McCain party? Not so much
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Well there already are some reasonable laws. Like if you say "go kill some blacks" to people and they do it, you're arrested.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
We’ll see if they are dumb enough to run another Romney or McCain and get steamrolled again
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
And people are too dumb to understand how federalism works. Most responses are directed via the governor and buffoons like Cuomo send sick people into nursing homes. That is where a huge portion of the deaths were: New York.
Trump didn’t have a good response, to be fair, but he wasn’t responsible for a lot of what he got blamed for.
Just a question, did the COVID death clocks randomly disappear when Biden got in office?
Created: