Wishlist notifications

October 6, 2007

Wsls

The way in which the wishlist email notifications works has now changed.

The way it works as of right now is:

1) when a book is suddenly available, and many people have that book on their wishlist, the people to notify are shuffled randomly (and reshuffled each time another copy is made available)

2) the first person on the notification list gets a message exactly 2 minutes after the book is added

3) each successive notification goes out 4 hours later. The notifications for the book stop being sent out if the book has been mooched and is no longer available, so people aren’t notified of a book that is no longer actually available.

Why the change? I wanted to fix these long-standing complaints:

1) if someone mistakenly adds a book and then removes it, the notifications have already gone out, and everyone who then clicks to mooch the book is annoyed that it isn’t available. With the new system, if the person removes the book (ie, clicks the “whoops” button) within 2 minutes, then no notifications are sent.

2) if someone mooches the book, everyone else gets notified but they’re too late, so they’re upset and annoyed by always being told that they’re too slow. This is an especially frequent occurrence with new and popular books, that can have 50 people wanting the same book.

3) the old system favored people who were always on their email program, especially if they set their mobile phone up to receive their wishlist notifications. That wasn’t really fair to the less-wired BookMooch users.

4) Europeans trying to get American books were at a serious disadvantage, as they are often sleeping when the book was added. The 4h “window” they have to grab the book under the new system may still find them sleeping, but it’s better than nothing. I’ve been thinking about an 8h window between notifications, but that seems awfully long. A 4h space between notifications will give each person a decent chance of receiving the email and getting the book.

5) My goal with the new system is for everyone to have an equal chance of getting a wishlisted book, but the “equal chance” now comes from the random shuffle of notifications, rather than the “first come, first served ‘free for all'” that was the previous system.

Note that a wishlisted book will be seen as available on the BookMooch web site, so if someone is sitting on BookMooch continually reloading their wishlist page, they’ll notice the book being available before anyone else. Hopefully, not that many people will do this, and if you set up a robot program to do this, I may get upset.

RSS feeds of your wishlist will show the book as available “pretty-much” right away, though RSS feeds are a on a five-minute delay, to help combat this and make the new system more fair, so that the first person notified still has a few minutes’ notice before anyone else gets a notification.

On my todo list is to add Instant Messenger support to the notifications, so you don’t have to be on email to get your timely notification.

61 Responses to “Wishlist notifications”

  1. Greg said

    I like this change. I use an RSS feed in Google Reader. But Google only checks this once every three hours so I am certainly not notified immediately!

  2. Kirk said

    Good idea. I actually got a wishlist book today, for the first time in a long time. 🙂

    Kirk

  3. cara said

    i rather liked the first come, first served approach, but then maybe that just goes to show i was at my computer too much. even though i do live in Europe, i have been able to snatch up many of my wishlisted books. yesterday once came up and in the usual fashion, i went to go mooch it. this was seconds later after it had appeared in my email, but it was already gone when i got to Bookmooch. i hope my wishlist luck has not disappeared with these new changes.

  4. Taneli T said

    Sounds good.

    That 2 minute delay in itself solves a lot of issues. It would be even better, if we could add the condition notes *before* the book appears in the system. That way it would be certain that the moocher always sees the condition notes (even in those cases when it takes more than 2 minutes to compose them).

    The 4 hour delay on successive wishlist notifications is also a fine idea. It should be fun to see how often the notifications will appear now.

    Thanks!
    -Taneli T

  5. Ben said

    This is a good improvement. Living in Europe, I’ve always been at a disadvantage to get popular books because of the difference in time zones. Any reason not to order the notification list as a FIFO queue instead of randomly? Seems fair that people who have been waiting the longest should get the first chance at a book.

  6. Michael said

    Thank you, John. My wife and I were discussing this very problem last night, and I was preparing to write you an e-mail proposing something very similar to what you have implemented. Your version is much better than my idea, however.

    Four hours is probably fine — though if you do decide it should be longer, I don’t suppose you have to go all the way to eight. Five or six might work just as well (and six would still divide up the day evenly).

  7. Ed said

    Why not a, “been on my wishlist longest” method. Send the email out to the two people who have been wanting the book the longest; then every 4 hours to the 3 and 4th longest, etc, etc.

    This gives “senior” members an unfair advantage, since it is more likely that they have a book on their list – but allows them enough time to find a computer, and if not – continues on to the next oldest requesting member.

  8. Ameryan said

    I like the change too! I have been visiting Bookmooch less often, mostly because every time I visit the site has been a click to tell me the book is gone, and then I am discouraged and don’t hang around. I like the idea of being notified if a book is actually going to be there for me, and then I will most likely visit more often, browse around and find some other books that aren’t on on wishlist! Thanks!

  9. Scott said

    Thank you, thank you, thank you! I have taken books off my wish list because I was fed up with not having a chance.

  10. ThePlaz said

    Thank god! This has always been my biggest problem with Bookmooch! Popular books are always taken after I get the email, and open up the site. This should let me get books more certain. (No more emails just to say every thing’s gone)

  11. pitbull rescuer said

    John, thanks so much for once again coming up with a carefully designed approach to a problem. Sounds like a winner & should cut down on the rollercoaster effect I’ve been facing lately — “I got the book! Oh, no, I didn’t…” The world would be such a different place if more people were like you in constantly trying to improve. It’s an inspiration! Ellen

  12. Aaron said

    I think this is a improvement overall. I’ve not added books to my wishlist in the past because I hate getting emails for books that aren’t available anymore.

    One change that I would suggest is to sort the list based on mooch ratio (low to high) and set people without a history to 1. People at equal mooch ratios could receive emails at the same time. This will reward people for giving and act as a stabilizing factor.

  13. Esther said

    I like this.
    I like that you’re thinking about these problems, and I like this solution.

  14. Julien said

    I am somewhat in favor of this change (though I really don’t mind getting wishlist e-mails for books that I find to be no longer available), but I do have a question. If I click the “Send a Reminder” button when I have a wishlisted book in my inventory, will it still send an e-mail to all the people who have it wishlisted? Because, well, that could defeat the purpose of the system…

    Also, are “possibly inactive” members included in the randomization? Is there a project on removing inactive accounts going on? I ask because I just posted two wishlisted books – one got mooched right away, the other has not yet, and I know there are some “possibly inactive” members on the wishlist for that second book.

  15. Furu said

    I’ll admit I prefer the sending to everyone and the first person to get it wins approach, but maybe because I had just downloaded an email checker program and was starting to have some real success getting my wishlisted books. 😉

    But if the general consensus prefers this new way I can learn to deal with it. I do like the two minute delay for everyone, though, because I’ve at least twice added books I didn’t mean to and had to cancel the almost instant requests.

  16. Tim said

    I have to say, and I apologize to those who feel otherwise (and John), but I think the new system is terrible. For two reasons:

    1) I no longer look forward to checking my BM email. Even if the books were gone I loved that sudden rush of excitement on seeing a new email in there for a long sought after book.

    2) The new system has not solved anything, only created a new, larger group of disenfranchised. The books are still going to be gone when you get to them, just now it will only be to those tech-y individuals who know and/or care to learn/set up an RSS feed. I know there are many other feed readers besides Google’s who update a heck of a lot more often than every three hours.

    Welcome to the new elite.

  17. bridgewalker said

    Kudos. Thanks for continuing to be so concientious and proactive.

    Having once added some items accidentally and having had to disappoint people who had them on their wish list, I hope I never have to do that again!

  18. Delania said

    I think you’re brillant John, but i hate this.

  19. Bunny said

    I have to agree with Delania, I hate this, but I Will give it a fair shot before I start mentally wishing it would go away. Not that my opinion matters in the least, especially if the overall group likes it.
    Cheers on helping out! Keep doing whatever you do to make Bookmooch a place for people to love! I promise I’ll keep Most of my negative crap to myself.
    I hope to see this in action soon, as I have been going through a dry-spell anyway…lol
    -Bunny

  20. Elle said

    Well the the majority of people seem to think this is a good idea so I suppose it will stick, but I’m not a fan. I would prefer it either stay as it was before (first come, first serve) or change to being a system in which the notifications are sent out in order of who has had it on their wishlist longest as opposed to randomly.

    I do like the two minute delay and like someone said above I would be a fan of being able to enter the condition notes while I was entering the book.

    All that being said I love BookMooch so much that I’ll roll with any changes!
    — Elle

  21. kirsty said

    Feature request: could the wishlist and save-for-later lists take account of the country you are in and the countries the book owner is willing to send to? It’s really annoying seeing that there is a book available, whether browsing or getting an email, when actually they are “send to my country only” when I’m in a different one.

    thanks.

  22. I should have mentioned two other facts:

    1) I regularly (about once a week) get hate & flame email about the way the old wishlist worked. This was by far the most common reason to get nasty email. It seems that the old way was actively annoying and angering people. The only other reason I get this sort of mail is “your browsing for books is not very good” but I get very few of those (and I’m working on that too)

    2) About 6 months ago, I brought up the topic of the wishlist notifications on the bm-discuss list, and there was a gigantic discussion that lasted weeks. Many alternatives were discussed, and by far the most popular method was the “random shuffle” method, which is what BM uses now. Of course, some people prefer “notify everyone, the fastest person wins” (the old way) while others prefer a “queue” (first to put the book on their wishlist gets the first notification” as well as “sorted by give to mooch ratio” but all these other suggestions were not popular with the majority.

    So… that’s why the wishlist notification has been changed in this way, because that’s how the majority of people on the bm-discuss list wanted it, after much discussion.

    -john

  23. re: “Feature request: could the wishlist and save-for-later lists take account of the country you are in and the countries the book owner is willing to send to? ”

    It already does, for email notifications. You won’t get notified of a book on your wishlist if the person wouldn’t send it to you anyway.

    As far as browsing & the web interface, I agree, it would be nice if this were taken into account, and it’s on the todo list.

    -john

  24. April said

    THANK YOU for trying to make it a bit fairer for everyone. I was starting to think about giving up on Mooch because like so many other folks, I’ve given away 6 times the number of books I’ve been able to Mooch. I’m certainly not listing any more books for now until my ratio makes more sense, but at least now there’s a fighting chance.

  25. Dan T. said

    Thank you, John, for taking a thoughtful and considered approach to this problem. I believe this is a more equitable solution – many thanks.

  26. Erin C said

    This is an interesting change yet I would still prefer that an e-mail is sent to all and the person who is sending the book be able to pick to whom they wish to send it too. It is very hard to recieve a book on your wish list. I have missed numerous books simply because I can not sit in front of my computer all day watching my e-mail. I can see how my suggestion could also be probmatic as well, with favortism….I hope this random e-mail shuffle proves to be lucky for me:)

  27. alina said

    Well, what can I say, it was good while it lasted… I still like bookmooch, though.

  28. Amanda K. said

    It looks like I am in the minority here, but I don’t like the sound of this. The first come, first served approach was what I liked most about Bookmooch. I will give it a chance but I think it will seriously drop my use of this system.

  29. Suzi said

    John, thank you for the change 🙂 I love that I’m not getting all the notification messages, only to find out the book has been mooched already! I log in a couple of times a day, and if something is available I grab it – and if it isn’t, I never know that I missed it so I’m not disappointed.

    I know there have been a lot of complaints on the forum about the new system, but I hope it’s kept because I think it’s great.

  30. Maggie said

    Well, since today was the first time I actually snagged a wishlist book after a number of those e-mails announcing availability of a book that was already mooched, I really like this change. I’m not able to be looking at my personal e-mail frequently and not allowed to use my employer’s account for personal use (and wouldn’t want to if I could). And my phone is synched to my business e-mail, not my personal account. So, even with that elite technology, I wasn’t seeing wishlist notices until they were pretty stale. Before today, I looked at the length of the wishlists for some of the books I want and figured it was pretty unlikely I would mooch them for at least several years; after everyone else had gotten their copies. Randomized selection is about as fair as one can get and balance multiple factors like not turning new members off (as could happen if wishlist notices went to old members first) or penalizing people who sincerly wish to give away books but don’t happen to own really popular ones that get mooched quickly (as could happen if priority was set on mooch ratio). My (longish) 2 cents.

  31. Amtep said

    John,

    Please consider the possibility that the 2 minute delay already takes care of most of the reason why you were getting hate mail, and that you don’t need the other changes. On the forum it sounded like accidentally adding a book was very common. I’ve even done it myself once, and people on LibraryThing said they’d done it too. Getting rid of all the false notifications from those is a huge improvement by itself. It also gets rid of the most vexations ones, where it was “already gone” even for the people who were lightning-fast.

    Do you have any stats that could show how common this really was? You may be able to analyze the points history to see how often a wishlisted book was added and then removed less than 2 minutes later. That would give some basis for estimating the effectiveness of these changes.

    Also, for a proper experiment you should change only 1 thing at a time 🙂

  32. Yolanda said

    I love the two minute delay as I too have accidentally added a book on people’s wish lists and got a nasty note when removed instantly. I like the new changes but like the first on the list approach, (even though I’m new and may closer to the bottom) because if someone who has been mooching for a long time and therefor has an advantage, that’s fine by me because that means they’ve been wanting and waiting for that book that much longer than me. And when I have had a book on a wish list for awhile, I would hope I would get it before someone who just added it to their list. I’m glad though that something was done to make it more fair. I appreciate the hard work to improve the system.

  33. IBelieveInFairies said

    Feh, this sounds worse than before. What about when you’re looking at your wish list and that rare offer of “mooch” would show up.

    I really like having books offered in order of longest wishing with a hold on the book when it’s been wished for like they do at PBS.

  34. Fyoder Larue said

    I’m not on the bm-discuss list, so will add my vote, abeit belatedly, for the queue method as being the most fair. Otherwise, for popular books, wishlist entries are just an entry in a lottery with poor odds. I think this reduces the value of bookmooch overall, making it a great place to get books few want, but good luck getting anything popular.

    That said, the current change is positive in that it reduces disappointment. It does get tiresome going to the site repeatedly only to see the book is already gone.

  35. Ana said

    Why not give people an option as to whether they want to receive an email even after a book has already been mooched? I see that’s a common complaint about the new system, and I personally do like knowing when a copy of a book I want has been given away, even if I’m not the one who gets it.

  36. Janine said

    I’m not sure if I really like this or not. But, I think it is certainly worth trying.

  37. Tia said

    John, the new system seems to make more sense. I’ve had notifications on the same book three times, only to log in and have the book already mooched by someone else . . .

    Thanks for working so hard for BookMooch–I love it!

  38. Jeff said

    I have never been able to get a copy on my wishlist save one time. I would check 15 minutes after an email and it was gone. I like this new change and hope I can get another off my list. Thank you!

  39. Laura said

    I’m not sold on this yet but I’m willing to give it a try. I’d feel better if the random shuffle had a weight assigned to it perhaps. If it took into account how long you’ve had the book on your wishlist or if you’ve been offered another popular book first. I’m not lucky when it comes to random generators. I’ve a feeling I won’t be getting any more must have books.

  40. Matthew said

    Thanks for making the change. I’m sure that I won’t get as many notifications, but this is a good thing as it won’t waste my time if the book has already been mooched by someone else.

    I think that your change to the notification policy is good and far.

  41. Karen H said

    I was hoping for a change, for those who have mooched a book that is then lost in the mail….

    I’m waiting for a book that now looks like it’s lost, it’s been nearly a month since it was mailed. I wish I could be put on #1 priority for the next available copy once the book is officially declared lost.

    Thanks, Karen

  42. Sally C said

    You could add Australia to the time difference problem – we are way away from both the US and Europe. So I think changes were needed and are welcome.

    I am only a new member but am sorry I won’t be getting notification, even when a book has been mooched before I can check. The frisson of excitement added to my day (like that little adrenalin rush!). And it gave me a reason to go to the site and do something there. I have a feeling that now I will be a bit more disconnected from the whole process. Another reason I liked getting the emails was because it gave some idea of how popular some books were and a way to gauge how closely to watch my emails.

    I’d also prefer a FIFO notification arrangement. Surely it would be very discouraging to have desired a book for ages and persevered only to know that a Johnny Come Lately like me was undercutting?

    Thanks for all your thought and work though John.

  43. Jill said

    I have to agree with Amtep. I think the 2 minute delay change alone would have solved the majority of the disgruntled masses. I would have been curious to see how much that change alone would have improved your inbox. I liked the first come, first serve basis much better. It was so TOTALLY different from PBS, and I think that’s what people are trying to turn you into. Under your old system I may have missed more books than got, but it made the ‘catching’ much more fun and worth it.

    Thanks again John, for a wonderful service you provide to all of us book-lovers!

    Jill

  44. Dottie said

    OK…I’m being flexible on this…sounds like some good ideas/changes rolling here…glad to see some changes as the false e-mails were getting “old”. I’m interested to see how this works out. I think I will end up liking BM as much as always.

    LOVE the 2 minute change:)

  45. Sara said

    I am for the 2 minute delay…that is good…
    However I am against the idea of having a random raffle on who gets the notification first. If I am understanding correctly …if it is pulled randomly on who receives the notification I could essentially never receive a notification on a wishlist book if I constantly lose what I call the “raffle.” If you want to have the wishlists to be more fair I dont see how this logic makes it so…
    If fairness was part of the equation then you should take the randomness of who gets the notification first out and create a logical order to who gets notified….such as who has had the book wishlisted the longest…or maybe who has not received a wishlisted book in the longest amount of time…something that makes sense…
    Since the underlying reason for this feature seems to be about fairness…then it should be fair. And this way is not…

  46. Melissa said

    I think this is an interesting idea. I have gotten my fair share of wishlist books. I tend to disagree with some on here. I don’t think any weight should be given (or considered to be given) as to how long a book has been on your wishlist. I don’t have time to sit at the computer and add all the books I could possibly want to mooch so that my name will be first. I do think, however, that people should have to have so many positive mooches on their record before being added into the rotation. Feedback is the number one way we regulate ourselves around here.

  47. Phyllis said

    I think we should at least have 24hrs to respone. People are at work and some dont get on their computer untill after work.

  48. Marlene said

    Hi Thanks John. I will just give it a chance and see if it will improve things. So far I have not managed to be fastest on a wish list book even though I do check my mail a lot, but I am in Europe.
    Most books I have on my wish list I am the only person who wants it. Except for some new books. Crossing fingers.
    Thanks for all your hard work!
    Marlene

  49. Anna said

    Thank you for making wired-ness much less of a requirement! This new system is better for entry-level working stiffs like me: the old system disfavored people with day jobs just as much as it did people without permenantly instant notice of new e-mail.

    The randomizing who gets told first is interesting. While I wouldn’t have minded first wished, first served so much — despite being fairly new around here — I can see why some people might feel it’s an unfair advantage to people who’ve been here longer.

    And sure, the randomization means I’m still not guaranteed to get an available book, especially a popular one, but it’s better than being told to move my rear end next time ’round when really what happened was, well, work.

  50. Jenny said

    Perhaps someone has mentioned this already, but could there be a “decline” option for wishlist books, as well? That way if someone wants to pass up a book for whatever reason the process can be sped up.

    I often list a group of books at one time and it’s a lot more convenient to get a chunk of mooch requests and go the Post Office once.

    Maybe it’s not likely that a book would go to the 6th or higher person very often. The stats on the new system would be pretty fascinating, I think.

    Also – love the randomizing and the two minute delay. Excellent improvements!

  51. Chris said

    I don’t get the RANDOM feature. Why would that be better? If someone has a book on their WISH LIST (“don’t list if you don’t want it”) the longest, that person should have first dibs. I feel that with the random feature, I will NEVER be offered a book. I am one of those people who is very unlucky.

  52. David said

    When reading the comments above, I realized something that will be missed without the previous wish-list notifications. Although it came at the expense of more emails, by being alerted of a wish-listed book, I knew in some cases that a member with similar interest was adding books to the site. This was one way that I browsed for books to request. :o>

    With the original system, by being slower than others in responding to email alerts, I would sometimes miss a specific wish-listed book. This was okay as I could still use the opportunity to browse inventories from the new members (…wish-listed books were many times added by users who were new to the site).

    This could still work with the new system… A member above mentioned the prospect of opting-in for a notification of wish-listed books even after they were requested by other members. This could be helpful to some. Also, perhaps there could be a way of browsing the inventories of newly-joined members, or, of browsing the inventories of established members, in general, who are adding new groups of books to the site. 🙂 Just a thought.

    I will miss the old wish-list notification system but there will be lots to adapt to and discover with the new system as well. Thanks 🙂

  53. TimB said

    I’ve given this some thought and have to say that the wishlist is my least favorite feature of bookmooch. In the old system every time I got an email I was always to late to get the book.

    I don’t see how the new system is better when theoriticly your name could get reshuffled to the back every time. I mean with so many people waiting for a book actually getting one from your wishlist is tantamount to winning the lottery.

    At least with the old system I felt like I was “In Line” to receive my book as the que moved upward. Now I feel that I will always be shuffled back to the end of the line no matter what.

    So what’s the solution? I personally think Bookmooch is now too big to have the wish list as you have a zillion people passed over every time a book becomes available and only that one person is happy. So I suggest we just do away with the wish list altogether and let everyone fend for themselves. It would be up to the individual to check the inventories every day or so to see if their book had become available.

    You may want to discount this idea as being “sour grapes” since I’ve never been able to get a book that was on my wish list and you may be right. But think of it like this, if you’re running a business and you have a feature that ticks off 99.9% of your customers and only makes that 0.01% happy what do you do?

  54. Ann said

    While I think the two minute delay is a great idea, I hate the randomly shuffled list concept. No wonder I haven’t received any bookmooch emails lately.
    Frankly, the mooch emails I get drive me to visit the site. This new way, it’s out of sight out of mind. I only came here now to check to see if something was wrong since I haven’t had any emails from Bookmooch in days.
    I also liked the first come first served concept. It was a fun game to try to get there first.

  55. Jennifer said

    I’d also prefer a FIFO system, as I have been a member for a long time and have been waiting for some books since I joined. The old system rarely worked for me because I have a life and cannot constantly monitor the site. But at least this new system gives me a fighting chance — today I was notified of a book in my wish list and it was actually STILL THERE when I followed the link. Amazing. I haven’t been listing all my books in my inventory on this site because I end up giving away a lot more than I get. Now I’ll start listing books again.

  56. Stephanie said

    I love the new method — thank you so much for putting thought into a solution and implementing something that will make an improvement.

    I know some people really would rather have a FIFO system based on how long a book has been on your wishlist, but I really think that doing it that way would alienate newer members at the expense of older members. (And I’ve had some things on my wishlist a very long time, so I’d probably benefit by that method, but I still think what you’ve done is fairer for everyone.)

    Thank you very much!

  57. Karen H said

    I don’t understand why I’m still getting notes that the book is already mooched then, if it’s within the four hour window? I’m getting far fewer book available e-mails, and I’m more frustrated then before, when I used to be able to mooch a few if I happened to be at my computer when they came in. I’m considering using up my points and dumping this site, it’s frustrating to not be able to mooch anything I really want! PBS has us in line as to when we requested it, though I have to wait, I know I’ll get a chance for it and don’t get constantly disappointed when an e-mail comes through and think maybe’ll I’ll get something good.

  58. Sara said

    I love Bookmooch and the wishlist system no matter whether it is the new or old one. I got a few wishlisted books from the old system and even got one from the new one today. Bookmooch has been amazing with having a lot of texts I need to classes which I love. Anyway I just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to try and improve the system whether you keep it or not because either way I am sure it’ll be great!

  59. Shary said

    I’ve only been on bookmooch a couple of months but I’ve sent 17 books already. Ive only been able though to mooch a few older kids books and older novels. I wondered if you had considered – because of the overseas people asleep thing, the some people are only able to check their email 1 X per day thing, etc …, could you consider that 1st come 1st serve is actually fair because if I request a book 3 days later than someone else or a week later then thru the shuffle I dont get it and they were reading a book they already mooched so they mooched this one after and I hadnt had a book in weeks its fair that I get the book because I was finally 1st on a list (or finally next). Also couldnt you give a notification 24 hours without everyone getting all haywire for those of us who are only able to see it once in 24 hr? How is that unfair, we’re only talking 1 day for the next person to get a notice. Are we that impatient?

  60. missbossy said

    Re Notification: there is a warning message on the site which I find confusing. When I hit “send reminder” I’m told “everyone who has this book on their wishlist already received an email notification when you added this book to your inventory.” – But is this correct? I have indicated that I will ship only in my country. In fact I’m willing to ship regionally (Asia) and I’m trying to ping a regional user. Have they already been notified? The message said yes but some details above suggest no.

  61. Mike said

    As a member who has benefited well from the old system I am not enamored of the upgrade. The old system encouraged responding swiftly and rewarded a member’s attention to his notifications. As with anything dumbed down, as things seem to be going in this world, when you create a system to be “fair” you penalize the exact people you should be rewarding and presage the eventual decline of that system. The law of the jungle works because it’s correct…..the strong survive not because they’re born that way but because they ADAPT.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: