DNF or just rude?

January 7, 2008

I recently recieved a note posted to one of my caches.

I don't know if it's a DNF or just rude?

"

Location: Georgia, United States

******* posted a note for Dam, its Sluice (Traditional Cache) at 1/6/2008

Log Date: 1/6/2008

Not logging a DNF cause we didn't make it THAT far. With what's considered a rainy december, there just wasn't any place to cross. Didn't feel like bushwhackin like that either from the other side. Sorry, but this one makes the ignore list. Just not worth the smiley. ~AG

"

What exactly constitutes a DNF? How close must one be to the cache, to cross the line from "didn't look for it" to DNF? Halfway from the car? 50 feet from the cache? 10 feet? 5 feet?

Or does the act of leaving the parking area with a GPS define the the begining of the search?

I could understand a rude note if a cache was wet, missing, defective, or dangerous.

But just too difficult? The cache is a 3.5 terrain. Clearly noted on the cache page.

I found it rude for somone to leve a derogatory note for a cache they haven't even found.

Or to take their perspective, didn't really bother to hunt. Rainy December in GA?

Lame.

Rixart

January 7, 2008

It's very rude for ANYONE to say something like "Just not worth the smiley". People work hard to create and hide these caches so others can have fun going out to find them. Not to be criticized because the conditions weren't to there liking. It was rude in my opinion.

January 7, 2008

I log a DNF if I am certain I am within the area. I also try and leave some info on where I looked in case it is OE.

1.5k · January 7, 2008

For me, I usually won't log a DNF unless I made a reasonable effort to find the cache. Pulled up and decided I didn't want to make the big hike after all? I might log a note, but not a DNF as I didn't really TRY to find it. Others will log a DNF if they so much as leave the house. No biggie either way.

I don't know that I'd read their note as all that derogatory. They didn't chastise you for placing a harder-to-reach cache...they simply said they'd ignore it as they're not interested in making a harder-than-average hike to reach a cache.

To me, that sounds like a lot of fun, but I won't fault them for not seeking one that doesn't interest them. Just as I hope no one faults me if I skip their 4th parking lot micro.

edit - filling in words to make a little more sense

Edited January 7, 2008 by KoosKoos

January 7, 2008

I recently recieved a note posted to one of my caches.

I don't know if it's a DNF or just rude?

"

Location: Georgia, United States

******* posted a note for Dam, its Sluice (Traditional Cache) at 1/6/2008

Log Date: 1/6/2008

Not logging a DNF cause we didn't make it THAT far. With what's considered a rainy december, there just wasn't any place to cross. Didn't feel like bushwhackin like that either from the other side. Sorry, but this one makes the ignore list. Just not worth the smiley. ~AG

"

What exactly constitutes a DNF? How close must one be to the cache, to cross the line from "didn't look for it" to DNF? Halfway from the car? 50 feet from the cache? 10 feet? 5 feet?

Or does the act of leaving the parking area with a GPS define the the begining of the search?

I could understand a rude note if a cache was wet, missing, defective, or dangerous.

But just too difficult? The cache is a 3.5 terrain. Clearly noted on the cache page.

I found it rude for somone to leve a derogatory note for a cache they haven't even found.

Or to take their perspective, didn't really bother to hunt. Rainy December in GA?

Lame.

Rixart

18.9k · January 7, 2008

Once I load a cache into the the GPSr and then decide to hit goto. That means I have started the hunt. If I end without finding it, then I log a DNF (Did not Find). Sometimes just to record my own story as to why I didn't get closer, sometimes to note I looked at ground zero and didn't find anything. Both stories are worth sharing.

Many will only log a DNF after spending time right at ground zero. I figure I started so I should record something.

3.5k · January 7, 2008

I would just ignore that one. Sounds like a cacher that should stick to caches "hidden" in Wal-mart parking lots. If they noticed the terrain rating they should have know it wasn't a PnG and would involve some physical exertion.

6.4k · January 7, 2008

Not a DNF, and they didn't log a DNF. They logged a note.

Also, it doesn't seem rude to me, they didn't say they were adding it to their ignore list because it sucked. I got the impression they felt the cache was too dangerous or hard for them to comfortably attempt and had no plans to try again at a later date.

Now, I also notice that the log you posted doesn't seem to be on the cache page anymore. If you deleted it, that WOULD be rude.

January 7, 2008

I also would think you would want the feedback. If the next twenty people all told similar stories, you have some data to work with. It would have been rude to offer no feedback.

January 7, 2008

I wouldn't worry about it. The note just defines the "cacher".

January 7, 2008

It's very rude for ANYONE to say something like "Just not worth the smiley". People work hard to create and hide these caches so others can have fun going out to find them. Not to be criticized because the conditions weren't to there liking. It was rude in my opinion.

Agreed.

IMHO, did you expend effort? = log a DNF

"Effort" is clearly subjective here.

January 7, 2008

I did not delete the cache note. Here is the e-mail I sent this VERY experienced cacher.

-- Copy of email sent to A******** --

"First:Given that you went to the location, parked, and attempted to find the way to the cache, I think it qualifies as a DNF.

Second: The cache is clearly marked as a 3.5 star terrain, so I don't know what you expected.

Third: IMHO posting a note on the cache page that it's not worth the smiley is rude.

Please change your log to a DNF or delete it."

The cacher finally deleted it themseves, I just wanted opinions.

18.9k · January 7, 2008

I did not delete the cache note. Here is the e-mail I sent this VERY experienced cacher.

-- Copy of email sent to A******** --

"First:Given that you went to the location, parked, and attempted to find the way to the cache, I think it qualifies as a DNF.

Second: The cache is clearly marked as a 3.5 star terrain, so I don't know what you expected.

Third: IMHO posting a note on the cache page that it's not worth the smiley is rude.

Please change your log to a DNF or delete it."

The cacher finally deleted it themseves, I just wanted opinions.

There was no need to delete it or ask that it be deleted or changed - my opinion.

6.4k · January 7, 2008

I did not delete the cache note. Here is the e-mail I sent this VERY experienced cacher.

-- Copy of email sent to A******** --

"First:Given that you went to the location, parked, and attempted to find the way to the cache, I think it qualifies as a DNF.

Second: The cache is clearly marked as a 3.5 star terrain, so I don't know what you expected.

Third: IMHO posting a note on the cache page that it's not worth the smiley is rude.

Please change your log to a DNF or delete it."

The cacher finally deleted it themseves, I just wanted opinions.

Well, my opinion is your email was way ruder then their cache note. That note sounds like it was a factual account of their caching experience, like it or not. Asking them to erase part of their caching history because you have a thin skin is rude, and whoever they are sounds like they handled it with as much class as possible by just deleting it and refraining from comment.

January 7, 2008

I'm new, how does deleting that note help anyone? Isn't the log a history of what happened?I'm not getting what was gained by deleting.

3.3k · January 7, 2008

I did not delete the cache note. Here is the e-mail I sent this VERY experienced cacher.

-- Copy of email sent to A******** --

"First:Given that you went to the location, parked, and attempted to find the way to the cache, I think it qualifies as a DNF.

Second: The cache is clearly marked as a 3.5 star terrain, so I don't know what you expected.

Third: IMHO posting a note on the cache page that it's not worth the smiley is rude.

Please change your log to a DNF or delete it."

The cacher finally deleted it themseves, I just wanted opinions.

Well, my opinion is your email was way ruder then their cache note. That note sounds like it was a factual account of their caching experience, like it or not. Asking them to erase part of their caching history because you have a thin skin is rude, and whoever they are sounds like they handled it with as much class as possible by just deleting it and refraining from comment.

I agree. I didn't see anything wrong with the note. It would be fine as a note or as a DNF. They didn't say there was anything wrong with the cache, just that they decided it wasn't of any further interest to them.

38.2k · January 7, 2008

Sounds like you placed a great cache and some parking lot hopper couldn't handle it. His log said more about him than it did about your cache. I would have ignored it.

9.8k · January 7, 2008

Wow, talk about misinterpretation.

Rixart, I deleted the note upon receiving your emial since you found it offensive. No reason to bring it here.

I said it wasn't worth a smiley. That translates to something like killing myself to get there isn't worth it to me. Not that the cache was poor or bad or anything like that. Where do you people invent this stuff? lol! I have no idea if the cache was good or not since I wasn't able to forage a 20 ft ravine with knee-deep water in it and didn't get closer to 100 ft. of where the cache may have been.

I didn't mean to be rude. I simply logged the note to let you know we tried and that this type cache just isn't for ME. I guess I won't be doing that again.

If I don't even look for the container, then it warrants a note. A DNF if when you tried to find the cache and failed. I didn't even get as far as trying to find the cache since I couldn't get anywhere near it!

Edit added: Yep, we had 10 days of rainfall in December. That's a monsoon compared to how dry it has been, including when you placed the cache probably.

Edited January 7, 2008 by AtlantaGal

January 7, 2008

With what's considered a rainy december, there just wasn't any place to cross.

What sort of crossing is required? Water to your ankles, knees, waist? Does the terrain change with the seasons? Knowing that might be something the next person would like to know.

3.3k · January 7, 2008

January 7, 2008

I would have just left the note alone and shrugged it off. Some people are just like that. Today, I logged a DNF on a cache that I actually found, but was unable to reach and sign the log. It was about 7 feet over my head, and I had no way of reaching it. I'll be back at another time with the right TOTT to retrieve it, but for now it was a DNF. Signing the log, (in my game) is the final act of finding the cache. If I forgot a pen or the cache don't have one, there are other ways to mark you "X",,,dirt, blood, mud, etc.

9.8k · January 7, 2008

Sounds like you placed a great cache and some parking lot hopper couldn't handle it. His log said more about him than it did about your cache. I would have ignored it.

Ahem that would be "her." And I tend to not like to get injured while caching. Just the way I play the game. My medical insurance coverage isn't THAT good The cache was appropriately rated for this time of year. In the spring and summer, I'd up it to a 4.5 cause the jungle on the other side of the ravine won't be easy to navigate without a machetee

1.1k · January 7, 2008

If someone doesn't like the cache, I see no reason they shouldn't be allowed to post a log reflecting that.

I see nothing wrong with that log. If someone doesn't want to cross a river, that's their perogative. if the next person considering the cache doesn't want to cross a river either, that log could save them a lot of wasted time.

January 7, 2008

***Sorry, but this one makes the ignore list. Just not worth the smiley***

Sorry, but that Geocacher makes the Ignore List...Just not worth the smiley.

January 7, 2008

AG, I brought it here, because I wanted opinions. Several thought I over-reacted, several thought I was justified in my opinion. I had a question and I thought here was the best place to get answers. I got lots of answers, thank you all.

As to the question of depth, the water was ankle deep when the cache was placed. It varies from day to day, up to knee deep. after rain. Depending upon WHERE one attempts to cross.

If one doesn't "feel like bushwackin" then a note on the page seems rude to me, that's all.

I have avoided many caches that I didn't feel were worth the physical or mental effort (at the time), but I certainly would not leave a public note saying they weren't worth a smiley.

I don't even have an ignore list.

I guess that's just where we differ.

Rixart

January 7, 2008

I've attempted caches and turned back becuase one reason or another....and I've posted a DNF stating my reason (maybe too muddy, to much water after a rain, too many people around...etc)....but never put it on ignore.

6.4k · January 7, 2008

I've attempted caches and turned back becuase one reason or another....and I've posted a DNF stating my reason (maybe too muddy, to much water after a rain, too many people around...etc)....but never put it on ignore.

It appears some people look at the ignore list like it's some sort of insult. Like if you were in the same room as the person and you ignored them.

The ignore list is just an easy way to remove caches you don't intend on searching for from your PQs and nearest caches list. It's not a "caches I think suck" list. It's an "ignore caches otherwise included in my search parameters" list. One may ignore caches because they aren't comfortable with the location or terrain, or a million other reasons that have nothing to do with the cache owner.

January 7, 2008

***It's not a "caches I think suck" list***

It is possible I made that list.....

5.7k · January 7, 2008

I've attempted caches and turned back becuase one reason or another....and I've posted a DNF stating my reason (maybe too muddy, to much water after a rain, too many people around...etc)....but never put it on ignore.

That's not a DNF, that's a DNL (did not look). For those we post a note or nothing at all.

9.8k · January 7, 2008

I've attempted caches and turned back becuase one reason or another....and I've posted a DNF stating my reason (maybe too muddy, to much water after a rain, too many people around...etc)....but never put it on ignore.

It appears some people look at the ignore list like it's some sort of insult. Like if you were in the same room as the person and you ignored them.

The ignore list is just an easy way to remove caches you don't intend on searching for from your PQs and nearest caches list. It's not a "caches I think suck" list. It's an "ignore caches otherwise included in my search parameters" list. One may ignore caches because they aren't comfortable with the location or terrain, or a million other reasons that have nothing to do with the cache owner.

Well some of the caches on my ignore list DO suck, but even that is subjective. One man's trash is another man's treasure and all that. But, for the most part my ignore list is caches I will never do that fall into my main PQ. It frees up space for caches I will do. Didn't mean it as an insult, but rather an explaination as to why I'd never be finding the cache.

Anyhoo, lesson learned. No more notes on Rixarts caches

5.6k · January 7, 2008

rixart,

You seem to be reading the log differently than the poster meant (I had this opinion even before the finder posted her comments). It seems you are reading "Just not worth the smiley" as a judgement of the cache. I read it as it wasn't the effort for that seacher, a personal statement.

And I agree with some of the others, you response seems as rude to her as you read her post to be.

3.7k · January 7, 2008

rixart,

You seem to be reading the log differently than the poster meant (I had this opinion even before the finder posted her comments). It seems you are reading "Just not worth the smiley" as a judgement of the cache. I read it as it wasn't the effort for that seacher, a personal statement.

And I agree with some of the others, you response seems as rude to her as you read her post to be.

Agreement on all points from me, as well. I do think AG might have elaborated a bit more in her note than "just not worth the smiley" (a bit abrupt, which may account for how the OP read it), but it still doesn't read as an indictment of the cache.

8k · January 7, 2008

I guess it would would really be rude if someone actually found your cache and then didn't log it on line at all. If this person had started to look for the cache and decides it wasn't something she wanted to do, abandoned the hunt, put the cache on her ignore list and didn't say anything you wouldn't have come to complain in the forum. Not every cacher likes the same kind of cache you like. Hopefully they can tell from the cache description and avoid the caches that they won't like. But this isn't always the case. Sometimes it is not until you start out that you decide this isn't a cache you want to go looking for. I'm one of those who generally believe in logging a DNF if I abandon a cache hunt. But not everyone views a DNF this way. Some feel that you have to actual get to ground zero and search. The logger here, clear felt she didn't want to log DNF but did write her experience on the cache. In this case she indicated that she wasn't going to make another try and was going to put the cache on her ignore list. I don't find the log rude at all.

Usually it's someone who hid a parking lot cache who is complaining that someone left a note instead of logging a DNF when they decided not to wait for a muggle to leave.

January 7, 2008

In the above situation, I would have also left a note on the cache page describing the "ravine near ground zero", and why I couldn't make it to GZ. To log a DNF I would have to arrive to GZ and search for a reasonable time. On the other hand, if I abandon the hunt at the trailhead, or halfway to the cache, for reasons not concerning the cache, usually I log nothing.

2.3k · January 7, 2008

A note was the proper entry in this case, NOT a DNF. You have to LOOK in order to NOT FIND. There was no search here.

2.5k · January 7, 2008

Maybe they should of wrote a note instead.

8.4k · January 7, 2008

I recently recieved a note posted to one of my caches.

I don't know if it's a DNF or just rude?

"

Location: Georgia, United States

******* posted a note for Dam, its Sluice (Traditional Cache) at 1/6/2008

Log Date: 1/6/2008

Not logging a DNF cause we didn't make it THAT far. With what's considered a rainy december, there just wasn't any place to cross. Didn't feel like bushwhackin like that either from the other side. Sorry, but this one makes the ignore list. Just not worth the smiley. ~AG

"

What exactly constitutes a DNF? How close must one be to the cache, to cross the line from "didn't look for it" to DNF? Halfway from the car? 50 feet from the cache? 10 feet? 5 feet?

Or does the act of leaving the parking area with a GPS define the the begining of the search?

I could understand a rude note if a cache was wet, missing, defective, or dangerous.

But just too difficult? The cache is a 3.5 terrain. Clearly noted on the cache page.

I found it rude for somone to leve a derogatory note for a cache they haven't even found.

Or to take their perspective, didn't really bother to hunt. Rainy December in GA?

Lame.

Rixart

Didn't read the thread. Just respondig to the OP.

YES, it was all the way rude.

I would post a rebuttal note on the page. I've had to do that once myself.

I over value the terrian and difficulty on many of my harder caches just to keep this type of unprepared person AWAY. It WORKS.

8.9k · January 7, 2008

I took the "not worth the smiley" comment as meaning her life was worth more than a smiley...nothing rude or innappropriate about it. Forcing her to delete her note was a bit rude on the other hand.

AG....your note was fine and would be welcomed on any of our caches!!

I'd also add that it isn't your place to decide for the cacher what constitutes a DNF, do you like being told what to do? That, to me, is the rudest part of it all! To me, it looks like you took exception to the "not worth a smiley" and needed a reason to justify making the cacher delete the log IMHO. I didn't know it was the owner's job to force their way of caching on others.

And Snoogs...if that seemed rude to me, I'd first contact the cacher and ASK as to the intent....making ASSumptions...well, we all know what that leads to! Posting a rebuttal could lead to a war which is FAR from what I'd want, that's just me though! Besides, not knowing all the facts and just jumping to conclusions (oh, wait...covered that ASSumption thing already).

Edited January 7, 2008 by Rockin Roddy

January 7, 2008

rixart,

You seem to be reading the log differently than the poster meant (I had this opinion even before the finder posted her comments). It seems you are reading "Just not worth the smiley" as a judgement of the cache. I read it as it wasn't the effort for that seacher, a personal statement.

And I agree with some of the others, you response seems as rude to her as you read her post to be.

Agreement on all points from me, as well. I do think AG might have elaborated a bit more in her note than "just not worth the smiley" (a bit abrupt, which may account for how the OP read it), but it still doesn't read as an indictment of the cache.

I agree with the agreement. The note could have said a little more but hindsight is 20/20. Asking AG to delete it was a bit much IMO. Privately asking for clarification on the comments in the note might have gone a long way to understanding what was meant if you felt that strongly about it. Understanding how you interpreted the comments, she might have edited the note without even being asked. Sounds like she handled the whole thing with class.

Because the ignore list is used for so many purposes, I think it is a good idea not to reveal who/how many are ignoring caches.

8.9k · January 7, 2008

rixart,

You seem to be reading the log differently than the poster meant (I had this opinion even before the finder posted her comments). It seems you are reading "Just not worth the smiley" as a judgement of the cache. I read it as it wasn't the effort for that seacher, a personal statement.

And I agree with some of the others, you response seems as rude to her as you read her post to be.

Agreement on all points from me, as well. I do think AG might have elaborated a bit more in her note than "just not worth the smiley" (a bit abrupt, which may account for how the OP read it), but it still doesn't read as an indictment of the cache.

I agree with the agreement. The note could have said a little more but hindsight is 20/20. Asking AG to delete it was a bit much IMO. Privately asking for clarification on the comments in the note might have gone a long way to understanding what was meant if you felt that strongly about it. Understanding how you interpreted the comments, she might have edited the note without even being asked. Sounds like she handled the whole thing with class.

Because the ignore list is used for so many purposes, I think it is a good idea not to reveal who/how many are ignoring caches.

THANK-YOU ND...being adults and talking through something perceived as a problem works MUCH better than bringing your problems in here....

January 7, 2008

I think a note was more appropriate than a DNF.

I use DNF only if I made a reasonable hunt for it while carrying a GPSr. I have even been in the right area according to yahoo maps, didn't find the cache, but still didn't use the DNF button (used a note instead) because I didn't have a GPS unit with me and so I wasn't CERTAIN that it was the proper area. Since many cache owners consider several DNF's in a row to be an indication to get out there and check their cache, a DNF isn't warranted unless you were actually in the right area.

"not worth the smiley" could have been taken 2 ways. It sounds like the poster meant it to convey that it was too hard for them. The other way it coudl be taken sounds like the way it came across to you, that the cache itself wasn't worth the hike.

It could have been worded better, but a note is more appropriate than a DNF in this case.

****edited because I re-read the thread and had misunderstood the first post myself***

Edited January 7, 2008 by Firespinner

January 7, 2008

Wasnt me . I only complain about DNFParking LOL !! Dont care how hard or wet of or brush covered it is .I just want some idea for a safe start .

I wouldnt worry about it .

20.7k · January 7, 2008

I think that the way the note was written allowed it to be misinterpreted and hurt the cache owners feelings. It would probably have been better to simply log the experience, but not mention the ignoring of the cache. That information certainly isn't helpful to future cachers and only served to cause angst.

I do believe that a 'note' was the proper log type. The way I almost always decide is if I get to ground zero and start looking around, but don't make the find, it's a DNF. If I abort the hunt prior to reaching ground zero, it's a note (or nothing at all because I can be lazy).

1.4k · January 7, 2008

I recently recieved a note posted to one of my caches.

I don't know if it's a DNF or just rude?

"

Location: Georgia, United States

******* posted a note for Dam, its Sluice (Traditional Cache) at 1/6/2008

Log Date: 1/6/2008

Not logging a DNF cause we didn't make it THAT far. With what's considered a rainy december, there just wasn't any place to cross. Didn't feel like bushwhackin like that either from the other side. Sorry, but this one makes the ignore list. Just not worth the smiley. ~AG

"

What exactly constitutes a DNF? How close must one be to the cache, to cross the line from "didn't look for it" to DNF? Halfway from the car? 50 feet from the cache? 10 feet? 5 feet?

Or does the act of leaving the parking area with a GPS define the the begining of the search?

I could understand a rude note if a cache was wet, missing, defective, or dangerous.

But just too difficult? The cache is a 3.5 terrain. Clearly noted on the cache page.

I found it rude for somone to leve a derogatory note for a cache they haven't even found.

Or to take their perspective, didn't really bother to hunt. Rainy December in GA?

Lame.

Rixart

Not reading through the the other replies because I've seen this debate for the 43rd time at least.

Imo, people won't log DNF's largely due to a sense of failure. To each their own. Nothing wrong with logging a DNF...it's helpful to cache owner's.

I get the feeling that this cacher isn't into this level of cache for their quest for smiley's, so be it, let is slide I guess.

As far as logging DNF...If I get to ground zero of a coordinate and can't find it then I log it. Most of the time I cache with the kids and many times we get disrupted before we "really" begin our search because of whatever reason.

Edited January 7, 2008 by egami

7.3k · January 7, 2008

As to whether a note or a DNF was appropriate, I'd say either. Logger's choice. Perhaps better a note in this case as it doesn't create a red box in GSAK, which might discourage other hunters.

As to whether the log was rude.

I try to remember as a cache owner that the log belongs to the logger. It's more for their record keeping of their caching then it is for me. Often owners feel that the log is an email directed at them, instead of remembering that from the logger's perspective, it's a log for their account page to record what they want to remember.

3.2k · January 7, 2008

I wouldn't worry about it. The note just defines the "cacher".

There you go.. all that needs to be said in a simple concise statement.

January 7, 2008

I wouldn't have paid that much attention to that note. Not a big deal. Frankly, I don't think this should have been brought to the forums at all.

And how did this turn into another DNF versus note debate? That's an issue that will never reach 100% agreement and won't be solved by endless numbers of posts.

JD

January 7, 2008

Thank you all for your replies and opinions.

After reviewing it all, and sleeping on it, I have come to the following conclusions...

I assumed that ignore lists were personal/private and a veteran cacher publicly stating on the cache page that they have placed a cache on their ignore list is an indictment of the cache or cache hider.

I assumed that a veteran cacher publicly stating on the cache page that it's "Just not worth the smiley" was also an indictment of the cache or cache hider.

I assumed that a veteran cacher would see that the above mentioned note could be interpereted as negative and might discourage others from hunting the cache.

I objected to the cacher publicly stating these things on the cache page.

If they want to put my caches on an ignore list, that's fine.

If they don't think this cache is worth their effort, that's fine.

In conclusion, maybe my skin is a bit too thin, and I should keep a little more perspective.

I apparently should make fewer assumptions.

It is, after all, just a game.

Again, thank you all for your opinions. Especially those with which I disagreed.

January 7, 2008

I think that the note could be taken several ways depending on what my mood was at the time. I also think that the last two sentences could have been left off but that's just my opinion.

Sometimes I think we react to things because we know what we would have ment if we wrote it or we would never write it ourselves.

3.9k · January 7, 2008

Not reading through the the other replies because I've seen this debate for the 43rd time at least.

When I read this line I had a feeling the rest of the post wouldn't be applicable to this thread.

And I was right.

DNF or just rude?

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