Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
jellis

Log deletions

Recommended Posts

a newish cacher is deleting my cache finds on his caches he claims I can’t use a stamp,  I can only use a pen. 

Partially stems because he recently claimed a find on one of mine when he admitted there was no logsheet and put a Needs Archive cause it was missing part of my container, so I deleted his find log. 

  • Surprised 2

Share this post


Link to post

You can contact Groundspeak, explain what happened and they'll get your log restored and locked so that owner couldn't delete it again.

  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, jellis said:

a newish cacher is deleting my cache finds on his caches he claims I can’t use a stamp,  I can only use a pen. 

Partially stems because he recently claimed a find on one of mine when he admitted there was no logsheet and put a Needs Archive cause it was missing part of my container, so I deleted his find log. 

Why was there no log in your cache for him to sign? He's frustrated!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jellis said:

a newish cacher is deleting my cache finds on his caches he claims I can’t use a stamp,  I can only use a pen. 

Partially stems because he recently claimed a find on one of mine when he admitted there was no logsheet and put a Needs Archive cause it was missing part of my container, so I deleted his find log. 

 

IMO you were out of line in deleting his  find log.   You could have taken the opportunity to explain to a new player the difference between Needs Maintenance and Needs  Archived, and then gone out and repaired your cache. 

  • Upvote 8
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, EggsTheBest said:

You can contact Groundspeak, explain what happened and they'll get your log restored and locked so that owner couldn't delete it again.

Did that but they may not respond til after the weekend.

 

1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

Why was there no log in your cache for him to sign? He's frustrated!

Last finder did not mention any cache issue.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, NanCycle said:

 

IMO you were out of line in deleting his  find log.   You could have taken the opportunity to explain to a new player the difference between Needs Maintenance and Needs  Archived, and then gone out and repaired your cache. 

I did explain to him the difference and I thought he understood. I’ve tried to explain the rules but still doesn’t understand. But instead he deleted 3 more of my finds. Letting HQ deal with it.i repaired the cache already yesterday about an hour after he posted it. 

Share this post


Link to post

I said he was newish not new. He has about 350 finds and over 40 hides. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, jellis said:

I did explain to him the difference and I thought he understood. I’ve tried to explain the rules but still doesn’t understand. But instead he deleted 3 more of my finds. Letting HQ deal with it.i repaired the cache already yesterday about an hour after he posted it. 

 

OK so why did you delete his find log?  Because he didn't sign the log?  When there wasn't a log to be signed, like that's his fault?  Or because you were p***ed off that he logged the NA?

You started the log deletion p***ing game.  Have you apologized and said he should go ahead and relog it and you'll relog your finds on his caches and call it good and shake on it?

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, NanCycle said:

 

OK so why did you delete his find log?  Because he didn't sign the log?  When there wasn't a log to be signed, like that's his fault?  Or because you were p***ed off that he logged the NA?

You started the log deletion p***ing game.  Have you apologized and said he should go ahead and relog it and you'll relog your finds on his caches and call it good and shake on it?

My thoughts exactly. My first reaction would be to apologize that there wasn't a log even though I was unaware of a problem. 

Literally, that's the first thing I do in this situation. 

Edited by Max and 99
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, jellis said:

I said he was newish not new. He has about 350 finds and over 40 hides. 

And he logged a NA instead of a NM? That's surprising! In the past year I've seen a few NA placed on caches by brand new geocachers when they couldn't find a cache. The reviewer saw it for what it was, fortunately! The new geocachers just weren't aware of what to do. But 350 finds and 40+ hides? That's baffling, especially considering how quickly you took care of the maintenance issue. That is commendable!

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

And he logged a NA instead of a NM? That's surprising! In the past year I've seen a few NA placed on caches by brand new geocachers when they couldn't find a cache. The reviewer saw it for what it was, fortunately! The new geocachers just weren't aware of what to do. But 350 finds and 40+ hides? That's baffling, especially considering how quickly you took care of the maintenance issue. That is commendable!

I was maintaining about 6 earlier and this one was on my way to work.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Max and 99 said:

My thoughts exactly. My first reaction would be to apologize that there wasn't a log even though I was unaware of a problem. 

Literally, that's the first thing I do in this situation. 

The log he posted about it was not a nice one. I won’t repeat his bad language he used. Reviewers and HQ can see it. I’ve met him before but he is very moody. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, jellis said:

The log he posted about it was not a nice one. I won’t repeat his bad language he used. Reviewers and HQ can see it. I’ve met him before but he is very moody. 

I stand corrected!  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, NanCycle said:

 

OK so why did you delete his find log?  Because he didn't sign the log?  When there wasn't a log to be signed, like that's his fault?  Or because you were p***ed off that he logged the NA?

You started the log deletion p***ing game.  Have you apologized and said he should go ahead and relog it and you'll relog your finds on his caches and call it good and shake on it?

Don’t we normally log a NM and wait til the cache is fixed. Or we are supposed log finds that we didn’t sign? I have been nice to him and he was nice to me but then he changed even before this happened. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, jellis said:

a newish cacher is deleting my cache finds on his caches he claims I can’t use a stamp,  I can only use a pen

 

Write it in pencil, and see what's said about that:)

Is that ALR written on the cache page ?   If so, I'd email the Reviewer (to maybe temp disable until fixed), then I'd mail HQ for reinstatement.

I can't find stamps or stickers forbidden in guidelines.  May be stickling, being petty about a stamp not an actual  "signature" in the log I guess.

We went through heck for some time watching stickers falling all over GZ.   :D  

 - Fortunately they seem to be done (until another thinks it's a great idea...).

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post

Officious of you to delete his log, when there was no log to sign. You should not have done that without first contacting this person, ask for a photograph of the cache, or a very good description of the cache to prove they found the cache. If that is supplied, accept the log; I most certainly would. Only if they didn't supply this, delete the log. You could mention that NA is inappropriate, as it should be NM

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

Officious of you to delete his log, when there was no log to sign. You should not have done that without first contacting this person, ask for a photograph of the cache, or a very good description of the cache to prove they found the cache. If that is supplied, accept the log; I most certainly would. Only if they didn't supply this, delete the log. You could mention that NA is inappropriate, as it should be NM

I would but with past experience I think HQ would rather me not to contact him or his caches. Strange on this forum many posts you guys would say Delete the logs if it wasn’t signed. If I found a cache broken I would contact the co then go back when it was fixed. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jellis said:

Strange on this forum many posts you guys would say Delete the logs if it wasn’t signed.

If I found a cache broken I would contact the co then go back when it was fixed. 

 

I have seen many say if a finder didn't sign the log, delete it,  but haven't seen many say to do the same if there's no log to sign.  

By wording in the OP, I thought you said that the missing part of the container was the log. That's not "broken".  My mistake I guess...

We wouldn't think of logging a find without at least adding a RIR strip to hold things over until fixed.  Some think a pic is okay now too.

The few caches I do each year now, the last thing I'd do is "go back", spending yet-another full day I could be elsewhere, when I can simply add paper to tide things over.  :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, jellis said:

I would but with past experience I think HQ would rather me not to contact him or his caches. Strange on this forum many posts you guys would say Delete the logs if it wasn’t signed. If I found a cache broken I would contact the co then go back when it was fixed. 

My understanding is that the cache was there (and was found), but the log was missing. In cases where the log is missing, or they have forgotten their pen (I do check their previous logs to see if they regularly do this first, in which case I just delete), if the person contacts me with a photograph of the cache or something to prove they were there and had found GZ, or at least a VERY good description, I give them permission to log...as have others to me on the two or three times I forgot my pen. It's polite to contact the CO in those occasions before logging. But if they do log I still ask for a description or photograph as proof; likely commenting it's polite to contact the CO first on these occasions, before logging. If they supply the proof the log stays, if they don't or ignore my message, I delete. But I give them a chance.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

My understanding is that the cache was there (and was found), but the log was missing. In cases where the log is missing, or they have forgotten their pen (I do check their previous logs to see if they regularly do this first, in which case I just delete), if the person contacts me with a photograph of the cache or something to prove they were there and had found GZ, or at least a VERY good description, I give them permission to log...as have others to me on the two or three times I forgot my pen. It's polite to contact the CO in those occasions before logging. But if they do log I still ask for a description or photograph as proof; likely commenting it's polite to contact the CO first on these occasions, before logging. If they supply the proof the log stays, if they don't or ignore my message, I delete. But I give them a chance.

Unfortunately, this approach is used quite frequently in my area.  I can't tell if it's "polite" or just lazy.  In the end this behavior just turns the cache and Listing page into a de facto Virtual.  After some period of time of the CO ignoring the problem and being "polite" to everyone, the container eventually goes missing too.  If the CO is lucky, someone might leave a piece of paper in a ziploc and call that the cache for some period of time.

 

Sorry. but being "polite" doesn't sound like much of a maintenance plan to me.

 

From where I sit, it sounds like the OP made a very good effort (maybe even herculean) to correct the issue of the missing log in a timely manner.  The Finder took it upon themselves to log a Find, probably because they have seen that sort of behavior many, many times before (without permission to do so).  The Finder posted the NA, basically because they couldn't believe someone could fix their cache that quickly.  Rather than going back and signing the new log, they decided it was more expedient to call the OP a liar and getting into big tit for tat war over the issue.

 

It will be interesting to see if the Finder takes their claim to HQ to get their log restored like the OP has done?  I think not, because it's pretty obvious they are not in the right in this situation.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Touchstone said:

Unfortunately, this approach is used quite frequently in my area.  I can't tell if it's "polite" or just lazy.  In the end this behavior just turns the cache and Listing page into a de facto Virtual.  After some period of time of the CO ignoring the problem and being "polite" to everyone, the container eventually goes missing too.  If the CO is lucky, someone might leave a piece of paper in a ziploc and call that the cache for some period of time.

 

Sorry. but being "polite" doesn't sound like much of a maintenance plan to me.

 

From where I sit, it sounds like the OP made a very good effort (maybe even herculean) to correct the issue of the missing log in a timely manner.  The Finder took it upon themselves to log a Find, probably because they have seen that sort of behavior many, many times before (without permission to do so).  The Finder posted the NA, basically because they couldn't believe someone could fix their cache that quickly.  Rather than going back and signing the new log, they decided it was more expedient to call the OP a liar and getting into big tit for tat war over the issue.

 

It will be interesting to see if the Finder takes their claim to HQ to get their log restored like the OP has done?  I think not, because it's pretty obvious they are not in the right in this situation.

Fortunately it doesn't happen that often where I live. Most COs replace the log, or someone does. If it becomes a virtual, simple, log a NM, then a month later if nothing has happened a NA. The sort of COs who answer a message tend to be the sort of COs who maintain their caches. The sort of CO who don't maintain their caches, tend to ignore messages. In that case log a NM and say the log is missing, and after a month of being ignored a NA.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Write it in pencil, and see what's said about that:)

Is that ALR written on the cache page ?   If so, I'd email the Reviewer (to maybe temp disable until fixed), then I'd mail HQ for reinstatement.

I can't find stamps or stickers forbidden in guidelines.  May be stickling, being petty about a stamp not an actual  "signature" in the log I guess.

We went through heck for some time watching stickers falling all over GZ.   :D  

 - Fortunately they seem to be done (until another thinks it's a great idea...).

Touchstone is our reviewer. HQ also contacted me last night and said they messaged the cacher about deleting my finds because I used a stamp. I was allowed to relog and told to contact them again if he continues. Hopefully the cacher will understand. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, jellis said:

The log he posted about it was not a nice one. I won’t repeat his bad language he used. Reviewers and HQ can see it. I’ve met him before but he is very moody. 

So now we're getting the rest of the story.   If you had mentioned in the OP that you deleted his log  because of  (or even partly because of ) bad language,  my initial reaction would have been different..  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/14/2019 at 1:27 PM, jellis said:

a newish cacher is deleting my cache finds on his caches he claims I can’t use a stamp,  I can only use a pen.

I know someone whose legal signature is a self-inking stamp. If it's good enough for her bank and for the IRS, then it's good enough for geocaching.

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, NanCycle said:

So now we're getting the rest of the story.   If you had mentioned in the OP that you deleted his log  because of  (or even partly because of ) bad language,  my initial reaction would have been different..  

No I did not say that. I deleted because he didn’t sign the log period. I deleted his other log claiming bad coords that he used bad language. 

Share this post


Link to post

I still haven’t responded to any of his messages but HQ sent him a message and this is his latest messages to me. 

"Must sign , with a pen ALL my caches . STAMPS WILL BE DELETED . You have been I formed . My caches , my guidelines . "

Pictures of your stamp and the Stamps others used with your moniker have been sent to HQ .

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Is he accusing you of 'divide and conquer' style of play, not actually visiting his cache and using a stamp as a proxy? Perhaps others have done this and now he's pushing back. 

Edited by L0ne.R
quotation mark in the wrong place

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Is he accusing you of 'divide and conquer style of play', not actually visiting his cache and using a stamp as a proxy? Perhaps others have done this and now he's pushing back. 

Nope just me by myself or I’m with friends, who I have one stamp where two of or three of us cache together but we would be together at the hide. I don’t use those stamps unless we are together. And if I accidentally use one, which I have, that cacher won’t log it. 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, jellis said:

I still haven’t responded to any of his messages but HQ sent him a message and this is his latest messages to me. 

"Must sign , with a pen ALL my caches . STAMPS WILL BE DELETED . You have been I formed . My caches , my guidelines . "

Pictures of your stamp and the Stamps others used with your moniker have been sent to HQ .

 

Childish.

 

9 hours ago, jellis said:

No I did not say that. I deleted because he didn’t sign the log period. I deleted his other log claiming bad coords that he used bad language. 

 

Disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, jellis said:

I deleted because he didn’t sign the log period.

This is the only bit I disagree with here - if he found the cache but there was no log to sign, that's not his fault.  If I found a cache and it had no log, I would still log the find and mention it in my log.  If I had something I could put in as a temp log, I would.  Not so long ago I signed a leaf and added it as a temp log.  But even if I could put nothing in, it's still a find.  I suspect, just a feeling, it might have been this find log deletion that broke the already rather shaken and potentially disturbed camel's back.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

That would in theory constitute an Additional Logging Requirement — the page says that you can log a find online "if [you] have signed the logbook". The help article does not elaborate on the definition of "sign", so it's really not up the CO to decide the utensil that must be used to put ones' name on the log.

 

And if you wanted to take it to the extreme, the geocaching guidelines only require you to "sign the log" before logging it online. In Canada and the United States, a "(legally binding) signature" is literally any marking created with your intent. So, a signature can be in pen, in pencil, by stamp — it doesn't even actually have to be your name — it's "a signature" as long as you make the marking with intent. So, I could drip my blood on a geocache log, and, as gross as that is, since that is technically a "marking created with my intent", I could claim that I "signed the logbook". 

 

I wouldn't worry too much about it, @jellis. HQ will probably side with you since they won't want to spark a huge debate about what it means to "sign" a "log".

Edited by Hügh
add a gross example for how ridiculous this whole situation is

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Hügh said:

The help article does not elaborate on the definition of "sign", so it's really not up the CO to decide the utensil that must be used to put ones' name on the log.

 

Once when I forgot my pen (rare event) I used a lump of charcoal to sign with. I also photographed the log and included that, as charcoal rubs off easily, as proof of signing. We get many bushfires in Australia, so depending which part of Australia, charcoal is often not that hard to find in the bush as a pen replacement.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 6/15/2019 at 1:12 AM, jellis said:

Don’t we normally log a NM and wait til the cache is fixed. Or we are supposed log finds that we didn’t sign? I have been nice to him and he was nice to me but then he changed even before this happened. 

 

Of course, you are within your rights to delete an online log if there’s no signature (or stamp!) in the physical logbook, but personally I reserve that right for those situations where I’m fairly certain that the cacher hasn't actually found my cache - i.e. the armchair loggers and other cheats.

 

I will accept photo evidence, and unless I have a good reason to suspect a find, I’m unlikely to challenge it.  (For those newer cachers that don’t seem to understand the necessity to sign a log, I do send a polite message to explain the possible consequences...)

 

In the case of a missing logbook, I’d say deleting the online log is very harsh - it may not be your fault that it’s missing, and you may not have even been aware of the problem, but it is your problem, not the finders.  I’d be very disappointed to have my find log deleted in such a situation.

Edited by IceColdUK
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/14/2019 at 6:10 PM, jellis said:

Did that but they may not respond til after the weekend.

 

Last finder did not mention any cache issue.

 

No geocache has any issues, until it does.

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/15/2019 at 8:10 AM, jellis said:

Did that but they may not respond til after the weekend.

 

Last finder did not mention any cache issue.

That doesn't mean there isn't a problem. I recently found a cache where the container has a hole in it and is letting in water. The log is soaked. I logged a NM. But several people have logged that cache since my visit, and not one of them has mentioned a problem with the cache, despite the broken cache and soaked log.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

That doesn't mean there isn't a problem. I recently found a cache where the container has a hole in it and is letting in water. The log is soaked. I logged a NM. But several people have logged that cache since my visit, and not one of them has mentioned a problem with the cache, despite the broken cache and soaked log.

That or they didn’t want to put a needs maintenance. I’m not going run out every time someone logs one of my caches as a find. I had recently replaced a few finders before.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

No geocache has any issues, until it does.

 

 

Thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Hügh said:

That would in theory constitute an Additional Logging Requirement — the page says that you can log a find online "if [you] have signed the logbook". The help article does not elaborate on the definition of "sign", so it's really not up the CO to decide the utensil that must be used to put ones' name on the log.

