Analysis of the 2011 GNOME user survey results

Last year Phoronix launched the 2011 GNOME user survey, an effort I initiated to try to give a voice to GNOME users, a voice I though was sorely lacked. I knew the effort wasn’t going to be accepted by GNOME developers, because through the years they have always rejected anything that resembles user feedback: surveys, polls, brainstorm, or something as easy as enabling voting in bugzilla. I gave it a try anyway because I made a bet with Zeeshan Ali that this would happen, and it did (although he never accepted that).

However, in the process the effort received a lot of positive feedback and the survey improved quite a lot, it would have been a shame to throw it to the trash, so, as Alan Cox suggested, I tried to make this survey happen anyway and thanks to Michael Larabel from Phoronix, it did.

According to GNOME people, such a survey, or in fact, any survey will always give bad results, because it’s impossible to get rid of all the biases. This was discussed extensively in the GNOME desktop-devel mailing list, and despite all my efforts to convince them otherwise, I didn’t succeed (which wasn’t a surprise at all). To give an idea of the sort of resistance we are talking about, I made the argument that even president elections across the globe would have similar problems, and they argued that even those are flawed. One would have to wonder what method in their minds would give proper statistically significant user feedback, but the answer is not surprising: nothing. Yet, they claim they listen to users, somehow. Although their method of “listening to users” remains mysterious, it probably involves personal experience: talking with their friends and family, and close circles (which are more biased than any survey could).

But in this discussion there was valid criticism, mainly the non-response bias. It was argued that only people that hate GNOME would answer the survey, and thus the survey would be biased towards negative comments, and the results worthless. There is some truth to that claim, and the survey tried to identify and mitigate that factor, with success I think. I will start by explained how this was done, because otherwise the survey would indeed be worthless for many purposes, which is not the case. Other arguments against the results of the survey are invalid in my opinion, but unlike other blogs from GNOME developers, this blog has comments open, so if you disagree and find other valid criticism to this survey, you are free to comment below.

Nevertheless, the most important point that GNOME people missed, is that this was a survey v1.0, and like all open source software, it can (and will) improve. Even if they are correct (they aren’t), and the results of v1.0 is totally worthless, that doesn’t mean that v2.0, or later versions, will. Unfortunately in their mind neither v1.0, nor v100.0 can provide any helpful results at all, or for that matter any other survey in the history of humanity.

I will present the rationale of why I think these results are good and valid, and I think any rational person would agree, but you would be the judge of that.

If you want to see the straight results of the survey, go to this Phoronix page.

Non-response bias

Let’s invent a scenario where we have a population of 1000 people, and we want to figure out how many people like shopping. To do that we sample 100 people and it turns out around 25% of them say they like shopping. That’s it, right? Job done. Well, what happens if most of people interviewed where males, say 2/3 males, 1/3 females. We know from other sources that we should expect the male/female ratio to be around 50/50, so we know there was a disproportion, but is that a problem? If it turns out that say, females have a bias towards liking shopping, then yes, there is a problem.

If we find results like that, we know there is bias, but we can use our knowledge about the male/female ratio expected in the total population to calculate what would be the real amount of people that like to shop in the total population. But as GNOME people were quick to mention, we don’t have a census of Linux desktop users, so we don’t have any idea of the proportions we might expect for different biases. In the example above, if we don’t know the male/female ratio of the total population, then we have no idea if 33/66 was disproportionate or not, all we know is that there is bias. And that’s the end of the game, the 25% our survey returned is worthless. We can say how many females and males like shopping, but nothing about the total population. I wouldn’t call this totally worthless, but GNOME people would.

But that is only if there is a bias. If it turns out that males and females like shopping at roughly the same proportion, then it doesn’t matter what is the ratio of the total population, and it doesn’t matter if we are being disproportionate or not. All we can do is identify the bias, if we don’t even ask the question “What is your sex?”, then we are truly lost, because we can’t even know if there was bias or not. So all we can do is try to identify all possible sources of bias, and then check if this bias is indeed happening or not.

Even worst is what happens if no females participate in the survey at all. That is highly unlikely in this case, but consider online surveys; people without Internet would be unlikely to participate, and if they have a bias then the results would be skewed. This was also used by GNOME people as an argument against any kind of online survey.

However, I had an idea; what if we ask people to print the survey and give it to these kind of people without Internet. This in effect would be no different from a survey that is not online, the only difference is that instead of paying people to go around finding GNOME users, we ask the community to do so — crowd-sourcing the problem. We didn’t ask this directly, perhaps for v2, but I added a question to identify how people are filling the survey: on their own, on behalf of somebody else, and so on.

We did spend a considerable amount of time trying to identify all these possible biases, and then add questions in the survey to see if there’s bias or not, and that’s all anybody can do.

So all the criticism GNOME people threw was taken care one way or the other, even if they didn’t agree so. The only way the results of this survey would be worthless is if somebody comes up with a possible bias that no question in the survey would identify (we need a new survey), or if it turns out there’s a real bias (we need a census).

Was there bias?

Let’s examine the main claim of GNOME people; people that answer the survey would have a bias towards hating GNOME.

Overall, how satisfied are you with GNOME?

Barely, Completely, Halfway, Mostly, Not At All

How are you taking this survey?

I am acting on behalf of somebody else, Completely on my own, Other, Somebody is pushing for me to do it

As you can see irrespective of the way people answered the survey, there’s a clear tendency: most people avoided the extremes and answered primarily “Mostly”, and then “Halfway”. The people that answered “I am acting on behalf of somebody else” went more for the extremes, but the difference is not significantly different from the people that answered “Completely on my own”. So, fortunately it seems GNOME people were wrong; there’s no bias.

Just to be sure, lets look at another, similar question:

How do you compare your current GNOME version with the version from one year ago?

Better, No Changes, Cannot Say, Worse

Again we see no significant differences depending on how people answered the survey; most people said either better, or worse at about the same rate. The people that answered on behalf of somebody else had a tendency to answer “Better”, and the people that got pushed, answered “Worse” a bit more, but in general no big difference.

Clearly, if there is a bias, it’s not dependent on how people are answering the survey. There’s another possibility; we didn’t get enough proxy responses. Statistically speaking, we would expect the results of “I am acting on behalf of somebody else” to be ±18% off target, but “Somebody is pushing for me to do it” only ±8, based on the amount of responses with a 95% certainty. So it would be nice if we get more of these responses on the next survey, but we can be relatively certain that if there is a bias, it’s not that great. Certainly not enough to declare the whole survey worthless.

I did similar analyses on the different questions of the survey, and I couldn’t find any significant biases from groups that could be underrepresented, therefore, the results of the survey are valid.

However, there are certain interesting results.

Interesting results

This is the same improvement question, but depending on whether or not people used GNOME 3.

How do you compare your current GNOME version with the version from one year ago?

Better, No Changes, Cannot Say, WorsePeople that haven’t used GNOME 3 mostly say that it hasn’t changed, but the ones that have used it have very different opinions, which matches what we have seen in online discussions: people either hate it or love it, but it’s interesting to see that the split is 50/50.

Another theory that popped in the discussions was that people that use terminals would hate GNOME 3, but “normal people” would love it.

Overall, how satisfied are you with GNOME?

Barely, Completely, Halfway, Mostly, Not At All

How often do you use a terminal/console?

Is there anything else?, When I have no other option, I can’t live without them, What is that?

However, it seems to be the opposite: people that don’t even know what a terminal is certainly don’t like GNOME, it’s the rest that do: from people that use it when there’s no other option, from people that don’t use anything else.

One of my theories was that contributors to the project would have a bias toward liking it.

Overall, how satisfied are you with GNOME?

Barely, Completely, Halfway, Mostly, Not At All

Have you contributed to the GNOME project?

No, Yes

But it appears I was also wrong; contributors to the project have roughly the same opinion as the non-contributors.

There is a much more clear differentiator tough: people that have tried to contact the project, unsuccessfully.

Overall, how satisfied are you with GNOME?

Barely, Completely, Halfway, Mostly, Not At All

Have you ever contacted the GNOME team?

No, I don’t know how; No, never had the need; Yes, successfully; Yes, unsuccessfully

The people that have tried to contact the project unsuccessfully tend to say either they are barely satisfied, or not at all with GNOME. Of all the people that have contacted the project 2/3 of them say it was unsatisfactory. This should be worrying.

And then, people that like to use another window manager.

Overall, how satisfied are you with GNOME?

Barely, Completely, Halfway, Mostly, Not At All

Have you ever contacted the GNOME team?

Yes, successfully; Yes, unsuccessfully; No, I don’t know how; No, never had the need

Clearly GNOME has problems interacting with other window managers. Or at least people seem to think so.

What needs to change?

Unfortunately there was no easy way to ask GNOME users this question so it was more or less open form, and that’s very difficult to analyze, however, I’ve taken the time to read them one by one, and count them, and so far I have 20% of the 10000 responses, but I doubt reading the rest will change the results much. I will try to do so in the future, as time permits, but I don’t promise much.

Better customization (397)

This is by far the most requested, people don’t want to manually fiddle with gconf/dconf, extensions, or gnome-tweak, they want a whole lot more options integrated. One suggestion was to have an advanced mode, which is something I have suggested in the past, but GNOME developers are adamant against it for no rational reasons.

Not only do people want more options, but they think some of the current ones are useless, and that defaults are all wrong. They also want more options for power management, like deciding what happens when you close the lid. Also more options to change the appearance: font, icons, keyboard bindings, screensaver, etc. Also, disable the accessibility stuff.

GNOME 2 (113)

People love their GNOME 2. A lot of them suggested to have two interfaces, others requested to improve the fallback mode, but most of them demanded to get rid of GNOME shell directly. A lot of people also asked to bring back the GNOME 2 panel, and taskbar.

Improve performance and footprint (89)

A lot people think GNOME is too bloated and asked for better performance, less CPU usage, less memory usage, smoother animations, faster start-up times, etc. Specially the ones that have used GNOME shell, which apparently is a resource hog.

Nautilus (57)

People are definitely not happy with nautilus. They complain it’s too slow, takes too much time to start, and lacks a lot functionality. Many suggested to get rid of it and use some of the already existing alternatives.

Notifications (46)

The new notifications are annoying; one shouldn’t need to move the mouse cursor the corner to see them; that makes it easy to miss them, which defeats the purpose of a notification.

Shutdown / Restart / Suspend (44)

This is a no-brainer; just add this option. Yes, you can see them by pressing “alt” but people don’t want that, there’s no excuse to remove basic functionality, and users are complaining hard for this particular feature.

Improve theming (32)

Users want better themes and icons, they don’t like the default theme, also want a dark theme, and also think the amount of customization a theme can achieve is not enough.

Better multi-monitor support (32)

Another very requested feature was to improve multi-monitor support.

Others (in order)

  • Improve Evolution
  • Listen to users
  • Reduce dependencies (specially PulseAudio)
  • Improved reliability / stability
  • Minimize / Mazimize
  • Tiling
  • Get rid of Evolution (or split the calendar component
  • alt+tab
  • Faster shell search
  • Collaborate more with other communities
  • Fix ATI fglrx issues
  • Integrate Zeitgeist
  • Render KDE apps seamlessly
  • Reduce dead space
  • Compiz compatibility
  • Developer attitude

Conclusion

What is clear is that most people want more configuration options, a lot liked GNOME 2 much better than GNOME 3, and they want an option to have an interface similar to GNOME 2 with GNOME 3 technology. For every user that likes GNOME 3, there is one that hates it. There’s plenty of people that think they are ignored by GNOME developers, and that users are treated like idiots (and they don’t like that). Users want a better attitude from the developers, not only toward users, but towards other FOSS projects like KDE (GTK+ apps like fine under KDE, Qt apps don’t under GNOME), and less of the not-invented-here syndrome.

Hopefully it has become clear to rational people that there is some value in the results of this survey, even if GNOME developers reject it. All the known biases were identified, and fortunately the ones that could cause non-response bias didn’t do so, so the results are valid and nobody was underrepresented :)

The next survey will incorporate some of the findings here, and hopefully more people would be aware of the need to reach people that normally wouldn’t answer this survey. Perhaps at some point GNOME developers would accept that there is no significative non-response bias because of that and start listening to the results.

About these ads

32 thoughts on “Analysis of the 2011 GNOME user survey results

  1. +Philip Really? All these months of effort I put into this were for nothing? Really? There’s absolutely no value at all in this analysis? It’s totally ruined?

    I find it amusing how some people think that by changing a strident rhetoric for soft one would somehow make arguments more valid, or data more significant; they don’t. The data is what the data is.

