Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Delta Air Lines | SkyMiles
Reload this Page >

Consolidated Closed Threads: DL Related COVID Mask Discussions

Consolidated Closed Threads: DL Related COVID Mask Discussions

Old Jul 19, 2020, 1:12 pm
  #76  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,315
Let's say I have covid (but I am asymptomatic), I get on a plane, I am wearing a mask, I want to eat and drink, I remove the mask to eat and drink and that takes me 15-20 mins, but I keep removing it to drink periodically, I am alongside someone else eating at the same time, sometimes drinking at the same time as me, how much does the mask help in that situation? It's all for show by Delta/any airline. Planes, trains, ships, all incubators. If I was worried about catching the sniffles, I would not fly, mask or no mask.
flyerCO, cmd320 and ahmetdouas like this.
Silver Fox is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 1:17 pm
  #77  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,309
Originally Posted by Silver Fox
Let's say I have covid (but I am asymptomatic), I get on a plane, I am wearing a mask, I want to eat and drink, I remove the mask to eat and drink and that takes me 15-20 mins, but I keep removing it to drink periodically, I am alongside someone else eating at the same time, sometimes drinking at the same time as me, how much does the mask help in that situation? It's all for show by Delta/any airline. Planes, trains, ships, all incubators. If I was worried about catching the sniffles, I would not fly, mask or no mask.
the mask is about risk REDUCTION, not risk ELIMINATION
jrl767 is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 1:18 pm
  #78  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,315
Originally Posted by jrl767
the mask is about risk REDUCTION, not risk ELIMINATION
Whoosh. Your caps lock is intemittent too.
Silver Fox is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 1:22 pm
  #79  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: ATL
Programs: Delta PlM, 1M
Posts: 6,362
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
yes at least remove the mandatory mask thing in that case and make it optional or recommended. I guess the USA is the epicentre of the outbreak so really strict about masks but in the uk people are finding it really funny they are making it mandatory while during the peak the government said no need for masks!

On British Airways if you are exempt and explain it politely to the cabin crew they do not challenge you further which is the polar opposite of what Delta is trying to do here
Masks should have been required all over at the start. Problem was, there were not enough and the health agencies wanted to avoid a run on supplies. So they lied and said not needed. They should have said wear a face covering of any sort but masks were not needed,

Now, the US (at least in many states) clearly should have a fairly strict mask policy. Yet we do not. Even when it is mandated it is often flagrently ignored with no consequences.

For an airline, there is additionally a huge perception risk in play here.
exwannabe is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 1:42 pm
  #80  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Programs: Sky Miles
Posts: 2
This "edict" by Delta will cost them millions they can ill afford to lose. BTW there is no legislative law in the Country that requires mask wearing. Only unenforceable "mandates" by tyrannical drunk on power elected officials. Cases are now just hitting the Courts throughout the Country challenging these "mandates".... The Gov's, Mayors etc will lose.
Silver Fox, cmd320 and ahmetdouas like this.

Last edited by obscure2k; Jul 19, 2020 at 7:30 pm Reason: moving In to political polemic territory, thus, off topic
Ted Stryker is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 2:58 pm
  #81  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
The mental gymnastics on this thread are insane. I can't believe that adult, presumably moderately to highly educated people are jumping through insane mental gymnastics and reading laws and regulations for the very first time and trying to jump to conclusions and defend an unsupportable position.

There are numerous carveouts in the ACAA that gives some latitude to carriers of how to validate fitness to fly. Regardless of whether or not you think this is a stretch, the reality is that there is more than enough reasonable grounds for Delta to conduct this screening measure that there will be no quick regulatory backlash - at worst it would gum its way though courts. My initial readings of the relevant ACAA materials it seems pretty clear that this is allowable, but quite frankly my interpretation is irrelevant as I do not specialize in aviation law and and regulations. Even for those on this forum that may have formal legal training and/or be practicing attorneys, unless your full time job is in aviation law or have spent at least the last three months studying the case law and full regulatory guidance around all relevant acts, your opinion is basically worthless because of the specialized nature of these regulations.

As a general statement, anyone who takes issue with wearing a mask on a flight has no right to fly. If you read my post history, you will see I am one of the most civil liberties-focused posters on this forum with regards to security theater, privacy, free speech, or a myriad of other topics. I don't care whether you do drugs, I quietly rage every time I am forced to present ID to the TSA or have my electronic devices seized consistently by the CBP despite being a US citizen, and will fight to stop the criminalization of hate speech - regardless of how disgusting and insensitive that language may be. But your rights do not extend to the right to harm others. The best understood scientific consensus related to COVID-19 and related families of viruses indicates that masks help protect others - and not at "statistical noise" levels but significant reduction in transmissibility. Whether or not you want to expose yourself is your choice, but it is not someone else's choice to have you expose them.

