MyOOPS開放式課程
請加入會員以使用更多個人化功能
來自全球頂尖大學的開放式課程,現在由世界各國的數千名義工志工為您翻譯成中文。請免費享用!
課程來源:TED
     

Rachel Botsman 談協作消費的案例

Rachel Botsman: The case for collaborative consumption

 

 

講者:Rachel Botsman

2010年5月演講,2010年12月在TEDxSydney上線

 

翻譯:趙弘

編輯:洪曉慧

簡繁轉換:劉契良

後制:趙弘

字幕影片後制:謝旻均

 

影片請按此下載

MAC及手持裝置版本請按此下載

閱讀中文字幕純文字版本

 

關於這場演講

在TEDxSydney,Rachel Botsman說我們「熱衷分享」,並表明Zipcar和Swaptree這類網站在改變著人類的行為規則。

 

關於Rachel Botsman

Rachel Botsman 撰寫和演講了關於通過網路技術進行協作和分享的影響力,以及它將如何改變商業、消費主義和我們的生活方式。她是《何為我的就是你的:協作消費的興起》一書的合著者。

 

為何要聽她演講:

Rachel Botsman 是《何為我的就是你的:協作消費的興起》一書的合著者。她是一名社會革新者,撰寫、查閱和演講了關於通過網路技術進行協作和分享的影響力,以及它將如何改變商業、消費主義和我們的生活方式。

 

她是CCLab的創始人,一個創新培育中心,與創業公司、大公司和當地政府部門合作,基於協作消費的理念,傳遞創新的解決方案。她就品牌與創新策略方面諮詢了財富500強公司與全球領先的非營利組織,她還是William J. Clinton基金會的前任董事。

 

Rachel Botsman的英語網上資料

主頁: rachelbotsman.com

主頁: collaborativeconsumption.com

Twitter: @rachelbotsman

 

 

[TED科技‧娛樂‧設計]

已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄(繁體)(簡體)。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

 

Rachel Botsman 談協作消費的案例

 

今天我想談一下,協作消費的興起。我會解釋它是什麼,並想在15分鐘內讓你相信,這不是個站不住腳的想法,或者一個短期趨勢,而是一個強大的文化和經濟力量。不單重塑了我們的消費物件,還有我們的消費方式。

我將以一個看似簡單的例子開頭。舉一下手,多少人擁有書籍、CD、DVD或者視頻,放在家中的某個角落,你可能不會看第二遍,但你又捨不得扔掉?我看不到所有人,但看上去所有人都舉手了。在我們家中櫃裡有一套《反恐24小時》的DVD,確切說是第六季,我想這是三年前買下來做聖誕禮物的。我丈夫Chris,還有我,很愛這部劇。但要面對現實,當你看過一遍,或者兩遍,你一定不想再看下去,因為你已經知道Jack Bauer怎樣打敗恐怖分子。因此我們架子上的東西,對我們已用處不大,但對其他人仍有即時價值。在講下去之前,我有一事告白。我在紐約住了十年,而且我對《慾望城市》很有興趣。我想把前集重看一遍,作為下週續集播放前的熱身。因此我能否把我們不想要的《反恐24小時》,換成想要的《慾望城市》呢?你可能已經注意到,一個新生領域已經出現,叫做交換交易。關於交換交易,最簡單的比喻,就像一個網上約會服務,提供給所有你不想要的東西。它所能實現的就是通過網際網路創造無窮的市場,將路人甲的所有物,與路人丙的需求物匹配,無論是什麼物件。

幾週前,我去了這樣的一家網站,叫做Swaptree。裡面有超過59300件物品,可以用我的《反恐24小時》即刻換得。想不到,位於加州洛城近郊Reseda的用戶rondoron,願意用他或她的幾近全新的《慾望城市》,換我的《反恐24小時》。換句話說,所發生的是Swaptree解決了我棘手的問題,經濟學家稱其為「需求的一致」,用了不到60秒。更令人驚奇的是,它會當場列印一張購買標籤,因為它知道物品的重量。這些就是諸如Swaptree的網站背後,技術層面的奇跡。但我的興趣不在這裡,也不在Swaptree本身。

我熱衷的,這幾年來致力研究的,是這些體制內在的協作行為和信任機制。當你想想看,就算在幾年前,這都是個瘋狂的想法。我會把我的物品與一個完全陌生人交換,我不知道對方的真名,也不經過任何金錢交易。然而Swaptree上99%的交易都進行的很順利,剩下那1%的負面評價,是為一些較輕微的原因,如物品沒有及時送達。這是怎麼一回事?一股極其強大的力量,有著巨大商業和文化影響已,登上舞臺。也就是,這種技術,使得陌生人互相信任成為可能。如今我們住在地球村,我們可以模擬從前只能面對面進行的活動,但其規模前所未有。因此真實發生的,是社交網路和即時技術,帶我們回到過去。我們以物易物、交換、分享,這些被重塑成一種充滿活力和吸引力的形式。我認為迷人的,是我們讓世界一起分享,不管是在鄰里、學校,辦公室,或是Facebook網路。這就形成一種經濟形態,即我的就是你的。從強大的eBay,網上交易的始祖,到汽車共用公司,如GoGet。你可以按月付費,按小時租車。再到社會信貸平臺,如Zopa,會從每個人手中,取100美元,將其匹配給世界每個角落的借款者。我們再次共用與協作,以一種我認為更流行而非嬉皮的方式,我將這種潮流稱為協作消費。

在我深入協作消費的不同體系之前,我想回答一下這個每位作者都會被問到的問題,即這個想法源自何處。我想說,早上我一覺醒來,然後說:「我要寫協作消費」。但實際上是由於錯綜複雜的一些看似不相關的想法。接下來,你會看到,有點像放禮炮的樣子,所有概念的火花進入我腦中。我首先注意到的是,一些偉大的概念是如何產生的。從群體智慧到聰明一族,關於形成有目的團體是何其容易。而與這種群體狂熱相關的例子遍佈全球,從總統選舉,到著名的維基百科,及之中的一切,關於眾人拾柴火焰高。

當你學到一個新單詞,這個單詞便會隨處可見,這就是發生在我身上的。當我注意到,我們要從被動消費者,成為創造者,成為高度協作者,所發生的是網際網路消除了中間人的存在。因此任何人,從T恤設計者,到針織者,都能以點對點銷售為生。而這股無所不在的力量,即點對點的技術革命,意味著共用正以驚人的速度發生著。我是說,想一想真的很驚人。在這場演講的每一分鐘,都有25小時長度的YouTube視頻會被上傳到網上。我認為這些例子的奇妙之處,在於它們是如何融入我們靈長類動物的本能。我是說,我們是從猴子演變而來。我們在共用與合作中長大,這種情況已經持續了幾千年。不管是結隊打獵,還是合作耕種,在這個叫做過度消費的龐大體系到來之前,我們已築好圍牆,建立了自己的封地。但事情在變化,原因之一是數字時代居民,或稱 Y世代,他們在共用中長大,包括檔案、頻遊戲、知識,這是他們的第二天性。因此,我們千禧代,我剛好是千禧代,都是轉變中的一員。讓我們從「我」的文化,轉變為「我們」的文化。

進展如此迅速的原因,得益於行動通訊。我們處於互聯時代,可以隨時隨地聯繫到任何人,只要用小巧的掌上設備。這些在我腦中閃過,直到2008年底,經濟崩盤時期。Thomas Friedman是我最愛的《紐約時報》專欄作家之一,他深刻的評論到:2008年我們撞壁了,自然大地以及市場的承受力都已達到極限。憑理性我們知道,建立於過度消費的經濟,是龐氏騙局、紙堆的房子。然而,作為個人,我們很難知道該做什麼。

所以這些有點喋喋不休,是嗎?我腦中也曾紛亂複雜,直到我意識到發生了什麼。由於四個主要驅動力:一,對於社區重要性的信念更新,和對朋友及鄰居真義的重新定義。二,點對點的社交網路和即時技術的洪流,根本上改變了我們的生活方式。三,緊迫未解的環境問題。四,全球經濟不景氣,根本上動搖了消費行為。這四個驅動力,混合在一起,造成了巨大轉變。從過度消費定義下的20世紀,過渡到協作消費定義下的21世紀。我相信我們處於轉捩點,共用的行為,通過Flickr和Twitter這類網站,作為網路上的第二天性,已經適用於網路之外日常生活中的各領域。從上下班乘車,到時尚設計方式,到我們種植食物的方式,我們再現了消費與協作。

因此我的合著者Roo Rogers和我,收集了全世界上千個協作消費的例子。雖然它們的成熟程度和使用目的有很大不同,我們深入講究,發現它們其實可以清晰的歸為三個系統。第一是再分配市場。再分配市場,就像Swaptree,是你拿用過的或者二手物品,把它從不需要的地方,送到需要它的某處或某人。它日益被認為是第五個「R」,減少、再使用、再迴圈、修復,以及再分配。因為它延長了產品的使用週期,因而減少了浪費。

第二是協作生活方式。這是資源分享,諸如金錢、技能和時間。我打賭,幾年之內,這類詞彙,如協同工作,沙發旅行和時間銀行,會成為日常用語的一部分。我最愛的協作生活方式,叫做土地共用。這是個英國方案,將Jones先生後花園的空地,匹配給Smith太太,未來種植者,雙方一起種植食物。這是簡單而聰明的想法之一,你會奇怪為何以前沒實現過。

第三個系統,是產品服務系統。它能讓你為產品的受益付款,即它為你做的事,不需要擁有產品。這個想法尤為強大。對於一些很容易閒置的物品,可以是任何東西,從嬰兒物品,到時尚,到...多少人有電鑽?擁有電鑽?好,這個電鑽終生只會被使用12到13分鐘。(笑聲)有點可笑,是嗎?因為你需要的是一個洞,不是電鑽。(笑聲)(掌聲)因此,為何不租個電鑽?或更好的,把你的電鑽租給別人,然後從中賺點錢?這三個系統放在一起,允許人們共用資源,無需犧牲自己的生活方式,或是他們珍視的個人自由。我不是要人們在沙坑分享玩具。

因此,我想舉個例子,說明協作消費多麼強大,能改變人們的行為。平均每輛車,一年要花費8000美元。然而,這輛車平均每天有23小時閒置不用。當你考慮到這兩個事實,直接擁有一輛車,顯得有點失去意義。所以這就是汽車共用公司,如Zipcar和GoGet的作用所在。在2009年,Zipcar擁有250位參與者,來自13個城市。他們都自認是汽車迷,和汽車共用新手。他們把車鑰匙交出來一個月,取而代之,他們必須步行、騎車、坐火車,或用其他公交工具。他們只能在十分必要之時,使用Zipcar會員身份。這個挑戰的結果,僅過了一個月,讓我們吃驚。神奇的是僅通過額外的鍛煉,這些人總共減了413磅的體重。但我最喜歡的資料,是250名參與者中,有100名,不想要回車鑰匙。換句話說,汽車迷們已經失去了擁有慾。

產品服務系統已經存在了許多年,想想圖書館和洗衣店。但我認為它們進入了新時代,因為技術使得分享減少摩擦增加樂趣。《紐約時報》有一段精彩論述寫到,「分享之於擁有權,相當於iPod之於8軌音訊,太陽能之於煤炭」。我同時相信,對於我們這一代,以關係滿足需求,相比之前任何一代都更不合實際。我不想要DVD,我想要裡面的影片。我不想要笨重的電話答錄機,我想要上面的留言。我不想要CD,我想要它播放的音樂。換句話說,我要的不是物品本身,而是它能滿足的需求或體驗。這激發了大規模轉變,因為使用勝過佔有,或如Kevin Kelly,《連線》雜誌編者所說,「存取權優於擁有權」。

現在,隨著我們的所有物成為浮雲,一條模糊的界線出現,在何為我的?何為你的?與何為我們共有的?我想舉個例子,來說明演變發生的多麼迅速。這代表了8年的時間,我們從傳統的擁有汽車,到汽車共用公司,如Zipcar和GoGet。到騎車共用平臺,再到最新的點對點汽車租賃,你可以賺一些錢,通過將汽車每天閒置的23小時,租給你的鄰居。所有這些系統需要一定程度的信任,這項工作的基石就是信譽。

在過去的消費系統,信譽不是那麼重要。因為我們的信用記錄比任何雙方互評更為重要。但如今在網路上,我們留下蹤跡。我們標記的每個垃圾郵件發送者,我們發表的每個想法、每條評論,都標誌著我們能否順利合作,以及可否信任。讓我們回到第一個例子,Swaptree。我可以看到rondoron完成了533次交易,百分百好評。換句話說,我可以相信他或她。記住我的話,遲早我們能夠通過類似Google的搜索,看到我們信譽資本的累積圖。而這個信譽資本,決定了我們的協作消費權。可以說,這是種新的社會貨幣,與我們的信譽度有相同的效力。

在尾聲部分,我相信我們處於這樣的時期。我們正從大量的閒置和浪費的宿醉中蘇醒,我們向前跨躍,來建立一個更加永續的系統,用以滿足我們對於社區和個人認同的內在需求。我相信這會被當作,可以說,是一次革命。當社會面臨巨大的挑戰,發生了巨變。從個體的獲得和花費,轉為對集體產品的重新探索。我的任務是讓分享變酷,我的任務是讓分享流行。因為我確實相信,它可以瓦解過時的商業模式,幫助我們跳過過度消費這種浪費的模式,並教會我們何為足夠。

非常感謝。

(掌聲)

以下為系統擷取之英文原文

About this talk

At TEDxSydney, Rachel Botsman says we're "wired to share" -- and shows how websites like Zipcar and Swaptree are changing the rules of human behavior.

 

About Rachel Botsman

Rachel Botsman writes and speaks on the power of collaboration and sharing through network technologies, and on how it will transform business, consumerism and the way we live. She is the co-author… Full bio and more links

Transcript

So today I'm going to talk to you about the rise of collaborative consumption. I'm going to explain what it is and try and convince you -- in just 15 minutes -- that this isn't a flimsy idea, or a short-term trend, but a powerful cultural and economic force, reinventing, not just what we consume, but how we consume.

Now I'm going to start with a deceptively simple example. Hands up -- how many of you have books, CD's, DVD's, or videos lying around your house that you probably won't use again, but you can't quite bring yourself to throw away? Can't see all the hands, but it looks like all of you. On our shelves at home, we have a box set of the DVD series "24" -- season six to be precise. I think it was bought for us around three years ago for a Christmas present. Now my husband, Chris, and I love this show. But let's face it, when you've watched it once -- maybe, or twice -- you don't really want to watch it again, because you know how Jack Bauer is going to defeat the terrorists. So there is sits on our shelves obsolete to us, but with immediate latent value to someone else. Now before we go on, I have a confession to make. I lived in New York for 10 years, and I am a big fan of "Sex and the City". Now I'd love to watch the first movie again as sort of a warm-up to the sequel coming out next week. So how easily could I swap our unwanted copy of "24" for a wanted copy of "Sex and the City"? Now you may have noticed there's a new sector emerging called swap trading. Now the easiest analogy for swap trading is like an online dating service for all your unwanted media. What it does is use the internet to create an infinite marketplace to match person A's haves with person C's wants, whatever they may be.

The other week, I went on one of these sites, appropriately called Swaptree. And there were over 59,300 items that I could instantly swap for my copy of "24". Lo and behold, there in Reseda, CA was rondoron who wanted swap his or her "like new" copy of "Sex and the City" for my copy of "24". So in other words, what's happening here is that Swaptree solves my carrying company's sugar rush problem, a problem the economists call "the coincidence of wants" in approximately 60 seconds. What's even more amazing is it will print out a purchase label on the spot, because it knows the weight of the item. Now there are layers of technical wonder behind sites such as Swaptree, but that's not my interest, and nor is swap trading per se.

My passion, and what I've spent the last few years dedicated to researching, are the collaborative behaviors and trust mechanics inherent in these systems. When you think about it, it would have seemed like a crazy idea, even a few years ago, that I would swap my stuff with a total stranger whose real name I didn't know and without any money changing hands. Yet 99 percent of trades on Swaptree happen successfully. And the one percent that receive a negative rating, it's for relatively minor reasons, like the item didn't arrive on time.

So what's happening here? An extremely powerful dynamic that has huge commercial and cultural implications is at play. Namely, that technology is enabling trust between strangers. We now live in a global village where we can mimic the ties that used to happen face-to-face, but on a scale and in ways that have never been possible before. So what's actually happening is that social networks and real-time technologies are taking us back. We're bartering, trading, swapping, sharing, but they're being reinvented into dynamic and appealing forms. What I find fascinating is that we've actually wired our world to share, whether that's our neighborhood, our school, our office, or our Facebook network. And that's creating an economy of what's mine is yours. From the mighty eBay, the grandfather of exchange marketplaces, to car sharing companies such as GoGet, where you pay a monthly fee to rent cars by the hour, to social lending platforms such as Zopa, that will take anyone in this audience with $100 to lend, and match them with a borrower anywhere in the world, we're sharing and collaborating again in ways that I believe are more hip than hippie. I call this groundswell collaborative consumption.

Now before I dig into the different systems of collaborative consumption, I'd like to try and answer the question that every author rightfully gets asked, which is where did this idea come from. Now I'd like to say I woke up one morning and said, "I'm going to write about collaborative consumption." But actually it was a complicated web of seemingly disconnected ideas. Over the next minute, you're going to see a bit like a conceptual fireworks display of all the dots that went on in my head. The first thing I began to notice: how many big concepts were emerging -- from the wisdom of crowds to smart mobs -- around how ridiculously easy it is to form groups for a purpose. And linked to this crowd mania were examples all around the world -- from the election of a president to the infamous Wikipedia, and everything in between -- on what the power of numbers could achieve.

Now, you know when you learn a new word, and then you start to see that word everywhere? That's what happened to me when I noticed that we are moving from passive consumers to creators, to highly-enabled collaborators. What's happening is the Internet is removing the middleman, so that anyone from a T-shirt designer to a knitter can make a living selling peer-to-peer. And the ubiquitous force of this peer-to-peer revolution means that sharing is happening at phenomenal rates. I mean, it's amazing to think that, in every single minute of this speech, 25 hours of YouTube video will be loaded. Now what I find fascinating about these examples is how they're actually tapping in to our primate instincts. I mean, we're monkeys, and we're born and bred to share and cooperate. And were doing so for thousands of years, whether it's when we hunted in packs, or farmed in cooperatives, before this big system called hyper-consumption came along and we built these fences and created out own little fiefdoms. But things are changing, and one of the reasons why are the digital natives, or gen-Y. They're growing up sharing -- files, video games, knowledge; it's second nature to them. So we, the millennials -- I am just a millennial -- are like foot soldiers, moving us from a culture or me, to a culture of we.

The reason why it's happening so fast is because of mobile collaboration. We now live in a connected age where we can locate anyone, anytime, in real-time, from a small device in our hands. All of this was going through my head towards the end of 2008, when, of course, the great financial crash happened. Thomas Friedman is one of my favorite New York Times columnists, and he poignantly commented that 2008 is when we hit a wall when mother nature and the market both said, "No more." Now we rationally know that an economy built on hyper-consumption is a Ponzi scheme; it's a house of cards. Yet, it's hard for us to individually know what to do.

So all of this is a lot of Twittering, right? Well it was a lot of noise and complexity in my head, until actually I realized it was happening because of four key drivers. One, a renewed belief in the importance of community, and a very redefinition of what friend and neighbor really means. A torrent of peer-to-peer social networks and real-time technologies, fundamentally changing the way we behave. Three, pressing unresolved environmental concerns. And four, a global recession that has fundamentally shocked consumer behaviors. These four drivers are fusing together and creating the big shift -- away from the 20th century, defined by hyper-consumption, towards the 21st century, defined by collaborative consumption. I generally believe we're at an inflection point where the sharing behaviors -- through sites such as Flickr and Twitter that are becoming second nature online -- are being applied to offline areas of our everyday lives. From morning commutes to the way fashion is designed to the way we grow food, we are consuming and collaborating once again.

So my co-author, Roo Rogers, and I have actually gathered thousands of examples from all around the world of collaborative consumption. And although they vary enormously in scale maturity and purpose, when we dived into them, we realized that they could actually be organized into three clear systems. The first is redistribution markets. Redistribution markets -- just like Swaptree -- is when you take a used, or pre-owned, item and move it from where it's not needed to somewhere, or someone, where it is. They're increasingly thought of as the fifth 'R' -- reduce, reuse, recycle, repair and redistribute -- because they stretch the life-cycle of a product and thereby reduce waste.

The second is collaborative lifestyles. This is the sharing and resources of things like money, skills and time. I bet, in a couple of years, that phrases like coworking and couch surfing and time banks are going to become a part of everyday vernacular. One of my favorite examples of collaborative lifestyles is called Landshare. It's a scheme in the U.K. that matches Mr. Jones, with some spare space in his back garden, with Mrs. Smith, a would-be grower. Together they grow their own food. It's one of those ideas that's so simple, yet brilliant, you wonder why it's never been done before.

Now the third system is product service systems. This is where you pay for the benefit of the product -- what it does for you -- without needing to own the product outright. This idea is particularly powerful for things that have high idling capacity. And that can be anything from baby goods to fashions to -- How many of you have a power drill? Own a power drill? Right. That power drill will be used around 12 to 13 minutes in its entire lifetime. (Laughter) It's kind of ridiculous, right? Because what you need is the hole, not the drill. (Laughter) (Applause) So why don't you rent the drill, or, even better, rent out your own drill to other people and make some money from it? These three systems are coming together, allowing people to share resources without sacrificing their lifestyles, or their cherished personal freedoms. I'm not asking people to share nicely in the sandpit.

So I want to just give you an example of how powerful collaborative consumption can be to change behaviors. The average car costs $8,000 a year to run. Yet, that car sits idle for 23 hours a day. So when you consider these two facts, it starts to make a little less sense that we have to own one outright. So this is where car sharing companies such as Zipcar and GoGet come in. In 2009, Zipcar took 250 participants from across 13 cities -- and they're all self-confessed car addicts and car-sharing rookies -- and got them to surrender their keys for a month. Instead, these people had to walk, bike, take the train, or other forms of public transport. They could only use their Zipcar membership when absolutely necessary. The results of this challenge after just one month we staggering. It's amazing that 413 lbs were lost just from the extra exercise. But my favorite statistic is that 100 out of the 250 participants did not want their keys back. In other words, the car addicts had lost their urge to own.

Now products service systems have been around for years. Just think of libraries and laundrettes. But I think they're entering a new age, because technology makes sharing frictionless and fun. There's a great quote that was written in the New York Times that said, "Sharing is to ownership what the iPod is to the 8-track, what solar power is to the coal mine." I believe also, our generation, our relationship to satisfying what we want is far less tangible than any other previous generation. I don't want the DVD, I want the movie is carries. I don't want a clunky answering machine, I want the message it saves. I don't want a CD, I want the music it plays. In other words, I don't want stuff, I want the needs or experiences it fulfills. This is fueling a massive shift from where usage trumps possessions -- or as Kevin Kelly, the editor of Wired magazine, puts it, "Where access is better than ownership."

Now as our possessions dematerialize into the cloud, a blurry line is appearing between what's mine, what's yours, and what's ours. I want to give you one example that shows how fast this evolution is happening. This represents and eight-year time span. We've gone from traditional car ownership to car sharing companies -- such as Zipcar and GoGet -- to ride sharing platforms that match rides to the newest entry, which is peer-to-peer car rental, where you can actually make money out of renting that car that sits idle for 23 hours a day to your neighbor. Now all of these systems require a degree of trust, and the cornerstone to this working is reputation.

Now in the old consumer system, our reputation didn't matter so much, because our credit history was far more important that any kind of peer-to-peer review. But now with the Web, we leave a trail. With every spammer we flag, with every idea we post, comment we share, we're actually signaling how well we collaborate, and whether we can or can't be trusted. Let's go back to my first example, Swaptree. I can see that rondoron has completed 553 trades with a hundred percent success rate. In other words, I can trust him or her. Now mark my words, it's only a matter of time before we're going to be able to perform a Google-like search and see a cumulative picture of our reputation capital. And this reputation capital will determine our access to collaborative consumption. It's a new social currency, so to speak, that could become as powerful as our credit rating.

Now as a closing thought, I believe we're actually in a period where we're waking up from this humongous hangover of emptiness and waste, and we're taking a leap to create a more sustainable system built to serve our innate needs for community and individual identity. I believe it will be referred to as a revolution, so to speak -- when society, faced with great challenges, made a seismic shift from individual getting and spending towards a rediscovery of collective good. I'm on a mission to make sharing cool. I'm on a mission to make sharing hip. Because I really believe it can disrupt outdated modes of business, help us leapfrog over wasteful forms of hyper-consumption and teach us when enough really is enough.

Thank you very much.

(Applause)
 


留下您對本課程的評論
標題:
您目前為非會員,留言名稱將顯示「匿名非會員」
只能進行20字留言

留言內容:

驗證碼請輸入5 + 8 =

標籤

現有標籤:1
新增標籤:


有關本課程的討論

課程討論
沒有影片載點

Anonymous, 2011-02-07 01:00:48

Creative Commons授權條款 本站一切著作係採用 Creative Commons 授權條款授權。
協助推廣單位: