Read The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward R. Tufte Online

the-visual-display-of-quantitative-information

The Visual Display of Quantitative Information...

Title : The Visual Display of Quantitative Information
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780318029924
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 197 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

The Visual Display of Quantitative Information Reviews

  • Zanna
    2019-01-19 09:11

    When I started secondary school I was mildly apprehensive about 'physics', an unfamiliar word that elicited an actual shudder from my mother. Fortunately, my elderly teacher had an infectious affection for his subject. I remember that he noticed me examining the monthly night-sky chart pinned to the classroom door, and thereafter would print off an extra copy specially and wordlessly hand it to me if he saw me in the corridor (never in class, not wishing to embarrass me*) Our first lessons tried to tell us what the subject was all about, and a poetic but confusing article telling me that it was about, among other things, not being able to push a blade of grass into the trunk of an oak tree demonstrated clearly that some things are best learned by seeing and doing than by reading.*he needn't have worried: evidence of my geekiness was not in short supply.One of our early experiments was The One With The Pendulum, and our homework was to write it up. When I had finished it, I must have shown my Dad, as he asked why there was no graph. "We weren't told to draw a graph" I replied. "But graphs are wonderful," he said. "Let's draw one anyway." and he showed me how. Our graph, which is probably still in my parents' attic somewhere, plotted length of pendulum against swing time, which unfortunately yields an exponential curve that's hard to work with. You can linearise the graph's equation by plotting the square of the time period, and then the gradient tells us 'little g', the strength of the Earth's gravitational field. Neat, eh?I have taught science for a few years now and I could not have failed to notice that kids hate graphs and graph drawing. It is unquestionably hard work and needs an understanding of numbers and design logic. I'm lucky that I got an undeserved merit for drawing an unsolicited graph in my first month of high school, because since that day I've been totally freaky for a nice chart. (These two pictures are from my own lab book, not the text) This review is dedicated to my Dad. Tufte really loves data. This book has an informative, accurate, but kinda DRY title. I would have called itSHOW US THE DATAuhhhh-uhhhh I've made a mistake. Tufte says thinking data is boring leads to bad, lying graphs. If your data is boring, just don't bother! He is crisply derisive of the idea that data needs graphically sexing up to be understood. As Freire tells usTRUST YOUR AUDIENCE.This man is not happy that graphs are designed and drawn by folks trained as artists, rather than folks trained in the relevant mathematics. "Graphical competence demands three quite different skills: the substantive, statistical and artistic... Allowing artist-illustrators to control the design and content of statistical graphics is almost like allowing typographers to control the content, style and editing of prose". Don't decorate the data, REVEAL IT.Bad graphics also lack integrity. Intead of SHOWING THE DATA, they distort it, usually for some political end. There are LOTS of examplesHowever, the concern with graphical integrity has often not helped. It tends to encourage the general dislike of graphs and the tendency for publications to dumb them down. Tufte points out that while graphical sophistication is usually low in news publications, journals and text books, the text sophistication is high, sometimes requiring expert knowledge!Many data sets are better presented in a well-organised table than in a drawing. Tufte follows this principle in presenting data on graphical sophistication and data density, and in showing his commissioned designs. "One super table is far better than a hundred little bar charts"Oh and for the love of all that is good, follow da Vinci and put the damn chart next to the text, or better nested cosily inside. None of this 'see fig. 2'Tufte radically redesigns the histogram and the scatter plot to remove distractions and non-data ink, moving towards clarity, data density and design grace. I won't spoil. As for the pie, keep it in the kitchen and put pumpkin in it: 'pie charts should never be used'Oh and there is plenty of graph-porn for us chart junkies (as opposed to chart-junk, which is definitely out). Tufte's favourite is Charles Joseph Minard's extremely famous infographic of Napoleon's army attempting to invade Russia in 1812-1813. He loves it so much it's reprinted four times...But there are all sorts of lovely maps and charts and general loveliness for your graphical delectation.Debunking the junk is what Ed is here for and the pleasure of the text is in the ARID humour he deploys and the way he trusts the reader to be a fellow smarty-pants. In more of a folks-are-smart way, not an elitist you-and-me-are-smart way. I was laughing. When a quoted designer says he's all about 'conveying the essential spirit of the data'. Tufte has got me primed. Fool NO! Show me the DATA, not its 'essence' and not its 'spirit'If you work with data, if you draw graphics, if you look at graphics, if you're interested in politics, economics, geography or science, if you like maths, art, design, truth, beauty, love…read this.

  • Lily
    2019-02-01 10:22

    2.5 stars. I read this book because 1) as a scientist, I care a lot about visualizing information in ways that are both meaningful and attractive, and 2) this book is hailed as a classic and cited by many when discussing what constitutes a good graphic. After eying it on many coffee tables and office bookshelves, I finally decided to pick it up from the library. I'm glad that I didn't buy it. There are some positives: a few inspiring examples of creative, precise designs that tell a story and reveal insights about the data. Some of the negative examples (graphs that exaggerate or obscure the data, or that are heavy-handed and ugly) are also useful to think about, and are occasionally very funny. I also liked how it touched on the history and evolution of different types of graphs. However, a major flaw is the lack of thought that was put into the writing. Many of the axioms that Tufte proposes for graphics could equally well apply to writing. For example, don't patronize your audience, and don't waste ink on non-information. Tufte unfortunately goes against both these principles with his disdainful, verbose tone. A great deal of verbiage and jargon could be stripped away to yield a text with much higher information density (to use his own term). The advice presented is reasonable, but much of it is just common sense for anyone who's paid a little attention to elementary math/statistics, or who simply takes the time to look at graphs and think about how they could be improved. He also contradicts his own advice about providing adequate explanation for plots by offering zero explanation for several plots that are nearly inscrutable, beyond saying "this is great" or "this is silly". His attitude towards artists is especially belittling - I was hoping for a more thoughtful take on the balance between beauty and practicality in graphic design. All in all, I think this the book has some smart points and good images, but not quite enough to warrant its position on a pedestal.

  • Hadrian
    2019-01-24 05:29

    I've read this previously, but I was reminded of it again when someone brought up the ink/information ratio. It's vital for anybody in science, research, or business, anybody who has to make presentations or write reports or analyze data, and is an antidote to years of sloppy PowerPoints and reading captions verbatim off of slides.

  • Kelly H. (Maybedog)
    2019-02-09 08:32

    Edward Tufte is brilliant. His books, including this one, are artwork disguised as a textbook. The purpose of all three is to explain both good and bad ways of explaining information but they are so much more than that. There is a rich history interwoven in the books' pages. The examples are so interesting that I found myself learning more than just how to convey information. For example, one of the best graphics for conveying information ever made is a chart/map tracking Napoleon Bonaparte's army's march across Europe which is so impressive it's difficult to describe. The graph includes information about army size, location and timeline in a very readable, straightforwd and yet still beautiful way. I was fortunate enough to attend one of his seminars after I was already a fan (my work paid for it and I got to keep the books!) which delves into all of his texts. I highly recommend it because he synthesizes the information beautifully and succinctly and you get all of his books and publications in print. If you can't make the seminar (no, I do not get any kickbacks, promise) the books are rather complex but they are absolutely stunning and make fascinating reading.

  • Roger Wood
    2019-01-23 02:13

    The book led was one of the most enlightening books that I've every read. I've always had a penchant for using numbers, images, and heuristics to explain, and began taking Edward Tufte's courses when the opportunity arose, starting in 1998. He held them in hotel ballrooms throughout the United States, and his followers attended with cult-like repetition, sometimes registering for the same course 6 times in one year.Edward Tufte is one of the most elegant designers of information alive today, the book was the beginning of my devotion to his philosophy of the visual articulation of facts, figures, and abstract concepts. This book, as well as professor Tufte's academic publishing, have influenced the world around us in so many ways. From the eloquent graphical explanations in the New York Times, to the vibrant digital displays of political elections on Fox News, and the historical statistics of hurricanes put forth on Weather Channel - all of this traces its heritage back to Edward Tufte and his award winning books. If you want to escape the two-dimensional hell of explanation that is the improper use of Powerpoint, this books and its two companions, provide safe passage to the promised land of clear, robust, graphical discourses of complex ideas.

  • Bruce
    2019-02-10 02:20

    Well, 3 1/2 stars, really, but GoodReads won't permit that. Don't let the horrifically dull title fool you. Edward Tufte knows a thing or two about chart design, to say the least (he's built a second career on this obsession). Think this is dull stuff? Ha, and again I say ha. It's darn sexy. Don't believe me? Consider this consequence of the era of optimism or this version of Little Red Riding Hood or this nifty day-in-the-life or this graphic design shop which is such a brilliant specialist in the whimsical-cum-nostalgic info-graphic style that They Might Be Giants commissioned them to produce everything from the liner notes to Mink Car to the flash animations embedded on No! to their website TMBG.com.And Tufte's book has its share of worthwhile "Aha!" moments as well. Take this snippet from p. 20, which follows six maps of the continental US depicting various types of cancer over a 19 year period by age, sex, and county. Tufte points out the clarity and key moments of interest in the various images (such as death "rates in areas where you have lived"), and then critiques: "The maps repay careful study. Notice how quickly and naturally our attention has been directed toward exploring the substantive content of the data rather than toward questions of methodology and technique. Nonetheless the maps do have their flaws. They wrongly equate the visual importance of each county with its geographic area rather than with the number of people living in the county (or the number of cancer deaths). Our visual impression of the data is entangled with the circumstance of geographic boundaries, shapes, and areas -- the chronic problem afflicting shaded-in-area designs of such 'blot maps' or 'patch maps.'" He goes on to further dissect the presentation and the foundational data in a way that I would never have dreamed of. Talk about your perfectionists... these map examples were drawn by him.At any rate, this book is all about comprehensible, usable design, and Tufte even designed it for maximum impact. Its slim girth (a mere 190 pages) is chock-full of historic graphical errors and successes, but you can read the first 50 alone and get the idea. Given that, I'm a bit taken aback (and yet strangely curious) to have discovered that Tufte has managed to produce at least three more disparate volumes.However, I've since learned that Tufte has some serious (and seriously earned) followers. Just last week, on the theory of in for a penny, in for a pound, I attended a program on improving data analytics, and was pulled aside at the end by one of the organizers who spotted my copy of The Visual Display.... "An important book," he sagely nodded. "You should have them all. But check out Steven Few's perceptualedge.com," he continued. "That's where the rubber really meets the road."Okay, fine, leave me alone! I swear that I'll never look at another pie chart again, just don't make me give up my dependence on the color copier?

  • Paula
    2019-02-12 09:33

    This is a book about graphs.How, you ask, could anyone write a book about graphs, let alone read one? Surely you've never found the sex appeal of a bar chart, the seductiveness of a scatterplot. Well my friend, you simply have never realized the power of a well-designed graph. Tufte took on the challenge of making visual information interesting decades ago, and it's still considered one of the top 100 books of the 20th century. He shows examples of what the best displays and worst displays are in the first part of the book. In the second, he breaks down graphs piece by piece as the reader learns how to construct a useful and informative graph, chart, table, or whathaveyou. The best graphs, etc., aren't flashy. You don't need any fancy computers to make them-in fact, Tufte particularly disdains computer programs for making everything busy and excessive. As is true of most things in life, the idea behind a graph is far more important and interesting than how it looks. A good display conveys that information almost instinctively and makes relationships clear. A poor display hides non-ideas behind graphics and labels. A terrible display actually distorts information; and to Tufte, these are inexcusable lies. Even though the likelihood of me making a chart in the near future is slim, I was surprised by how much thought it takes to develop a good display. I also think it made me a better display reader-something that comes in handy when reading the paper or watching the Colbet Report. Above all, this book reinforces the primary rule of communication: start with a good idea, and edit it down until only what's necessary remains.

  • Isk
    2019-02-09 03:28

    One-sentence summary:The graphical analogue of Elements of Style: obvious (avoid junk!), useless, contradictory, and wrong.Don't understand the hype about this book; it's super outdated (refers mainly to hand-drawn-ish charts; and considering most of use standard tools to create our visualizations, not sure how we're supposed to actually implement his suggestions), and a lot of the advice and "good" examples (Marey's train schedule? Come on!) are horrible (and even contradictory -- at one point he bemoans Chernoff faces and later exhibits them in an exemplar).Ignore Part 1 (the first three chapters) entirely. Skim the rest.Two principles:1. Maximize data-ink ratio2. Avoid chartjunk (e.g., moire, grids, and ducks)Apply these two principles:1. Redesign box plot (not sure if I agree, though the redesigned box plot does look more elegant)2. Scatterplot -> range frame3. Multifunctioning graphical elements (e.g., stem-and-leaf plot)4. Graphics should tend to the horizontal

  • Daniel Rekshan
    2019-02-08 05:07

    People have told me to read this book for years and I've always been impressed by the strength of their recommendations.However, on reading this book, I was initially underwhelmed. I felt like Tufte was just rehashing common sense about graphs. I read through it and found myself saying, 'yeah yeah, I get it.'On reflection a week after finishing, I realized this book is genius. Tufte concisely and clearly articulates principles, which should be common sense, so well that they have appearance to be common sense.

  • Sasha
    2019-01-24 03:21

    Never was a dude so salty about bad graphs and bad data. Humorous as well as clever.

  • This Is Not The Michael You're Looking For
    2019-01-22 09:23

    Before going into the review itself, a comment on a slight oddity of the book (which will become important in the review): The copy I read is the 7th printing (March 2011) of the second edition (originally published in 2001; the first edition was published in 1982). The reason I bring this up is a discrepancy not mentioned anywhere in/on the book or on any website I could find. At least one chapter has been rewritten (or added) since the second edition was originally published. Chapter 8 contains examples and data from 2003 and 2004, as well as ending with a data point from 2009! Generally, one would consider the rewriting of a chapter (rather than the correction of typos and other errors) to be, if not a new edition, at least worthy of mentioning in the description of the book, but no such mention has been made. Without a copy of an earlier printing of the same edition, I cannot comment on whether other changes are present or absent; this was the only chapter where I noticed data or examples that post-date the original second edition printing.---This book by Edward Tufte is considered a classic in graphics design and its easy to see why. Filled with examples of both good and bad graphic design, he eloquently argues for rules of design that maximize information and "truth" to avoid misinformation and distraction. Truly a masterwork, it is not without flaws. He has a tendency toward hyperbole, declaring certain graphs to be the "worst ever made" or "best ever made". He accuses many graphical designers of deliberately lying to the consumer, when the reality in many (although certainly not all) cases is likely more a case of incompetence or ignorance. He states rules to follow with a certainty that are sometimes themselves not backed up with data, but rather simply reflect opinion.And finally, some of his principles lack any real discussion or acknowledgement or context, something which stands out in particular with the recognition that most of the examples are rather dated. For example, he has a large discussion focused on the size of printed graphics, a discussion which completely ignores any context in which a graphic might be presented beyond the printed page. When the second edition was originally printed in 2001, most scientific presentations were still using overheads or physical slides; the widespread use of Powerpoint for presentations did not take off until a few years after the book was published. However, the chapter with this discussion is the one mentioned above that has clearly been updated since 2009! This enhances the dated feeling of some of the discussion, making one wonder if there is a bit of statistical and graphic Luddite influence to the writing.I should say that he does mention Powerpoint and Excel at one point with clear disgust, and I am the first to agree that using either for designing *printed* graphics is a very poor choice. However, for for visual presentation in a talk or lecture, Powerpoint is better than many of its competitors. Unfortunately, some of his design discussion simply doesn't translate to non-printed publication, including presentations and graphics to be found on the web, which may have very different design considerations, not the least of which is the potential for consumer interactivity. (He has written additional books, some of which I plan on reading, and some of which may get into these issues, although I suspect not).Despite all of these flaws, I truly believe the book is incredibly well done and its influence since it was originally published cannot be understated. Scattered throughout the book, often (although not always) recapped at the end of chapters, are "rules" of design that are so striking in their statement, I plan on collecting most of them onto a single piece of paper to hang on the wall by my desk as a visual reminder of what to do and think about when designing my own graphics going forward. That, more than anything else, illustrates my feelings toward this book.

  • Padraig
    2019-01-29 07:35

    It's good, I guess I’m knocking a star off because it focuses on paper-based graphs as opposed to computer ones (not really the fault of the book as it was first published in 1983).The book is like the graph equivalent of Strunk & White’s The Elements of Style. Where Strunk says ‘Omit needless words.’, Tufte says ‘Omit needless ink.’ (I’m paraphrasing). Despite concerning itself with paper-based graphs, the concepts still apply, and if I took one lesson from the book, it’s to let the data shine through.The production of the book is beautiful, it’s printed on vellum-like paper, and there are many example graphs, good and bad, going back to the 1700s. For an academic-style book, it’s also very readable.There’s another message of the book, which is the under-utilisation of graphs. Graphs are capable of conveying a large amount of information very concisely, showing correlations between inputs, but how often do you see graphs in newspapers? Not nearly enough.

  • Michael Economy
    2019-02-12 05:15

    I'm imaging tufte writing up this rant in a basement with "we're not gonna take it" blaring in the background, every few paragraphs he mumbles something like "this will show them!" to himself.Section two is pretty much the kind of five paragraph essay I was required to write in school. It's not very often someone makes an argument that hard.Overall, this book is awesome, the book isn't 100% up to date, but the same complains with visualizations would still apply.I'm all amped up to create lots of info graphics now.

  • Lindig
    2019-02-19 08:20

    I discovered Tufte when I was collecting movable books and this showed up in my bookstore with a pop-up pyramid in it. I found out later that he had self-published this title because no printer or publisher he approached wanted to do the pop-up and he was determined to have it.It's a wonderful explication of the ways in which to analyze data and figure out how to present it in clean, efficient ways that slide the information into waiting minds. Essential.And anybody who enjoys this book will like the site flowingdata.com

  • Steve
    2019-02-13 08:07

    I went to a Tufte course and four of his publications were given out as part of the course fee. This is the first one he published on this subject, and the first I've read. Overall, if you've never made a statistical graphic, this covers some of the basics but it feels a bit dated as well. Read this book if you're looking for some history on the subject of plotting data, and plenty of opinions from the (well-respected) author.I'm no stranger to making statistical graphics, it's a task that comes up when writing research publications, at work, and sometimes in my home projects. I was hoping to find some novel ways to think about plotting data, or at least some clean guidelines beyond those I already knew (e.g., use less ink, focus on data-ink, and emphasize unexpected or critical results). Since I had no formal training in the subject just exposure to many examples and some tips from random blog posts over the years I figured I had a lot to learn. With that perspective, the material in this book was a bit of a let down. I have to imagine that when it was written, Tufte dropped some wisdom on chart designers, but it has since percolated out into the mainstream, both embedded in tools and anecdotal advice given to plotters.Tufte has a justifiably dim view on how computer drawing tools were used at the time to make charts, but I think he unrealistically kept the focus on manual production of plots in the second edition. As a point of reference, I have never published in a venue that allowed hand-drawn graphics to be included in a manuscript, and I think that's pretty much a universal standard these days. He also highlights a few plot designs that were pretty interesting (and unused) in 1980 when this first came out, but have not caught on at all in the fields that I know of in the 35 years since. Time to revisit their utility, maybe? One major omission in this book was the role of bias in chart preparation. Some data visualizations are pretty straight forward and have very little bias injected into the display (think scatterplots, with simple points that let you pull out their patterns using "visual analytics"). Now consider his proposed "rugplot", which is basically a series of 2D scatterplots arranged next to each other such that 1 dimension is shared between adjacent plots (just look at the pic near "Data Ink Minimization 135" in the link). There is a huge hidden bias here: the chart preparer can select any pair of the N dimensions to show next to each other. Different choices will lead to different stories being told, but with no way for the viewer to really consider alternative hypotheses than the one presented by the designer. But what if you wanted to pick other pairs of dimensions to look through? You can't. Since there are so many possible combinations to choose from, you would be right to doubt that the designer chose the "best" or even a "fair" representation of the data. This is one specific example of bias in data visualization, but given that this problem crops up in sufficiently complex multi-dimensional data source such as those championed by Tufte, I would have thought it would have been a topic of discussion in the text.Well, this review got away from me a bit. The book is a fun thing to flip through, it's easy reading, and just feels great to hold. More non-fiction books should be like this! One of his updated books might be more fulfilling to a student of modern statistical graphics, but this one certainly frames the history and advances through the 1970s quite well, if that's what you're looking for.

  • Kjetil Endresen
    2019-02-11 04:14

    This book was a joy to read.The book is essentially about graphical display of information, like the graphs we put in our powerpoints and maps in our texts. It is not a gallery of modern and beautiful visualizations as could be expected, rather, it takes on the history and creation of visualizing data in the 1600s and forward, and giving some general principles that goes for all display of information. He talks about data pr. square centimeter and suggest that the human eye can see differences down to 0,1mm and it can therefore be useful to have as much data possible close together. He talks about data-ink maximization where he compares amount of data to used ink, and suggest that as much of the inkas possible used should be used for information, rather than grids, lines and what he calls "chart junk"."Graphical elegance is often found in simplicity of design and complexity of data".Edward Tufte has in addition designed and published the book himself, and I can recommend it to everyone dealing with visualizations and maps in general, and especially to those dealing with statistics and economics.

  • Jacob Ritchie
    2019-01-26 07:19

    Some good shit!!! 💯

  • Min Tran
    2019-02-19 06:14

    A classic!

  • Louis
    2019-01-19 08:37

    The book goes through many examples of displaying information visually. And it does so through a historical context, reminding us that the issues that are faced and the many ways to (mis)-represent them have been around for centuries.What I'm reminded of is that statistics and data analysis is not just about methods, but they are means of communication. And like all methods of communication, they can be made less clear whenever you have something other than clear communication as the goal.Many of the techniques discussed in the creation of various plots and charts are artifacts of when printing graphics was done by ink and pen, and difficult to reproduce. But the book's focus is not on the techniques of making these visual displays, but on the principles in designing efficient displays.I use a number of data analysis packages and packages, Excel, R, Python, etc. After reading this it makes me look at these other packages and their options differently, wanting to evaluate the choices there designers made. It also makes me look at charts and graphs on internet sites, newspapers and magazines differently. I imagine the author would consider that to be a success.

  • Lucas
    2019-02-10 03:25

    This is a helpful and thoughtful work, and I enjoyed it almost as much for its book-design as for the design of its charts and graphs. Certainly I will now think differently about such items. I also look forwards to trying tol roll sparklines into my academic work.

  • Todd N
    2019-02-19 09:26

    Since I work for a business intelligence company I figured I might as well learn something about the grammar of data visualization. And this is definitely the Strunk and White of displaying data.I especially liked the historical tour of data display. It showed how Snow’s map helped to end an cholera epidemic in England and prove that contaminated water was indeed the causative agent. And the famous graphic of Napoleon’s march to Moscow and back that makes the terrible loss of life very clear. It made me a little sad that almost all graphics we encounter these days are generated by computers and not by artists.It’s a very easy read (about 3-4 hours) and a lot of it seems so obvious until you actually try to put it into practice.There are several more books in the series that I’m working my way through now.

  • Sashko Valyus
    2019-02-07 08:34

    Книга про те як перетворювати цифри в красиві мінімалістичні графіки. Досить занудна не дивлячись не те, що контенту не багато. Основні тезиси:- розберіться спочатку в тому, що маєте малювати- не брешіть графіком, і не дайте виглядом неправильного розуміння- при оцінці цін на часовій шкалі, варто враховувати рівень інфляції- відсікайте все лишнє і надавате додаткової цінності

  • Margie
    2019-02-10 07:13

    Everyone should read this book. Although I am not yet adept at creating data-rich, well-designed visual displays of information (and frankly, I blame spawn-of-satan Microsoft), Tufte's books at least have taught me to recognize the inferiority of other's attempts (and the limitations of Microsoft's software).

  • ^
    2019-02-02 07:18

    Utterly superb. Utterly unmissable. A book which also indirectly draws one's serious attention to the significant dangers of information LOSS in our computer age, because the incredible subtlety of information capable of expression via the medium of pen and ink on paper.

  • Sally
    2019-02-19 08:33

    A well-produced book, where for a wonder each graph and its accompanying text are visible together. Many interesting graphs; an initial discusion of history, the rest of the book being criticism. The author is expert but somewhat opinionated (never, ever use a pie chart?)

  • Dustin
    2019-01-31 08:16

    Reads quickly. I'll never design a graph the same way again.

  • Stanley
    2019-01-29 07:12

    If my textbooks in school were drawn like this one, I might actually have read them.

  • Marjori
    2019-02-07 10:12

    Not as organized as his later works. Beautiful Evidence published in 2006 compiles most of the good work from his books.But this one still contains very useful tips and examples!

  • Spencer
    2019-02-04 07:16

    what makes a graph sweet? what makes a graph lame? do you care? do you care enough to read all 4 of this authors books on the subject?

  • Annuska
    2019-02-18 04:31

    Classic