There are huge rights violations that happen every day. There is plenty of room to protest against authoritarianism or the massive erosion of individual rights in an increasingly Orwellian panopticon security state. Fight those battles. Complaining about wearing a mask to protect others is the most immature, nonsensical, and self-defeating position you can take - especially when mandated by a private entity like an airline that should have more - not less - latitude on who they allow to fly them than they do today.

Delta is in the right to strengthen its mask regulations. There are virtually no legitimate medical carveouts to not wear a mask while still being fit to fly. The only one I can moderately think of are highly autistic children (or highly disabled autistic adults) with extreme hypersensitivity to unusual touches. Other than that? If you can't wear a mask, you're almost certainly not fit to fly.
ethernal is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:05 pm
  #82  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LHR/ATH
Programs: Amex Platinum, LH SEN (Gold), BA Bronze
Posts: 4,489
Originally Posted by ethernal
The mental gymnastics on this thread are insane. I can't believe that adult, presumably moderately to highly educated people are jumping through insane mental gymnastics and reading laws and regulations for the very first time and trying to jump to conclusions and defend an unsupportable position.

There are numerous carveouts in the ACAA that gives some latitude to carriers of how to validate fitness to fly. Regardless of whether or not you think this is a stretch, the reality is that there is more than enough reasonable grounds for Delta to conduct this screening measure that there will be no quick regulatory backlash - at worst it would gum its way though courts. My initial readings of the relevant ACAA materials it seems pretty clear that this is allowable, but quite frankly my interpretation is irrelevant as I do not specialize in aviation law and and regulations. Even for those on this forum that may have formal legal training and/or be practicing attorneys, unless your full time job is in aviation law or have spent at least the last three months studying the case law and full regulatory guidance around all relevant acts, your opinion is basically worthless because of the specialized nature of these regulations.

As a general statement, anyone who takes issue with wearing a mask on a flight has no right to fly. If you read my post history, you will see I am one of the most civil liberties-focused posters on this forum with regards to security theater, privacy, free speech, or a myriad of other topics. I don't care whether you do drugs, I quietly rage every time I am forced to present ID to the TSA or have my electronic devices seized consistently by the CBP despite being a US citizen, and will fight to stop the criminalization of hate speech - regardless of how disgusting and insensitive that language may be. But your rights do not extend to the right to harm others. The best understood scientific consensus related to COVID-19 and related families of viruses indicates that masks help protect others - and not at "statistical noise" levels but significant reduction in transmissibility. Whether or not you want to expose yourself is your choice, but it is not someone else's choice to have you expose them.

There are huge rights violations that happen every day. There is plenty of room to protest against authoritarianism or the massive erosion of individual rights in an increasingly Orwellian panopticon security state. Fight those battles. Complaining about wearing a mask to protect others is the most immature, nonsensical, and self-defeating position you can take - especially when mandated by a private entity like an airline that should have more - not less - latitude on who they allow to fly them than they do today.

Delta is in the right to strengthen its mask regulations. There are virtually no legitimate medical carveouts to not wear a mask while still being fit to fly. The only one I can moderately think of are highly autistic children (or highly disabled autistic adults) with extreme hypersensitivity to unusual touches. Other than that? If you can't wear a mask, you're almost certainly not fit to fly.
The issue here is there is no Federal Mandate saying "no mask, no fly". The CDC gives many exemptions to mask wearing, for some very minor medical ailments as well. So it is not surprising for people to feel a bit discriminated against if they are told, "no mask, no fly", or "you are sick, don't fly because you don't feel comfortable wearing a mask". There are many asthmatics who fly with inhalers with them, and they have never been told oh you need an inhaler, are you safe to fly? Masks can make things much worse for them, so all of a sudden they cannot fly? That can't be right.

In the US, the Federal Government controls many things aviation related in a strong and clear way, so not getting involved in masks make it a complete free for all, and we have yet to see someone kicked off the plane for saying they are asthmatic and not wanting to wear a mask. If that happens and the person is shown to have asthma, I cannot see the airline winning the case. The only case I saw in the US with the refusal to wear a mask leading to the person getting kicked off the plane was some idiot who didn't give any reason to not wear one.

Let's see what the other US airlines do, but personally if Delta goes that way and they are the only one, I would actively avoid them.

