
The $6,600 Master's Degree. - schlecht
http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130524203941-213114599-the-6-600-master-s-degree
======
p4bl0
As a French person my first reaction to the title was "that's awfully
expensive!". Then I thought about the US education system and thought "Oh, the
title must actually imply that it's cheap…". I still had to go read the
article to make sure. And then I learned that it's actually an online master.
So my (second) first reaction was that it's cool to be able to get a master's
degree from a top university from almost anywhere in the world, but then I
realized that the people who would benefit the most from this are in
developing countries and $6,600 is already way, way, way too much there (and
that's not taking into account the fact that these courses are video-driven
and that available internet broadband might also be a problem). So I guess
that's not really who it is intended for, which implies that it is a "second
class" degree for US student. Not sure how I should feel about this.

~~~
insertdisktwo
re: Second-class degree Geogia Tech's engineering program ranks extremely high
in the U.S. and the United States' academic institutions rank extremely high
on various world-wide charts.

Having spent a long time on the inside track of the Silicon Valley hiring
processes, I can vouch that getting a degree from a prestigious institution
really does fast-track your interview, at least when it comes to the screening
or pre-screening phase.

$6,600 will at the current engineering salaries be at most a month and a half
of your future net salary in the USA, or about 4-5 months worth of rent in San
Francisco, so it is overall a very small forward investment to make if you
live in the US.

I doubt the degree will be treated as "second class," this will occur only if
the words get out that the program is somehow easier to finish and I strongly
doubt that. If anything, without in-person TA-ing and live peer interaction,
it will be harder to complete some of the courses.

re: Cost of graduate-level education in the USA I understand that EU-citizens
get free Masters' education. This is somewhat a side-effect of the EU-wide
Bologna process, which promoted everyone's Bachelors degree into a Masters by
adding a year's worth more of education and introducing a credit-system. If
you are a non-EU citizen trying to get a degree in the EU, you will be paying
much more than $6600 in many countries, including the socialist-leaning
Scandinavia.

Any US citizen can give FAFSA a try and (from memory) more than half of the
undergraduate student body receives some form of financial aid from the
government. There are reputable sources that say that paradoxically the
generous FAFSA grants are partially responsible for a tuition inflation, but
this debate is completely off-topic.

~~~
jmduke
Re: FAFSA --

If you go into any community with a lot of college students / new grads you'll
hear a lot of complaints about how its impossible to qualify for FAFSA,
scholarships, financial aid, etc.

I'm a middle-class white male and was incredibly worried that I'd hit FAFSA's
'blind spot': our family has a home and a stable middle-class income, but not
enough to comfortably afford even a public college education (for our European
friends: public colleges offer lower tuition for students residing in the same
state as the college because they are partially funded by the state -- instead
of paying 50K tuition, I'd be paying around 20K). Furthermore, I was by no
means a prodigy: I did well enough in high school to more or less choose the
college I went to (I'm from Virginia, and our public colleges are some of the
best in the country) I certainly wasn't being courted or showered with
incentives.

I managed to still get a pretty fair shake from FAFSA (that 20K number was
knocked down to around 11K) and was able to secure some elective scholarships.
America's college system isn't some bureaucratic hellhole destined to crush
the spirits of its entrants; its just coping with some changes it wasn't
really designed to handle.

~~~
josephhardin
I was middle class(maybe lower middle class), and my entire education end up
paid for. Not only that, but after work study, I actually made enough money to
live on without having to get an outside job. Students taking out these huge
loans should just consider a state school, or to put in for scholarships.

------
h1fra
In Europe school actually cost this much (average), with campus and classroom.
Maybe, the question is asked the wrong way in this article. Why does education
cost student 50000$ a year in US?

~~~
gambiting
I was going to say the same thing. I come from a country where Higher
Education is free(yes yes I know - paid for by the taxpayer), but I have
personally studied in the UK paying 3450 pounds a year (~5300 USD) in one of
the best universities in that country. Yes I know it went up now to 9000
pounds(~13600 USD) but still, it's a lot less than what they charge for
education in the US, which I don't understand.

~~~
codeonfire
There are no answers to the difference in tuition prices that don't lead to
uncomfortable social comparisons of two countries. It depends on if you
believe education markets are efficient or not, meaning the true value will be
reflected in the price. Two things that would make a degree worth less are
limited access to education and limited social mobility for degree holders.
Free also does not mean unlimited access.