    And if we are talking about attitude, how about the attitude of GNOME developers? Do you see any reason why this non-response bias would make the survey worthless? Do you see any other reason at all? I don’t see you addressing any problems with the survey, so why would GNOME developers be so quick to dismiss these results? There’s no reason at all.

    And in fact, if GNOME developers were as interested as me in hearing the voice of GNOME users, wouldn’t they be running this survey?

  2. a) Software development and design is not a democracy
    b) “Listening to users” is *not* a good idea. They usually do not know what is best for them, but they think they do. If you listen to users you end up with crap. A better approach is to observe their behavior.

  3. “Statistically speaking, we would expect the results of “I am acting on behalf of somebody else” to be ±18% off target, but “Somebody is pushing for me to do it” only ±8, based on the amount of responses with a 95% certainty”

    Interesting, but do you have the raw data and calculations to demonstrate this? It would be useful if all the charts had the significance levels drawn on to easily see what differences are statistically significant and what are visually striking but insignificant for the survey size.

  4. +PonySugarcube That idea is often repeated, but it’s completely misrepresented. Sometimes people don’t know what they need, but sometimes they do, specially when they have it in front of their eyes. But what is undeniable is that when users say they do not like something, or even hate something, there’s no way around it; they don’t like it, and they know it.

    Do you really think you know better than users? Show me one example where the majority of users hated something, and it turned out they were wrong. One.

    Show me one example where a project went against the wishes of its users and succeeded. One.

  5. “people that don’t even know what a terminal is certainly don’t like GNOME” — this sentence seems to be based on the answers of about three people, am I correct?

  6. “Show me one example where a project went against the wishes of its users and succeeded. One.”

    The iPhone.

  7. “Show me one example where a project went against the wishes of its users and succeeded. One.”

    The motor car.

  8. @a-199: I hope you are not referring to this? http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/08/henry_ford_never_said_the_fast.html

    Anyway, it’s irrelevant. If Henry Ford had asked his customers whether they wanted a motor car (after explaining them what it is), they would have said “yes”.

    The point about listening to the users is not about asking them “what items do you want to see in the system menu?” (to which, indeed, some users might not be ready to answer) but: “I’m planning to remove the shutdown button from the system menu because of X and because of Y; is that OK to you?”.

    Please let’s stop assuming that users are stupid and resorting to silly wordplays to prove one’s point.

  9. +a-199

    The motor car.

    Where is the survey where the majority of horse users said the didn’t like cars?

    +iain

    The iPhone.

    Where is the survey where the majority of smartphone users didn’t like iPhones?

  10. “Where is the survey where the majority of smartphone users didn’t like iPhones?”

    That wasn’t your initial question. You asked for examples of a project that didn’t listen to users that succeeded. The iPhone was clearly liked by the majority of smartphone users, but Apple have famously refused to listen to users demands.

  11. +iain

    That wasn’t your initial question.

    I asked for an example where a project went against its users. I meant software projects, but fine, use products, you still have failed to present evidence for your claim.

  12. I see you have put a lot of work into this.

    You discuss biases at length, but I see no mention of the biggest bias of all: 99.5 % of the respondents knew what Gnome is, while most Gnome users probably do not. Those who do are unlikely to be representative of Gnome users in general. This may explain the answers to the “How often do you use a terminal/console” question, for example.

    The question “How satisfied are you with Gnome in regard to language availability” is even more biased towards people who were reading the survey in English. But at least that problem affected only one of the questions.

  13. +Ross Burton

    Interesting, but do you have the raw data and calculations to demonstrate this? It would be useful if all the charts had the significance levels drawn on to easily see what differences are statistically significant and what are visually striking but insignificant for the survey size.

    BEHALF: 31
    ONOWN: 9411
    OTHER: 74
    PUSHED: 150
    (empty): 68

    Using the Cochran equation that is commonly used to calculate sample sizes:

    n = t² x p(1-p) / m²

    Where n is the sample size, t is the confidence level (standard normal), p is the prevalence, and m is the confidence interval.

    Assuming the worst prevalence (0.50), you have something like this for 95% confidence, (assuming an infinite population):

    sqrt((1.645^2 * 0.5 * (1 - 0.5)) / x)

    But you can just use any online calculator.

  14. +mpt

    99.5 % of the respondents knew what Gnome is, while most Gnome users probably do not. Those who do are unlikely to be representative of Gnome users in general.

    This is an unsubstantiated claim.

    Those who know what GNOME is are likely to be representative of GNOME users in general. See, I can do the same. But I will do more, I will actually provide an argument: the people that use Linux do so mostly because they are computer-literate, and one of the first things they learn after using Linux is figure out what desktop environment they are running, even if they don’t know what a desktop environment is.

    Either way, this also popped in the discussion, and one solution was to have pictures of different desktops, so even if they don’t know what GNOME is, they could still select the desktop they are using. It turns out the people that answered “No” selected a variety of desktops: Windows, KDE, GNOME, Unity, etc.

    Now, why would this group be underrepresented? You failed to present an argument for that as well. Let me present mine; they aren’t. The reason why so few respondents responded “No”, is because few GNOME users don’t know what GNOME is. Simple, huh? It’s so simple it actually makes sense.

  15. I might finish reading this and analyze the results. But in the first four paragraphs, you’ve made so many disparaging comments about “GNOME people” that are not true of me or of my criticism. That kind of all-in-one-bucket mentality makes your ability to objectively measure results very suspect.

  16. +Shaunix McCance Saying something is not true is easy. Providing valid arguments, evidence and data is not, and you haven’t provided any.

    If there is any valid criticism, by all means enlighten us, how are these results worthless?

  17. @mpt I am currently using Gnome and enjoying the experience, but object to the claim that the majority of Gnome users, that is in particular, Gnome Shell — the complete user experience as it was designed, are novice users.

    Consider the process by which a novice user could get to use Gnome.
    – First they must choose to install a Linux based Operating System. This requires the both know what an Operating System is, and why their current one is unsatisfactory on a technical level.
    – Then they must choose distro. What novice user chooses Fedora (by far most visible distro to ship Gnome Shell as the default desktop)? Basic tasks like enabling DVD playback, making use of their wireless divers, and general software management are more technically involved, and likely to result in the sort of error that the novice user is unable to comprehend, let along rectify (despite this criticism, I like Fedora, and would recommend it to a more advanced user, just as I would Arch Linux;). No, the overwhelming likely hood is that the vast majority of novice users will end up using Ubuntu, which now no longer includes most of the user visible components of Gnome in its default installation, or still more likely, remain in the dark ages with Windows.

    Whilst use cases are a useful tool, it seems increasingly that Gnome have forgotten who their users actually are. You can not hope to reach out to new users simply by simplifying the interface, and hoping they will appear, if they have no probably root to your project. Yes, Ubuntu may have a significant change of converting less technically experienced users, but unless something drastically changes, Gnome does not.

    As far as I have observed, the only segment of users with which Gnome, and desktop Linux in general, has made persistent progress is more advance, users with a greater level of background knowledge, and appreciation of the technical and ideological advantages of free software. As a student of computer science, it is clear that in my cohort at least, desktop Linux appears to yield a majority mind share, rather than being neglected to distant third as it is in most markets. Why should the users who have the most to gain from Gnome as a project, and equally, the most to contribute back, be the least strongly considered by the project? (which is largely developed by individuals who became interested in free software by much the same means).

    Sun Tzu said ‘If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.’
    I would contest that Gnome is failing to do both: the typical Gnome user is typically assumed to be a novice, when in fact ‘expert’ knowledge (expert, at least, in the eyes of a novice) is required to even come into contact with gnome, and Gnome seems to believe that simply providing a better user experience will significantly influence the probability of a new user adopting Gnome, when more significant barriers stand in his / her way.

    Notes:
    – I have used Gnome throughout to refer to the Gnome project, not any individual developer or group of developers. I would not like any suggesting that this or any other similar comment be interpreted as a personal attack be a reasonable one (indeed, I do not know any Gnome developers personally).
    – My comment may contain mistakes or misrepresentations (I certainly have not reviewed it sufficiently to ensure their absense), feel free to point them out, although I would appreciate that they not be taken to speak for the validity of unrelated points.
    – I do think most of the design decisions of Gnome 3 were solid, but then I am a programmer also. It seems to me, that in is design, the sense of aesthetic judgement is more akin to that with which one would assess well written code, than interfaces designed with real users in mind.
    – I think that Gnome’s apparent rejection of empirical methods is hypocritical; you use the claim that your concern is for the user, to reject the feedback of the user.

  18. > > The motor car.
    > Where is the survey where the majority of horse users said the didn’t like cars?

    Most horse owners nowadays also own a powerful car (if not a heavy truck) to carry their horses around to competitions. 500 horse powers under the hood, and 2 horses in the carriage :)

    I agree that, there are several unpleasant words about so-called “GNOME developers”, that is meant in fact (I believe) only for a few GNOME persons, like 2%? (probably with a loud voice on mailing lists). I do not think it concerns most 98% of the GNOME developers, for example if you value them per amount of commits or bug closed. That’s my perception.

    Good work!

  19. Felipe, I wasn’t saying anything about your results in my comments. I was making a comment about your attitude. You responded with more attitude. Every time I’ve pointed out something that affects scientific validity, which I believe I’ve always done in a civil manner, your response has been dismissive and rude.

  20. +Thomas Wright

    I couldn’t agree with you more.

    Whilst use cases are a useful tool, it seems increasingly that Gnome have forgotten who their users actually are.

    No, they haven’t. I have had many discussions with GNOME developers, and they are perfectly aware of who their current users are, but it seems they don’t care about their current users, they care about their target users, which is “normal” people (i.e. not geeks). I tried to explain to them that they cannot reach “normal” people if it isn’t through geeks.

    They are so cocky they are not afraid of loosing users, because they think they would be a minority (although of course they don’t have any numbers, or evidence for that). It seems to me, based on these results, that it’s quite likely they might loose about half their user-base rather easily.

    +luc

    I don’t know what most GNOME developers stand for, but I tried to push this survey with them, together, and they rejected it. At least that’s what the loudest voices said, and nobody else came up in defense of this survey.

    +Shaun McCance

    Felipe, I wasn’t saying anything about your results in my comments.

    Yes you were:

    makes your ability to objectively measure results very suspect

    In case you don’t see what you are doing; you are using “appeal to emotion”, a fallacy, to try to shift the argument in your favor.

    Please stop arguing about my “tone” and focus on the ball. How to disagree.

  21. Pingback: Top 10 suggestions from the 2011 GNOME user survey « Felipe Contreras

  22. Nice analysis. Thanks for all the hard work you put into it.

    For another look at the GNOME project, how about surveying GNOME developers so we can get a better idea of who they are and what their attitudes are? I’d be very interested in that, but I suspect not many would be interested in participating.

  23. I think one of the fair criticisms of the survey was that some of the responses were just plain stupid. The insistence, for example, that Shell be able to integrate with other WMs – I understand that older versions of Gnome could swap Metacity / Sawfish for something else, but was that really such a fundamentally critical feature? Related, the idea that people should be able to use Compiz with Shell? What possible sensible reason could one ever have for wanting to try these combinations?

  24. Related, the idea that people should be able to use Compiz with Shell?

    You are assuming that people want to use GNOME shell. The results show otherwise.

    Either way, you can say the criticisms are stupid, but that’s what GNOME users think.

  25. Felipe – the idea that people might not want to use Shell isn’t stupid, and people can and do run Gnome applications with other window managers and desktops, or with Shell derivatives like Cinnamon.

    But that’s not what I said – the problem is the people who insist they should be able to use Shell but replace Mutter with something else, or run Compiz and Shell simultaneously. That the WM and panels used to be replacable doesn’t mean they must always be so, and idea of running two compositors is, as I said, stupid.

  26. the problem is the people who insist they should be able to use Shell but replace Mutter with something else, or run Compiz and Shell simultaneously.

    I don’t know what makes you think that a significant amount of users in the survey suggested that.

  27. Maybe not a significant amount, but it’s something you listed under suggestions, and it’s the kind of thing that makes it hard to take the whole thing seriously.

    Maybe I’m prejudiced by having followed the responses on the Phoronix forums, but for every good suggestion, it seems there’s a a dozen stupid ones. It’s not good that they have a reputation of ignoring feedback from their users – but well, having seen some of that feedback, who can blame them?

  28. Maybe not a significant amount, but it’s something you listed under suggestions, and it’s the kind of thing that makes it hard to take the whole thing seriously.

    A significant amount of users suggested something, but it’s not to run them simultaneously. It seems you don’t even understand what the feedback is.

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