Jump to content

Racist 'Bots' Impersonating Me


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1101 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Alwin Alcott said:

if i would be on it i'd send a request to all also mentioned on it to AR the publisher.

 

I'm more and more wondered how in heavens name you can keep running a business with that attitude...

Publishing such a list would also be considered libellious in a lot of countries and the person doing it could be in a world of financial pain if someone decides to sue

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Every MMO on the web, with a 'Free-2-Play' option, has an overabundance of clueless individuals who constantly whine... "I don't know why [name of company] allows these free-2-play rabble in [nam

Most — not all — who lodge a complaint in the forum do not want to make the effort to take whatever measures available and suggested to them, like blocking, because they are not really interested in s

And the people you're trying to stop are in the remaining 20%, or know how to get there. Meanwhile, isn't it interesting that the people trying to defame you link to your own web pages? You'd thi

Posted Images

32 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

So you think it's better to have a notecard with no way for the accused to defend themselves rather than have people ban people if/when they have a problem with them? Should I start giving out notecards saying to ban you because you keep calling people obnoxious clueless gits?

Wouldn't you consider the AR system to be an independent judiciary? LL have no reason to influence decisions regarding abuse reports and therefore I consider this to be sufficient. The abuse report system is clearly working because every time whoever is running these bots makes a new one it gets banned does't it? so the system works. Sure the person is able to create a new account but that is due to them being able to workaround anything LL puts in place to stop this. 

Squatting is not a violation of the TOS because it is up to YOU, the "owner" of the land to set the permissions how you want the land to be used. YOU are setting the permissions to allow squatting, therefore YOU are allowing people to squat. Why would it be a violation of TOS for someone to do what YOU are saying is fine on your land. Overprimming also won't be against the TOS for the same reason. If you want to run a rentals business, you are responsible for maintaining your land and ensuring your tennants are following whatever rules you give them. It is not LL's job to run your business for you. 

Squatting on land in real life is completely different to SL as in SL you are unable to squat on land when the land owner has set permissions accordingly.

I too allow people to have their friends come over and rez objects yet people cannot squat and you know why? I, unlike you, know how to run a rentals business in such a way that allows people to rez without squatting. Now that your account is suspended maybe you will have time to do some research on this so if/when you are allowed to return you won't have problems with people squatting.

If you have reported it to LL then you have done your part. You are not the police, you should not be publicizing anything about this. LL will look into the matter and take the appropriate action, it is not for you to go claiming someone has done something to the public especially without giving them a chance to defend themselves.

...

I too allow people to have their friends come over and rez objects yet people cannot squat and you know why? I, unlike you, know how to run a rentals business in such a way that allows people to rez without squatting. Now that your account is suspended maybe you will have time to do some research on this so if/when you are allowed to return you won't have problems with people squatting.

My account isn't suspended whatsoever. The people engaged in griefing groups have been removed and are not related to me.I don't need to "research" how land permissions work after being in SL for 13 years.

I don't view your questions in good faith -- or you. I think this is part of the elaborate griefing process. 

Of course I can set the rules I wish on my land, and this idea that it's "not for me" to decide who is banned from my rentals is for the birds. The Lindens recognize that their servers are re-rented and that people make their own rules on their own sims, and if these don't violate the TOS they don't care.

As it has been explained multiple times, the GOOD of having people being able to rez with their friends outweighs the BAD of squatters -- which are easily detected. I check my lots frequently in various ways and I find them pretty quickly. It doesn't matter if you can technically block a squatter and that they aren't a TOS offense. They are a moral and legal offense in the world of normal, common sense and that's fine. Stealing is wrong. It is breaking one of the 10 commandments. It is a crime. Stealing prims you don't pay for is wrong.

Just because every crime isn't blocked by technical means doesn't make it a crime. For example, let's say somebody steals a tool from a hardware store, and the detector fails to go off. Or it goes off, and there were so many false alarms the staff stopped paying attention. It is still a crime anyway.

All of this sort of stuff is sophistry and you know it, and as I said, it's merely an elaborate form of griefing itself. Who has the time to take a notecard and type it up word by word taking out the names??? Honestly...

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, KanryDrago said:

Publishing such a list would also be considered libellious in a lot of countries and the person doing it could be in a world of financial pain if someone decides to sue

*Shrugs*

It's not libelous if you report the truth, it is not false or malicious, and does not cause financial harm. If anything, these are people who caused ME financial damages which is why I publicize their bad behavior. In many cases they threaten me with bad publicity, or reporting me falsely for some false crime to the Lindens, and the only recourse I have is to have a record of what the real story is.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

*Shrugs*

It's not libelous if you report the truth, it is not false or malicious, and does not cause financial harm. If anything, these are people who caused ME financial damages which is why I publicize their bad behavior. In many cases they threaten me with bad publicity, or reporting me falsely for some false crime to the Lindens, and the only recourse I have is to have a record of what the real story is.

The assertions you have made such as possession of an adult sex bed and groups with daddy on them do not constitute even vaguely proof. Some takes you to court and they will have no trouble finding you guilty if that is all the evidence you have to offer. Dont bother I already know you will come back saying oh yes it is. Frankly I hope therefore someone does take it to a court as its the only way you will learn that you are wrong about it

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, KanryDrago said:

The assertions you have made such as possession of an adult sex bed and groups with daddy on them do not constitute even vaguely proof. Some takes you to court and they will have no trouble finding you guilty if that is all the evidence you have to offer. Dont bother I already know you will come back saying oh yes it is. Frankly I hope therefore someone does take it to a court as its the only way you will learn that you are wrong about it

Nonsense from start to finish. If the Lindens fine a child avatar using an adult bed, even merely having an adult bed in their land, they would ban them, and have done so, let alone anything worse. You seem not to grasp that this is not allowed under the TOS. 

No court in the land is going to take a case involving anonymous avatars in a virtual world where there is no discovery and where damages cannot even be shown in any way relevant to real life whatsoever. I think you need to study libel law a lot more than you have, especially US First Amendment law. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

 

Nonsense from start to finish. If the Lindens fine a child avatar using an adult bed, even merely having an adult bed in their land, they would ban them, and have done so, let alone anything worse. You seem not to grasp that this is not allowed under the TOS. 

No court in the land is going to take a case involving anonymous avatars in a virtual world where there is no discovery and where damages cannot even be shown in any way relevant to real life whatsoever. I think you need to study libel law a lot more than you have, especially US First Amendment law. 

I didnt mention a child avi using a ***** bed and yes that is against tos and quite rightly

 

You however stated them having a home with one in, not the same thing at all, and who gives a damn about american law. Plenty of americans been sued for libel in other countries, lost and ended up bankrupt. Just because you think its only american law that counts doesnt make it so.

 

In addition some people have accounts that can be tied to real people quite easily and they merely need to show that

Edited by KanryDrago
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see from your past posts that edge-casing and pushing the envelope on these issues are your hallmarks, for whatever reason.

Yes, having them in your home is indeed an offense. Let me suggest that having thousands and thousands of customers over the years and having seen everything under the sun in my rentals business, I might have more data to draw from than you. But it doesn't matter. What my list is about is the rules for *my rentals* and in *my rentals* they are not allowed, period, end of story.

I also discourage child avatars of any kind anywhere, sexualized or not, because in my vast experience with them, they are almost always trouble. And I don't care what liberation-theology arguments you have against this, it doesn't matter, my rentals, my rules. Go on your own sim.

It doesn't matter if an account can be tied to a real person, such as in my case, because in 99% of THESE cases they can't.

Again, you need to read the real case law. And go back in SL history and realize that the Lindens ended their lax nonsense on this topic in a heartbeat once real-life German prosecutors began examining SL. Then all the US law in the world wouldn't save them as they saw they had a HUGE PR issue to deal with, and they dealt with it, swiftly.