~~~
gambiting
What do you mean by unlimited access? Sure, there is only a limited amount of
university places, but it does not matter what is your social situation or how
much money you currently have - you can study law or medicine just the same as
a rich guy, as long as you have good grades that allow you to get into the
university in the first place. But if you did study hard and got good grades,
any degree you could choose is 100% free.

~~~
codeonfire
By unlimited access I mean discrimination. Two key tools used to hide
discrimination are extra-curriculars and subjective entrance interviews, both
of which can be present in totally free schools.

~~~
barry-cotter
In Ireland for well over 90% of degree courses it's blind marked exams all the
way. In Britain apart from Oxbridge it is again exam marks all the way (big
apart from). In France I think ENA is the only school with entrance
exams/interviews but much like Oxbridge acceptance means you are part of the
ruling/upper class unless you choose to throw it away. German universities
don't do entrance interviews, they do exam ranking and brutal weedout classes.

The USA is more or less unique in the blatancy of the class values implicit in
its university entrance requirements. The cancer spreads, much like
professional graduate degrees but it is still most obvious in the land of
origin. Gotta keep them Jews out, or nowadays them Asians. It's about the
_right sort of extracurricular_ , don't you know?

------
jval
This is completely right. Most of the commenters here keep thinking about it
from the perspective of people in countries that already have great access to
education, but disruption begins with people who don't already have access to
a product or are struggling to afford the existing alternatives.

In the case of education, these people are most likely to reside in the
developing world - there are billions of people in places like the BRIC
nations for whom $6,600 is a really reasonable price to access education over
the internet without having to leave their current homes, families and
commitments. Not only that, they get to put Georgia Tech on their resume and
apply for jobs domestically and overseas (especially in the US) where people
will recognise their qualifications, even if they have an online masters and
not a masters.

The scale of something like this is difficult to fathom - we are talking many
times the population of the US and Europe combined who could benefit from
something like this. This is why we are witnessing something truly
revolutionary.

~~~
mtgx
I agree with your general theory, but I don't think $6,600 is "reasonable" for
a college degree in BRIC nations. I think even in the more developed countries
in Europe that's at the high-end of what it costs to get one. It only seems
reasonable for an American, who usually pays what - $100,000-$200,000?

$2,000 is what I'd call "reasonable", although if we're really thinking about
truly revolutionizing education for the other 3+ billion people, it needs to
go even cheaper than that. Everyone should get access to the same level of
quality education, and their financial situation should _not_ be a major
impediment.

~~~
guiambros
As someone from one of the BRIC countries (now living in the US for the past
decade), I can tell you that $6,600 would be a ridiculously _affordable_
option for tens of thousands of students in these markets.

Brazil, in particular, has the exact opposite model of the US. Public
undergrad schools are generally weak (with very few exceptions). If your
parents can't afford to send you to a private high school, you'll probably
have a tough time ranking well on the top public universities (which are not
only free, but normally ranked _lot_ better).

Not surprisingly, some public universities receive 10-20x more candidates/spot
than other private options.

MOOC and initiatives like this pilot from Georgia Tech have the potential to
change this picture radically in the next 10-15 years.

Instead of spending $100,000+ for a second class degree, some students will
opt to spend a fraction of this, for a top tier US school. And you could use
the difference to complement your education in other different ways - in-
person courses, unpaid internships abroad, trips, etc.

Probably still not the same as going in-person to a top university school, but
still revolutionary. The goal shouldn't be to send everybody to the best
universities in the world (which is an impossible and unrealistic goal), but
to give the _best education that each person can have_.

------
bayesianhorse
I'm in favor of furthering online education, moocs, educational content in
general and even certification programs along these lines.

But I also have to ask: If this degree costs 20% of a traditional Master's
education, is it even worth 20% as much? The degree clearly states "Online
Master".

We might see a value developing here, but there is an equal chance that the
early students get ripped off big time. They might learn a lot, but are they
really getting their money's worth in additional skill marketability?

~~~
marquis
While I agree, in that attending college is in part the social experience in
interacting with peers, one-on-one time with lecturers/TAs and lab work, this
is a step forward to allowing anyone who wants to learn have that opportunity,
and use the technology we have to improve on that technology so future-
learning just gets better and better. Tiny steps.

An enterprising person may well setup a facilitator experience, where students
gather to watch online lectures and do group labs, at a fraction of the cost
(plus not having to pay board away from home) and having the best materials to
work with.

~~~
zanny
This hits on what I think is key to breaking out of the borked education
system. You need to put like minded learners together with bountiful
educational texts and resources to solve the problems both independently and
together.

It is less about stuffing random facts in the brain than developing group
oriented problem solving skills in a specialized discipline.

------
ghshephard
Just to put this in comparison - I recently took a two-week networking course
(in the United States) for $7300. While this was in-person, with
labs/instruction from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM every day, and the class was limited
to twelve students, it does put things into perspective.

The real cost, as always, in getting a degree is the students time. Someone
capable of getting a Masters degree, can, without too much effort, make
$100K/year pretty quickly (If income is what they are interested in).

This is why education is normally inexpensive in other countries - students
are having to forego all that income, so it's in the interest of the country,
to encourage their populace to become educated - so they subsidize.

I think part of the reason why Education is so expensive in the United States,
is they have a fairly regressive tax system, with poor social systems (in
comparison to other first world countries). Health Care is expensive,
Education is expensive. It's a very difficult country to be poor in.

I'd love it if the $6,600 Master Degree started a disruptive trend.

~~~
johnbellone
I have been contemplating between getting an MBA or a PhD in software
engineering (because I want to teach) for the past few years.

For the latter it would be strictly because I want to create something, be
innovative, and give back to my industry. The former - you're really paying
for the connections - and possibly a few lessons on economics that have grown
dry in your head.

I am justifying the price tag on a two year (night) MBA because I feel like I
am getting into that "club" that most of the bigwigs are in.

Am I wrong?

~~~
ghshephard
The variables obviously are Where are you getting the MBA (Ivy League MBAs,
even evening ones, have more value), what is the price tag - there is a big
difference between a $50K MBA and $200K MBA, and what field you'll be going
into.

MBA has very little (some might almost say negative) value in Silicon Valley
startup world, but obviously more value in mature companies, or companies that
are transitioning from startup->mature (possible exception being the CEO, VP
of BizDev/Marketing and possibly VP of Product Management). MBAs have close to
zero value for people who wish to be simultaneously tactical and technical.
I've never seen a network engineer, or firmware developer get any value out of
their MBA. It's really for people who are either going to go into the business
side of a company, and/or go into management.

Also - it's important to note if you'll have to quit working while you are
getting your MBA - that makes the credential doubly expensive.

~~~
insertdisktwo
I disagree that MBAs have a negative value in the Silicon Valley. Most
investors I know value someone having one business person on the team early
on. This person can help drive the validation/marketing/sales side of the
business plan forward. People with hybrid skills (MBA + engineering degree)
are from my personal experience highly appreciated.

~~~
ghshephard
I didn't say "negative value in Silicon Valley" (it definitely isn't), but,
"Silicon Valley Startup world" (I.E. the first six-eighteen months when the
technology is being built).

At one very prominent startup that I worked for, lead by some very, very well
known executives (who are extraordinarily prominent in the valley today),
there was a general position for the first two years of our company, "Hire no
MBAs." They really believed that the MBA was a negative at that phase of the
company's history, and were looking for Programmers, designers, coders,
systems administrators, DBAs, etc.

------
jacques_chester
As an Australian gazing across the pond, it's weird to see what the fuss is
about.

My alma mater (UWA) has a Master of Professional Engineering degree which I
can complete for $15k AUD (and since they guarantee entry to their BCompSci
grads, I'm considering it). Sydney Uni have a Master of Project Management
that I costed at 20k AUD (edit: I was quite wrong, it's closer to 45k).

And the FEE-HELP program means that, if I chose, I could do it without paying
up front.

Public higher education is a mess in many ways. But sometimes, boy, I really
do live in the lucky country.

~~~
insertdisktwo
You have to keep in mind that Georgia Tech is one of the best engineering
schools in the U.S. (disclosure: I am not in any way related to this
institution) and consequently worldwide.

$15K AUD is very close to ~$14.5K USD. This is less than half of that.

~~~
jacques_chester
I'm really comparing it to the 50, 100, 200k figures I see bandied about. The
order of magnitude.

------
blazespin
I think we need to have some A|B testing around this.

While I am a huge believer in this, my little finger tells me that Online
students will perform worse when it comes to exam time.

There is an energy to synchronous group learning you can't duplicate via
websites. I remember when I was in college and university, a bunch of us
bonded a bit and got pretty competitive (in a friendly way) when it came to
our grades and test results. If you developed a good relationship with your
prof, they would often have high expectations of you and you didn't want to
let them down. These emotional connections can be pretty inspiring to kids
ages 18-22.

If they want to be competitive with campus students, they need to either
duplicate these emotions online (via virtual worlds?) or perhaps increase the
workload and adjust the bell curve so students fail out quickly unless they
take it very seriously.

~~~
chasing
This. (Except for the virtual worlds stuff.)

If what they're selling is online videos and someone to check your homework,
$3,300/yr sounds kind of expensive.

------
jfaucett
this is huge. I've been saying (as well as probably most other coders), that
education should go in this direction. It just seems obvious. I even did a
Bachelors paper on this subject (in combination with FOSS) and studied the
amount of savings it would lead to if implemented for high school education.

Additionally, I graduated with a BA in 2011 and the entire process felt
archaic to me, filled with wasted time, and more importantly costing lots of
my hard-earned money. The only way I was able to get the degree was with help
of family and by taking CLEP tests for over 70 hours. (rougly equivalent to 23
courses), the CLEP tests only costed in total around $500, and allowed me to
skip 2 years of study. (so if anyone hasnt heard of CLEP and is low on funds
and wants to get a degree I would highly recommend them :)

I'm definately going to look into this in more detail though, getting a
Masters would be nice and if all it costed was $6,600 for the 2 years (and
study was remote) I think i'd be able to manage it as a full-time developer
with a family.

------
glurgh
_Looking back on it now, this experience had far more in common with the
Middle Ages than the world of 2013. What's the difference between watching a
lecture in an auditorium and watching HD-quality video in one's living room or
beach cabana?_

There's no difference at all but for any even mildly ambitious undergrad in a
STEM field, physically attending a research university is an opportunity to
get involved, however peripherally, in such research. For someone pursuing a
graduate degree this seems more like a requirement rather than a serving
suggestion.

Georgia Tech is not a respected engineering school just because it does a
decent job of fielding 500-person classes.

~~~
HarryHirsch
> There's no difference at all but for any even mildly ambitious undergrad in
> a STEM field, physically attending a research university is an opportunity
> to get involved, however peripherally, in such research.

This is precisely the point. Our undergraduates go mostly up to Med School,
and having a reaearch paper published is almost a requirement to get into any
decent medical program.

Also, in an online course the interaction between is of a wholly different
kind that a traditional brick-and mortar university. The social network that
you build while at uni is part of why you go there in the first place.

------
ChrisAntaki
I opted out of college. Sometimes it bums me out though, because I feel like
by learning on the job, I reached the 10 thousand hour mark too early. And
it's annoying, I have this savings account of thousands of dollars, and it's
like, what am I supposed to do with it? If I had went to college, I'd have
been in debt from the get go, so it would be more motivating to pay off like
$100k of student loans. This $6,600 college course sounds like a scam. How are
you going to be motivated to pay off loans, if there are none? At least it's
better than getting paid to learn.

------
tseabrooks
Maybe this depends greatly on the particular discipline you're in. In the US
it's not that difficult to get your Master's degree in C.S. for free + monthly
stipend, at least in my experience.

I know a number of people across the natural science disciplines who TA'd /
RA'd their way through Grad School. I might be misunderstanding how common
this is but it seems any discussion of Grad School cost should discuss the
fact that natural science students will often get paid to go to Grad School in
the US.

~~~
insertdisktwo
Please let me know if this applies in the case outside of being a PhD student.

The US educational system has a tradition of issuing a Masters as a
consolation price to PhD dropouts who've done enough of the
coursework/research.

Bona-fide Masters programs with scholarships/stipends are very hard to find.
If there's counterexamples I would like to know about them. From my
experience, these are very rare.

~~~
josephhardin
My (Terminal at that institution) masters was paid for completely, as well as
being paid a salary. In STEM fields I'm not sure I know anyone who didn't have
their MS paid for. Sure, some professors will push you to get a Ph.D. but you
always have the option of just writing your thesis and finishing.

------
anxx
With the internet, most education is free. When we pay education, we mainly
pay for 1) exclusivity (there are not a million other people attending
Harvard) and 2) standards (standard exams within an accredited curriculum, so
the GPA and major will mean something). Increasing the amount of online
education preserves the standards, but removes / broadens the exclusivity. I
am not sure this is a great thing for people from Georgia Tech; they now have
to compete with a lot more people for similar jobs.

An online education with tough admissions would be better if one tries to
preserve the brand (and thus provide insurance* to the program trainees).

* by insurance, I refer to insurance of employability, like Peter Thiel described in his PandoMonthly interview.

------
nicholassmith
There's always going to be a place for University's to exist, there's certain
amounts of skills that require a practical experience that they can provide,
but for most courses shifting it online makes more sense. The costs are lower,
it's easier to manage, it encourages more people to gain a formal education
and hopefully strengthen their careers.

It's going to be interesting seeing which ones will offer an actual bit of
paper at the end that says 'I'm educated in X by Y' and how much it's going to
cost. $7k for a degree from a prestigious school is going to be a popular
option, so whilst they lose the high amount per student, they gain it back in
larger student numbers.

------
timedoctor
This is just the beginning. I can see a future where top ranked universities
offer online degrees at a small fraction of the current prices.

In fact I think the pricing will be separated out so that the lectures are
100% free and you pay for examinations or for tutoring or for small group
mentoring with professors.

The logical conclusion is mega-universities that teach to millions of people
in multiple countries around the world and out-compete existing universities
leading to a large percentage of current universities being shut down or used
only for courses where in-person training is necessary (for example medicine,
some engineering courses etc).

------
inselkampf
Before they wiped out college tuitions costs back in Ireland in 1996 the cost
of doing a an excellent CS degree in UCC (<http://ucc.ie>) was about 2000
Irish pounds (about $2800 at the time) a year for 4 years.

If you were wanted to do medicine it was a whopping $5000 or so a year over
about 5 years.

There were lesser hidden costs (200 for a registration fee kind of thing) but
thats about it.

We considered that outlandish at the time.

The costs of the US education system baffle me on a daily basis.

However I don't see online courses as the way to go. Most people don't
complete them.

------
pbw
A rich modern society will spend most of its money on two things: education
and health-care. The appetite for education will increase so quickly that in-
person degree programs will continue to do okay as premium offerings even as
online degrees flourish. Long term online will "win" but it will take decades.
Look at how few 100% telecommute there really are. Yes the trend is there but
the actual transition is slow, consider the rush hour traffic in any big city.

------
ck2
Wouldn't a responsible government try to provide this to all high school
graduates as a fallback minimum?

If bought by the millions the cost should be a fraction?

Would never fly in the US because we do not invest in the future anymore
unless it's for corporate profit.

------
chasing
The first quote doesn't appear in the article Berman links to. And I can't
find a reference to $6,600 anywhere else except in that non-existent quote.

Am I missing something? Did Berman pull that number out of thin air? Where did
he get it?

\---

Edit- Here [<http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/faq/>] they write:

"We’re not yet ready to announce a specific program cost, but the plan is to
offer the Georgia Tech OMS CS for a total cost of under $7,000—a fraction of
the cost of Georgia Tech’s on-campus program and even less than that of
comparable private universities."

That FAQ has a lot more meat than the LinkedIn article...

------
alan_cx
Has no one out side of the UK heard of The Open University?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_University>

~~~
Surio
Ha ha, had to chuckle at that one. It's one of UK's "best kept" secrets, I
suppose ;) . The course materials are bloody fantastic, and in terms of value
of money, spot on :)

------
Ihmahr
I live in the netherlands and here you couldn't even pay more than $6.600 for
a masters degree.

~~~
insertdisktwo
If you look up the prices for non-EU citizens you will see some places are
prohibitively expensive, even in Netherlands.

In most places you have to have at least 10k EUR (13k USD) on your bank
account for each year of the program, on top of the tuition fees.

------
andrewljohnson
The author doesn't mention a lot of journalists will be replaced by robots
too. He thinks the Internet was a great tidal wave for the profession... Just
wait for the next auto summarization breakthroughs.

------
rhoua
I live in a country where I know the language well to laugh with drunks in a
bar, but not well enough to get a masters.

If one could get a college education from a distance in a language I know
well, that would be amazing.

------
kozikow
Does anyone know if this degree will count as masters in front of USA
immigration department? The only reason I see for getting the masters degree
is getting into the EB2 bracket for green card.

------
don_draper
I got my Master's education much cheaper from Oreilly U @ oreilly.com

------
waps
Well in <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5757226> a lost of posters were
arguing how brain work could never be replaced, nor could technology be used
to lower the need for highly-educated creative professionals.

Professor/teacher is pretty much the quintessential example of highly-educated
brain work, isn't it ?

> He estimated the school would have to hire one full-time teacher for every
> 100 online students as opposed to one full-time teacher for every 10 or 20
> students who study on campus.

Also from the article:

> Looking back on it now, this experience had far more in common with the
> Middle Ages than the world of 2013. What's the difference between watching a
> lecture in an auditorium and watching HD-quality video in one's living room
> or beach cabana?

This is the situation that was hit at the end of the Roman Empire, the
beginning of what would later turn into the dark-ages. Plenty of highly
educated people, ever more and more, and ... no reason to have them. No reason
to have all that many farmers either. This was a result of using iron-age
technology to it's fullest potential. You should see some Roman surgery tools,
they're amazing. They're much more specialized than "our" surgery tools.
Surgeons today have 10 kinds of knives, syringes, stitches, compresses, all
very general tools. Roman surgeons had hundres of tools, each a weird metal
thingamabob specifically built for one singular procedure. We use special
tools today in some cases, but mostly very general tools like 5 sizes of the
same gripper, tweezers, ... that sort of thing.

They used iron to it's fullest potential, and we use computers, but the end
result is the same : massive population numbers, yet the economy only
justifies ~1% to maybe 5% of the population, with most of even that employed
in either the government itself or the military. At some point, even slaves
become a losing proposition (better to give those precious jobs to family, and
keep in mind that Roman slaves had rights, and were more akin to someone
holding a job. I'm not saying slaves in the Roman empire had rights comparable
to Americans (they lacked voting, for example), but they certainly couldn't be
killed randomly or on a whim). No goods shortages, quite the opposite : almost
universal abundance (not for expensive goods, but things like food, clothing,
furniture, cutlery, apartments, ... no shortages). Not that anyone was happy
with just having what everyone else had, no matter how comfortable it actually
was (it evolved - for the better, for almost a century). Unemployment numbers
hit ridiculously high proportions and never went back down (like in the poor
centers of Euro cities now, 80-90% unemployment in areas the size of towns),
and ever more of the famed Roman armies were dedicated purely to keeping order
in cities. Enemies, ideological ones and physical ones, which had no hope
whatsoever of surviving a single confrontation with a single centuria (the
unit a centurion commanded) became able to do large amounts of damage due to
help from dissatisfied locals, and the situation just systematically kept
getting worse.

So realistically this is just another indication that the middle ages will
come back. Expect atheism, or realism in general, to lose a lot of it's
appeal, because it's only message to 99% of the population will be what it was
just before the dark ages :

The only useful thing you could realistically do for others is to die, right
now.

~~~
Surio
I re-read it, to see if the metaphor has been stretched a little too far.
Nope. You seem to have drawn your Historical lessons correctly, and kept the
narrative to the point (Chilling read though!). However, begs a few questions:

1\. Are we doomed, as a species _with sentience and recall_ , to repeat the
same historical mistakes over and over again?

2\. This is the only "flaw" that I could find, really: While organised
religion has definitely been a stranglehold over humans during the European
dark ages, right now, in many parts of the World, it is not Atheism, but
fundamentalism that is more and more prevalent (N.B: Lest people be mistaken,
I am not talking about Islam only, or singling it out here). So, that one fell
slightly off the mark for me.

3\. We are also moving towards a post-peak, energy-scarce, capital-scarce,
World scenario, so perhaps, these trends might themselves reverse, or die-out
before reaching the kind of critical mass it reached during the Roman
collapse?

But, in general, yours' is a very lateral observation, radically different
from the "celebrate all things technology" article linked. Enjoyed reading it,
although its suggested implications left a very bad after taste in the mouth.

------
spoon17
home truth

