No Online Logs, Fewer Hassles

2.7k · July 19, 2006

I can't seem to find who it was, but someone recently pointed out that they had no online logs (in response to recent debate about "cheating")

I thought at the time it was pretty absurd, but now I have joined him.

My reasons:

I seem to have a knack for "disturbing" cache owners with my online logs. To the best of my knowledge and belief i have never posted anything patently offensive. I have been careful NOT to offend as much as I am able. But I still end up being "the talk of the town" about my offensive logs.

I truly believe people in this game are too sensitive.

Surely I cannot offend by NOT logging. (OK I wasn't born yesterday, I'm sure my NOT logging will offend many, too)

I think not logging online will give me the ultimate freedom in "playing my own way". How so?

If I go on a hunt and find the cache is "lame" I can just sign the log (or not- I'm free that way ya know) and the owner (who probably knows their cache is lame anyway) will not glean my "disapointment" and cannot make any more of it than it really is. As a matter of fact, the owner won't even know I visited unless they find my name on the paper log.

Even on the "lame" ones, I often have fun, but sometimes it doesn't come across that way in the log.

I have also been hassled (called a thief and threatened with prosecution even) because I happened to be the last person to log a cache.

So now, they can't call me the "cache police" because I'm free to simply IGNORE any hazards or violations I see. When I find a cache that I think is problematic, i simply DON'T sign the log and no one even knows I know about it!

(Am I being cynical? Yeah.)

I am free to sign the log or not. I can log on a tree nearby. I can count the find if I was "in the area" if I want. What the heck, i can count the find even if I didn't leave my computer. I can find the same cache a hundred times. I can find my own caches. I can sign someone's "pocket lint". Who can it hurt? I'm FREE!

For me, the real enjoyment in caching is getting out and seeing neat things I would not have otherwise seen. For this I don't need digital smileys or a big find count.

If I go out and hunt a cache and I find a neat view, or see wildlife, or find a "secret" place I never knew about, I have had a successful "find". Finding a box is a plus, but if I don't find it I still had fun.

I do regret losing my "history" by deleting all my old logs, but now I have a fresh start and I can keep track of my adventures on my own blog- and make it private so others can't read it and take offense.

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events.

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus? :laughing:

2.4k · July 19, 2006

Yeah, but now you have the increased pain of not being able to filter out your finds when generatng PQs. Yeah, you can do it with third party software, but unless you create and ignore list and put all the caches you've found on it, you're pulling more "useless" data each time you find a cache and losing "useful" data. Which, to me at least, would be a bigger hassle than just logging each find with simply "TNLN, thanks for the cache".

Edited July 19, 2006 by IV_Warrior

3.1k · July 19, 2006

I am not sure about that. I feel that logging online is a way of thanking the cache owner. They know that the cache is still there and that you enjoyed yourself while finding it. If you did not enjoy yourself than you do not have to log that one.

My game is logging online in a timely manner and telling the cache placer "Thanks".

How would you feel if no one logged your owned caches online?

Edited July 19, 2006 by ParentsofSAM

2.7k · July 19, 2006

both of these things (first two response posts) have been considered.

I know that if everyone did not log online, cache maintenance would be more difficult. I am lazy like that. I only check my caches when someone reports a problem. So as not to get "a dose of my own medicine", I will need to be more proactive in maintenance. This would not hurt generally and might cause some to think twice before "spew®ing micros".

And yes, i do put each found cache on my ignore list as my present method of filtering out finds. (This whole thing is still somewhat experimental)

I have also noticed that my finds are still counted in the "filter finds" link, even though they are all deleted. This means I could log a simple "found it" then delete it and the filter would still work. This seems to somewhat decrease the "freedom" however, and probably would be more offensive to cache owners.

I think GSAK will be useful in find logging also.

22k · July 19, 2006

That's too bad. (Seriously)

While I don't care if you log "Found It's", I'm placing and finding caches and travel bugs to interact with other people. I enjoy the community.

Do people suck? Sure they do, but if you want to eliminate feedback, then you need to eliminate all contact. That means yours.

Find caches, sign nothing and post nothing.

Personally I hope you don't. You've always seemed like somebody who'd be fun to cache with.

Edited July 19, 2006 by BlueDeuce

2.1k · July 19, 2006

That's too bad. (Seriously)...

... You've always seemed like somebody who'd be fun to cache with.

I agree. I hope you reconsider.

I suspect that only a small percentage of cache owners have had a problem with your logging. But they can make a large impact with their negative responses (just like in the forums).

July 19, 2006

I'm sorry you felt that way also. I love to read other people's logs. I truely enjoy reading the logs on my caches, even the ones that aren't glowing. It helps me ot see my caches through other's eyes--and that helps me place better caches as I go along.

Some people are too sensitive. They usually don't last long, I have noticed (although they are a pain while they are around!).

Some people are too blunt in their logs. If that describes you, well, you don't have to hash out all the gritty details every time. You can just say "Found it. That makes number 101 for me" and leave it at that.

Other people are not very skilled at on-line communications. They sound upset when they really aren't, or they come off as sarcastic when they were going for dry humor. For every person that disliked your logs, there may have been three who liked them---We have a tendency to only pipe up when we dislike something, after all. In any event, I feel sure that there are going to be people in your area who will miss your logs (even if it's just that they don't have them to complain about anymore )

July 19, 2006

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

Attitude problem..... Get over it. :laughing:

July 19, 2006

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events.

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

Dude you are still 600 behind me :laughing:

7.3k · July 19, 2006

The freedom to use with none of the messy obligation to interact with actual people or provide feedback. Sounds like a plan.

July 19, 2006

"For me, the real enjoyment in caching is getting out and seeing neat things I would not have otherwise seen. For this I don't need digital smileys or a big find count."

It seems with all of the posts and effort in the forums, your real enjoyment might be in front of the keyboard stirring the pot. If you are seeking the freedom of caching you own way, do you need this forum to pound your chest? Do you even need a handle. They may be thousands of people just like you who cache in silence (perhaps a bad choice of words) - that have even more finds than you. They may be so stealthy they even have thousands of hides without posting a single one on GC.com. To finds their hides you are free to roam the nearest woods with you head down and the GPS in the car.

I think you may have been on the mark when you commented on people being too sensitive here, I think you may be their leader.

IMHO I hope you can get some enjoyment out of this community activity.

38.2k · July 19, 2006

The freedom to use with none of the messy obligation to interact with actual people or provide feedback. Sounds like a plan.

That says it all!

If people spend the time and money to place a cache, the least we can do is tell them we found it. The paper log is not a viable substitute because the owner may never see it for a variety of reasons (stolen, washed away in a flood, ruined by water, etc...).

If everybody had your attitude I don't think we'd have nearly as many caches available for us to hunt. Most owners I know (including myself) place caches for others to enjoy. The online logs are the best and most immediate way for us to know that people are actually doing that.

I think that the onlines logs and sharing of experiences and sense of community that they foster are a big reason for the success of this sport. Look at letterboxing. Its very similar to geocaching, had about a 150 year headstart and doesn't require the purchase of expensive electronic equipment. Yet geocaching blew by it in popularity in under a year (in the US) and never looked back. I believe the online logs are a huge part of the reason for that. Letterboxers don't have them, geocachers do.

Edited July 19, 2006 by briansnat

July 19, 2006

Writing logs is half the fun for me, whether they are finds of dnfs.

Scott

20.7k · July 19, 2006

It seems with all of the posts and effort in the forums, your real enjoyment might be in front of the keyboard stirring the pot. If you are seeking the freedom of caching you own way, do you need this forum to pound your chest? Do you even need a handle. They may be thousands of people just like you who cache in silence (perhaps a bad choice of words) - that have even more finds than you. They may be so stealthy they even have thousands of hides without posting a single one on GC.com. To finds their hides you are free to roam the nearest woods with you head down and the GPS in the car.

I think you may have been on the mark when you commented on people being too sensitive here, I think you may be their leader.

IMHO I hope you can get some enjoyment out of this community activity.

I agree. For someone who has decided to be silent, he sure has a bunch to say.

