Pet Pieves

January 14, 2010

Notice the title - "Pet Pieves." Do you notice anything about this? It's misspelled. It's supposed to be "Pet Peeves." Often misspellings are part of a puzzle; but more often than not, they are due to laziness of the cache owners when posting a new cache. Misspellings are not really one of my big pet peeves of Geocaching...but I do have some I'd like to share. If everyone worked more on the quality of existing caches, then I think the positive experience of geocaching is increased greatly. New cachers are able to log finds and experienced cachers are able to grow as well.

Here are some of my pet peeves - feel free to add your own so I can be sure to avoid them when hunting or placing caches!

1) Puzzle caches: When you set up a puzzle cache based on math that requires a specific solution, make sure your description is intelligent, specific, and error-free. If it is not error-free and the error is reported to you, FIX IT and move on. No one is perfect, but it's foolish to refuse to change a math error just because "other people haven't noticed it."

2) Cache owners: If someone posts a log asking for help, RESPOND to it! You may politely decline to help, but I think it is rude (or lazy) to just ignore their post for months on end. It appears that you are uninterested not just in your own cache, but in those hunting your cache. Everyone gets busy from time to time, but if you have too many caches to maintain at a high standard, maybe you could offer to give some up for adoption.

3) Vandalism: Now that I've started placing my own caches I have noticed how quickly my caches can become vandalized. Guys really...this is embarrassing to the geocaching community. It's almost a guarantee that when a cache is placed that the surrounding 10-15 foot area will be completely demolished within the week. I'm not sure if it's because people are just not careful with their environment, having prior experience in which they had to muscle-off a cache lid. But I think we need to practice a hands-off approach to caching at first. If we can't find it by simply using our eyes, then maybe we can start prodding and prying gently to see what gives.

Be sure to give you input on these and add your own so we can all try to avoid the rude/destructive/frustrating pet peeves!

6k · January 14, 2010

My pet peeve is people who expect the world to be perfect and everybody to march lock step doing whatever they see as the right thing.

The hobby is run by human beings, flawed though they may be, they seem to generally get by.

9.3k · January 14, 2010

Be sure to give you input on these:

1 ) Puzzle caches: I've oft been described as being dumber than a bag of hammers, yet I continue to punish what little functioning grey matter I have left by attempting them whenever they pop up. I agree that I'm not a fan of puzzles which are capable of more than one right answer. I also like to see some flavor of coord checker on the cache page so I can verify my attempts.

2 ) Cache owners: I support the mantra of "Take Pride In Your Hide". While this covers many different aspects of cache placement and maintenance, I agree that owners should respond to any and all inquiries about their caches.

3 ) Vandalism: I haven't really noticed that occurring at my hides. I don't tend to hide caches in sensitive areas, so my ground zero may be a bit hardier than others, able to survive a bit of poking and prodding. If I did find my ground zero had been blitzkrieged, I would either move the cache to a sturdier location, or archive it.

My thoughts are in blue.

That being done, I guess my biggest pet peeve would be poor container selection. In most areas around the globe, containers of reasonable quality can be had for very little $$$. When I see a relatively new player using a crappy container, I assume that their choice was based on inexperience. What I can't fathom is why seasoned cachers would intentionally select a cache container that is utterly unsuited for the hide's environment.

January 14, 2010

3 ) Vandalism: I haven't really noticed that occurring at my hides. I don't tend to hide caches in sensitive areas, so my ground zero may be a bit hardier than others, able to survive a bit of poking and prodding. If I did find my ground zero had been blitzkrieged, I would either move the cache to a sturdier location, or archive it.

Yeah, sometimes it's just a function of poor cache placement. I had to recently move one due to this. Also included in my thought was the fact that everything around the cache gets torn up when people search. That's just unfortunate.

PS. #4 pet peeve - cranky cachers. haha.

5.7k · January 14, 2010

Micros in general. All geocaches that are placed so as to attract the attention of muggles or security personnel. Geocaches that are placed in ivy or other landscape in such a manner that the seekers are induced into entering the landscaped areas in such a manner as to cause damage. Geocaches that are placed in locations where there is unstable soil, resulting in significant human caused erosion.

38.2k · January 14, 2010

3) Vandalism: Now that I've started placing my own caches I have noticed how quickly my caches can become vandalized. Guys really...this is embarrassing to the geocaching community. It's almost a guarantee that when a cache is placed that the surrounding 10-15 foot area will be completely demolished within the week. I'm not sure if it's because people are just not careful with their environment, having prior experience in which they had to muscle-off a cache lid. But I think we need to practice a hands-off approach to caching at first. If we can't find it by simply using our eyes, then maybe we can start prodding and prying gently to see what gives.

If I experienced this it wouldn't be a pet peeve, it would be a reason for me to stop placing geocaches. Thankfully I haven't encountered it with my caches , nor with most of the ones I've found.

If it is a persistent problem for you you might want to re-think your hiding strategy.

10.1k · January 14, 2010

2) Cache owners: If someone posts a log asking for help, RESPOND to it! You may politely decline to help, but I think it is rude (or lazy) to just ignore their post for months on end. It appears that you are uninterested not just in your own cache, but in those hunting your cache. Everyone gets busy from time to time, but if you have too many caches to maintain at a high standard, maybe you could offer to give some up for adoption.

2b) Don't make pompous demands on other cache owners.

1.5k · January 14, 2010

I had a pet Peeve once, but I forgot to feed it for a long time and it died.

Now I just admire other peoples Peeves.

Edited January 14, 2010 by Right Wing Wacko

19k · January 14, 2010

I had a pet Peeve once, but I forgot to feed it for a long time and it died.

Yeah, that happens when you don't feed 'em, and sometimes (often, perhaps) that's a good thing.

18.9k · January 14, 2010

...

2) Cache owners: If someone posts a log asking for help, RESPOND to it! You may politely decline to help, but I think it is rude (or lazy) to just ignore their post for months on end. It appears that you are uninterested not just in your own cache, but in those hunting your cache. Everyone gets busy from time to time, but if you have too many caches to maintain at a high standard, maybe you could offer to give some up for adoption.

3) Vandalism: Now that I've started placing my own caches I have noticed how quickly my caches can become vandalized. Guys really...this is embarrassing to the geocaching community. It's almost a guarantee that when a cache is placed that the surrounding 10-15 foot area will be completely demolished within the week. I'm not sure if it's because people are just not careful with their environment, having prior experience in which they had to muscle-off a cache lid. But I think we need to practice a hands-off approach to caching at first. If we can't find it by simply using our eyes, then maybe we can start prodding and prying gently to see what gives.

...

As for Number 2 - you might be shocked to learn just how many emails are automatically deleted or otherwise handled by various junk mail filters at the desktop, corporate firewalls, corporate filters, ISP filters and more. Just because you don't get a response - DO NOT assume the email was delivered and read and then ignored. Assume it may have been lost along the way.

As for number 3 - sorry to hear that. With over 140 cache placements of my own - I have never seen anything like what you are describing.

January 14, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

4.8k · January 14, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

You've never been to Nebraska. Nothing but corn as far as the eye can see....

18.9k · January 14, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

I never said I had not seen any vegitation "damage".

I just don't consider that to be geovandalism or harmful to the environment in any way. Generally speaking any such "damage" goes away after 1 good rainstorm and a few sunny days for the grass to grow.

If the prairie can reclaim a paved asphalt road inside of 5 years (I've seen it) - then a few mashed weeds and grass blades is nothing.

18.9k · January 15, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

You've never been to Nebraska. Nothing but corn as far as the eye can see....

you've never been to the sandhills..... http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-52ebb1caa385

4.8k · January 15, 2010

you've never been to the sandhills..... http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...bf-52ebb1caa385

You are correct

I haven't been to Nebraska since 1991 though. I'm sure it's a lot different now.

1.7k · January 15, 2010

My peeve (and it really is more than a peeve) is people who steal things from caches that don't belong to them, like geocoins and travel bugs. I hope there is a special place in geo-hell reserved for them.

5.7k · January 15, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

I never said I had not seen any vegitation "damage".

I just don't consider that to be geovandalism or harmful to the environment in any way. Generally speaking any such "damage" goes away after 1 good rainstorm and a few sunny days for the grass to grow.

If the prairie can reclaim a paved asphalt road inside of 5 years (I've seen it) - then a few mashed weeds and grass blades is nothing.

"Generally speaking any such "damage" goes away after 1 good rainstorm and a few sunny days for the grass to grow."

This may in fact be true where you live, but I can tell you for danged certain that in areas where I have geocached, it is absolutely not the case.

January 15, 2010

My peeve, is for all the dog owners that used the crap bags but then just throw the bag full of crap into the bush or off to the side of the trail.

January 15, 2010

Don't make pompous demands on other cache owners.

lol. Sounds like a lazy cache owner just got burned! Haha

Some of these ideas are really good. One good point was about the spam filters being the culprit for a lak of response. I guess there's no way around that except to wait.

4.8k · January 15, 2010

My peeve, is for all the dog owners that used the crap bags but then just throw the bag full of crap into the bush or off to the side of the trail.

Oh yeah. That's worse than just leaving it lie. At least if it's left to sit there it will, eventually, become soil.

I remember the good ol days when you didn't have to bag doggie poo. After all, a main component of soil is poo.

January 15, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

You've never been to Nebraska. Nothing but corn as far as the eye can see....

Is THAT what the cropcircles were all about?

10.1k · January 15, 2010

Don't make pompous demands on other cache owners.

lol. Sounds like a lazy cache owner just got burned! Haha

Some of these ideas are really good. One good point was about the spam filters being the culprit for a lak of response. I guess there's no way around that except to wait.

And, again, you would be wrong. It's the geocacher with the self-important sense of entitlemet who got burnt.

3.2k · January 15, 2010

lol. Sounds like a lazy cache owner just got burned! Haha

...says the cacher too lazy to place caches for others to find to the cacher who has placed and maintained caches for the last 6 years.

7.5k · January 15, 2010

1) Puzzle caches: When you set up a puzzle cache based on math that requires a specific solution, make sure your description is intelligent, specific, and error-free. If it is not error-free and the error is reported to you, FIX IT and move on. No one is perfect, but it's foolish to refuse to change a math error just because "other people haven't noticed it."

2) Cache owners: If someone posts a log asking for help, RESPOND to it! You may politely decline to help, but I think it is rude (or lazy) to just ignore their post for months on end. It appears that you are uninterested not just in your own cache, but in those hunting your cache. Everyone gets busy from time to time, but if you have too many caches to maintain at a high standard, maybe you could offer to give some up for adoption.

3) Vandalism: Now that I've started placing my own caches I have noticed how quickly my caches can become vandalized. Guys really...this is embarrassing to the geocaching community. It's almost a guarantee that when a cache is placed that the surrounding 10-15 foot area will be completely demolished within the week. I'm not sure if it's because people are just not careful with their environment, having prior experience in which they had to muscle-off a cache lid. But I think we need to practice a hands-off approach to caching at first. If we can't find it by simply using our eyes, then maybe we can start prodding and prying gently to see what gives.

Be sure to give you input on these and add your own so we can all try to avoid the rude/destructive/frustrating pet peeves!

My pet peeve - COs that don't invest in the game. They play the game for a week, maybe a month, find no caches or a couple of caches then put out micro caches that cost $0 to create. Promptly get bored and disappear, leaving it up to the community and the reviewer to finally do the archiving.

Regarding the vandalism pet peeve - my spinoff pet peeve are COs that plant in a flower bed then get angry at finders for crushing the plants.

Edited January 15, 2010 by Lone R

January 15, 2010

My pet peeve, it is spelled cemetery, not cemetary!

19k · January 15, 2010

I was going to say, "Misspelling the word, 'Peeves'", but I will now have to change that to "Deliberately misspelling the word, 'peaves'"

January 15, 2010

My peeve, is for all the dog owners that used the crap bags but then just throw the bag full of crap into the bush or off to the side of the trail.

Oh yeah. That's worse than just leaving it lie. At least if it's left to sit there it will, eventually, become soil.

I remember the good ol days when you didn't have to bag doggie poo. After all, a main component of soil is poo.

I'm surprised by this too. People actually DO that?!

7.4k · January 15, 2010

You can't control everyone else's behaviour, but you can control the way you react to it. Stomping around the forum telling everyone what to do is an immature reaction to your pet peeves.

January 15, 2010

1) A geocacher with very few finds under their belt who when logging a DNF, they say the cache must be missing and click the needs maintenance icon.

Ever heard of beginners luck?

In my mind a geocacher with several hundred finds or more has more gravitas when reporting a DNF and is more likely to get me out there to check up on the cache.

2) "Me too" or "garbage" caches. Caches with bad containers placed in bad locations. When placing a cache you should think "Would I want to come to this location to geocache? I will defend myself that I have a cache along a very popular bike trail. The purpose of the cache was the challenge finding it, logging it and replacing it while dodging bicyclists and pedestrians. However the rest of our caches are in parks where the location is worthy of a visit.

19k · January 15, 2010

My peeve, is for all the dog owners that used the crap bags but then just throw the bag full of crap into the bush or off to the side of the trail.

Oh yeah. That's worse than just leaving it lie. At least if it's left to sit there it will, eventually, become soil. I remember the good ol days when you didn't have to bag doggie poo. After all, a main component of soil is poo.

OMG! What is happening in the cosmos? Yet another point upon which Bittsen and I happen to agree! I see that I'm gonna have to make a trip to the Opinion Store this weekend!

January 15, 2010

OMG! What is happening in the cosmos? Yet another point upon which Bittsen and I happen to agree!

I don't know, but the latest Über Genius firmware seems to have finally ironed out all of the opinion problems

4.8k · January 15, 2010

OMG! What is happening in the cosmos? Yet another point upon which Bittsen and I happen to agree!

I don't know, but the latest Über Genius firmware seems to have finally ironed out all of the opinion problems

I keep saying, eventually people come around to my way of thinking.

19k · January 15, 2010

OMG! What is happening in the cosmos? Yet another point upon which Bittsen and I happen to agree!

I don't know, but the latest Über Genius firmware seems to have finally ironed out all of the opinion problems

I keep saying, eventually people come around to my way of thinking.

Yeah, but which one?

January 15, 2010

Don't make pompous demands on other cache owners.

lol. Sounds like a lazy cache owner just got burned! Haha

Some of these ideas are really good. One good point was about the spam filters being the culprit for a lak of response. I guess there's no way around that except to wait.

And, again, you would be wrong. It's the geocacher with the self-important sense of entitlemet who got burnt.

I really find it odd that a couple of you are so defensive. Are you part of the original problem? Why not give your input instead of basically name calling or criticizing? If you don't want to be part of the solution to improve, then you are probably part of the problem...just saying. I haven't demanded anything or as one person said, "stomped around the forums" (haha). This is an open discussion and we won't all agree. But that's ok. I just think it's more important to discuss the differences of opinions regarding caching and how we as cachers can improve. If you think cache owners are doing a good job, then say why! Tell us what you like about current methods and defend yourself logically. That way we can all learn something, whether we agree or not in the end. Still gives us something to consider. Now...happy caching to all and to all a good night.

9.3k · January 15, 2010

I really find it odd that a couple of you are so defensive. Why not give your input instead of name calling?

Brother, you called Harry Dolphin, (one of the most respected folks in these forums), lazy.

If that's not the start of an agnst fest, I don't know what is.

1.7k · January 15, 2010

My pet peeve, it is spelled cemetery, not cemetary!

Is that a pet cemetery peeve?

Sorry I had to do it.

19k · January 15, 2010

Just noticed another pet peeve of mine: "SoCal". Noooo, people. It's SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA for Pete's sake!

Knowschad,

SoStPa

January 15, 2010

Just noticed another pet peeve of mine: "SoCal". Noooo, people. It's SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA for Pete's sake!

Knowschad,

SoStPa

Agreed!

Taoiseach,

EaOnt

January 15, 2010

I really find it odd that a couple of you are so defensive. Why not give your input instead of name calling?

Brother, you called Harry Dolphin, (one of the most respected folks in these forums), lazy.

If that's not the start of an agnst fest, I don't know what is.

Well, certainly I don't mean to insult anyone. I'm a pretty literal kind of guy. In other words, 2+2 always equals 4 no matter who is doing the math. Just because someone is respected, doesn't mean they cannot be lazy at times. However, "one of the most respected folks in these forums" definitely counts for something. You typically don't become respected just because you've been around forever (although that can help). Usually you have good ideas and good inputs too. I'm extremely confident that Harry Dolphin MUST have some good ideas, and I really do want to hear them! He seemed to be trying very hard to defend cache owners and I'm not sure why. Tell me! I've been caching since 2004. But I have only had a handful of caching adventures up until this past year when I really took off. I'm still learning a LOT about this geocaching stuff and being an engineer and manager at heart, I need to know how stuff works and runs. If cache owners don't respond to posts or maintain their caches, I want to know why not. Is it normal not to respond? Is that acceptable to everyone? I'll go along with the majority, but my only goal here was to get people thinking about things all of us can do to change the sport for the better. Plus these open discussions have given me a lot of good things to avoid both when placing caches and when hunting. Anyway, 'nuff said about that. I want to keep the discussion centered on pet peeves.

January 15, 2010

Just noticed another pet peeve of mine: "SoCal". Noooo, people. It's SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA for Pete's sake!

Knowschad,

SoStPa

Agreed!

Taoiseach,

EaOnt

I think you are referring to a post of mine. I've lived in Southern California all my life, and SoCal is a commonly seen and accepted diminutive. Same with "So. Cal." or "So. Calif." I'm sorry if it confuses anyone not from the area. My post was actually asking about caches in that area, so it's fine if those readers from other areas overlook the question.

19k · January 15, 2010

OK, I'll bite... why don't you just come right out and tell us about the source of your three pet peeves instead of posting three generalities. I don't see any of those as huge issues.

As for your "pieve" #3...it depends a great deal as to where you live, but basically... archive a cache like that and go back the next summer and see how much "damage" remains. For the most part, nature reclaims powerfully. Not always, I will agree. But almost always.

January 15, 2010

I think you are referring to a post of mine. I've lived in Southern California all my life, and SoCal is a commonly seen and accepted diminutive. Same with "So. Cal." or "So. Calif." I'm sorry if it confuses anyone not from the area. My post was actually asking about caches in that area, so it's fine if those readers from other areas overlook the question.

Still... SoCal... Just the term itself... 'SoCal'

**Shudders**

January 15, 2010

It still amazes me when other cachers have never seen "geovandalism" or any sort of vegetation damage. I expect StarBrand to have never seen any because nothing grows in Nebraska but still, hehe. I'm working on a "study" for this to show how extreme it can get.

I never said I had not seen any vegitation "damage".

I just don't consider that to be geovandalism or harmful to the environment in any way. Generally speaking any such "damage" goes away after 1 good rainstorm and a few sunny days for the grass to grow.

If the prairie can reclaim a paved asphalt road inside of 5 years (I've seen it) - then a few mashed weeds and grass blades is nothing.

See, in Washington, a good rain is something we get everyday, well, at least most people think that's how it works out here, but I've been to a few cache sites that would take more than a good spring/summer to recover from. I mean, it's not really the mere fact that one little area has been damaged a little, it's the fact that WE did it and other people may start to notice some of these high traffic caches and start to think twice about letting caches into "their" parks. Just need that one park manager visiting another park to see something like that and put the brakes on caching at their own park. So that's the main reason I frown on it. I've done enough bmx jumping in my days to know what real vegetation destruction consists of (

a video I shot of a set of trails my friends built a few years ago, by hand) so yes, it shouldn't happen, but the main issue is the future of caches in some parks.

January 15, 2010

http://vimeo.com/740858

That looks so fun

If only I were younger...

Where exactly was that?

January 15, 2010

On the topic of geovandalism: there is a cache in this area. (It's placed by a certain CO made infamous here in the last few days. It's a coincidence that I bring him up. Really!)

The problem is that the cache is close to a crumbling, yet historic, rock wall. The cache is not actually in the wall, but near enough to it that cachers have been taking the wall apart in the search. I recently visited the site to assess the CITO situation, and noticed that the wall continues to deteriorate as rocks are removed to look behind them, and are not properly replaced. It's been bothering me enough to wonder what to do about it. This thread has prompted me to mention it.

Can anyone recommend what can be done about this cache? I'm not inclined to contact the cache owner. Not any more.

38.2k · January 15, 2010

On the topic of geovandalism: there is a cache in this area. (It's placed by a certain CO made infamous here in the last few days. It's a coincidence that I bring him up. Really!)

The problem is that the cache is close to a crumbling, yet historic, rock wall. The cache is not actually in the wall, but near enough to it that cachers have been taking the wall apart in the search. I recently visited the site to assess the CITO situation, and noticed that the wall continues to deteriorate as rocks are removed to look behind them, and are not properly replaced. It's been bothering me enough to wonder what to do about it. This thread has prompted me to mention it.

Can anyone recommend what can be done about this cache? I'm not inclined to contact the cache owner. Not any more.

You could approach the owner with your concern and suggest that he post prominently on the page that the cache is not in the rock wall. I have a cache near a fragile historic feature and this has worked quite well.

On a busy page like that it has to be prominent for it to work though. First words on the page, in bold letters.

If the owner is not receptive, then perhaps needs archived note is in order. Or if you'd rather not go public, send an email to the local reviewer explaining the situation.

4.8k · January 15, 2010

My peeve? It's not really a pet because I don't feed it, I don't care for it and I could watch the peeve die in a fiery car wreck, but my peeve is going to a FTF that nobody has claimed, hours after publication, and looking for over an hour for this 1.5 diff cache and coming up dry.

Yeah, that's a peeve I could kick across the street. I could tie it up and whip it with barbed wire. That's the kind of peeve I could tie to an anthill covered in maple syrup. I could take this peeve and boil it in lead. This is the kind of peeve that even a mother doesn't love. It's one of those peeves that children think are hiding under their bed. It's a peeve of horror movies.

Not a pet peeve at all. Just a peeve!

1.4k · January 15, 2010

Blackberry bush caches. They're right up there with PO caches. For a cache to be justified in a large, thorny mass, there's got to be some spectacular views from near there, or blackberries that are made of gold growing on those bushes. "You should bring gloves." Really? YOU should find a more creative place for your hide.

There's my $0.02.

First post by the way. Hope nobody minds.

14k · January 15, 2010

My peeve? It's not really a pet because I don't feed it, I don't care for it and I could watch the peeve die in a fiery car wreck, but my peeve is going to a FTF that nobody has claimed, hours after publication, and looking for over an hour for this 1.5 diff cache and coming up dry.

it gets worse then the next day there is a log that goes...

"I can't believe FTF was still available. My four year old found it. Thanks for the easy find and the $20 FTF prize"

1.9k · January 15, 2010

1. owners that know a certain bug/coin hasn't been in the cache its listed in for YEARS!

2. travelers that have over 50 records and gone thousands of miles yet NOBODY bothers to take its picture!

3. blinkies hid on those black wrought iron fences[come away with nothing but black hands]

4. 9999999999999999999 rocks hides with clue "under a rock"

5. coin "proxy cards"[most people will just "discover" these]

6. hides with worthless clues e.g. "so easy you don't need a clue"

Pet Pieves

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