Problems at Wikimedia France?

[Poetlister]

Here is a page Grant expectations for Wikimedia France - 2017-2018. Reading between the lines suggests that WMF has concerns. Further light is cast by a post on the mailing list:

Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 15:11:12 +0200
From: Marie-Alice Mathis <mariealice.gariel@gmail.com>
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR
Message-ID:
<CAOQ7Aqv-6J1yV13wnSV+FYvhvy_3kjS_7edHayqDt8_gHh96bg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hello all,

I haven’t had a real opportunity to introduce myself: I am Marie-Alice
Mathis, 32, a now ex-member of the Board of Wikimédia France.

The transition with the newly elected members of the Board is now complete
and I gladly step down to get away from the violence, exhaustion and
frustration of these past few months.

I was a Board candidate because after completing my PhD I finally had more
time to contribute to the projects and serve the community through the
French chapter: after watching my husband Rémi Mathis do it for years I had
a pretty good idea of what it meant. I did not know our ED Nathalie Martin
or our chair Émeric Vallespi before working with them, and now that I have
I can vouch for their hard work and attachment to the movement’s values.

Today, I have lost friends or people I thought were friends because I
defended Nathalie and Émeric in good faith during the smear campaign based
on the community’s assumption that they were the source and cause of all
the chapter’s problems, real or perceived. Although I have worked with them
closely for a year, I have been repeatedly informed that I’ve been
manipulated by Nathalie from the start and should not have blindly believed
everything Émeric was saying. I’ve been personally attacked on WMF sites,
email lists, and social media for weeks, my every word scrutinised,
questioned and mocked assuming I was either ignorant or lying. I’ve been
told by so-called feminists who were endorsing a particularly sexist rant
against me to “stop making inflammatory comments”. I’ve been called a
conspiracy theorist because I questioned the role of our former chair
Christophe Henner, now chair of the Board at the WMF, in the threats to
withdraw our chapter agreement and the cutting of half our FDC funding.
People close to Christophe who have resigned from the WMFR Board early in
the crisis rather than take responsibility for their mistakes now call
themselves victims and whistleblowers. The WMF, who is perfectly aware of
the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against Christophe for
facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France, is
pretending WMFR leadership has used the threat of legal action to
intimidate chapter members and silence opposition.

Some unfounded allegations have been made on this very list by prominent
members of the community (and what is a newbie’s word worth in that case,
right?): from extremely serious accusations of misuse of chapter funds for
personal gain (that strangely enough never made it to the French justice
system despite a so-called “rather convincing rationale”), to gratuitous
ones that Nathalie was making the Board’s decisions for us and dictating
our communication (I am old enough to write my own emails, thank you very
much), to ever vague ones of “quite generous expenses reimbursement“. None
of this has been supported by proof or tangible facts, but the goal of
spreading distrust and dissent in the chapter and the wider community has
clearly been reached. Even now that Nathalie has left her position and the
Board has resigned, some are still defaming her in the French media in the
hopes of winning the stupid argument of who were the bad guys in the crisis.

[Randy from Boise]

Now here is my question: What do these local Wikimedia bureaucracies actually achieve for the millions(?) of dollars they receive from the mother bureaucracy? They go to work and get paid and write big checks for rent and run up expense accounts — doing what exactly?

French WP now has the second largest number of Very Active Wikipedians of the various Wikipedias (owing to the continued decline of Gemany WP, mostly, rather than to some sort of demonstrable pattern of French WP's growth). Chaos in this bureaucracy is a big story. But what do these groups ACTUALLY DO?

Anyone??? Anyone??? <-----insert Ben Stein (T-H-L) voice here.

RfB

[Kingsindian]

Busywork to show that they are doing something for the money they receive, is my guess.

I think you mean "Anyone, anyone"

[Graaf Statler]

Now here is my question: What do these local Wikimedia bureaucracies actually achieve for the millions(?) of dollars they receive from the mother bureaucracy? They go to work and get paid and write big checks for rent and run up expense accounts — doing what exactly?

Simple. Playing around, creating well paid face jobs, trying to get positions in the real society with there wiki references, and trolling around on Wikipedia to keep the situation as it is. And once or twice a year they take the toilet roll printed with the Duck Tales from the wall of the toilet of there fancy office and send it to SanFan as there reporting. Or any other paper. And that is enough to get the grands. Good faith, you know.

[Bezdomni]

Well, there's PR of course. Nathalie Martin has a youtube channel.

[Graaf Statler]

Well, there's PR of course. Nathalie Martin has a youtube channel.

Or start your one consultancy like Frans Gijzenhout did with his Wiki references. Or get 70K like Sandra, the director is who get it for producing some toilet rolls for SanFan. No, there are opportunities enough! Or arbcom trollen with your old boy Wikimedia friends, also fun.

[No Ledge]

The WMF, who is perfectly aware of the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against Christophe for facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France

That's a damn serious charge.

Christophe is the President of the WMF!

Ten cuidado, Katherine!

[Graaf Statler]

The WMF, who is perfectly aware of the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against Christophe for facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France

That's a damn serious charge.

Christophe is the President of the WMF!

Ten cuidado, Katherine!

WMF is aware of many problems for years! But they don't care! They just troll everybody who is critical out with there corrupt arbcom's, there Meta stewards, our with James Alexander's Safety and Trusty department with a SanFanBan!

[thekohser]

The WMF, who is perfectly aware of the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against Christophe for facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France

That's a damn serious charge.

It's surprising to me -- they looked so happy together!

[Kingsindian]

There have been many rumblings about Wikimedia France on the mailing list for some time now. Haven't really followed the drama, to be honest.

Has there been any coverage of it in the French press?

[Poetlister]

WMUK organises lots of edit-a-thons and Wikimedians in Residence. As far as I can see, Wikimedia France does far less. As for the number of Very Active Wikipedians, it is not exactly clear that Wikimedia France has anything to do with it. Does it support these people in any way?

[Graaf Statler]

WMUK organises lots of edit-a-thons and Wikimedians in Residence. As far as I can see, Wikimedia France does far less. As for the number of Very Active Wikipedians, it is not exactly clear that Wikimedia France has anything to do with it. Does it support these people in any way?

Almost nobody in Europe knows how Wikipedia is created, who Jimbo is, and something as WMF and chapters exists. Even the press does't know. Most people (also journalists) think it is a site with a editorial office and a editorial staff. On the last meeting of the Dutch chapter were 12 members, including the board. I think the hard core of Wikipedia and Wikimedia-NL is about 20 people, (WM-France is bigger because the country is bigger, but don't expect WP-FR is something well known.) WM-NL, WM-BE (partly French, partly Dutch, Belgium hasn't it's one Wikipedia) and WP-NL are for year flying under the radar. There is no controle. It's a old boys network, the press doesn't control them because they even don't know they exist or they don't know what it is, and WMF doesn't control anything, but keeps on giving money because of there good faith principe.

[Bezdomni]

Well, there's PR of course. Nathalie Martin has a youtube channel.

I wish you spoke French, Graaf, because that video makes quite clear that creative commons doesn't fly in France. I haven't been following it closely, KI; it's quite intricate. Apparently the FDC has been complaining about WM France's total reliance on the the WMF for financing. While they think the WikiCheese project was great, they don't feel they're getting enough bang for their buck overall. A lot of the grant proposal I looked at was for activism where their success rate may not have been great. (Their efforts to lobby the legislature regarding the commons were quickly stymied for example by the SACEM (basically a copyright clearinghouse)... that's what the video is about, Nathalie Martin was there, representin' for the wiki-way in national assembly hearings.)

[Kingsindian]

Thanks. What is this C l'info site? Is it some kind of news outlet?

[Bezdomni]

I've been wondering the same thing. ^^ It's the nouvel obs article recycled. (maybe it's like buzzfeed -> patheos)

No, no, it's not: it's the official site of the TV show. I wasn't sure. I'll add the ownership info just for fun once I track it down.

[Graaf Statler]

I've been wondering the same thing. ^^ It's the nouvel obs article recycled. (maybe it's like buzzfeed -> patheos)

Wikipedia criticism in Europa is always one small blogs etc, and never in newspapers. Look for instance here, Earth Matter, it's unknown blog for alternative medicine.
And Yes, I understand French, but does't speak it very well. Well, this video makes perfect clear what I am saying for a long time, states like France and Holland consider there intellectual property like petroleum or gold in there ground, and because of that those the free source chapters are so unsuccessful. It's useless what they do.

[Bezdomni]

No no it's not the TV show C'est dans l'air.
RFI is one of their partners (radio france int'l). I'm not sure.

lol: turns out it's Martin Arnal, 18 ans, Etudiant en première année de relations internationales, passionné par l'actualité depuis le plus jeune âge. Créateur de C L'Info

I don't know how he arranged to recycle content from Rue89 -- which is a separate platform owned by Xavier Niel (Illiad / Free), Pierre Bergé (who just died), & Matthieu Pigasse (Lazard bank) -- same folks who own Le Monde...)

Graaf, ewe reminded me: Here's a search for one of the key names in that Nouvel Obs article at a dissident French blog (Wikibusters).

[Graaf Statler]

Nice link, thanks.
And here we are, it could be about WP-NL. We have 40% 2-line articles about arseholes who are hitting a ball. When I think I might be quietly updating infoboxes or flip all those copied lists from Pokémon.com. It's the same chaos. I think you are right, creative commons doesn't fly in France, Europe. There isn't something like a free source movement except by a few free source lunatics. The whole Wiki idea doesn't fit in out culture.

[Bezdomni]

Some administrations were required to use logiciels libres for a while in France. I think now it's only recommended.

https://references.modernisation.gouv.f ... libres.pdf

[No Ledge]

Attempting to further sort out this "intricate" situation.

Directrice exécutive Nathalie Martin was removed from the meta website's org chart on 5 September 2017, leaving Secrétaire général Cyrille Bertin in charge.

Apparently Bertin was the only person on the org chart reporting directly to Martin, and everyone else reported to or through Bertin. In any event the org chart shows these two at the top.

In 2015, Martin and her "companion" Cyrille Bertin dreamed together of renovating a nineteenth-century family farmhouse (cost € 400,000) for which they sought participatory financing over the Internet.

Hence the imputations of nepotism (T-H-L). My apologies if Google translate messed this up badly; I speak next to no French.

Here's the timeline, which should seem familiar to those who recall the timeline. At least the Unicorn didn't hire her husband partner.

[Bezdomni]

And of course the author of the email opening the thread mentions that her hubbie is at the BNF after loyal service as president of WM France. I remember Loys Bonod1 was not a fan of Rémi Matthis. The Bibliothèque Nationale de France spent a lot of time fighting google books while Rémi was at the WMF. I wonder what their position is now...

1 author of "Comment j'ai pourri le web"

(a story of a high school teacher who gave his students an impossibly arcane assignment after planting a bunch of fake facts on Wikipedia (and on some study sites where you can buy essays). When his facts turned up in the papers (or his essays were turned in to him) he explained to the students what he'd done and whipped up a media storm.)

[Poetlister]

At least the Unicorn didn't hire her husband partner.

Just as well. I suspect that he might have been rather a disaster from what I know about him. I don't think it's being suggested that Nathalie was a disaster, other than the nepotism issue.

[Bezdomni]

They both seem to have had highly dysfunctional work environments during their tenure judging by these timelines. Now whether that was inherited or created I have no idea...

DYK: Schiste (Henner) was (at one point) the main author of the first "Citation Needed"?

cf. http://thecitation.org/

This article he wrote about the CNIL there might be interesting to read in translation1 for those who think that the server farm in Amsterdam constitutes a physical presence within the EU. (The argument he advances that WM France is entirely independent of the WMF is bogus if all of WM France's funding comes from the WMF as Thierry Noisette suggests in the article cited above... no judge is going to look at an association which receives all of its funding from a single entity as being independent of that entity... or at least one wouldn't think so.)

1 ymmv reading law via google translate ^^

[Graaf Statler]

They both seem to have had highly dysfunctional work environments during their tenure judging by these timelines. Now whether that was inherited or created I have no idea...

DYK: Schiste (Henner) was (at one point) the main author of the first "Citation Needed"?

cf. http://thecitation.org/

This article he wrote about the CNIL there might be interesting to read in translation1 for those who think that the server farm in Amsterdam constitutes a physical presence within the EU. (The argument he advances that WM France is entirely independent of the WMF is bogus if all of WM France's funding comes from the WMF as Thierry Noisette suggests in the article cited above... no judge is going to look at an association which receives all of its funding from a single entity as being independent of that entity... or at least one wouldn't think so.)

1 ymmv reading law via google translate ^^

... no judge is going to look at an association which receives all of its funding from a single entity as being independent of that entity... or at least one wouldn't think so........

Of course! But Wiki lawyers think they can overrule European laws with there server farm in Amsterdam constitutes and there Terms of Use! They have no idea! And if someone pointed this out in a moderated way on the micro project Wikiquote-NL, you always have mister James Alexander with his Safety and Trust department and a collection fine trolls to let him shut up!
But, we will see how this drama ends up.

[Poetlister]

Rémi Mathis is resigning from Wikimedia France. He makes the following statement:

Dear Wikipedians,

I'm leaving Wikimedia France, after 5 years at the board, 3 as chair, 3 as
chair of the Scientific Committee. The violence which took place this
summer and the way the Foundation behave (or rather, did nothing against
it) are not acceptable.
Here is a short explanation of my departure in English. The longer one, in
French, is here:
https://medium.com/@mathis.remi/la-toxi ... d6e1b71a73

Various dissensions and various oppositions have combined in recent months
within Wikimedia France, culminating in some members questioning its
governance. On this occasion, the community showed a behaviour which is not
suitable for a democratic association.

Some members behave like a pack of hounds, leading to the departure of the
executive director Nathalie Martin, after such a harassment on lists and
social media that she filed a complaint against 12 people. That makes 13
with the complaint she already filed against the ex-chair Christophe Henner
– now chair of the Wikimedia Foundation – for sexual harassment at the time
they worked together. Other members of the board have been systematically
harassed, sometimes with incredibly chauvinistic statements, leading to the
departure of all the board but one member.

I continuously sent messages, from July to October, to the Foundation to
warn them of what was going on. I even met its Legal Director, LaPorte, and
its Chair, Henner. They did nothing to counter these violence, part of
which took place on the lists and websites of the Foundation – they did
nothing to protect these women. On the contrary, they continuously
questioned the words and deeds of Wikimedia France board, providing
legitimacy to those who spread obnoxious rumours and committed violence and
abuse. Their sole preoccupation was to avoid a scandal, silence the
victims, and protect their Chair.

Within an organization which struggles to find new members, which
endeavours to be women-friendly and which communicate on their desire to be
more inclusive, it raises a lot of questions. Even Hollywood begins to
react and denounce people such as Weinstein: it is properly unbearable that
the digital world – and not anyone, but one committed to the greater good –
still hides the dust under the rug and refuse to take their responsibility
against morbid, dangerous, violent or sexist behaviours.

Given all that, and after losing all hope to be heard – after months
talking to a blank wall – I’m leaving Wikimedia France, resigning from it
Scientific Committee, and strongly condemn the toxic and irresponsible
strategy of the Wikimedia Foundation.

I also inform you that

*Frédéric Martel, culture and media journalist and author (France Culture)
*Laurent Le Bon, president of the Picasso Museum
*Cédric Villani, mathematician, Fields medallist

are also resigning from their position on the scientific committee.

Best,

Rémi Mathis
Chair 2011-2014
Chair of the Scientific Committee 2014-2017
Global Wikipedian of the Year 2013

[thekohser]

Rémi Mathis is resigning from Wikimedia France. He makes the following statement...

(link) for those who wish to see the note and the follow-up, which includes a dressing down of the CEO of WMF.

[Poetlister]

Rémi Mathis is resigning from Wikimedia France. He makes the following statement...

(link) for those who wish to see the note and the follow-up, which includes a dressing down of the CEO of WMF.

Sorry not to provide a link. I got that by e-mail before it went online. For those who can read French, it's worth reading the fuller, French version which is linked from his English post.

[Graaf Statler]

I have read the French version. And also the statement of Katherine Maher, and it is to me complete clear WMF can't handle this crisis. They think, well we replace a few people, and the problems are solved. That is untrue. The problems in this wiki's are structural, because they have (dis)functioned for years without any serious control and are a internal chaos. WMF was and is still blind with there good faith mania for the real problems, and they have no idea were they are talking about!

[dogbiscuit]

Hi Emeric,

I am very pleased that you take mental health seriously. I remember, not so
long ago, that your actions while you were in Wikimedia France had serious
impact on the mental health of at least two of your members.

In January, someone had a meltdown just in front of you. Could you remind
us what you did after that ?

In April, you learnt that your actions as a chair caused me a medical
leave. What can the Foundation and the movement as a whole learn about how
you dealt with the situation ?

Warmly,

Caroline

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/w ... 88843.html

Clearly nothing to see here, WMF a professional organisation that knows how to handle the inevitable problems that arise.

It strikes me that we are seeing the consequences of a group who many years ago proclaimed that real world rules were wrong and what was needed was the new Wikipedian way of doing things. It is hardly surprising that a group that has attempted to overthrow rules of society evolved over centuries has made a disaster of doing things in their brave new way.

PS No idea who these people are, but it ain't clever and it ain't pretty.

[thekohser]

It strikes me that we are seeing the consequences of a group who many years ago proclaimed that real world rules were wrong and what was needed was the new Wikipedian way of doing things. It is hardly surprising that a group that has attempted to overthrow rules of society evolved over centuries has made a disaster of doing things in their brave new way.

Or, in other words, the Friendly Safe Spacer practices are coming home to roost.

[Bezdomni]

(The argument Henner advances that WM France is entirely independent of the WMF is bogus if all of WM France's funding comes from the WMF as Thierry Noisette suggests in the article cited above... no judge is going to look at an association which receives all of its funding from a single entity as being independent of that entity... or at least one wouldn't think so.)

odd echoes...

Cette ingérence dans la gouvernance de l’association est juridiquement très risquée : les conditions posées par la Wikimedia Foundation à Wikimédia France (selon un système censé être indépendant) sont tellement aliénantes qu’un tribunal reconnaîtrait certainement que Wikimédia France n’est plus indépendante, et n’est qu’une sous-entité de la Foundation, et donc responsable en tant qu’hébergeur du contenu de la Wikipédia francophone.

source

This (inappropriate) interference in the governance of the association is legally very risky: the conditions the WMF posed on WM France (according to a system meant to be independent) are so alienating that a court would certainly recognize that Wikimedia France is no longer independent, and that it is only a sub-entity of the Foundation, and, as such, is legally liable for hosting the content of fr.wp

Unsurprisingly, nobody disrupted the Berkman center luncheon with any such tough questions.

edit of translation: responsable = liable

[Midsize Jake]

Or, in other words, the Friendly Safe Spacer practices are coming home to roost.

Yeah, but let's be fair to the politically-correct folks - in principle, "safe space policies" are meant to keep the opposition out of public organizational meetings and what-not when the opposition is assumed to be loud, "violent" and/or obnoxious. One can criticize their existence and use, in many cases rightly so, but what these WMF chapters are starting to do now is use these kinds of rationales to squelch internal dissent.

Again, one can always argue that this is the inevitable result of having such "policies" in the first place, but we don't hear about it so much in most other organizations that claim to welcome public participation. IMO this is more like the evolution of Wikimedia's institutionalized arrogance combined with its forever-ongoing "fetishization" of anonymity - they can't trust their own people, or anybody, but they need to keep up those participation numbers, so ultimately they end up abusing their own rules when there's a problem. This is either because they really have no alternative, or because they think that's the only way to avoid looking like a dysfunctional organization.

[Graaf Statler]

Or, in other words, the Friendly Safe Spacer practices are coming home to roost.

Yeah, but let's be fair to the politically-correct folks - in principle, "safe space policies" are meant to keep the opposition out of public organizational meetings and what-not when the opposition is assumed to be loud, "violent" and/or obnoxious. One can criticize their existence and use, in many cases rightly so, but what these WMF chapters are starting to do now is use these kinds of rationales to squelch internal dissent.

Again, one can always argue that this is the inevitable result of having such "policies" in the first place, but we don't hear about it so much in most other organizations that claim to welcome public participation. IMO this is more like the evolution of Wikimedia's institutionalized arrogance combined with its forever-ongoing "fetishization" of anonymity - they can't trust their own people, or anybody, but they need to keep up those participation numbers, so ultimately they end up abusing their own rules when there's a problem. This is either because they really have no alternative, or because they think that's the only way to avoid looking like a dysfunctional organization.