BTW I'm done with this conversation because in my experience, people who push the envelope on the child avatar stuff are endless and it's not my issue nor how I care to spend my time arguing.

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Prokofy Neva said:

My account isn't suspended whatsoever. The people engaged in griefing groups have been removed and are not related to me.

You say that but YOUR ACCOUNT (as in the account by the name of "Prokofy Neva" appears to be suspended by all means of checking I have access to.

2 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Of course I can set the rules I wish on my land, and this idea that it's "not for me" to decide who is banned from my rentals is for the birds.

I never said you can't set the rules, I also never said you can't ban people for any reason you see fit (even if you don't like the color shirt they are wearing, you are allowed to ban them) what I disagree with is your "DO NOT RENT LIST" being publicly distributed as this notecard does not give the accused any way to defend themselves. I'm fine with you keeping the list, in fact I have a very very short list of people banned from my rentals and I keep this list to myself and my staff as this is MY ban list.

5 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

The Lindens recognize that their servers are re-rented and that people make their own rules on their own sims, and if these don't violate the TOS they don't care.

Exactly, why should they care if someone breaks your land specific rules? It is not their business. They provide you with the tools to remove and/or ban people from your land and that is their part done. Anything more would be like the police in real life breaking down your door and arresting you because your neighbour doesn't like your ringtone.

7 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Stealing prims you don't pay for is wrong.

They aren't stealing anything when you are saying "here, this land is for you to rez whatever you want on it" by not setting your land permissions properly.

7 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

If anything, these are people who caused ME financial damages which is why I publicize their bad behavior. In many cases they threaten me with bad publicity, or reporting me falsely for some false crime to the Lindens, and the only recourse I have is to have a record of what the real story is.

Once again, you are not the law in SL. it is not your job to publicize these details. You are essentially making wanted posters for anyone on your list. Lease it to LL to police SL, if you want to have your own ban list go right ahead but this isn't something you should be sharing. If you are so clueless as to why then it makes perfect sense why a griefer is targeting you and it sounds like you deserve everything you are getting.

Furthermore if you are recording evidence like you say, and you have recorded evidence of someone being a pedophile, would you not be recording illicit material? Would this not be against the law in the state/country you live in? Are you now going to delete whatever you recorded and if so can you now prove that user is a pedophile without producing the evidence which incriminates you?

1 minute ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Nonsense from start to finish. If the Lindens fine a child avatar using an adult bed, even merely having an adult bed in their land, they would ban them, and have done so, let alone anything worse. You seem not to grasp that this is not allowed under the TOS. 

I think you will find the mere act of having said bed will not get a user banned. I use a child avatar myself and have no less than 4 adult beds rezzed where I spend most of my time. That does not mean I use the beds in any way and doesn't mean I have ever been a part of *****. In fact if you have a look at any house I have ever lived in on SL you are likely to find an adult bed, and no child compatible bed. Not because I want it this way but because I never found a child bed I liked so I never kept a bed for my own avatar. 

5 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

No court in the land is going to take a case involving anonymous avatars in a virtual world where there is no discovery and where damages cannot even be shown in any way relevant to real life whatsoever. I think you need to study libel law a lot more than you have, especially US First Amendment law. 

You have been on SL for what, 13 years? You've had your rentals "business" for 12 years correct? Surely you have heard of any of the cases which have made it to court where a user has sued either Linden Labs or another resident. Bragg v. Linden Lab in 2007, Richard Minsky sued Victor Vezina along with Linden Labs in 2008, Kevin Alderman (Eros LLC) v. Volkov Catteneo also in 2007. These are just three of the many cases which have been taken to court, and you say no court would take a case involving anonymous avatars.

3 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

It doesn't matter if an account can be tied to a real person, such as in my case, because in 99% of THESE cases they can't.

I thought you just said avatars are anonymous? Avatars are far from anonymous. In fact in one of the 3 cases I mentioned above Kevin Alderman successfully has the details of the real world person behind the avatar Volkov Catteneo released by LL for the court case. You cannot claim courts won't take the cases when there is clear precedent already made.

7 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Yes, having them in your home is indeed an offense. Let me suggest that having thousands and thousands of customers over the years and having seen everything under the sun in my rentals business, I might have more data to draw from than you. But it doesn't matter. What my list is about is the rules for *my rentals* and in *my rentals* they are not allowed, period, end of story.

It;s not a TOS offense though. If you believe is it then I challenge you to point out anywhere in the TOS that states this. I suggest starting your search at Linden Lab Official:Clarification of policy disallowing *****. Once again I find myself repeating myself, I never said you cannot have your own rules for your rentals. It's your business and your land do whatever you want with it, but that does not mean anything against your rules is against the TOS and certainly doesn't mean you are the SL law.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

And she wonders why she is the target of abuse etc. She even believes that she doesn't deserve it.

What puzzles me though is why she keeps coming here to complain about it happening again, when she knows that she always gets the same sort of responses.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Alwin Alcott said:

/me starts patiently waiting for the next "the whole SL world is against me" thread ...

Insult people you disagree with, make a libelous list of avatars and publish it publicly, make a blog and forum thread freaking out about getting griefed, then wonder why you might get griefed and trolled. It's fun.

 

2 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

And she wonders why she is the target of abuse etc. She even believes that she doesn't deserve it.

What puzzles me though is why she keeps coming here to complain about it happening again, when she knows that she always gets the same sort of responses.

You typed faster than me.

 

Edited by Gadget Portal
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

You say that but YOUR ACCOUNT (as in the account by the name of "Prokofy Neva" appears to be suspended by all means of checking I have access to.

I never said you can't set the rules, I also never said you can't ban people for any reason you see fit (even if you don't like the color shirt they are wearing, you are allowed to ban them) what I disagree with is your "DO NOT RENT LIST" being publicly distributed as this notecard does not give the accused any way to defend themselves. I'm fine with you keeping the list, in fact I have a very very short list of people banned from my rentals and I keep this list to myself and my staff as this is MY ban list.

Exactly, why should they care if someone breaks your land specific rules? It is not their business. They provide you with the tools to remove and/or ban people from your land and that is their part done. Anything more would be like the police in real life breaking down your door and arresting you because your neighbour doesn't like your ringtone.

They aren't stealing anything when you are saying "here, this land is for you to rez whatever you want on it" by not setting your land permissions properly.

Once again, you are not the law in SL. it is not your job to publicize these details. You are essentially making wanted posters for anyone on your list. Lease it to LL to police SL, if you want to have your own ban list go right ahead but this isn't something you should be sharing. If you are so clueless as to why then it makes perfect sense why a griefer is targeting you and it sounds like you deserve everything you are getting.

Furthermore if you are recording evidence like you say, and you have recorded evidence of someone being a pedophile, would you not be recording illicit material? Would this not be against the law in the state/country you live in? Are you now going to delete whatever you recorded and if so can you now prove that user is a pedophile without producing the evidence which incriminates you?

I think you will find the mere act of having said bed will not get a user banned. I use a child avatar myself and have no less than 4 adult beds rezzed where I spend most of my time. That does not mean I use the beds in any way and doesn't mean I have ever been a part of *****. In fact if you have a look at any house I have ever lived in on SL you are likely to find an adult bed, and no child compatible bed. Not because I want it this way but because I never found a child bed I liked so I never kept a bed for my own avatar. 

You have been on SL for what, 13 years? You've had your rentals "business" for 12 years correct? Surely you have heard of any of the cases which have made it to court where a user has sued either Linden Labs or another resident. Bragg v. Linden Lab in 2007, Richard Minsky sued Victor Vezina along with Linden Labs in 2008, Kevin Alderman (Eros LLC) v. Volkov Catteneo also in 2007. These are just three of the many cases which have been taken to court, and you say no court would take a case involving anonymous avatars.

I thought you just said avatars are anonymous? Avatars are far from anonymous. In fact in one of the 3 cases I mentioned above Kevin Alderman successfully has the details of the real world person behind the avatar Volkov Catteneo released by LL for the court case. You cannot claim courts won't take the cases when there is clear precedent already made.

It;s not a TOS offense though. If you believe is it then I challenge you to point out anywhere in the TOS that states this. I suggest starting your search at Linden Lab Official:Clarification of policy disallowing *****. Once again I find myself repeating myself, I never said you cannot have your own rules for your rentals. It's your business and your land do whatever you want with it, but that does not mean anything against your rules is against the TOS and certainly doesn't mean you are the SL law.

I notice you run your own rental business. Could this be driving your continued "engagement" on this topic?

I assure you my account is not suspended.

Claiming that recording the fact of an ***** violation is itself ***** in some fashion is SHEER sophistry. Of course it isn't, any more than an abuse report on the official system isn't.

I think we've also discovered another factor (besides your rental business) driving your "engagement" -- your status as a child avatar.

None of the cases you cite from actual law have anything to do with libel, but are property or copyright disputes.

Now that I've seen the full measure of what is driving your "interventions" I'll have to cease wasting time on answering your complaints. They aren't in good faith.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I notice you run your own rental business. Could this be driving your continued "engagement" on this topic?

I assure you my account is not suspended.

Claiming that recording the fact of an ***** violation is itself ***** in some fashion is SHEER sophistry. Of course it isn't, any more than an abuse report on the official system isn't.

I think we've also discovered another factor (besides your rental business) driving your "engagement" -- your status as a child avatar.

None of the cases you cite from actual law have anything to do with libel, but are property or copyright disputes.

Now that I've seen the full measure of what is driving your "interventions" I'll have to cease wasting time on answering your complaints. They aren't in good faith.

 

36 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

BTW I'm done with this conversation

Well that didn't take long did it.

Why would my rental business drive my engagement in this? Sure I run a successful rental business that is clearly more organized than yours, but I am generally always at or close to 100% occupation and don't need new tenants. You have no effect on my business whatsoever and it would make no financial difference to be if you were on SL not getting griefed, getting griefed or banned. The same goes for my child avatar, you have no idea why I use a child avatar so don't have a go at me for having one.

FYI the reason is a long story involving properly portioned avatars and an in joke with friends. I used an avatar years ago which was a properly proportionate human but as people on SL are generally much taller and bigger than real life my friends joked that I could be a child if I was a little shorter so I made the switch one day for a laugh and stuck with it. I do not participate in any SL activities made for child avatars and only keep it as part of the joke between my friends. I also keep an adult avatar if I need to go to adult regions and a couple of fantasy avatars I sometimes switch to.

Sure none of the three cases I pointed out are to do with libel but guess what, you said no court would take as case between two anonymous avatars but I proved you wrong as 1. Courts have taken cases between SL residents before and 2. Residents are not as anonymous as you make them out to be.

Edited by Hintswen Guardian
Spelling error.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

You say that but YOUR ACCOUNT (as in the account by the name of "Prokofy Neva" appears to be suspended by all means of checking I have access to.

Time to stop this then. SInce you are accusing Prokofy of pilloring people, you surely don't want to pillory him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:
On 11/19/2017 at 9:20 PM, ChinRey said:

Oh yes, you're absolutely right there.

But is there any particular reason why you want to publish a list of names of the people you have found it necessary to ban?

There are a number of good reasons.

1. So that I can remember never to rent to them again -- you'd be surprised how many people try again, and if you just keep a notecard in your inventory, you forget it; a central, publicized list means you don't.

2. So that other landlords know tenants to whom they shouldn't rent, and tenants themselves know whom to ban if they wish.

3. So that people face some even mild, minimal public opprobrium for their bad behavior. So often people don't get that in SL and get away with murder. Why should squatters NOT be publicized? Of COURSE they should be publicized. If someone has "*****" groups, sites, and content on their profile, that is more than fine to use as a reason to ban; to publicize; and to abuse report because *it is not allowed in SL*. It's a rule like any other; if violated ther should be a police blotter.

4. Years ago, LL maintained a police blotter. This was not so helpful because it was incomplete and named no names, but useful. I think police blotters are important to have in any community.

5. As I often have to explain, we don't have a free press or an independent judiciary in SL. ALL we have is reputational management. ALL we have is publicizing bad deeds socially. And so I do. BECAUSE IT IS ALL WE HAVE. There is no other deterrent for bad behavior. The Linden abuse report system often "goes nowhere". It isn't a violation of the TOS to squat on people's land or overprim in a rental. But both these things are indications of bad behavior and bad character that should be publicly censured as it would be in real life.

[...]

It's good to see a response to this question; I've been wondering the same. It makes sense to keep such a list for reference, and perhaps to share it with like-minded landlords. And yet I still wonder about the practice of publicly distributing the list.

  • Doing so would seem to give offenders broader and longer-lasting publicity than they'd get otherwise. Is it more effective as "public opprobrium" or as troll-fodder?
  • Also, commercially, it's like the opposite of testimonials, like a mirror-world book jacket that, instead of friendly blurbs, lists the author's complaints about all the critics who misunderstood the book. It may be informative and serve a public good, but would it sell books?
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

In many cases they [...] report me falsely for some false crime to the Lindens

Perhaps they learned that from you ;)  Y'know, reporting falsehoods - like you did with me in your blog. Remember that? Fortunately, you didn't exclude me from your blog so I was able to use your own blog and prove that you were wrong. Remember now? Nobody there came to your aid. That must have been a disappointment for you. All those years in SL and you didn't even understand the minimap lol. Or perhaps you did, but prefered to invent something just for the sake of reporting a falsehood.

Edited by Phil Deakins
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:
On ‎16‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 5:40 PM, marcov Carter said:

 

 

On ‎20‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 3:46 AM, Aislin Ceawlin said:

I have a hard time with avies being listed as pedophiles on the list with no proof, and no way for them to defend themselves. Maybe they are, but how is anyone to know?

 

 

4 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

 

Well, have a hard time all you like. I have evidence from their profiles and/or their behavior, I abuse report them if relevant, and I record it. That's how "anyone is to know". Because I've reported it. If you act as if nothing is real, nothing can be determined, nothing is able to be recorded, it's all endlessly subjective and endlessly virtual, then you get nowhere. I take a stand, and as I said, people are welcome to take it or leave it but I think it's justified as a way to encourage the rule of law in a lawless environment.

In my experience, nearly every time you find people in child avatars with an adult bed, with numerous groups about Daddy and me and all the other horrid stuff, they claim they are not in violation of anything. Obviously, they are not to judge.

 

Hmm ... I never posted comment in this thread.

Prokofy, could you please tell me what my name is doing here ?  O.o 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Prokofy Neva said:

No idea. I saw that box there and couldn't get it to delete. Some glitch I guess.

Unless there is some major issue at the time, you have to click on the quote box itself before trying to delete it. Not inside it mind but where it tells you how long ago the quoted post was made and who you're quoting.

Alternately you can back out of the thread, come back in and use the quick response section at the bottom. The forum saves whatever post you were working on at the time you backed out and will place that post into the quick response when you go to use it. There's a small pop in at the bottom of the text entry field that asks if you want to use your last post or clear the editor. Any action other than clicking the linked editor clear will close the pop in.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1101 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

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

×
×
  • Create New...