Jump to content

Logging Everything as Finds?


RAYD.D.
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I recently went to an event where you had to find Jenga blocks with words on them. You had to find at least 14 to get the cords for the real cache. When i got home i seen where some cachers logged every block as a found cache.These same people were bragging earlier how they had over 10,000 finds.Im kinda new to caching so i was wondering if i should do the same. I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

Link to comment

I recently went to an event where you had to find Jenga blocks with words on them. You had to find at least 14 to get the cords for the real cache. When i got home i seen where some cachers logged every block as a found cache.These same people were bragging earlier how they had over 10,000 finds.Im kinda new to caching so i was wondering if i should do the same. I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

 

And now that you know one of the ways they got so many, doesn't it make the find count seem a bit irrelevant? Don't be impressed by big numbers - finding more caches doesn't make them a better cacher than you or anybody else. Just get out there, have fun finding as many as you want, and play the game the way you'd like to play it :)B)

Link to comment

With a multi it is not normally possible to log each stage, as there is only one GC number for the cache. You can't normally log a waypoint as a find as there is no GC number attached to child waypoints.

 

Sounds like things were set up with a GC number for each block in order that people could log each block individually if they found it. So not a mulit, more like a series.

 

If it was set up that way and was therefore possible to log each block found as an individual find then I can understand why people would take advantage of that and log them all.

 

Seems a strange way to set things up, but if that's the way the organiser did it then that's the way they meant it to be.

And it is difficult to be sure without knowing exactly how it was set up or what was in the setters mind, or how much effort had to go into finding each block.

Link to comment

Logging a separate smiley for each stage of a multi-cache seems to be a regional thing.

 

I wouldn't do it, but I also wouldn't worry about whether others are.

 

I only concern myself with the play of others when it affects my own enjoyment of the game (failing to close to containers, not putting them back where they were found, logging entirely fake finds, logging "throwdowns" both make it tough to figure out when a cache is really missing).

 

Multi logging multi caches has no effect on other players.

Link to comment
I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

 

I agree with you.

 

Some don't. They feel a need to pump their numbers because they think having a lot of finds makes them a somebody. If they want to think that, goodie for them.

Link to comment

Logging a separate smiley for each stage of a multi-cache seems to be a regional thing.

Do you mean multis are set up differently in different regions?

I have never seen a multi where it was even possible to log a smiley for each stage.

Or maybe different things are called multis in different regions?

 

However, it's all academic now as this obviously wasn't a multi as stated by the OP.

 

If the cache setter has given a unique GC code to something and it has been reviewed and accepted by a reviewer and published as conforming to the guidelines, then it's loggable and you get a smiley.

 

If there's no unique GC code then it's not loggable.

 

Or maybe I am being too simple :)

Link to comment
I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

 

I agree with you.

 

Some don't. They feel a need to pump their numbers because they think having a lot of finds makes them a somebody. If they want to think that, goodie for them.

 

Now I am fully confused (doesn't take much).

 

Where are all these 'multicaches' where you can log every waypoint - Not that I want to, i'm just curios as well as confused :)

Link to comment

This seems to be the same mentality that tells some people that it's OK to log multiple "attended" logs on an event for each and every temporary cache that they found, that was set for the event.

 

It's a mental aberration that is (apparently) prevalent in some places. *

 

I tell ya - it's mental! But, the geocaching community, being as "all inclusive" as possible, tries to embrace all geocaching creeds. B)

 

MrsB :)

 

*Possibly caused by a visitation from these guys...

 

l_emc_hamster.jpg

Edited by The Blorenges
Link to comment
I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

 

I agree with you.

 

Some don't. They feel a need to pump their numbers because they think having a lot of finds makes them a somebody. If they want to think that, goodie for them.

 

Now I am fully confused (doesn't take much).

 

Where are all these 'multicaches' where you can log every waypoint - Not that I want to, i'm just curios as well as confused :)

 

All multis. You can log a find for every waypoint in any multi if you are so inclined and the cache owner lets you.

 

It turns out that the OP wasn't referring to multis though. Rather it was an event where attendees claimed to have attended it 21 times. B) I guess it's possible if you keep leaving and coming back.

Link to comment

Logging a separate smiley for each stage of a multi-cache seems to be a regional thing.

Do you mean multis are set up differently in different regions?

I have never seen a multi where it was even possible to log a smiley for each stage.

Or maybe different things are called multis in different regions?

 

However, it's all academic now as this obviously wasn't a multi as stated by the OP.

 

If the cache setter has given a unique GC code to something and it has been reviewed and accepted by a reviewer and published as conforming to the guidelines, then it's loggable and you get a smiley.

 

If there's no unique GC code then it's not loggable.

 

Or maybe I am being too simple :)

You are.

 

Check out IK's previous post as it spoke to the practice referenced by the OP.

 

Some event owners set up temporary caches for people to find during the event. Whether or not these caches can be logged individually on teh cache page is a decision to be made solely by the cache owner.

 

A cacher such as the OP or BS who feels that they are somehow cheated by other people logging in this manner can easily overcome that feeling that by simply looking at the other player's profile. All of the finds logged in this manner will be included in his/her event totals. Ignore that and you'll get a feel for their 'actual' finds.

 

Of course, a simpler way to get beyond this is to come to grips with the fact that this isn't a competition and that no one player's find totals are truly comparable to any other player's.

Link to comment

All multis. You can log a find for every waypoint in any multi if you are so inclined and the cache owner lets you.

 

It turns out that the OP wasn't referring to multis though. Rather it was an event where attendees claimed to have attended it 21 times. :) I guess it's possible if you keep leaving and coming back.

 

Oh I seeeeee. Doh, thank you Briansnat.

 

You mean they are logging multiple found it logs on the same cache.

 

Now I understand. Sorry, was having a senior moment there. (That's worrying B) )

 

Gosh, do people really do that?

On normal multis?

How peculiar.

That's why it didn't twig what was meant by logging waypoints.

 

Each to their own I suppose.

Link to comment
I feel that signing a log is a find. I dont feel that everytime i do a multicahe i log every way point. How do you feel?

 

I agree with you.

 

Some don't. They feel a need to pump their numbers because they think having a lot of finds makes them a somebody. If they want to think that, goodie for them.

 

Now I am fully confused (doesn't take much).

 

Where are all these 'multicaches' where you can log every waypoint - Not that I want to, i'm just curios as well as confused :)

 

All multis. You can log a find for every waypoint in any multi if you are so inclined and the cache owner lets you.

 

It turns out that the OP wasn't referring to multis though. Rather it was an event where attendees claimed to have attended it 21 times. B) I guess it's possible if you keep leaving and coming back.

 

Yes, people attended the event 21 times. Flash back to say 2006, and this was a highly controversial subject, that would induce threads such as you would see for lame micros. This practice seems to have died out substantially since then due to peer pressure. So much so that this is the third "confused new person" thread I've seen on the subject in the past year or so.

 

Generally confined to the Mid-Western U.S. at this point. They are still going balls to the wall with it in Ohio. You can probably guess where this event was. ;)

 

So you can pretty much join them and do it, or say, "no way, I ain't doing that". I have attended events years ago where some people attended the event multiple times, but I (and many others) did not. Moot point, since I haven't seen a single event in New York where it happened since 2007.

Link to comment

All multis. You can log a find for every waypoint in any multi if you are so inclined and the cache owner lets you.

 

It turns out that the OP wasn't referring to multis though. Rather it was an event where attendees claimed to have attended it 21 times. :) I guess it's possible if you keep leaving and coming back.

 

Oh I seeeeee. Doh, thank you Briansnat.

 

You mean they are logging multiple found it logs on the same cache.

 

 

Still no. They are logging temporary caches placed in the park for the event that are not (and never will be) listed on Geocaching.com; There is a Groundspeak policy on this; it's up to the event host to decide whether or not to allow this. It's just that an extremely small percentage of Geocachers (in the grand scheme of things) from the Mid-Western U.S. still do it.

Link to comment

Still no. They are logging temporary caches placed in the park for the event that are not (and never will be) listed on Geocaching.com; There is a Groundspeak policy on this; it's up to the event host to decide whether or not to allow this. It's just that an extremely small percentage of Geocachers (in the grand scheme of things) from the Mid-Western U.S. still do it.

NURSE! I need some extra meds today please!

 

:)

 

Ok, got it. They were posting additional 'attended' logs on an event cache - one for every temporary cache they found.

I've looked at the event page now and can see what it's all about.

So now on their stats they are shown as having attended 20 or so events - when in fact they have attended 1.

I see.

 

Don't know why I struggled so much with the concept at the start of the thread, sorry. B)

In my defence, it is darn cold here today and has been a very slow moning in the shop, so I think my brain went into hibernation.

Might join it I think.

Link to comment

 

Don't know why I struggled so much with the concept at the start of the thread, sorry. :)

In my defence, it is darn cold here today and has been a very slow moning in the shop, so I think my brain went into hibernation.

Might join it I think.

 

No... I tell you, it's the hamsters in the night... see post #12 B)

 

MrsB

Link to comment

No... I tell you, it's the hamsters in the night... see post #12 :)

 

MrsB

Thank you. That's a much more acceptable explanation than just being dim.

 

I mean, you can't do anything about the hamsters right? They just come don't they. And steal brains. Silently. Nothing you can do about it. I think I just saw one in the corner. But it's not night time.

 

NURSE !!!

Link to comment

IMHO, logging any cache (incl multi or event) more than one time is just wrong. The guidelines allow for a CO to delete these "duplicate" found it logs.

 

I find it ironic that when someone suggests that logging a find on their own Challenge cache puzzle listing is approprate once they've completed the challenge, most folks find that to be absolutely wrong. Yet all these people don't have a problem with numbers cachers posting a couple dozen attended logs at a single event in a deliberate attempt to rack up their stats?

 

Hey, maybe we should be logging 2 found its on every puzzle cache, too. After all, a puzzle is 2 hunts... one for the coordinates and the second for the cache. Not!

 

I wonder if they log a duplicate find for every change of direction on a night cache?

 

As CO, I would (and do) delete any duplicate found it logs, though I always message the cacher first and ask them to remove or note the duplicate finds. If they don't change it within a few days, I delete it myself.

Link to comment

IMHO, logging any cache (incl multi or event) more than one time is just wrong. The guidelines allow for a CO to delete these "duplicate" found it logs.

 

I find it ironic that when someone suggests that logging a find on their own Challenge cache puzzle listing is approprate once they've completed the challenge, most folks find that to be absolutely wrong. Yet all these people don't have a problem with numbers cachers posting a couple dozen attended logs at a single event in a deliberate attempt to rack up their stats?

I'm pretty certain that the people who are jumping up and down yelling 'cheater' is the same in both threads, as are the subset who answer with "It's up to the cache/event owner".

 

As CO, I would (and do) delete any duplicate found it logs, though I always message the cacher first and ask them to remove or note the duplicate finds. If they don't change it within a few days, I delete it myself.
If you were the holder of such an event, it would be a non-issue. It's not as if cachers are trying to force additional attended logs on unwilling event holders. The events in question are typically developed to promote these temporary caches and the logging of same.

 

It should also be noted that these temporary caches used to be listed on the site as regular caches to log. When the guidelines were changed to no longer allow listings for temporary caches, the alternative suggested by TPTB was to have these temporary caches logged individaully to the event page. As such, people who make or allow such logs are merely following TPTB's suggestion. They are not doing anything wrong.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
.... don't have a problem with numbers cachers posting a couple dozen attended logs at a single event in a deliberate attempt to rack up their stats

 

I'm not convinced it is about racking up stats - at least not for all users who are doing it. This practice is the cultural norm in some mid-western states. Some users are using it to keeping track of finds - they've hunted and found a temp cache, and this log is the bookkeeping for that.

 

I'd guess that if I had started caching in Wisconsin, I'd have followed the local norm and have a bunch of events "attended", at least for a while, until I got lazy about it, or read of the scorn aimed at this practice by some.

 

As it doesn't bother my caching play, I don't care.

 

Re logging a find on your own Challenge cache, I don't care about that either - but since you asked (other thread), I equate it to logging any other cache you own. Hey, you're the cache owner, you can give yourself permission to log it if you want. And as the practice of logging finds on ones own caches, like multi-attended logs and logging finds for each stage of an event, has no effect on the larger community, I don't care.

 

Stuff that provides false information (fake finds, throwdown finds), I care.

 

Temps were listed into 2003 - I think the March 2003 guidelines were the first to have a cache Permanence section.

And, as sbell111 has already said, logging them to the event was the suggestion of Groundspeak.

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

I feel that signing a log is a find.

Many people have the same opinion. But it is only an opinion. For these people the online find log is used to report that they signed a log book in the final of that cache. Other people have different opinions about when the online find log (or an attended log for an event) may be used. In some regions it is common practice to log extra attended logs for an event for each temporary cache found. Some cache owners allow you to log a find each time you visit their cache, or for each stage in a multi cache. Some cache owner may even allow you log an extra find for doing some extra task beyond finding a cache and signing a log.

 

The great thing is that nobody can make you log a cache for something you don't want to use the online find for. If you believe that you should only log a find online when you have signed the log for the final of that cache, then you do not have to log a find online for any other reason (including "because someone else is doing it").

 

The find count is not a competition. The online log is simply a way to share you experience with other people. Perhaps if people realized this there would not be so many people logging every extra thing they can think of as a find. On the other hand, there are people who want to have a count of each target they find using a GPS while geocaching, whether or not there was a log to sign. So they log each stage of a multi and each temporary event cache they find. They may see the find log as a way to track what they have found rather than a score they can use to compare where they stand against other geocachers.

Link to comment
That strange practice is a local phenomena........limited to just a few areas in the middle of the states. B);)

It makes no sense to me and I am not willing to try to understand the given rationale. :)

 

Don't do it unless you and the event holder both agree that it's appropriate.

fixed
Link to comment

 

........

The find count is not a competition.

..............

 

"cough" "cough"...........

 

Did I mention that I found 1157 geocaches in 24 hours and now am the current World Record Holder of that title?

 

lol :)

Yeah. Like a hundred times. You're your own publicist. We get it.

Link to comment

I'd guess that if I had started caching in Wisconsin, I'd have followed the local norm and have a bunch of events "attended", at least for a while, until I got lazy about it, or read of the scorn aimed at this practice by some.

When I attended my first geocache event, I was told by a more experienced cacher (yes, a Wisconsin resident!) that it was OK to log the temps that I found. I did that on one or two more events, before I realized that it was not a widely accepted practice, and I haven't done it since, but I have friends that still do, and I don't argue with them.
Link to comment
That strange practice is a local phenomena........limited to just a few areas in the middle of the states. B);)

It makes no sense to me and I am not willing to try to understand the given rationale. :)

 

Don't do it unless you and the event holder both agree that it's appropriate.

fixed

 

That's crazy.... You can't just modify my quote !!

Now it's all wrong.

 

Here's the real story.......... (my version.... I'm only saying that because otherwise you will modify my quote)....

Way, way back...long ago... some low count cachers couldn't go out in the snow to cache.... and so...the west coasters numbers were going up in the winter...and the east coasters were not...... so....the east coasters started making temporary caches at events to pump up their numbers. They brought caches from the local area...they brought new caches that they were going to hide later....they even brought caches for other cachers to carry around at the events in their pockets (termed POCKET CACHES). This practice got soooo out of hand, that the PTB eliminated the practice in the website.

Now.... those cachers were very unhappy....and they complained and complained....finally in a weak moment...the PTB stated.... "we give up.... if you really have to find all those pocket caches.... just log the event over and over again...will that make you happy?"...

 

Ever since then, some cachers have been multi-logging events (only in some local areas of certain now-famous states). There was even one event where each cacher that said "Hello" could log that cacher as a find. This resulted in 86 finds on one event.

 

So..... Don't do it.

Link to comment

IMHO, logging any cache (incl multi or event) more than one time is just wrong. The guidelines allow for a CO to delete these "duplicate" found it logs.

 

I find it ironic that when someone suggests that logging a find on their own Challenge cache puzzle listing is approprate once they've completed the challenge, most folks find that to be absolutely wrong. Yet all these people don't have a problem with numbers cachers posting a couple dozen attended logs at a single event in a deliberate attempt to rack up their stats?