Edited July 19, 2006 by sbell111

July 19, 2006

They sound upset when they really aren't, or they come off as sarcastic when they were going for dry humor.

This is me in a nutshell. Much gets lost in online translation, I think. We need more smilie options for logs. :laughing:

July 19, 2006

Heck, why even look for caches at all? Turn off your GPS and just wander about aimlessly taking in "all the sights"....same thing as you describe...right? What's your point?

2.7k · July 19, 2006

While I disagree with the OP's position, I think the people who are simply implying he is a troll are wrong as well. Just because someone is frustrated at a given moment does not mean they are trolling.

OP - Why not post links to some of your logs that are getting negative feedback and let us see for ourselves what the fuss is all about?

And if someone really accused you of being a theif... well, I'd put every single one of their caches on an ignore list and be done with them for good. Not worth the aggravation to deal with people like that.

July 19, 2006

Heck, why even look for caches at all? Turn off your GPS and just wander about aimlessly taking in "all the sights"....

My friends who introduced me to caching do not log their finds at all. They say they seek caches because it makes their hiking experiences more exciting by giving them a goal. That, apparently, is enough for them. [/devil's advocate]

2.3k · July 19, 2006

Waa waa waa...nice to see the mob jump all over someone and DEMAND the game be played 'their way'... :laughing:

38.2k · July 19, 2006

Waa waa waa...nice to see the mob jump all over someone and DEMAND the game be played 'their way'...

I just went through all the posts and didn't see one that demanded that the game be played their way.

18.9k · July 19, 2006

Positive, negative, neutral, long, short - whatever - I like knowing that somebody found my caches. The biggest reason I place them is to know that people found them and so much the better if they enjoyed the experience.

3.9k · July 19, 2006

I am free to sign the log or not. I can log on a tree nearby. I can count the find if I was "in the area" if I want. What the heck, i can count the find even if I didn't leave my computer. I can find the same cache a hundred times. I can find my own caches. I can sign someone's "pocket lint". Who can it hurt? I'm FREE!

You could do all these things before, and it wouldn't have hurt anyone. That part didn't change.

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events. ... care to prove my number is bogus?

Nope. I don't care if you had 424 honest finds, or 424,567 fake ones. Neither number changes anything for me.

8k · July 19, 2006

People who don't log online should be banned from geocaching.

9.2k · July 19, 2006

I can't seem to find who it was, but someone recently pointed out that they had no online logs (in response to recent debate about "cheating")

[yadda yadda yadda snipped]

So you're taking advantage of being able to look at other people's logs, to help determine if a cache is still in place, and whether or not it seems like a cache you'd be interested in going after. But you're refusing to contribute to that same pool of knowledge.

How selfish.

20.7k · July 19, 2006

While I disagree with the OP's position, I think the people who are simply implying he is a troll are wrong as well. Just because someone is frustrated at a given moment does not mean they are trolling.

I used to date a girl who had an incredible flair for the dramatic. She was always making every tiny issue into a huge ordeal, a personal afront directly at her by the universe. I don't know why this thread reminds me of her. I suppose many of them do.

9.1k · July 19, 2006

::: waits for sbell111 to start a thread with the subject "No Forum Posts, Fewer Hassles." :::

Hmmm... if he decides not to post, how can he announce that in a forum thread. :laughing:

Oh well, I can always dream.

:laughing:

20.7k · July 19, 2006

Did the ignore feature get broken yesterday?

Edited July 19, 2006 by sbell111

9.1k · July 19, 2006

blah blah blah yadda yadda drivel drivel?

Apparently so. :laughing: I'll give you another chance. Call it a new beginning, in the spirit of Confucius Cat's clean slate.

20.7k · July 19, 2006

I hope Lep doesn't reply to my post since I've 'ignored' him.

July 19, 2006

Don't type unhelpful mean things in cache logs and you won't have any problems.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Kacky

9.4k · July 19, 2006

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

There's no need to prove your number is bogus. All people have to do is just say your numbers are bogus and you'll crawl up into your emotional box.

This is more a proverbial you, so don't take it personally. But the premise seems to be "I care so much about what others think that I might as well disappear entirely."

Of course you can escape those messy social encounters entirely. But then again you can't go online afterwards and make claims and post online since it dashes your attempt at anonymity.

To use an old cliche: can't have your cake and eat it too. Either drift off into the shadows or remain active - but don't try both.

July 19, 2006

Con Katt, Since you put this out here for public comment, furthering your social contact, I'd say you log the finds-DNF's-notes, whatever. If the owner comments, then you ignore and choose not to reply. Call it 'turning the other cheek.' - This way, you're not interacting anymore than you want to.

6.7k · July 19, 2006

I rarely log finds either - I used to, but it just leads to controversy all too often.

People liked my logs, I've never had a negative comment, never had but one log deleted (one was deleted following the DRR hysteria)... in fact since I quit logging them people tell me they miss them, as I tried to write interesting, funny stuff... but certain gc forum folks felt obligated to scour my logs looking for crap to get all het up over and it became a PITA!

Plus, I mostly cache with others in groups - we generally sign once, a 'team' name if you will, so as not to fill logs and take forever signing. Again, certain folks here in the forums decided that horrible behavior must be stopped and I got sick of being called a cheat.

A few days ago I took a newbie, an 11 y.o. kid I know from ham radio, that has been nominated "Alabama Young Ham Operator Of The Year" out caching, we found six great caches and discovered and toured an exotic animal breeding farm along the way... a great day I will long remember (ever seen a bearcat?), but I didn't log the finds, just don't care to. He did, that's enough.

Yesterday a family that lives 60 miles away called and asked me to join them; they wanted me to be with them for their 1000th find. I dropped everything and went! We did a really fun, new-that-day 5-part multi, hid two caches for their kids that I will maintain, found four more and had dinner - another great day with people I love to be with... but I didn't log the finds, and won't. They will, my logs wouldn't add anything.

Besides, I left a few of my personal geocoins in some of the caches - I NEVER log them in as it makes them an immediate target - I'd rather people be surprised to find them in the cache.

I do log them if I cache alone and there is an issue, if it needs maintenence or I DNF it, or maybe if it's special in some way and deserves comment, since no one else with me will be logging it.

I can't say I agree with the OP's motives entirely, but I do agree that it's entirely up to each cacher whether you log online or not - if your sig or that of the people you're with is in the cache, you're good to go!

As far as find count, I will likely never reach 2000, as I quit logging online at 1885 or so. It's enough for me to know that if someone calls me for a phone-a friend hint I can tell them how to get to almost 4000 of them! Numbers are meaningless.

Ed

July 19, 2006

While I disagree with the OP's position, I think the people who are simply implying he is a troll are wrong as well. Just because someone is frustrated at a given moment does not mean they are trolling.

I used to date a girl who had an incredible flair for the dramatic. She was always making every tiny issue into a huge ordeal, a personal afront directly at her by the universe. I don't know why this thread reminds me of her. I suppose many of them do.

:laughing:

I couldn't have said it better. How many threads here don't go that way?

I think we should make a new rule/guidline/carved-in-stone law. Logging all finds or DNFs is mandatory.

And anyone who suggests otherwise in the forums should be banned.

18.9k · July 19, 2006

...... I will likely never reach 2000, as I quit logging online at 1885 or so. It's enough for me to know that if someone calls me for a phone-a friend hint I can tell them how to get to almost 4000 of them! Numbers are meaningless.

Ed

...then why mention them..... :laughing:

6.7k · July 19, 2006

...... I will likely never reach 2000, as I quit logging online at 1885 or so. It's enough for me to know that if someone calls me for a phone-a friend hint I can tell them how to get to almost 4000 of them! Numbers are meaningless.

Ed

...then why mention them.....

To make a point - that anyone who worries about my find count, or anyone else's, is seriously misguided.

Only I know what I have found, only I can derive any pride or pleasure out of that number... even though I myself no longer know exactly what my find count actually is!

The OP was about not logging online, therefore having no identifiable find count, my post was directly related.