 

And if you wanted to take it to the extreme, the geocaching guidelines only require you to "sign the log" before logging it online. In Canada and the United States, a "(legally binding) signature" is literally any marking created with your intent. So, a signature can be in pen, in pencil, by stamp — it doesn't even actually have to be your name — it's "a signature" as long as you make the marking with intent. So, I could drip my blood on a geocache log, and, as gross as that is, since that is technically a "marking created with my intent", I could claim that I "signed the logbook". 

 

I wouldn't worry too much about it, @jellis. HQ will probably side with you since they won't want to spark a huge debate about what it means to "sign" a "log".

Maybe they should change it Mark the logsheet with your caching name or team

Share this post


Link to post

Latest message from HQ

I have escalated my request to cease deleting logs based on a stamp being used, from a request to a warning.  Let us know if he continues deleting after today.”

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, jellis said:

Latest message from HQ

I have escalated my request to cease deleting logs based on a stamp being used, from a request to a warning.  Let us know if he continues deleting after today.”

 

With your finds (hopefully) safe, maybe now’s the time to start building bridges?

 

As I said before, deleting the other guys found log seemed harsh to me.  Why not be the bigger man and let him reinstate it?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, IceColdUK said:

 

With your finds (hopefully) safe, maybe now’s the time to start building bridges?

 

As I said before, deleting the other guys found log seemed harsh to me.  Why not be the bigger man and let him reinstate it?

 Because she's a woman?

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 Because she's a woman?

 

Oops!  Ok, bigger woman.  I’m going to get myself into trouble here... 😉

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

I like Touchstone’s response above. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jellis said:

I like Touchstone’s response above. 

 

That’s fine.  I look forward to you next post about the ongoing hostilities. 😉

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/16/2019 at 8:51 AM, jellis said:

I still haven’t responded to any of his messages but HQ sent him a message and this is his latest messages to me. 

"Must sign , with a pen ALL my caches . STAMPS WILL BE DELETED . You have been I formed . My caches , my guidelines . "

Pictures of your stamp and the Stamps others used with your moniker have been sent to HQ .

 

Jeez, seems like both sides are being unreasonable. Can't SOMEONE take the high road?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, bflentje said:

 

Jeez, seems like both sides are being unreasonable. Can't SOMEONE take the high road?

 

Apparently not. I'm with IceColdUK.  Everything else was fine, but deleting his log was unneccesary antagonism and threw petrol on the fire (seemingly on purpose).

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, funkymunkyzone said:

 

Apparently not. I'm with IceColdUK.  Everything else was fine, but deleting his log was unneccesary antagonism and threw petrol on the fire (seemingly on purpose).

 

 

I don’t think it would’ve made any difference he was against using stamps before I deleted his log. He kind of made up his own rules or exaggerated Groundspeaks Guidelines.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, jellis said:

I don’t think it would’ve made any difference he was against using stamps before I deleted his log. He kind of made up his own rules or exaggerated Groundspeaks Guidelines.

 

And yet before you said...

 

On 6/15/2019 at 8:27 AM, jellis said:

Partially stems because... <snip> ...so I deleted his find log. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

An interesting read for sure.  I wonder if the reasoning for being against stamps is the fact they tend to take up more room on the log sheet than just a signed entry?  I'm not saying this is justification for his rules....but perhaps the reasoning he's working under.  

I'll be honest.  I maintain about 14 caches at the moment and I'm amazed at the number of times someone will log a find and state they forgot their pen/pencil.  While I think some of our fellow geocachers carry around too much stuff and look completely out of place in some urban settings (especially when hunting LPC's), in my opinion having a pen/pencil is just part of the minimum requirements.  Having at least one backup pen/pencil is just smart, common sense.  

If Karl Malden had been a geocacher we wouldn't have this issue as he would remind everyone not to leave home without a pen.  Of course, I've just dated myself as most in the younger crowd won't know who Karl Malden is or the reference I'm making.  🙂  
 

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, kd0bik said:

Karl Malden

:D ???? Not part of the younger crowd, but still have no idea who this is. I could google him I suppose.

Just googled him. Better add many non-Americans to the "younger crowd" :lol:. (I had seen him in movies though; just didn't know his real name.)

 

If someone forgets their pen, I first check their other logs to see if this is a regular thing. IE, I might suspect them of being an armchair logger. If I find they always forget or drop their pen (I did have one of those once) I just delete. If it's not a regular occurrence I contact them to ask for more proof of find.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

×