I'm pretty certain that the people who are jumping up and down yelling 'cheater' is the same in both threads, as are the subset who answer with "It's up to the cache/event owner".

 

As CO, I would (and do) delete any duplicate found it logs, though I always message the cacher first and ask them to remove or note the duplicate finds. If they don't change it within a few days, I delete it myself.
If you were the holder of such an event, it would be a non-issue. It's not as if cachers are trying to force additional attended logs on unwilling event holders. The events in question are typically developed to promote these temporary caches and the logging of same.

 

 

I can actually give you about 3 or 4 examples where a handful of adamant temporary cache loggers did force additional attended logs on unwilling event holders where the vast majority of attendees did not log any temps. That'll happen when the practice is dying out in an area, and most people aren't doing it any more. And don't worry, those cache pages didn't turn into a forum or anything. :)

Link to comment

 

........

The find count is not a competition.

..............

 

"cough" "cough"...........

 

Did I mention that I found 1157 geocaches in 24 hours and now am the current World Record Holder of that title?

 

lol B)

 

Congrats to you. Some of us don't care at all. :)

 

That goes to the topic of this (and countless other) thread(s). I call it cheating. It's a lame practice to log multiple finds on one cache or event for any reason, justified by the CO or not. That being said, everyone plays the game their own way. If you like to find "creative" ways to boost your numbers, you can do that. If you want to chase a single day record, you can do that too. Want to hunt one cache a month? Go to town with your bad self. I agree with the posts above, if it has no effect on others, there's really nothing to complain about. I still have my opinion on it though....

Link to comment
That strange practice is a local phenomena........limited to just a few areas in the middle of the states. B);)

It makes no sense to me and I am not willing to try to understand the given rationale. :)

 

Don't do it unless you and the event holder both agree that it's appropriate.

fixed

meh. i do understand the given rationale, but i don't agree with it. if a cache or whatever else isn't listed on gc.com, then you can't log it as found here. period. nothing else makes sense. it's not up to the event holder to change that.

Link to comment

Thanks to Ventura Kids for providing the background to this for us newbies. That's really interesting and does put a slightly different complexion on the practice.

 

I never realised there used to be these temporary caches that moved around - and in people's pockets.

 

I suppose if someone started playing the game that way and it was an accepted practice back then, they may see nothing untoward in continuing to play it that way.

And has been said lots of times, it really doesn't impact on anyone else.

 

To those of us who have never known temporary caches it seems like a very odd practice - especially as the 'workaround' is to log multiple attended logs.

But I can also see how to others it is just an alternate way of logging something they have always logged. I can imagine there is a degree of defiance in their actions against the removal of a practice that they thought was perfectly legit.

 

So thanks for the informative background, it does make a bit more sense now I know the whole story.

Link to comment

I've only logged events where there were temporary caches (exception: the one 10th anniversary event I went to), and then only once. I call the rest of you cheaters.

Oh, and by "temporary caches", I'm talking about micros placed for poker runs and such. Actual get-the-coords-find-the-container caches, not pocket caches.

Link to comment
I've only logged events where there were temporary caches (exception: the one 10th anniversary event I went to), and then only once. I call the rest of you cheaters.
Oh, and by "temporary caches", I'm talking about micros placed for poker runs and such. Actual get-the-coords-find-the-container caches, not pocket caches.

they're still not listed on gc.com, so you still can't log them as found.

 

and even if you didn't find any temporary caches, you still attended the event, so you should log it as "attended". you don't have to of course, but whether you found any temp caches or not shouldn't make a difference in whether you do or don't. yeah, logging an attend increases your find count for some reason, but that's just how the website works and also shouldn't make a difference whether you log or not.

 

if you want to log temp caches, list them on some other website and log them there. or create your own site and list them there.

Link to comment
I've only logged events where there were temporary caches (exception: the one 10th anniversary event I went to), and then only once. I call the rest of you cheaters.
Oh, and by "temporary caches", I'm talking about micros placed for poker runs and such. Actual get-the-coords-find-the-container caches, not pocket caches.

they're still not listed on gc.com, so you still can't log them as found.

 

and even if you didn't find any temporary caches, you still attended the event, so you should log it as "attended". you don't have to of course, but whether you found any temp caches or not shouldn't make a difference in whether you do or don't. yeah, logging an attend increases your find count for some reason, but that's just how the website works and also shouldn't make a difference whether you log or not.

I logged the events that were listed. I just declined to log the ones that didn't have temporary caches because, by my own rules, it artificially bumped my find count. I'm not sure I've attended an event since the log type was changed to "Attended", officer (other than the anniversary one). If an event owner insisted I log as "Attended" I'd consider it. But otherwise, I'm under no more obligation to log an event a certain way than I am with any other cache. I want my find count to more or less reflect my number of caches found, which to me does not include "burgers eaten". Those are my rules for my finds; I don't expect anyone else to follow them or insist I change them (the "cheaters" comment above was sarcastic to the extreme, if that wasn't obvious).

 

I do log notes on these events, by the way.

Edited by Dinoprophet
Link to comment
That strange practice is a local phenomena........limited to just a few areas in the middle of the states. B);)

It makes no sense to me and I am not willing to try to understand the given rationale. :)

 

Don't do it unless you and the event holder both agree that it's appropriate.

fixed

 

That's crazy.... You can't just modify my quote !!

Now it's all wrong.

 

Here's the real story.......... (my version.... I'm only saying that because otherwise you will modify my quote)....

Way, way back...long ago... some low count cachers couldn't go out in the snow to cache.... and so...the west coasters numbers were going up in the winter...and the east coasters were not...... so....the east coasters started making temporary caches at events to pump up their numbers. They brought caches from the local area...they brought new caches that they were going to hide later....they even brought caches for other cachers to carry around at the events in their pockets (termed POCKET CACHES). This practice got soooo out of hand, that the PTB eliminated the practice in the website.

Now.... those cachers were very unhappy....and they complained and complained....finally in a weak moment...the PTB stated.... "we give up.... if you really have to find all those pocket caches.... just log the event over and over again...will that make you happy?"...

 

Ever since then, some cachers have been multi-logging events (only in some local areas of certain now-famous states). There was even one event where each cacher that said "Hello" could log that cacher as a find. This resulted in 86 finds on one event.

 

So..... Don't do it.

Revisionist history. Nice. Not accurate or classy, but nice.
Link to comment

This is a really interesting thread. I had no idea that people logged like that at all. I guess that being from Colorado / The West Coast, folks don't do that sort of thing at events.

 

How do I feel about it? Meh, it doesn't hurt me. I agree with others who say that as long as there is a clear agreement between the cacher and the event owner, and it's not breaking a guideline in any way, then go for it. Would I do it? No. I like to earn all of my finds; and according to my definition of 'earning,' this doesn't really seem to cut it.

Link to comment

It's ALL about the numbers ! B)

If it wasn't .... they would have NO reason to do it.

 

One event Attended log would suffice.

Therefore, the only reason to do it is to pump up the find count. :)

 

Those temporary caches don't show up anywhere else...and they are gone the instant the event is over.

Hundreds of caches that I've found are long gone. Luckily, I still have my memories and find logs. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Now it's all wrong.

 

Here's the real story.......... (my version.... I'm only saying that because otherwise you will modify my quote)....

Way, way back...long ago... some low count cachers couldn't go out in the snow to cache.... and so...the west coasters numbers were going up in the winter...

Huh? :) HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! B);):D:D:lol:

Maybe YOU couldn't go caching in the winter, but we sure don't let a little snow of cold stop us around here!

Link to comment
Hundreds of my caches are long gone. Luckily, I still have my memories and find logs.

yeah, i'm sure a dozen identical "attended" logs on some event listing will help you keep the memory alive much better than you could with just a single log on the same listing :)

Link to comment
Hundreds of my caches are long gone. Luckily, I still have my memories and find logs.

yeah, i'm sure a dozen identical "attended" logs on some event listing will help you keep the memory alive much better than you could with just a single log on the same listing :)

What difference does it make what the logs read? If I were to TFTC on a temp cache, would it be different than a TFTC on any other?

 

Further, what would it matter to you if someone else chooses to log in this manner? Are you harmed in any way by this practice or is it just the very thought that someone else uses this method and you don't that you can't abide?

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...