20.7k · July 19, 2006

...... I will likely never reach 2000, as I quit logging online at 1885 or so. It's enough for me to know that if someone calls me for a phone-a friend hint I can tell them how to get to almost 4000 of them! Numbers are meaningless.
...then why mention them.....
To make a point - that anyone who worries about my find count, or anyone else's, is seriously misguided.

Only I know what I have found, only I can derive any pride or pleasure out of that number... even though I myself no longer know exactly what my find count actually is!

The OP was about not logging online, therefore having no identifiable find count, my post was directly related.

You heard him, stop worrying about Alabama Rambler's find count. I hope to see no more threads worrying about Alabama Rambler's find count. We can all sleep easy tonight.

BTW, was anyone worried about Alabama Rambler's find count? :laughing:

July 19, 2006

I'm going to have to work on my logging style--I never get any negative feedback. Must not be edgy enough.

24.7k · July 19, 2006

...... I will likely never reach 2000, as I quit logging online at 1885 or so. It's enough for me to know that if someone calls me for a phone-a friend hint I can tell them how to get to almost 4000 of them! Numbers are meaningless.
...then why mention them.....
To make a point - that anyone who worries about my find count, or anyone else's, is seriously misguided.

Only I know what I have found, only I can derive any pride or pleasure out of that number... even though I myself no longer know exactly what my find count actually is!

The OP was about not logging online, therefore having no identifiable find count, my post was directly related.

You heard him, stop worrying about Alabama Rambler's find count. I hope to see no more threads worrying about Alabama Rambler's find count. We can all sleep easy tonight.

BTW, was anyone worried about Alabama Rambler's find count?

During the 'controversy' I forgot to worry about TAR's count. Whoops.

As for the OP and logging in general that's how you thank the owner for the cache. Online or off, that log is why they place the cache. The physical log is subject to being jacked and the cache owner may never have the pleasure of reading your log. I do know that when I collect a cache or swap log books I do go through and read them and that's something I enjoy.

3.5k · July 19, 2006

By not logging online you're skipping an important part of the game - the sharing of experiences. If you're worried about numbers, just post a note and not a find.

< But whatever you do, don't use cut and paste logs! > :laughing:

July 19, 2006

I've never tried this, and I don't want to wait for my next find to find out... So I'll ask here.

Is it possible to log a find with no text whatsoever in the log?

July 19, 2006

I've never tried this, and I don't want to wait for my next find to find out... So I'll ask here.

Is it possible to log a find with no text whatsoever in the log?

I've seen them with just a smilie, but I don't think they can be blank.

38.2k · July 19, 2006

I'm going to have to work on my logging style--I never get any negative feedback. Must not be edgy enough.

Yeah, you have to wonder *what* these people are writing. 600+ logs and I've yet to have one irate owner get back to me.

7.2k · July 19, 2006

I can't believe no one noticed this.

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events.

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

You should do better research. From the GC.com home page just one minute ago...

There are 291246 active caches in 222 countries.

So what do I get for proving you wrong?

Wait........ you're not claiming two finds per cache are you?!?! For shame! :laughing:

7.2k · July 19, 2006

Yeah, you have to wonder *what* these people are writing. 600+ logs and I've yet to have one irate owner get back to me.

I've had one. He deleted my find because he had a chip on his shoulder since I would not list one of his locationless cache submissions. He got his revenge by deleting a legitimate find on one of his caches.

8k · July 19, 2006

I can't believe no one noticed this.

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events.

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

You should do better research. From the GC.com home page just one minute ago...

There are 291246 active caches in 222 countries.

So what do I get for proving you wrong?

Wait........ you're not claiming two finds per cache are you?!?! For shame!

Just because a cache is archived doesn't mean you can't count it in your finds. Since I can't search for archived caches I have no way of knowing whether or not the OP could have found 424567 caches or not.

1.1k · July 19, 2006

The freedom to use with none of the messy obligation to interact with actual people or provide feedback. Sounds like a plan.

That says it all!

If people spend the time and money to place a cache, the least we can do is tell them we found it. The paper log is not a viable substitute because the owner may never see it for a variety of reasons (stolen, washed away in a flood, ruined by water, etc...).

If everybody had your attitude I don't think we'd have nearly as many caches available for us to hunt. Most owners I know (including myself) place caches for others to enjoy. The online logs are the best and most immediate way for us to know that people are actually doing that.

I think that the onlines logs and sharing of experiences and sense of community that they foster are a big reason for the success of this sport. Look at letterboxing. Its very similar to geocaching, had about a 150 year headstart and doesn't require the purchase of expensive electronic equipment. Yet geocaching blew by it in popularity in under a year (in the US) and never looked back. I believe the online logs are a huge part of the reason for that. Letterboxers don't have them, geocachers do.

Darn straight. I finally hid my first cache, GCX1RW, on my own farm, and waited for a finder. My first finders log really made my week, I was braced for negative feedback and got this glowing report:

Woohoooo!!! Our very first FTF!!! Saw this one just after getting back from vacation, and we just had to go for it! (Even though we were a little apprehensive about poking around on private property. It was all good, just like the Cpt. said)

T: So much stuff to chose from, but we had to take the FTF (First to Flask..ha ha..see pic) Very nice, and will be put to good use.

L: We had brought an airplane model and a kewl church coin, but the airplane model got left in the car by accident. Too far away to make two trips on this high 90's day! The church coin is very nice though.

Took Cache Commando Joe. He is undergoing an intense pre-brief before heading out on his mission. Should only be a week or so till "go-time!"

A very well done cache! Highly recommended! TFTC Captain!

I'll continue posting logs online so I can, perhaps, bring others the pleasure his log brought me.

If you choose not to, you are still welcome to find mine, but I'll miss the fun of reading it online. :laughing:

7.2k · July 19, 2006

I can't believe no one noticed this.

OBTW, I now claim 424,567 finds, none of which are virtuals, none of which are "pocket caches", none of which are events.

I AM TOP DAWG! ------------------- Since I don't log online, care to prove my number is bogus?

You should do better research. From the GC.com home page just one minute ago...

There are 291246 active caches in 222 countries.

So what do I get for proving you wrong?

Wait........ you're not claiming two finds per cache are you?!?! For shame!

Just because a cache is archived doesn't mean you can't count it in your finds. Since I can't search for archived caches I have no way of knowing whether or not the OP could have found 424567 caches or not.

Easy to find out. Go to the most recent cache published in your area (or anywhere). Hold your mouse over the "log your visit" link at the top right. Look at your browser bar down at the bottom of your browser window and you will see the URL for that hyperlink. That link has the cache ID number. The last one in GA is just over 430,000. This would mean that the OP has found almost every cache ever submitted, even those that never made it past the approval process and all caches from day one, some of which were long gone from their locations since the OP only started caching in January of 2003.

So, what do I get? And I DON'T want a pony.

2k · July 19, 2006

I am sorry if this upsets anyone but, it seems to me that the OP's attitude is one of "It's all about me!".

He can log or not, I don't care. To bring his attitude in here is just a childish cry for attention. Not child like, childish. If he didn't want to be a part of the online community he would have just stopped logging and left it at that.

As for me, the hike is nice, or the hide was interesting, or sorry I didn't enjoy that cache, it is the community that I enjoy. The people, those I meet on the trail or at an event, or those I never meet in person. We don't always agree, but we don't have to. We have something in common, it's called Geocaching. We all have our opinions, we don't have to make the world bend to ours. I will continue to log online and share my experiences as they happen. It's the least I can do to give back to the community of PEOPLE that has brought so much fun into my life. Thank you one and all.

July 19, 2006

Easy to find out. Go to the most recent cache published in your area (or anywhere). Hold your mouse over the "log your visit" link at the top right. Look at your browser bar down at the bottom of your browser window and you will see the URL for that hyperlink. That link has the cache ID number. The last one in GA is just over 430,000. This would mean that the OP has found almost every cache ever submitted, even those that never made it past the approval process and all caches from day one, some of which were long gone from their locations since the OP only started caching in January of 2003.

So, what do I get? And I DON'T want a pony.

Neat little trick. Whoever plants No. 500,000 cache should get a pony for a milestone cache.

No Online Logs, Fewer Hassles

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment