Pointless Micro Caches

6.2k · June 8, 2008

The real issue is what makes a for a good caching experience, rather than does a micro make a bad one. This is an old old (stale?) argument simply put to bed- Micros should be listed as Micros so those who don't like Micros can safely ignore Micros. Those who don't care about the size (back me up here ladies!) but the quality of the hunt are then free to enjoy themselves.

June 8, 2008

What makes a micro pointless?

Busy mum/housewife....those 'Off Yer Trolley' a 5min break from the chores.

Roadside micros - hey, If it's a stop along a boring journey to stretch legs bring 'em on. (Just think before you hide them please, If the micro is hidden behind the largest tree/bush in the layby that will be the very tree that people stop at to relieve themselves.)

6 mile hike across the moors for a micro, micro in a forest, hmmmm, bit needle in a haystack - only for those who REALLY like a challenge.

Micro amongst rubbish - it could be a regular amongst the rubbish, can't just blame the micro for that. The rubbish may not have been there when the cache was set, cito the area or bring it to the attention of the owner to cito/move.

June 8, 2008

I'm not particularly keen on micros, but I really enjoyed finding GC102DV Guide Stoops - Edale at my second attempt on 5th April 08, after a failed attmpt with partner on 13 Jan 08. As support driver for a team competing in Four Inns race, I only had time for 1 cache, so this was particularly satisfying. There's a series of caches at guide stoops in the Peak District - carved direction stones dating from 1700s - some are micros, others larger, depending on location, a classic example of appropraite sized caches for appropriate locations. GCGG9E StAG Hunt in Cambridge is also an interesting location (St Andrew the Great church), and retrieving without being spotted, adds to the challenge.

June 9, 2008

Each to his/her own really.

Is there a point ? I guess so - after all a lot of people enjoy the challenge of not just finding the co-ordinates but also the mental puzzle of exactly where / how the cache has been placed.

Its a bit like puzzle caches in that way.

Personally, its normally a family game for us, and with a child of 8 and one of 3 we tend to stick to traditional caches at the moment.

June 9, 2008

Some Cachers are oblivious to general area around where they place a cache. Whether it be the person who places a micro behind the smelly filthy dumpster, rather than place it in the more pleasant location a few feet away, or, as in the case I described, the cacher who places a tupperware amongst the trash on the ground. Even if it had been a pleasant area which then went down hill, I believe that a responsible owner should archive or relocate their cache. In the case I quoted it would have only needed moving about 50 Ft and it would have been away from the dumping area.

I agree with the sentiment - a cache should take someone where they wouldn't have gone previously and at the same time be an interesting location. I've been complimented that many of my caches are such.

But, we all make mistakes sometimes...

I recently placed a cache in a motorway service station close to where I live as part of the Motorway Mayhem series as another cache had expired there. At the time I placed the cache it looked a good location but the FTF the following day pointed out that the location was regularly used as a latrine by lorry drivers who couldn't be bothered to walk the 100m to the 24 hour toilets in the service station. To be honest there wasn't much evidence at the cache location itself but only about 10m away I even discovered used soiled toilet paper. It was my fault - I should have used my nonce and thought - the number of times I've wondered why the lorry park in motorway service stations smell like urinals...

I immediately disabled the cache and moved it only a small distance to a location that, while a bit more of a challenge to discover as it's more open, is a much better all round location.

And yes, I did disinfect the cache container before replacing it

June 11, 2008

Why all the complaining? If you dont like micros then dont do them. I very rarely swap items when I find them anyway. As for people thinking a place is a dump when they get there dont worry you dont have to go back. I always thought this was a nice sport that was just a bit of fun. I clearly made a mistake in taking a look at the forums. All people seem to do is moan and insult eachother for no reason other than they didnt enjoy a cache as much as they wanted to. Shame. Im going to stick with finding them by myself and staying away from people that take things far to seriously.

June 12, 2008

Why all the complaining? If you dont like micros then dont do them. I very rarely swap items when I find them anyway. As for people thinking a place is a dump when they get there dont worry you dont have to go back. I always thought this was a nice sport that was just a bit of fun. I clearly made a mistake in taking a look at the forums. All people seem to do is moan and insult eachother for no reason other than they didnt enjoy a cache as much as they wanted to. Shame. Im going to stick with finding them by myself and staying away from people that take things far to seriously.

Well 'Ferret', there are a few interesting bits to your post.

You make it sound as though you are a very experienced Cacher, with your 2 years of membership and the comment about 'rarely swap items...anyway.' However, I hardly think that 10 caches (9 in the last 7 months) gives you very much insight into the issues being discussed here.

There are those that seemingly do nothing but moan, but even they sometimes have a point. However, your comment 'As for people thinking a place is a dump when they get there dont worry you dont have to go back.' further illustrates your lack of understanding of the point being made. If you had a few more caches to you credit you might understand. Having wasted time finding it, the fact that you do not need to revisit is hardly any consolation.

For those for which it is not just about the numbers, Caching is frequently about the location. To quote the Groundspeak FAQ page...

The location of a cache can be very entertaining indeed. As many say, location, location, location! The location of a cache demonstrates the founder's skill and possibly even daring.

So getting somewhere to find it covered in waste hardly meets that definition. When you have visited a few more caches and found that the tupperware is hidden amongst fly-tipping including (in the worst case I have seen) soiled babies nappies and female sanitary items, you not only wonder what dregs of society left the rubbish but why the cache owner has continued to leave the cache there!

A belated welcome to you and I hope you continue to slowly build up your caching experience.

2.3k · June 12, 2008

Is this thread still going?

Aren't you all a bit bored with moaning about/defending micros?

(I'd insert multiple yawning smilies)... if I could be bothered.

June 12, 2008

Is this thread still going?

Aren't you all a bit bored with moaning about/defending micros?

(I'd insert multiple yawning smilies)... if I could be bothered.

My original question was not intended to develop into a micro-bashing thread, but was directed at people who set POINTLESS micros. And that doesn't mean ALL micros. There are some excellent ones out there. I just wanted to understand their reasoning.

Addressing someone who has set over 50 micros, I would have hoped that you would have been suitably qualified to help answer my question rather than returning naive comments which don't help anyone, or the hobby. I cannot speak for your caches, or does the cap fit?

June 12, 2008

There's a great micro in Boroughbridge, Yorkshire. It is part of an open air museum and fits in perfectly with the guidelines. I have also done several in the middle of built up areas... also fine. But then why do some people put a film pod in the middle of a wood? No excuse IMO. The rule should always be the largest container which can be hidden. I have been upsizing our caches this year where possible. MaxKim.

June 12, 2008

Thanks for all the comments folks which are very interesting, however as expected, it seems that only one person has put forward an argument in their defence which is "would I like to do them?" which I accept is quite a valid point.

I have enjoyed finding the odd micro, but I must admit they don't usually do it for me, but I don't put negative comments about them in the logs any more as it just seems to cause bad feeling. I will keep on looking for them though. I just hope that new cachers don't place boring ones because it's so easy to.

Hi all, as the owner of 30odd caches at the time of writing I feel some justification in the placement of micro caches.

The caches we own are, where individual the normal Tupperware type containing the usual swaps.

Some of the caches are placed on circular walks of up to eight miles and nine caches, so to place a regular size cache at every location and stock it with something different would be daunting.(you only need a certain amount of bouncy balls).

The hunt should be about the area in which the cache is locating and the interest generated by the finding of different types of cache, so a mixture of sizes and contents is an acceptable way to end a days caching.

(it's wrong to be different, everybody is different, so, everybody is wrong.)!!!!!!!

June 12, 2008

Is this thread still going?

Aren't you all a bit bored with moaning about/defending micros?

(I'd insert multiple yawning smilies)... if I could be bothered.

No worries, I'll do it for you

June 12, 2008

Is this thread still going?

Aren't you all a bit bored with moaning about/defending micros?

(I'd insert multiple yawning smilies)... if I could be bothered.

I bet you come back and have another look

June 14, 2008

Well I'm now convinced I need to hide more boring micros - just to rile addicted snobs!

Edited June 14, 2008 by limpfish

June 14, 2008

The hunt should be about ....................

In your opinion......

June 15, 2008

The hunt should be about ....................

In your opinion......

In my opinion, it's my opinion that counts.

June 15, 2008

there are some great micro and nano caches which have taken us to places we would never have been without them GC19P0A being a great example. There are some really nff boxes (no I am not going to point the finger)

It is a questi9on of getting good information in teh cache page - some people want to stop in layby's to find film canisters I dont, but will happily walk along canals to do so

Each to his own

Bob

2.3k · June 15, 2008

Is this thread still going?

Aren't you all a bit bored with moaning about/defending micros?

(I'd insert multiple yawning smilies)... if I could be bothered.

I bet you come back and have another look

:wub:

3.7k · June 16, 2008

There haven't been many attempts to answer the OP's question. Why? I don't think that there are so many "pointless" micros about.

Even if you think you know of one: chances are that the person who hid it thought that there was a point to it, so is hardly likely to explain why he/she hid one with no purpose in mind.

The only question is whether you'd agree with their idea of a worthwhile location. If not, it doesn't make it pointless, just a cache of a type not to your taste. Unfortunately, geocaching.com isn't very well set up to indicate what type of cache it is, so there are always going to be occasions where you're seeking a cache which isn't going to seem worthwhile. If it was my site I'd ensure that each cache had a clear indication of its target audience (in other words, it would indicate what the "point" was meant to be in a searchable fashion).

I can't think of many that I've done where I really thought they were pointless: one or two I've wondered about, but at least the approach was interesting even if the actual location wasn't.

June 16, 2008

There haven't been many attempts to answer the OP's question. Why? I don't think that there are so many "pointless" micros about.

Even if you think you know of one: chances are that the person who hid it thought that there was a point to it, so is hardly likely to explain why he/she hid one with no purpose in mind.

I daresay it's right that not many cachers set caches they consider pointless, although there are one or two where cache owners have told me that a particular cache of theirs is not very interesting.

I went through a period a while back when I came across an increasing number of caches that I found quite unpleasant to do (and generally I just walked away from them). This happens to me rarely now as I just have had to just be more careful in choosing ones that are likely to interest me.

June 16, 2008

The only question is whether you'd agree with their idea of a worthwhile location. If not, it doesn't make it pointless, just a cache of a type not to your taste. Unfortunately, geocaching.com isn't very well set up to indicate what type of cache it is, so there are always going to be occasions where you're seeking a cache which isn't going to seem worthwhile.

I agree totally with these sentiments, however, where does it say in the GC guidelines that a cache has to be placed in a "worthwhile location"? I reiterate my earlier comments, the "point" of geocaching is the use of a GPS to find a hidden object - nano/micro or whatever, in whatever location.

Neil

June 16, 2008

The only question is whether you'd agree with their idea of a worthwhile location. If not, it doesn't make it pointless, just a cache of a type not to your taste. Unfortunately, geocaching.com isn't very well set up to indicate what type of cache it is, so there are always going to be occasions where you're seeking a cache which isn't going to seem worthwhile.

I agree totally with these sentiments, however, where does it say in the GC guidelines that a cache has to be placed in a "worthwhile location"? I reiterate my earlier comments, the "point" of geocaching is the use of a GPS to find a hidden object - nano/micro or whatever, in whatever location.

Neil

They don't say "has to be placed in a worthwhile location" but the guidelines do state:

"Ultimately you'll want to place a cache in a place that is unique in some way. The big reward for geocachers, other than finding the cache itself, is the location. A prime camping spot, great viewpoint, unusual location, etc. are all good places to hide a cache."

June 18, 2008

I place our caches in places which we enjoy walking (often a favourite walk) and would like to share the area with caching companions!

Peter

June 22, 2008

We have all seen them. Personally, I don't understand it, especially if there is a much better spot to be found nearby. So the reason for this post is to try and find out the way people think who set caches like this. Don't be embarrassed! Come forward and give us a rational explanation please! Maybe then, we will be able to appreciate this type of cache a bit better!

I guess I've got a bee in my bonnet over this now, since it has become a very local phenomenon, as of yesterday.

"Sign of the Times" series by "Lord Of The Cachers" (and why, it seems, a sock-puppet account?) For example: GC1DDWC

A load of "caches", all the same (nano caches stuck between the uprights of street signs and the back face of the sign, street name in the cache name). I thought the requisites for geocaching were:

- need for a GPSr

- need for a search

neither of which applies in this series.

I logged them until I could not bear to see another one, basically so that they don't appear as a great "unfound" morass on the local map.

3.7k · June 22, 2008

"Sign of the Times" series by "Lord Of The Cachers" (and why, it seems, a sock-puppet account?) For example: GC1DDWC

A load of "caches", all the same (nano caches stuck between the uprights of street signs and the back face of the sign, street name in the cache name). I thought the requisites for geocaching were:

- need for a GPSr

- need for a search

neither of which applies in this series.

Bad example: it has quite a long description giving the history of the area etc. The thread is (supposed to be) about 1-line descriptions.

I'd assume that the hider thought that it would educate the cacher about the local history, and at the same time be a quick find for people wanting an easy micro.

Also, I don't know how I'd approach this one without a GPSr: there's no hint, and no description of the hiding place. If I just had a printout of the cache description, I might manage it using the Google map but there's no guarantee that it would be quick (let alone search-free): and many bigger caches are easier to find using just a map.

June 22, 2008

Bad example: it has quite a long description giving the history of the area etc. The thread is (supposed to be) about 1-line descriptions.

I'd assume that the hider thought that it would educate the cacher about the local history, and at the same time be a quick find for people wanting an easy micro.

Also, I don't know how I'd approach this one without a GPSr: there's no hint, and no description of the hiding place. If I just had a printout of the cache description, I might manage it using the Google map but there's no guarantee that it would be quick (let alone search-free): and many bigger caches are easier to find using just a map.

I wonder then why the thread title is "Pointless Micro Caches", not "One Line Descriptions"?

Actually, a really good example. The descriptions may as well be 1 line. The same description was cut and pasted into 15 or so caches, very few of which are actually in Bracknell Town. Most are in the historic and ancient parishes of Winkfield and Warfield, which were collections of historic hamlets, until the 1990s. Therefore the descriptions are wide of the mark: a missed opportunity. If a history lesson was intended, Bracknell Forest Council's own heritage leaflets would have been a good starting point.

Further, the majority of the caches lie in the 1990s suburban housing estates, none in the hamlets nor even in the forests and green belt for which Bracknell Forest is known and why people visit from a wide area. As regards preparing your printout of the cache description, simply click the PLUS sign on the map to zoom in 4 times before printing. Then the corelation of the cache name to the street name is obvious, so is the location.

Perhaps, I'll grant you, the first of the series would require the briefest of searches, given the shortage of magnetic material to which to attach nano caches. I'd defy you, or anyone else, to complete this series and remain enthused until the last one has been bagged.

As they were still being published as we set out, there are several more still to be claimed. Want a FTF, anyone?

2.9k · June 23, 2008

Sandvika, as you are a premium member.

To avoid the morass you mention go to the cache page and click on ignore this listing (top RH side)

This prevents them appearing in your searches and nearest unfound list.

June 24, 2008

A cache is a cache to me. Living in SW London/NE Surrey, we are surrounded by muggles and concrete! Try placing a cache round here and it will be muggled in days if not hours. Church Micros take you to some very nice churches, Side Tracked Micros are something to do to and from work. I love finding a well stocked cache in a scenic area, not possble round here though. I have hunted some very well placed micros in woods and urban areas alike. If you don't like micros, ignore them, if you live in an urban area you don't have a lot of choice!

I have not placed any caches yet but have identified about 6 likely places within 1k of my flat, all micros, through necessity (spelling). If I wanted to place a regular/large I'd have to travel some distance and as I don't drive or have a bike, maintainig them will be a problem.

Live and let live, if you don't like them, ignore them but take into account the location, we may have had no choice!!!

Nanos, now thats another story...

1.3k · June 24, 2008

I'm with Sandvika on this

Mind you the cache setter will get bored with one line logs... as a hider you have to hide something good to get a decent log

June 24, 2008

This "if you dont like em dont seek em " argument is lame....

I can't agree with that. I do not like multi-caches. But I will never suggest that they are pointless. I do not like the virtuals, or earth caches. I am a Traditional Cache type of guy!! That being said, a traditional micro is fine by me. If there are types of caches I don't like, I don't hunt them. You should do the same. Just because you or I don't like them doesn't make them pointless. If you don't like micros, exclude them with your filter!! They wont' show up on your GPS and therefore you won't even know they are there. That way you don't have to stress yourself out with a pointless microcache.

June 24, 2008

This "if you dont like em dont seek em " argument is lame....

I can't agree with that. I do not like multi-caches. But I will never suggest that they are pointless. I do not like the virtuals, or earth caches. I am a Traditional Cache type of guy!! That being said, a traditional micro is fine by me. If there are types of caches I don't like, I don't hunt them. You should do the same. Just because you or I don't like them doesn't make them pointless. If you don't like micros, exclude them with your filter!! They wont' show up on your GPS and therefore you won't even know they are there. That way you don't have to stress yourself out with a pointless microcache.

Try a search on "back to basics". That'll sort you namby pamby Liberals out. "each to their own", "don't do it if you don't like it". Rubbish!

They can be placed where absolutely necessary, but folks have an issue where they're placed when a much bigger cache could be placed. You just ruined it for someone who can be bothered to maintain a decent cache.

Pure lazyness.

The_dog

2.2k · June 24, 2008

Looks like someone's socks need a wash

June 24, 2008

Looks like someone's socks need a wash

"...Pure lazyness..." and a spelling lesson.

3.9k · June 26, 2008

And a grammar lesson...

June 26, 2008

I've resisted so far, and can resist no longer.

There is no answer to this question: "Pointless Micro Caches - why?" The OP wants an answer to the question "why", specifically for micros, and more specifically for those micros that are pointless. Well, having narrowed it down that far, there can be no answer. If the cache is pointless, and this thread is only about pointless caches, then by definition it has no reason, and there is no answer to the question "why?"

Now, if it had been phrased differently, the question may have been possible to answer.

But it wasn't.

So it isn't. :lol:

Happy caching everyone.

June 26, 2008

Now, if it had been phrased differently, the question may have been possible to answer.

42

June 26, 2008

Now, if it had been phrased differently, the question may have been possible to answer.

42

Have a pan galactic gargle blaster on me...........

June 27, 2008

Before this all degenerates into a big farce involving custard pies and plenty of mud slinging (and hopefully not much of it sticking) I'll put in my ten penneth...

I think micros have their place... but I wish their was a size option for it on the website. Yes, this could mean that people who don't like micros can ignore them if they want to. However, from a purely selfish point of view, this would mean that for cache owners who may not have mentioned in the blurb what the size of the cache is, that I would have an idea what I am hunting for!

One person's junk is another person's treasure and all that.

6.2k · June 27, 2008

I think micros have their place... but I wish their was a size option for it on the website.

There is, and you can filter them in or out in PQs.

2.3k · June 27, 2008

My new nano containers arrived today.

June 27, 2008

I've resisted so far, and can resist no longer.

There is no answer to this question: "Pointless Micro Caches - why?" The OP wants an answer to the question "why", specifically for micros, and more specifically for those micros that are pointless. Well, having narrowed it down that far, there can be no answer. If the cache is pointless, and this thread is only about pointless caches, then by definition it has no reason, and there is no answer to the question "why?"

Now, if it had been phrased differently, the question may have been possible to answer.

But it wasn't.

So it isn't.

Happy caching everyone.

I will attempt to answer the unanwerable question. To make the answer even more impressive, I will do it as someone who doesn't like the sort of caches that the OP alludes to.

Some people place caches that they acknowledge themselves are not very interesting for two reasons:

-They like placing caches and it's easy to place this sort of cache

-For those cachers who would rather do any cache rather than no cache, regardless of of where the cache is

Fin

June 27, 2008

My new nano containers arrived today.

I'm unfriending you on Facebook.

1.2k · June 27, 2008

You have an opinion, or just post whoring? Which is it?

Ditto the one above.

I really don't care for the attitude you display that says "I have more posts..been around longer.." therefore I am correct. Get your nose out of your butt, and dish up some reasonable replies.

You micro lovin' commie.

When I was a forum moderator there was a guideline concerning personal attacks and abuse. As you profess to be such an expert I wonder why you are intent on breaking as many of the guidelines as you appear to.

It is normal behaviour here to refrain from such childish abuse. Also some of the words you are using are not normal abuse in the UK. Hmmm!!

3.7k · June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

You have an opinion, or just post whoring? Which is it?

Ditto the one above.

I really don't care for the attitude you display that says "I have more posts..been around longer.." therefore I am correct. Get your nose out of your butt, and dish up some reasonable replies.

You micro lovin' commie.

When I was a forum moderator there was a guideline concerning personal attacks and abuse. As you profess to be such an expert I wonder why you are intent on breaking as many of the guidelines as you appear to.

It is normal behaviour here to refrain from such childish abuse. Also some of the words you are using are not normal abuse in the UK. Hmmm!!

Take a break Dave.

It was meant as :

a) A message to agree with the OP about pointless micros...I did agree that micro's have their place.

The "commie" reference should be taken in jest, as it was meant.

c) I never said I was an expert at anything, except winding up people.

d) The American "accent" is fake, so don't get paranoid.

I love this game, and I know people say play it your way, I just don't like the micro way. It's not right, where not appropriate. I have recently archived 30 decent caches (some of which were micro's, but in a nice place to see) in protest at the amount of lame micros being placed in my area.

That's my problem, but that's the way I'm dealing with it, and I'm out of the game.

Apologies to absolutely everyone who was upset. Can I have my 10% warning removed now please.

How many speelling or grammitcal errors this tyme? <----ya see that, it's a joke!

Regards,

and see ya.

Edited June 27, 2008 by the_dog

June 27, 2008

dont care what size the cache is, what can or cant be put in it. As long as the place where the cache is of interest to me thats all that counts.

I would agree but after a couple of micros today... I knew they where micro;s, there name said micro's...

My complaint please do not put them next to them on the ground right nest to a post. Especially one in a car park... I have Geohounds (luckily not with me today) I know what they would have done on 3 of todays caches...

Just please I did not have geohounds with me today...

Gerrit

June 27, 2008

dont care what size the cache is, what can or cant be put in it. As long as the place where the cache is of interest to me thats all that counts.

I would agree but after a couple of micros today... I knew they where micros, there name said micro's...

My complaint please do not put them next to them on the ground right nest to a post. Especially one in a car park... I have Geohounds (luckily not with me today) I know what they would have done on 3 of todays caches...

Just pleased I did not have geohounds with me today...

Gerrit

Edited June 27, 2008 by GerritS

1.2k · June 27, 2008

You have an opinion, or just post whoring? Which is it?

Ditto the one above.

I really don't care for the attitude you display that says "I have more posts..been around longer.." therefore I am correct. Get your nose out of your butt, and dish up some reasonable replies.

You micro lovin' commie.

When I was a forum moderator there was a guideline concerning personal attacks and abuse. As you profess to be such an expert I wonder why you are intent on breaking as many of the guidelines as you appear to.

It is normal behaviour here to refrain from such childish abuse. Also some of the words you are using are not normal abuse in the UK. Hmmm!!

Take a break Dave.

It was meant as :

a) A message to agree with the OP about pointless micros...I did agree that micro's have their place.

The "commie" reference should be taken in jest, as it was meant.

c) I never said I was an expert at anything, except winding up people.

d) The American "accent" is fake, so don't get paranoid.

I love this game, and I know people say play it your way, I just don't like the micro way. It's not right, where not appropriate. I have recently archived 30 decent caches (some of which were micro's, but in a nice place to see) in protest at the amount of lame micros being placed in my area.

That's my problem, but that's the way I'm dealing with it, and I'm out of the game.

Apologies to absolutely everyone who was upset. Can I have my 10% warning removed now please.

How many speelling or grammitcal errors this tyme? <----ya see that, it's a joke!

Regards,

and see ya.

Given your admission that you have archived 30 of your caches and the fact that you "joined" in May this year I can only conclude that you are writing your abuse under the guise of a sock puppet.

Using such an alias to make such postings is a blatant breach of forum guidelines. Why do you not express your opinions under your own ID?

June 28, 2008

Given your admission that you have archived 30 of your caches and the fact that you "joined" in May this year I can only conclude that you are writing your abuse under the guise of a sock puppet.

Using such an alias to make such postings is a blatant breach of forum guidelines. Why do you not express your opinions under your own ID?

1. My oldself does not exist anymore.

2. This is my ID. I am a premium member, how does that constitute a "sock puppet".

Your response borderlines on abuse I'm afraid. That's fine, at least someone is prepared to say what they think.

1.2k · June 28, 2008

If anyone construes any of my postings as abuse please feel free to report me.

Getting bored with this "discussion" now, going elsewhere.

Pointless Micro Caches

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