I actually hope someone is brave enough to say they are asthmatic, they refuse to wear a mask, the airline then tries to kick them off the plane, and then they get sued to the hilt for disability discrimination. It seems with this new rule, Delta is trying everything at their disposal to avoid this situation, in which they know they will lose, so are going to very aggressive ways to avoid being in that situation.
Silver Fox likes this.
ahmetdouas is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:09 pm
  #83  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: DL PM; IHG PlatAmb; Hilton Dia; Marriott Plat; Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 7,272
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
The issue here is there is no Federal Mandate saying "no mask, no fly". The CDC gives many exemptions to mask wearing, for some very minor medical ailments as well.
.
The CDC is not generally a regulatory body, so the "guidance" you are referring to is kinda irrelevant here bud. Its actual authority to detain and quarantine sick passengers is quite different and contained in regs.
Adam1222 is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:09 pm
  #84  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Mexico City
Programs: Hyatt Explorist, Hilton Gold, Marriot Gold, IHG Silver, Choice Platinum, Wyndham Gold
Posts: 3,805
Once flu season starts and is mixed with the coronavirus and more people start dropping like flies, a public health emergency will be declared, and masks will be mandatory everywhere. No more debates 😊
Global Adventurer is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:10 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LHR/ATH
Programs: Amex Platinum, LH SEN (Gold), BA Bronze
Posts: 4,489
Originally Posted by Adam1222
The CDC is not generally a regulatory body, so it's "guidance" is kinda irrelevant here bud.
Yes but many states and airlines use the CDC as an explanation when enforcing masks. They are recommending face coverings, so we should make it mandatory!
ahmetdouas is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:23 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
The issue here is there is no Federal Mandate saying "no mask, no fly".
There doesn't need to be. While airlines are considered common carriers, they are as private entities given a wide latitude to whom they wish to do business. There are explicit protections around discrimination (including medical disability discrimination) but an airline has a right to refuse a customer for any reason they choose that is not explicitly protected by law. For example, violating rules set out by the airline for ticket booking and/or loyalty programs. Delta has created a rule around wearing a mask that they seek to enforce. In order to not be discriminatory, they are providing a mechanism for those who may not be able to wear a mask to be exempt from this policy.

The CDC gives many exemptions to mask wearing, for some very minor medical ailments as well. So it is not surprising for people to feel a bit discriminated against if they are told, "no mask, no fly", or "you are sick, don't fly because you don't feel comfortable wearing a mask".
The CDC does not provide guidance with regulatory impact to airlines, so what the CDC says isn't that relevant. That said, it is a good source of vetted scientific consensus with actionable recommendations. And your statement of "many exemptions" is just misinformation. The CDC does not give "many exemptions" - certainly not that are relevant to air travel. CDC guidance is here. The carveouts are basically "mental disability" (I highlighted this already) and young children. That's it. They highlight challenges of deaf individuals that rely on lipreading but there are workarounds that don't require not wearing a mask. The other exclusions are not airplane-relevant, such as activities around water, heavy machinery that could get caught on the mask, and very high-intensity exercise. That's it.

There are many asthmatics who fly with inhalers with them, and they have never been told oh you need an inhaler, are you safe to fly? Masks can make things much worse for them, so all of a sudden they cannot fly? That can't be right.
Asthmatics that are fit to fly are not practically impacted by masks. An active high-intensity asthma attack would be a reason to remove the mask. A mask will not independently trigger an asthma attack (if anything, while a cloth mask may not do much, high-grade masks are actually known to reduce acute asthma attacks because they block triggers - in fact, it is recommended for many type of asthma that respirators should be worn when doing some higher-risk activities like cleaning that may trigger a reaction). If an individual with asthma is not able to breath normally with a cloth mask covering, this is a sign that the asthma is not under control and should consult a doctor before flying (which, hey, Delta is offering here - sounds like a win-win, especially since it appears Delta is paying for it).

In the US, the Federal Government controls many things aviation related in a strong and clear way, so not getting involved in masks make it a complete free for all, and we have yet to see someone kicked off the plane for saying they are asthmatic and not wanting to wear a mask. If that happens, I cannot see the airline winning the case. The only case I saw in the US with the refusal to wear a mask leading to the person getting kicked off the plane was some idiot who didn't give any reason to not wear one.
Assuming that the procedures Delta are following are legal, they would be laughed out of court because asthma is not a contraindicated to wearing a mask (and indeed is often RECOMMENDED for many types of asthma in some activities)

Let's see what the other US airlines do, but personally if Delta goes that way and they are the only one, I would actively avoid them.
You are welcome to do this. It's a silly position, but I support and applaud your right to boycott Delta for a policy you don't like. Unfortunately for you, the silent majority here does appreciate it (as evidenced by virtually every poll, especially among high income-high education people that make up most of Delta's high revenue flyers) so you are likely not going to drive the impact you are seeking.
GateGuardian likes this.
ethernal is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:30 pm
  #87  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LHR/ATH
Programs: Amex Platinum, LH SEN (Gold), BA Bronze
Posts: 4,489
Originally Posted by ethernal
There doesn't need to be. While airlines are considered common carriers, they are as private entities given a wide latitude to whom they wish to do business. There are explicit protections around discrimination (including medical disability discrimination) but an airline has a right to refuse a customer for any reason they choose that is not explicitly protected by law. For example, violating rules set out by the airline for ticket booking and/or loyalty programs. Delta has created a rule around wearing a mask that they seek to enforce. In order to not be discriminatory, they are providing a mechanism for those who may not be able to wear a mask to be exempt from this policy.



The CDC does not provide guidance with regulatory impact to airlines, so what the CDC says isn't that relevant. That said, it is a good source of vetted scientific consensus with actionable recommendations. And your statement of "many exemptions" is just misinformation. The CDC does not give "many exemptions" - certainly not that are relevant to air travel. CDC guidance is here. The carveouts are basically "mental disability" (I highlighted this already) and young children. That's it. They highlight challenges of deaf individuals that rely on lipreading but there are workarounds that don't require not wearing a mask. The other exclusions are not airplane-relevant, such as activities around water, heavy machinery that could get caught on the mask, and very high-intensity exercise. That's it.



Asthmatics that are fit to fly are not practically impacted by masks. An active high-intensity asthma attack would be a reason to remove the mask. A mask will not independently trigger an asthma attack (if anything, while a cloth mask may not do much, high-grade masks are actually known to reduce acute asthma attacks because they block triggers - in fact, it is recommended for many type of asthma that respirators should be worn when doing some higher-risk activities like cleaning that may trigger a reaction). If an individual with asthma is not able to breath normally with a cloth mask covering, this is a sign that the asthma is not under control and should consult a doctor before flying (which, hey, Delta is offering here - sounds like a win-win, especially since it appears Delta is paying for it).



Assuming that the procedures Delta are following are legal, they would be laughed out of court because asthma is not a contraindicated to wearing a mask (and indeed is often RECOMMENDED for many types of asthma in some activities)



You are welcome to do this. It's a silly position, but I support and applaud your right to boycott Delta for a policy you don't like. Unfortunately for you, the silent majority here does appreciate it (as evidenced by virtually every poll, especially among high income-high education people that make up most of Delta's high revenue flyers) so you are likely not going to drive the impact you are seeking.
You are wrong. There are many asthmatics to whom wearing a face-masks make it very uncomfortable and harder for them to breathe.

I think you are pushing your agenda here too much. I am not debating whether masks are beneficial or not. I am saying some people find them hard to manage, and this doesn't mean they are unfit to fly!

The CDC very clearly from the link you says states exemptions "anyone who has trouble breathing". Asthma is easily within that definition, so technically any asthmatic can claim the CDC style exemption. Let's see if an asthmatic flies with Delta and claims the exemption, I am interested to see what the Doctor says, but clearly since they will be on Delta's payroll they will obviously be biased for Delta's own benefit. It's like the equivalent of a pharma company giving a doctor an incentive to prescribe their specific medication!

I am not trying to discourage people from flying Delta, I just want their rules to be fair to everyone and not discriminate.

It is clear Delta are very aggressive with the masks and also with the middle seat empty, I just hope the Feds create clear and transparent rules and procedures around masks so that airlines don't abuse their power.
Silver Fox likes this.

Last edited by ahmetdouas; Jul 19, 2020 at 3:53 pm
ahmetdouas is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 3:54 pm
  #88  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,991
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
You are wrong. There are many asthmatics to whom wearing a face-masks make it very uncomfortable and harder for them to breathe.
This is almost certainly psychosomatic, at least to the extent that it actually impacts breathing. The impact to airflow from wearing a compliant facemask is trivial. The change in altitude of the plane is far more significant than whatever change in airflow a person is getting from a mask (in terms of ability to release CO2 and inhale an amount of O2). The reality is that masks really aren't that comfortable to wear. So to say that "facemasks make it uncomfortable" - then that is a universal exclusion. There are hundreds of thousands of nurses, doctors, and surgeons that wear surgical masks and millions of workers that have to wear respirators - often in extremely high temperatures - that have asthma or other respiratory issues.

You know what else is uncomfortable? I'm 6' 4" and flying in a 30" seat pitch is uncomfortable and causes me knee pain. Yet somehow I've made it this far.

The CDC very clearly from the link you says states exemptions "anyone who has trouble breathing". Asthma is easily within that definition, so technically any asthmatic can claim the CDC style exemption. Let's see if an asthmatic flies with Delta and claims the exemption, I am interested to see what the Doctor says, but clearly since they will be on Delta's payroll they will obviously be biased for Delta's own benefit. It's like the equivalent of a pharma company giving a doctor an incentive to prescribe their specific medication!
You say Delta's benefit.. like turning away a customer is a benefit to Delta. Of course Delta wants to allow a passenger to fly. Otherwise they have to give a refund. I don't think Delta is in the business of giving unnecessary refunds right now.

I'm not going to say that there are not potential instances where someone would be fit to fly but not to fit a mask. But these are exceptionally few and far between. The physics of wearing a low-grade mask just doesn't impact airflow very much. An average healthy adult - even with non-acute asthma or in moderate/early stages of a lung disease like COPD - could layer on 5 surgical masks and still breath fine as measured by O2 sat. If wearing a mask creates immediate respiratory distress (i.e., causes a significant and sustained drop in O2 saturation despite natural adjustments to breathing rhythm) then that person should ABSOLUTELY not be on a densely packed plane and/or airport during a respiratory illness pandemic. Their respiratory health is already in such poor condition that COVID-19 would almost certainly be a death sentence. The exact flip side of this is Delta is being negligent by carrying a passenger who self-declared as inherently unfit to fly (respiratory distress from wearing a mask), potentially getting them exposed to COVID on the flight, and dying.

There really just isn't a lot of middle ground here. Outside of the mental health exclusion, either they can wear a mask, or their respiratory health is so compromised that Delta would be negligent flying them during a pandemic.
ethernal is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 4:02 pm
  #89  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: AS MVPG, DL FO, Marriott Gold, Hertz 5 Whatevers
Posts: 1,097
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
The issue here is there is no Federal Mandate saying "no mask, no fly". The CDC gives many exemptions to mask wearing, for some very minor medical ailments as well. So it is not surprising for people to feel a bit discriminated against if they are told, "no mask, no fly", or "you are sick, don't fly because you don't feel comfortable wearing a mask". There are many asthmatics who fly with inhalers with them, and they have never been told oh you need an inhaler, are you safe to fly? Masks can make things much worse for them, so all of a sudden they cannot fly? That can't be right.

In the US, the Federal Government controls many things aviation related in a strong and clear way, so not getting involved in masks make it a complete free for all, and we have yet to see someone kicked off the plane for saying they are asthmatic and not wanting to wear a mask. If that happens and the person is shown to have asthma, I cannot see the airline winning the case. The only case I saw in the US with the refusal to wear a mask leading to the person getting kicked off the plane was some idiot who didn't give any reason to not wear one.

Let's see what the other US airlines do, but personally if Delta goes that way and they are the only one, I would actively avoid them.

I actually hope someone is brave enough to say they are asthmatic, they refuse to wear a mask, the airline then tries to kick them off the plane, and then they get sued to the hilt for disability discrimination. It seems with this new rule, Delta is trying everything at their disposal to avoid this situation, in which they know they will lose, so are going to very aggressive ways to avoid being in that situation.
Private companies can do anything that they want to, just as Costco can evict customers from property for not complying with the mask order as well. The "no shirt, no shoes, no service" concept in the past kind of applies here, and federal law doesn't protect people against that. Delta has a protection in place for people with disability (medical reason for not being able to wear a mask) so that they don't get sued for violating the ADA; they are simply asking people who fall in that category to provide proof (evaluation at airport) that they actually can't. If their request for exemption is denied, then the passenger is actually eligible for a refund even on a nonrefundable ticket. The Feds/DOT have already said that while they won't be imposing a mandate on masks, they are allowing companies to make that decision.

I'm sure in making these decisions, management (as with most companies) has already worked with legal to ensure that they don't get sued.
ethernal likes this.
ab2013 is offline  
Old Jul 19, 2020, 4:08 pm
  #90  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by ethernal
This is almost certainly psychosomatic, at least to the extent that it actually impacts breathing. The impact to airflow from wearing a compliant facemask is trivial. The change in altitude of the plane is far more significant than whatever change in airflow a person is getting from a mask (in terms of ability to release CO2 and inhale an amount of O2). The reality is that masks really aren't that comfortable to wear. So to say that "facemasks make it uncomfortable" - then that is a universal exclusion. There are hundreds of thousands of nurses, doctors, and surgeons that wear surgical masks and millions of workers that have to wear respirators - often in extremely high temperatures - that have asthma or other respiratory issues.
Are you suggesting there aren't psychological disorders that could prevent a person from wearing a mask?
Silver Fox likes this.
cmd320 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.