I do confirm that i explicitly tested this with my super unused facebook account, just stating that i was testing restrictions on talking about Linux, the text was: """I don't often (or ever) post anything on Facebook, but when I do, it's to check if they really, as announced on hckrnews, are restricting discussing Linux. So here's a few links to trigger that: https://www.qubes-os.org/downloads/ ... https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/"""
and indeed within seconds I got the following warning: """ We removed your post The post may use misleading links or content to trick people to visit, or stay on, a website. """. This is one massive wow considering how much Facebook runs on Linux.
A user who never posts anything suddenly posting a message containing urls might in itself be a signal that something is weird. It would be an interestint test to post something not linux related and see how that fares.
I'd be curious if it's blocked if someone links just debian.org . I can definitely see a [totally overzealous] "security filter" blocking Qubes, but Debian is one of the most popular Linux distros in the world, so that would be especially ridiculous.
If your domain links to content that AVs flag as malware, it gets blocked on FB. Distrowatch is likely uniquely susceptible to this because they're constantly linking to novel, 3rd-party tarballs (via the "Latest Packages" column).
It's either intentional, which would be puzzling and unsettling, or it's a bug which has gone unnoticed. In any case it is proof that big tech is in no shape to take on the responsibility for moderating discourse on the internet. This reminds me of the bug that falls into a typewriter in the beginning of the movie "Brazil" which causes a spelling error and the arrest and execution of a random innocent person. Granted, this type of automated banning without any ability to involve a real human is not costing any lives (yet), but I am increasingly worried about how big tech is becoming a Kafkaesque lawnmower. One thing is to deliberately censor speech that you do not like, another is to design a system where innocent and important speech is silently censored and noone in charge even notices.
Distrowatch was blocked for linking to an AV-flagged privoxy 4.0.0 tarball. The same kind of anti-malware blocking you'd expect for a mass-market, non-technical audience. Nothing to do with "speech" or Linux in general.
On another note, Sourceforge just removes the malware flag, but did they actually check anything or just went with the provided explanation without any concrete details? If I hijacked some software and got caught, I'd act nonchalantly like this as well and hope it'll blow over without anyone noticing.
Thank you for providing this, it seemed a little clickbaity. Even far less technical companies run some things in Linux so seems weird they’d ban Linux talk in general.
> Starting on January 19, 2025 Facebook's internal policy makers decided that Linux is malware and labelled groups associated with Linux as being "cybersecurity threats".
That's quite the statement to make without any source to back it up; I wonder what the evidence for this is.
I assumed that part was conjecture. However, if you define “internal policy makers” broadly from the users perspective, then it’s provably true from the result.
I get that it is worded like it was people in a boardroom making a decision after having a debate. However an overworked admin, or an AI Moderator could just as easily be lumped together as “internal policy makers” from the users perspective.
They are the source. A journo could write an article and mention distrowatch as where they got their information from. If you don't trust them - great, you can do your own research.
> I wonder what the evidence for it is
Maybe "Any posts mentioning DistroWatch and multiple groups associated with Linux and Linux discussions have either been shut down or had many of their posts removed" and "We've been hearing all week from readers who say they can no longer post about Linux on Facebook or share links to DistroWatch. Some people have reported their accounts have been locked or limited for posting about Linux"
What do you think evidence consists of if not that?
Probably this: "I've tried to appeal the ban and was told the next day that Linux-related material is staying on the cybersecurity filter." (from the OP) .. Of course, it would have helped if the post author quoted FB's response so we could judge that for ourselves.
It is obviously allowed to discuss Linux. There is plenty of discussion about Linux on Facebook, including some about the recent "ban".
My guess is that some automated scanner found something wrong about the linked page. Maybe there is some link to a "hacking"-oriented distro, maybe some torrents, some dubious comment, etc... Probably a false positive, it happens.
Reminds me of when they do 'firewall updates' at work, and many of the common open-source repositories/hosting etc are blocked.
I understand than some malicious software may use things like curl, but it's also annoying to have to re-create the same ticket and submit to internal IT, and then if someone working on the ticket hasn't done this before, they close it, we have to have a meeting about why we need access to that site...
Didn't Zuck recently announce that he's getting rid of fact checkers, on the pretext that the parties hired to do fact checking are biased and introduce censorship and unfair false positives that get accounts shut down?
Was it just a cost reduction: fact checking takes effort and those checkers have to be paid? With the result being situations like this?
There is no such thing as unbiased information. So FWIW, I think fact checking is really just a fight for censorship. Official lies and half truths instead of lies from everywhere intermixed with truths.
There are so many ways to do it wrong even if you tag info as true or fake and in principle you do it with good intention. For example it was the case that certain information was tagged as fake and when claimed for a correction the administrators "could not do anything" (Spain cases researched by Joan Planas by doing requests himself personally for the biggest official agency in Spain, called Newtral, which is intimately tied to the Socialist Party in Spain... really, the name makes me laugh, let us call war peace etc. like in 1984). But they were way faster in doing it in the other direction or often found excuses to clearly favor certain interests.
Now put this in the context of an election... uh... complicated topic, but we all minimally awake people know what this is about...
I imagine something about that caused certain lists to be populated in certain ways, and no linux user cares enough about Facebook to help them correct the problem.
I cared tiny bit. I even went out and bought a phone so that I could "prove I was a real person" or whatever to try to make a FB account. Account creation failed, my IP was banned, and I just blocked every FB domain and haven't looked back.
Yeah, I was really surprised by this. Last year, I reported a number of people, who were trying to scam me (via Messenger messages related to Marketplace listings). Not only did Facebook did not see anything wrong with the accounts and scammy messages, I was flagged for sending useless reports.
Their filters are comically bad. I belong to a Selectric Typewriter enthusiats group and we keep having to re-word things so they don't go into a black hole. Typewriter parts like "operational shaft" or "type ball" or even brand names of gun cleaners and lubricants that are popular with typewriter folks will cause a post not to appear.
I think they're wrong about the policy. It's more likely that the policy is "let's run the moderation bots unattended to save costs" and is actually site agnostic.
Well, my confidence in the owner of this company is as high as... so I am not surprised that if he is paid (I have no idea this os the case in this very situation), he will no wonder do what the money dictates without any consideration whatsoever. Did anyone see the ridiculous change he made after years of selling (at least in Europe) fact checking, following censorship and teaming up, the scandal selling data to influence an election before. I do not expect anything nice from this leadership. That is why I stopped using Facebook years ago as much as I could.
I'm not convinced this is intentional. I think their auto-moderation stuff is just buggy lately. To illustrate part of why I say that:
Yesterday I tried to submit a link to a Youtube video of the Testament song "Native Blood". Nothing terribly controversial about that, and I'm nearly 100% sure I've posted that song before with no problems. But it kept getting denied with some "link not allowed because blah, blah" error.
So is "Native Blood" banned on FB? Well, I tried a link to a different video of the same song, and was able to submit it just fine. This feels like a bug to me, and I wouldn't be surprised if similar bugs were interfering with other people trying to post stuff.
Granted that's just speculation so take this for what it's worth.
I agree, overzealousness sounds like the most likely reason for this.
> Starting on January 19, 2025 Facebook's internal policy makers decided that Linux is malware and labelled groups associated with Linux as being "cybersecurity threats".
The author gives no evidence to back up on this claim.
I'd argue that automated ""AI""-driven moderation is actually more sinister than a human being deciding it. Censorship and control over communication by automated processes should be held to a very high standard (and probably regulated, I'd think). From IBM in 1979: "A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision." ( https://web.archive.org/web/20221216204215/https://twitter.c... )
Maybe it is about time that we stop relying on closed gardens, censored and managed on a whim, and start reclaiming our internet and freedom back, publishing in open platforms?
This is the trouble with automation. It's clear this isn't a malicious post, it just matched some keywords their moderation bot identified as such.
I think a lot of the censorship problems would be resolved if they just shut the bots off and relied on user flagging. Does that require a lot more people? Sure. But the long-run result would be far more people would use and trust these networks (covering the revenue of hiring moderators). I know I'd be a lot happier if there was a thinking human deciding my fate than a random script that only a few people know the inner-workings of.
As-is, it seems like a lot of these social networks are just shooting themselves in the foot just to avoid costs and get a false sense of control over the problem.
Um, no. I don't want to see pics of NSFL gore before the userbase has had a chance to remove them. Which is what most moderators spend time removing from FB, to the point where it psychologically traumatizes them.
I'm not watching a 20 minute video on the topic, but there is a user in an HN comment[1] stating links to debian.org and qubes-os.org were removed by facebook.
The cost of pissing of devs is so high, why cant companies just knuckle under- stop attacking add-blocking browsers like firefox or dev-operating systems. Why would you want to enter that world of pain of getting a ton of adversaries with while balancing on stack o swiss-cheese and duct tape?
What is going wrong in those decision maker heads.
I thought Zuckerberg was removing any fact checkers and platform censoring. I'm thoroughly confused. But maybe since Zuckerbergs death the company changed directions again.
I'm genuinely surprised that people were using facebook of all things to discuss Linux distros.
The idea of having to wade through AI generated pictures of Shrimp Jesus and my mad uncle posting about his latest attempts to turn lead into gold (yes, really) to find out about new distros to try seems very alien to me.
Also, turning lead into gold is easy: Just break all the protons off to get Hydrogen and maybe Helium, then compress it back so you get a star to form, and wait for it to go nova. Or, if you're in a hurry, you can compress your Hydrogen more and if you kind of jiggle it just the right way then you should get some gold along with other heavy elements.
Tech obviously isn't a strong suit, but elsewhere Facebook does have corners with good/entertaining/useful small communities. They have good SNR and are more personal than Reddit.
The secret is to train your feed by bookmarking the groups and linking to them directly instead of accepting whatever flailing nonsense the algo decides to default to.
Having said that - I hope everyone has worked out by now that when you have a "free speech" culture based on covert curation and moderation of contentious issues, it's not just going to be about porn and trans people.
Non-mainstream (i.e. non-consumer) tech is going to be labelled bad-think and suppressed too.
I assume Facebook doesn't want anything posted on FB that can't be turned into a racist diatribe. There's not a whole lot of racism potential in Kernel tuning.
Maybe you could squeeze in anti-Finnish rant about Linus, but it would be minimal
Welcome to 2020 Facebook, except they're coverage of valid topics to ban and censor has expanded more broadly now. This might've been avoided had more of its users sent a message 4-5 years ago that social media censorship isn't acceptable in a society that prides itself on free speech.
Perhaps they've become closer buddies with MICROS~1. I wouldn't be surprised if they did this in exchange for "AI" compute, i.e. that losing the Linux audience is worth less than being seen favourably by elder oligarchs.
No one, more than linux users, cares about privacy and freedom. What is even the point of using crapbook? Everyone in linux community is either hanging out on IRC or matrix or have self hosted forums
What? Google is a linux user - I doubt they care about privacy or freedom. Same with facebook - that company uses linux a lot while actively opposing privacy.
Lots of people use linux because it's a good OS, irrespective of privacy concerns (see the occasional flareup about some software or another automatically shipping off bug reports - some people don't care, others are incredibly concerned).
My wife was temporarily banned for a photo of a marble statue.
My mother receives invitations to groups that share photos of migrants drowned in the Mediterranean.
Don't use Facebook, and certainly don't depend on it.
Edit: Recently, a lot of associations working to prevent HIV, sexually-transmitted diseases and family planning have been progressively de-listed, or their content blocked and their accounts banned, all over the world on all META platforms. This is the true face of freedom of expression according to META and its “community rules”.
I've turned the flags off now. It's not a very good thread, though—mostly jokes and generic reactions, which is what happens when an article contains little information, but the information it does contain is provocative. (Edit: the comments got somewhat better through the afternoon.)
These little scandals nearly always turn out to be glitchy emphemera in the Black Box of $BigCo, rather than a policy or plan. I imagine that's the case here too. Why would Facebook ban discussion of the operating system it runs on, after 20+ years?
(Btw: @dang doesn't work - if you want reliable message delivery you need to email hn@ycombinator.com)
If I'm reading right, the same facebook who announced a week or so ago that they where scaling back all moderation and validation around online safety, are now putting a blanket ban on users discussing such a fundamental aspect of modern technology that facebook itself runs on it?
If this is a genuine policy, I'm at a complete loss to understand Facebook's stance on anything.
Distrowatch has taken the observation that distrowatch URLs are blocked and really hyperbolized that into the broader and incorrect claim that discussion of Linux is banned. It isn't.
the "free speech" was a promise to promote right wing speech. do not mistake it for ideology.
banning left wing activism, either acknowledging the genocide in Gaza or apparently now promoting free (less surveilled) software is against what the authoritarians want so it is banned.
this is all consistent if you see it through that lens
I thought they were going to go full free speech. /s
Seriously, if you haven’t already, sign up for a Mastodon account. This is the motivation you need. Encourage some friends and family members to connect with you there.
This is an obvious mistake, it's obvious Facebook isn't deliberately banning Linux posts, it's obvious their moderation is incorrectly flagging some posts for some reason, it'll get fixed. It could have been an interesting story and discussion about problems with false positives and automated moderating, or about the lack of human contact at Facebook scale, but instead it's just passionate screeds from too easily excitable posters.
Some comments were deferred for faster rendering.
perihelions|1 year ago
polotics|1 year ago
krisoft|1 year ago
zdp7|1 year ago
ashoeafoot|1 year ago
amatecha|1 year ago
richrichardsson|1 year ago
lemper|1 year ago
boomboomsubban|1 year ago
I've been perplexed for years, I wonder if it went unnoticed all this time or they reverted then reimplement the ban.
loeg|1 year ago
If your domain links to content that AVs flag as malware, it gets blocked on FB. Distrowatch is likely uniquely susceptible to this because they're constantly linking to novel, 3rd-party tarballs (via the "Latest Packages" column).
In this case, it was the Privoxy 4.0.0 release from the 18th. You can see it linked in this Jan 19 snapshot of the site: https://web.archive.org/web/20250119125004/https://distrowat...
ulrikrasmussen|1 year ago
loeg|1 year ago
Some context: https://sourceforge.net/p/forge/site-support/26448/
amatecha|1 year ago
archon810|1 year ago
bjoli|1 year ago
Vaslo|1 year ago
oneeyedpigeon|1 year ago
That's quite the statement to make without any source to back it up; I wonder what the evidence for this is.
dec0dedab0de|1 year ago
I get that it is worded like it was people in a boardroom making a decision after having a debate. However an overworked admin, or an AI Moderator could just as easily be lumped together as “internal policy makers” from the users perspective.
lofenfew|1 year ago
> I wonder what the evidence for it is
Maybe "Any posts mentioning DistroWatch and multiple groups associated with Linux and Linux discussions have either been shut down or had many of their posts removed" and "We've been hearing all week from readers who say they can no longer post about Linux on Facebook or share links to DistroWatch. Some people have reported their accounts have been locked or limited for posting about Linux"
What do you think evidence consists of if not that?
amatecha|1 year ago
buyucu|1 year ago
paulnpace|1 year ago
GuB-42|1 year ago
It is obviously allowed to discuss Linux. There is plenty of discussion about Linux on Facebook, including some about the recent "ban".
My guess is that some automated scanner found something wrong about the linked page. Maybe there is some link to a "hacking"-oriented distro, maybe some torrents, some dubious comment, etc... Probably a false positive, it happens.
mr_toad|1 year ago
I knew a company that leapt to the same conclusion regarding GitHub.
emmelaich|1 year ago
I presume that it is used for launching hacks, but even so discussion should not be banned.
Just makes me wonder if DistroWatch is telling the whole story.
indymike|1 year ago
everdrive|1 year ago
http://www.fedora.mirror.facebook.net/
bluedino|1 year ago
I understand than some malicious software may use things like curl, but it's also annoying to have to re-create the same ticket and submit to internal IT, and then if someone working on the ticket hasn't done this before, they close it, we have to have a meeting about why we need access to that site...
nailer|1 year ago
Fnoord|1 year ago
Seriously though, I'm curious (have no account): are you able to post that link on Facebook?
kazinator|1 year ago
Was it just a cost reduction: fact checking takes effort and those checkers have to be paid? With the result being situations like this?
notfed|1 year ago
the-grump|1 year ago
I guess Linux needs to go mainstream first.
NikkiA|1 year ago
No, it was clearly an attempt to court Trump, unfortunately 'not enough ass kissing, yet' according to the trump team.
germandiago|1 year ago
There are so many ways to do it wrong even if you tag info as true or fake and in principle you do it with good intention. For example it was the case that certain information was tagged as fake and when claimed for a correction the administrators "could not do anything" (Spain cases researched by Joan Planas by doing requests himself personally for the biggest official agency in Spain, called Newtral, which is intimately tied to the Socialist Party in Spain... really, the name makes me laugh, let us call war peace etc. like in 1984). But they were way faster in doing it in the other direction or often found excuses to clearly favor certain interests.
Now put this in the context of an election... uh... complicated topic, but we all minimally awake people know what this is about...
breakitmakeit|1 year ago
__MatrixMan__|1 year ago
I imagine something about that caused certain lists to be populated in certain ways, and no linux user cares enough about Facebook to help them correct the problem.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
hansvm|1 year ago
kouru225|1 year ago
nu2ycombinator|1 year ago
lukaslalinsky|1 year ago
guappa|1 year ago
fortran77|1 year ago
emmelaich|1 year ago
nottorp|1 year ago
It's just some "AI" hallucinating.
notfed|1 year ago
germandiago|1 year ago
insane_dreamer|1 year ago
mindcrime|1 year ago
Yesterday I tried to submit a link to a Youtube video of the Testament song "Native Blood". Nothing terribly controversial about that, and I'm nearly 100% sure I've posted that song before with no problems. But it kept getting denied with some "link not allowed because blah, blah" error.
So is "Native Blood" banned on FB? Well, I tried a link to a different video of the same song, and was able to submit it just fine. This feels like a bug to me, and I wouldn't be surprised if similar bugs were interfering with other people trying to post stuff.
Granted that's just speculation so take this for what it's worth.
Igrom|1 year ago
rnd0|1 year ago
That seems pretty automated to me.
not2b|1 year ago
blast|1 year ago
jdxcode|1 year ago
> Starting on January 19, 2025 Facebook's internal policy makers decided that Linux is malware and labelled groups associated with Linux as being "cybersecurity threats".
The author gives no evidence to back up on this claim.
userbinator|1 year ago
amatecha|1 year ago
yuvalr1|1 year ago
BlueTemplar|1 year ago
Avoid platforms altogether.
rglover|1 year ago
I think a lot of the censorship problems would be resolved if they just shut the bots off and relied on user flagging. Does that require a lot more people? Sure. But the long-run result would be far more people would use and trust these networks (covering the revenue of hiring moderators). I know I'd be a lot happier if there was a thinking human deciding my fate than a random script that only a few people know the inner-workings of.
As-is, it seems like a lot of these social networks are just shooting themselves in the foot just to avoid costs and get a false sense of control over the problem.
maybesomaybenot|1 year ago
BryanLunduke|1 year ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOdMTS6XVu4
paulnpace|1 year ago
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42840143
loeg|1 year ago
tombert|1 year ago
philipwhiuk|1 year ago
[deleted]
bgtool|1 year ago
[deleted]
Craggles086|1 year ago
All the Linux reviews that I have been warned about or have been removed have been links to DistroWatch.
https://youtu.be/xOdMTS6XVu4?si=BzT8MufRwxe-Tvba
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
InDubioProRubio|1 year ago
thefounder|1 year ago
beretguy|1 year ago
funcDropShadow|1 year ago
assimpleaspossi|1 year ago
7bit|1 year ago
imchillyb|1 year ago
Inability to market directly is antithesis to Facebook and its ilk.
Linux gives users control. That is the very last thing anyone in power wants anyone else to have.
lexicality|1 year ago
The idea of having to wade through AI generated pictures of Shrimp Jesus and my mad uncle posting about his latest attempts to turn lead into gold (yes, really) to find out about new distros to try seems very alien to me.
knowitnone|1 year ago
UntitledNo4|1 year ago
einpoklum|1 year ago
Also, turning lead into gold is easy: Just break all the protons off to get Hydrogen and maybe Helium, then compress it back so you get a star to form, and wait for it to go nova. Or, if you're in a hurry, you can compress your Hydrogen more and if you kind of jiggle it just the right way then you should get some gold along with other heavy elements.
jbm|1 year ago
Imagine being confident enough to believe and document that. Crazy? Maybe, but a crazy one can appreciate.
TheOtherHobbes|1 year ago
The secret is to train your feed by bookmarking the groups and linking to them directly instead of accepting whatever flailing nonsense the algo decides to default to.
Having said that - I hope everyone has worked out by now that when you have a "free speech" culture based on covert curation and moderation of contentious issues, it's not just going to be about porn and trans people.
Non-mainstream (i.e. non-consumer) tech is going to be labelled bad-think and suppressed too.
hn_acc1|1 year ago
DidYaWipe|1 year ago
Iolaum|1 year ago
beardyw|1 year ago
vmilner|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
zactato|1 year ago
I assume Facebook doesn't want anything posted on FB that can't be turned into a racist diatribe. There's not a whole lot of racism potential in Kernel tuning.
Maybe you could squeeze in anti-Finnish rant about Linus, but it would be minimal
Lardsonian|1 year ago
James_K|1 year ago
I'm glad someone finally said it.
bombcar|1 year ago
habibur|1 year ago
aurelien|1 year ago
Give their database to bot for search and destroy and you will understand by how many will survive.
Good luck!
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
akurilov|1 year ago
hsuduebc2|1 year ago
docmars|1 year ago
kussenverboten|1 year ago
cess11|1 year ago
kristiandupont|1 year ago
udev4096|1 year ago
em-bee|1 year ago
sophacles|1 year ago
Lots of people use linux because it's a good OS, irrespective of privacy concerns (see the occasional flareup about some software or another automatically shipping off bug reports - some people don't care, others are incredibly concerned).
chris_wot|1 year ago
Beretta_Vexee|1 year ago
Edit: Recently, a lot of associations working to prevent HIV, sexually-transmitted diseases and family planning have been progressively de-listed, or their content blocked and their accounts banned, all over the world on all META platforms. This is the true face of freedom of expression according to META and its “community rules”.
Meta censorship of abortion pill content (french) : https://www.radiofrance.fr/franceinter/podcasts/veille-sanit...
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
bawolff|1 year ago
w0m|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
numbsafari|1 year ago
lproven|1 year ago
Even LWN is covering it.
https://lwn.net/Articles/1006328/
dang|1 year ago
These little scandals nearly always turn out to be glitchy emphemera in the Black Box of $BigCo, rather than a policy or plan. I imagine that's the case here too. Why would Facebook ban discussion of the operating system it runs on, after 20+ years?
(Btw: @dang doesn't work - if you want reliable message delivery you need to email hn@ycombinator.com)
LorenDB|1 year ago
benrutter|1 year ago
If this is a genuine policy, I'm at a complete loss to understand Facebook's stance on anything.
loeg|1 year ago
spencerflem|1 year ago
banning left wing activism, either acknowledging the genocide in Gaza or apparently now promoting free (less surveilled) software is against what the authoritarians want so it is banned.
this is all consistent if you see it through that lens
nonrandomstring|1 year ago
[deleted]
oliwarner|1 year ago
Post itself is a little light on evidence, but there are people here already who've tried to post Linuxey things, and have seen it in action.
johnea|1 year ago
I would ask flaggers to simply skip those posts and let people who are interested in discussing those topics have their discussion.
Shutting down other peoples conversations is a disturbing trend and it is giving HN more of a one sided echo chamber feel.
IgorPartola|1 year ago
Seriously, if you haven’t already, sign up for a Mastodon account. This is the motivation you need. Encourage some friends and family members to connect with you there.
grazing_fields|1 year ago
[deleted]
paulnpace|1 year ago
RandomBacon|1 year ago
dredmorbius|1 year ago
kbelder|1 year ago
This is an obvious mistake, it's obvious Facebook isn't deliberately banning Linux posts, it's obvious their moderation is incorrectly flagging some posts for some reason, it'll get fixed. It could have been an interesting story and discussion about problems with false positives and automated moderating, or about the lack of human contact at Facebook scale, but instead it's just passionate screeds from too easily excitable posters.
(I didn't flag it, btw.)
beardyw|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
ribcage|1 year ago
[deleted]
Craighead|1 year ago
[deleted]
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
Swoerd|1 year ago
[deleted]
ditto664|1 year ago
[deleted]
stonesthrowaway|1 year ago
[deleted]
itsmartapuntocm|1 year ago
boozerloozer|1 year ago
[deleted]
vcryan|1 year ago
rolandog|1 year ago
guappa|1 year ago
duxup|1 year ago
buyucu|1 year ago
forgetfreeman|1 year ago
iefbr14|1 year ago