You are complete right. In fact this wiki's have died. The good editors has left a long time ago, and what is left are a few diehards who most times have some interest, like WIR jobs, there CV, there article or about a friend, a job in Wikimedia, etc. But they are not interested in Wikipedia anymore, they are seldom still active there. But, also this group, what is left, is divided and there are tensions. You see that now on WP-NL, they have trolled every critical out, and now Ziko van Dijk, formal chairman started a few days ago to complain about that Strategic Direction Wikimedia 2030, both on the WM Wiki as on WP-NL. It is a matter of time till it explodes, just like it did on WP-Fr. And on WP-NL they were also talking about that safe space policies a few mouths ago. It is a kind of last lifeline buoy.

[thekohser]

Unsurprisingly, nobody disrupted the Berkman center luncheon with any such tough questions.

You mean the Berkman Klein center? I learned more about that place from Wikipedia's article about it, which was conveniently edited by User BKCHarvard (T-C-L).

When SJ Klein is thanked by Maher, I can't help but imagining that her comment would be transcribed as, "Thank you, Essjay".

[Bezdomni]

Aha, I wondered who that guy was. http://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/

[Graaf Statler]

Unsurprisingly, nobody disrupted the Berkman center luncheon with any such tough questions.

Yeh, those were hard hitting questions to our giggling hippy girl with here pink sunglasses. And really the questions which I expect of a Harvard Law School Professor.
I am deeply impressed. Only, what had it to do with the question "Will Wikipedia exist in 20 years?", because that is complete unclear to me.

[Bezdomni]

Berkman: "If Wikipedia is the flagship (of peer production), where's the fleet?" (working together is difficult, with tensions between labor & capital)

Maher seems to point to WikiBase as a dominant ontology influencer. Folksonomies (crowd-abstracted quintessences) apparently have equity value that will attract capital institutional partners. Now whether WikiBase's ontologies are as complete as Elseviers', that's another question, though apparently they were better than the Smithsonian's.

I'm not sure she really answered the question, which might be caricatured as "If WikiCrappo (ever declines / has declined) into complete chaos, where are the local spin-offs that the WMF software (mediawiki) has nurtured for local projects that do not necessarily seek to broadcast globally?" If it had something to compare itself to, the flagship might learn to better address the inevitable periods of sclerosis in a governance structure which elevates select members to judge-for-life status. Maybe it's too bad the WMF doesn't encourage programs they won't themselves be hosting, because the concentration of "common knowledge" in one equity warehouse makes that depot a (legal, vandalism, arson) target when governance goes haywire and laws inevitably get broken. (no propaganda on election weekends in sovereign nations, no libel on BLP / BCP / talk pages / log entries, no fencing of stolen monkey souls, no identity theft, etc.)

aspirin

[Graaf Statler]

Berkman: "If Wikipedia is the flagship (of peer production), where's the fleet?" (working together is difficult, with tensions between labor & capital)

Maher seems to point to WikiBase as a dominant ontology influencer. Folksonomies (crowd-abstracted quintessences) apparently have equity value that will attract capital institutional partners. Now whether WikiBase's ontologies are as complete as Elseviers', that's another question, though apparently they were better than the Smithsonian's.

I'm not sure she really answered the question, which might be caricatured as "If WikiCrappo (ever declines / has declined) into complete chaos, where are the local spin-offs that the WMF software (mediawiki) has nurtured for local projects that do not necessarily seek to broadcast globally?" If it had something to compare itself to, the flagship might learn to better address the inevitable periods of sclerosis in a governance structure which elevates select members to judge-for-life status. Maybe it's too bad the WMF doesn't encourage programs they won't themselves be hosting, because the concentration of "common knowledge" in one equity warehouse makes that depot a (legal, vandalism, arson) target when governance goes haywire and laws inevitably get broken. (no propaganda on election weekends in sovereign nations, no libel on BLP / BCP / talk pages / log entries, no fencing of stolen monkey souls, no identity theft, etc.)

aspirin

I am afraid I am to much a feet on the ground type for this lovely hippy girl. I always was, also when I used to live in the hippie communities in Greece and the Netherlands. We were talking about peace and love, and smoking pot, but were for the hell is she talking about?? And what did she smoke?