Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Huntress Catteneo

Pointless meetings

Recommended Posts

Oh THAT dog story. Yes that was funny, I thought (and totally unscripted).

Those were not auditions. Not at all, but presentations to create more inclusiveness. Usually, people would say hi to the crowd but the hotel owners decided to have fun with it. Like it or not, bringing people to meetings like that actually adds to your talent pool and I hope you now recognoze the value in that. Its one way to get more participation. It's a form of personal investment. When people are involved, they remember it more, and they want to get more involved. (for example, getting hotel owners involved in ZEXPO opened some doors and was a good PR move)

Sadly, there were moments when we actually had an ACUG attendee or 2 scare away new people like that by telling them they were not wanted, or had no purpose at meeting. Yes, the transcripts exist. That is exactly the shutting-diown behavior that has helped remove people from the process. It's the type of thing that has contributed to the exodus such as Huntress mentions in start of this thread.

Apart from some moments like the performing dog, ZEXPO content did not actually take over meetings at all. In fact, effort was made to keep such updates short, and sometimes it was barely mentioned. Truth is, certain elements were always complaining about ANY mention off such events which is/was preposterous, because at the time, (during event build) thats exactly the kind of material most people cared about. (maybe you didn't). This allegation that ZEXPO took over meetings is false. Its a fabricated story.

And ACUG happened to be 100% on-topic for this material AND it was the ONLY place many people really managed to catch up with the news. SAorry, but there were times when things like ZEXPO WERE the news. On Topic. I am about MORE communication. Not less. And if something like ZEXPO was 'hot' at the time (big development) then it makes 100% sense to talk about it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused.  Didn't people who were interested in how the arrangements for Zexpo were progressing attend Zexpo meetings, join the Zexpo group and read the Zexpo blogs, or do at least one of those things?     

Seems to me that the people at ACUG meetings by and large fell into two groups -- people who'd heard the latest news about Zexpo at least once already, and presumably didn't need to hear it yet again, and people who weren't particularly interested in keeping up with the latest announcements about Zexpo in the first place and would have been content to wait to attend the event itself to find out what was going on, rather than being a captive audience.     

In any case, that's all in the past, and we don't have Zexpo to preoccupy us any more.  Nor are we arguing about Mosh South, which used to take up a fair bit of time.    The major problems we used to have with things like Adult Verification, Search and the DG are now, to a great or lesser extent, fixed.   While there's certainly room for discussion about how they could be made to work better, I don't see that they need to take up anything like as much time as they used to.

To my mind, there's been a sea-change in LL's approach to Adult Content during the last year.   It's no longer a question of bugging Blondin to do stuff week after week and, generally, nothing much happening about it.    Now, we're being given the tools to do things ourselves and being encouraged to go off and do them, with assistance from LL as and when necessary and LL feels like providing it.    

There's plenty of both room and need for discussions about Adult Content, both here and in-world, and I'm certainly spending more time than ever before at in-world discussions about various initiatives (frequently with people who wouldn't dream of attending an ACUG meeting because they attended a couple in the past and formed the impression those are all about acrimonious squabbles about Zindra-specific issues), but LL doesn't really need to have someone present at most of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to be confused.

Blondin wasnt being 'bugged' and much was done, because community did it (with LL involvement when approrpiate). Maybe you just didnt like those particular initiatives, but the simple fact is we're talking about the exact same style initiatives......that you proposing are ok now...same thing....

As you  wrote: 'Now, we're being given the tools to do things ourselves and being encouraged to go off and do them, with assistance from LL as and when necessary and LL feels like providing it.' That is exactly what was already happening. Simply proposing that certain projects are exchanged for others with the so-called 'sea change' would be a lateral move only, if it werent for the exodus situation, which this thread relates to. In short, knocking down one series of resident's work and belittling that history for the sake of new initiative is not necessary and is alientating.

I am glad you enjoy the so-called 'sea change' but recognize the original thread here is indicating the downside of that change and it would be smart to acknowledge and validate those perspectives.

Two groups at ACUG? You are missing the 3rd, most important group: the NEW people who were drawn and included in the process. Again, grown or decline? Which will it be.

A more inclusive, more welcoming meeting porcess can benefit all. Thankfully, it is easy to address this if there is the will and consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Ginette Pinazzo wrote:

... and much was done, because community did it (with LL involvement when approrpiate).

Much was done perhaps, but it was not done by the community at large, but rather by the small subset of it soliciting Linden Lab for free resources, and thereby (most of the time) putting themselves in direct comptition with those who paid for the same resources, but did not draw any benefit from them.

As Innula said, Linden Lab now has put the community to their own devices to execute our own plans without the artifical life support groups like zexpo received for a long time. To me it seems like most of the kicking and screaming comes from those who no longer gets the free resources, while the rest of the community is actually much more content with the situation. 

Add to that, there has been made major progress since Viale and team stepped in, so as Innula says, we have seen a sea of change (to the better.)

As I have said before, for this to work in the continuation, I believe there is a need for a meeting between Linden Lab and their primary account customers on the Zindra mainland estate to discuss issues directly related to the estate. Some of the time these issues may overlap with overall adult policy and marketing issues, and should then be kicked up to that meeting or forum.

For adult policy and marketing issues maybe a quarterly session spanning half a day is all that is needed. This way people have more time to prepare and submit proposals to Linden Lab, and those interested can spend longer time in meaningful discussions at these meetings. It also gives Linden Lab more time to prepare and possibly more to present at each session. Hopefully this will make them more attractive and draw a more diverse audience. It also breaks the perceived link with Zindra and more of the old that now sticks with the AUCG meetings. 

Adult development issues (as relevant to mesh, LSL, the client and server software) is more appropriately rolled into a developer forum. The same is the case for merchant issues that should be rolled into the merchant forum. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but your reply does nothing to resolve my confusion about why it was thought necessary to take up considerable amounts of time presenting Zexpo-related stuff in detail to an audience whose members either attended Zexpo meetings (and must presumably have heard it before) or didn't, presumably because they weren't that interested the first place in hearing the details of planning for Zexpo.

I kept on thinking, during these presentations, "Why am I being told all this?  If I wanted to know about it in this sort of detail, I'd go to a Zexpo meeting or join the Zexpo group or read the Zexpo blog."   And I still don't know the answer, not that it matters now.    But I hope we do manage to avoid that sort of situation in future -- as, I think we are doing, now, with the Zexpo group holding its own discussions and brainstorming sessions, publicised here, without needing to involve people (including LL) who don't need to be involved as a captive audience.

And I fear you mistake my reference to Blondin being bugged by people.   I agree he wasn't being bugged about Zexpo -- he must have found listening to presentations about Zexpo a very welcome relief from listening to  people complaining to him about LL-related stuff, like the convoluted Adult Verification procedure, Adult Content's invisibility in search and so on, which some of use considered rather important and which he never managed to do anything about.

Be that as it may, I just don't think ACUG is either an appropriate, or particularly productive, place to discuss, in any great detail,  particular initiatives and events organised by residents.   That's best done by the people who're actually involved in them, unless there's a particular need for LL involvement, and, even then, it's probably best discussed with Viale, or whoever, separately.    By all means mention things as news items at ACUG meetings, but not much more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most likely explanation is that all zexpo's activities were "official" and that somehow made them all-important and superior over "private" and, heaven forbid, commercial activites going on in Zindra. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really bad form to continually detract from resident's previous work, when recognition would be more appropriate and professional. Items like ZEXPO were 100% relevant and appropriate at ACUG while it was going on. And it was not a minority concern. It was a majority. And growing. In fact, it was only a tiny minority that refused to participate in such developments and that is the truth. Its easy to prove with records that show who engaged and who did not.

Items like ZEXPO were/are very commercial. Do not continue to trumpet a perceived (on your end) bias against commercialism by ZE or whoever, just because you do not agree with specific practices of business growth, attraction and retention. If you don't agree that attracting and retaining residents, especially content creators is a key to comemrcial growth, that's fine. Agree to disagree and move on.

The undeniable truth is that many residents have left the ACUG process, while they had been engaged previously. That is a decline in involvement and does not bode well for future communication and resident engagement.This needs ot be addressed if ACUG is to be taken seriously as a useful hour of time for anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry that you seem to be still confused.

You are exxagerating the amount of time ZEXPO took up at ACUG. The dog story was a real exception. Besides, as Ive told you alrady many times, ZEXPO was important at the time, whether you agree or not. Maybe you just didnt care to be involved and that's fine. You think I need ot sit for an hour and listen to talk about changing a region name? Talk about captive audience. Understand you are not involved in, or may not care about, every topic. There will be ones that dont interest you from time to time.

Ive already explained how those presentations were about bringing new people to process, but you conveniently ignored that and drag us back to your apparent confusion over things Ive already answered.

Let's move on, shall we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ginette Pinazzo wrote:

Let's move on, shall we?

In case you have not noticed, most of us moved along quite nicely when Viale took over, and great progress have been made. 

Only a few want to revert things back to the past. Don't get stuck in it. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:



In case you have not noticed, most of us moved along quite nicely when Viale took over, and great progress have been made.

Yes you and a couple think great progress, as of course you are getting listened to and getting what you want.  As I said wayyyy at the start of this, some people get outright ignored, not progress in my book.  I am not just doing 'woe is me' because I am not getting my way, I am saying it is not a fair way to do things for anyone, and for those getting ignored, there seems little point in being there.  No point being there, so don't go, so meetings become a group of people all thinking along the same lines and getting what they want most of the time.  No stimulus, no fresh input, how is all that progress?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Huntress Castanet wrote:

No point being there, so don't go, so meetings become a group of people all thinking along the same lines and getting what they want most of the time.  No stimulus, no fresh input, how is all that progress?

Most people don't have a need to nanny sit with the service provider to get stimulus, but are interested in meeting them for sorting out issues of policy or practical matters that bugs them. 

Your disappointment will get less the minute you realize that Linden Lab's role is more of a regulator and less of an active participant in this part of SecondLife. Or put another way; for LL to be seen to be an active player in the adult industry incurs significant business and reputational risk the company wants to avoid.

We, as residents, also want to avoid that risk, as it reduces the likelihood of regulatory interference (anyone said SOPA to illustrate how eager these regulators can be?) The more community and resident driven SecondLife is, the safer it is for Linden Lab's business, and the safer it is for their customers. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:



Most people don't have a need to nanny sit with the service provider to get stimulus, but are interested in meeting them for sorting out issues of policy or practical matters that bugs them. 

 

LOL  when I said no stimulus, no fresh input, I was not referring to LL at all.  That stuff comes from having a wide variety of people in a group, and a reasonable size group, that is achieved by being visible and accepting as a group. 

Big business works better in smaller groups as they usually have one or two main goals to aim for and they don't tend to need as much variety of opinions to reach them.  In fact for big business it can mess things up majorly if there are too many ideas thrown out into the mix, and everything needs to be a bit more orderly.

I am well aware that SL is a business, but a business still needs its customers to survive, and to do that they must listen to what the customers want.  Most of the time they 'listen' by looking at which of their products are selling and which aren't.  Sex sells, so LL really has to learn how to sell it without upsetting the more religious inclined, and without lowering their image in general.  With something that is fairly intimate for most people, and with online sex oriented stuff definitely not being everyone's idea of an area to work on, LL really need to here from and have to help of the people that use the world, to make it successful.  Sure they can just decide on stuff to try themselves, but chances of it working are not high, and I am sure they know that. Trouble is, a lot of personalities don't mix well together , especially when you are talking about the people that will attend meetings, strong people, ones with ideas to share and who bring voices to be heard (not always just their own).  With such personalities, if there is no overall controlling or calming influence, then it all goes to hell (like it has done past and present).  Since most do not trust the way others work, they all look for a more neutral party, which is where LL whether they want to be involved or not come in, since apparently no one else is acceptable as someone to help keep communication open, useful and inclusive so that some good stuff can come of it.

 

Some people seem to keep making assumptions that I know nothing or next to nothing, about business, big business, adult marketing issues, meeting formats and structures, compromising, etc.  I don't need to run around shouting from the rooftops what I do and do not know, or can or can not do, I just need to know it and do it.

With getting stuff done in the SL world, we can't do everything ourselves, we have to work in co-operation with LL, trouble is we generally have to work as groups for our ideas to carry any sway, so we get back to the idea of having useful gatherings.  Currently I don't know of any gatherings I would say are terribly useful for improving the adult side of SL, I see plenty seemingly trying to make it worse though. And I see plenty of individuals that seem to think they are too important, or their ideas are too important, to let others speak, or take anything they say into consideration.

So back to the main question, are the meetings pointless currently?  Seem to be as far as I can tell, I have been trying to help change things so they won't be, that is partly what this thread is for, to highlight that there is a problem and see if anyone wants to do something positive about it.  So far from the various posts all I see is that absolutely nothing will change and like many who have read this, I just see that there is no point in me giving up precious sleep, time and effort to no purpose.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that these meetings should be a discussion forum with LL as the mediator or even facilitator is flawed in my opinion. Residents are perfectly capable of progressing such forums on their own, and taking LL out of the equation may actually make it more civilized as it may.

To your assumption "...so LL really has to learn how to sell it without upsetting the more religious inclined, and without lowering their image in general.", I say a clear and loud NO. They don't need to learn that at all. Doing so would be high risk business both for them and for us. 

What is needed is for LL to facilitate and provide mechanisms in-world (through the client and server software) that enables residents to address this market. This includes the signup process, anatomically correct avatars, better avatars, improved profiles, more efficient search, reliable marketing channels, better group communication tools, mobile clients, etc, etc. All this as part of providing the platform for residents to develop content and experiences on. 

But for LL to engage in the selling of adult content – even to be seen as doing that will guaranteed make them ripe for regulatory intervention. So no!

I have made comments before on how these meetings can be split to address different needs and make them more meaningful to a wider audience, so I will not repeat that. 

I am sure something can be done about how the meetings are organized without making operations manuals as some have been inclined to do. ... like publishing an agenda upfront so people can make informed decisions if they want to participate or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:

The idea that these meetings should be a discussion forum with LL as the mediator or even facilitator is flawed in my opinion. Residents are perfectly capable of progressing such forums on their own, and taking LL out of the equation may actually make it more civilized as it may.

 

ROFL  The whole point is the residents weren't and currently aren't capable of that.  LL took on the role they did because it was the only way to get the meetings to function in some useful manner.  Yes things should be able to run well, but like here it all deteriorates fast when some parties just go at each other all the time and nothing manful gets discussed, and no other voices get heard.  Here on the forums, more gets said and heard by others at least because some of the nonsense is stopped by being removed, or sadly in the case of some threads, the whole lot being frozen so as to stop the heated carry on that serves no purpose or relationship to what was meant to be getting discussed. 

In these forums, for the most part LL has let them run with people conversing as the choose, and I haven't seen it as a shining example of productivity or progress.  I have seen it fall into the same useless carry on as the meetings, with the same people involved, with little of the actual subjects raised being discussed, and a fantastic putting off of anyone new that pops up.  Be great to take LL out of the equation and have civilized meetings, but so far I see absolutely no indication this is at all possible.


Gavin Hird wrote:

 

I am sure something can be done about how the meetings are organized without making operations manuals as some have been inclined to do. ... like publishing an agenda upfront so people can make informed decisions if they want to participate or not. 

The matter of seeing and knowing the agenda I addressed as well in my second post to this thread - "Items don't get addressed unless in the agenda, yet, pity noone knows what is submitted, and pity that some matters that are submitted never get mentioned or brought up.  So what are you supposed to do if you know things have been submitted to the agenda and at the meeting they are never mentioned or introduced?"

The meetings have been failing, there is no indication that will change while certain people keep acting as they do.  I suggested to quite a few people many many months ago that it would be better if a couple of people did not come, but have representatives come instead.  It was also discussed by quite a few that there should be a resident not a LL rep at the helm so to speak, but again there was no way it could be certain people as it would be seen to be biased and in all likelihood would be even if they did not intend it so.  Regardless people from one side would would not accept one from the other side trying to 'chair' a meeting or whatever.  Meanwhile those of us not on a 'side' sit there wondering when a meeting is actually going to be about something of substance that matters to us and is about what we all thought the main purpose was.

So far I have seen plenty of evidence that the meetings are indeed pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Huntress Catteneo wrote:


Gavin Hird wrote:

The idea that these meetings should be a discussion forum with LL as the mediator or even facilitator is flawed in my opinion. Residents are perfectly capable of progressing such forums on their own, and taking LL out of the equation may actually make it more civilized as it may.

ROFL  The whole point is the residents weren't and currently aren't capable of that.  LL took on the role they did because it was the only way to get the meetings to function in some useful manner.  

No, I know that the Adult Hub have civilised and productive meetings where people come up with new ideas and get things done without the assistance of LL, and I'm certain that the ZA and the Zexpo and the Vortex groups do too.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry you feel that the meetings are pointless, and then, perhaps, your best bet is to not participate.

Those of us who have found the meetings meaningful have witnessed a significant simplification in age verification, information to new residents about adult content as soon as they confirm their age per the new process, email about adult content to all residents over 18 who had not yet verified, listing of adult locations in the destination guide, renaming and making the Vortex sim more accessible, and in general meetings that proceed in a calm and collected manner.

In addition we have the adult hubs operational, and for Zindra Alliance we have established the Zindra Arena and revitalized the Zindra Directory that every day distributs a large number of Zindra locations to visitors both at the adult hubs and from other locations. 

In the last meeting Viale suggested he was in the process of reviewing the signup process to include age verification as in integral part of it, something Zindra Alliance have suggested for quite some time.  This si something we would encourage and welcome. 

All this is, in my view, the result of positive and proactive discussions that has happened at these meetings over the last half a year or so. It is certainly a most welcome depart from the micro management of the dealings of one particular group that hogged the agenda in the past. 

Just my 2 cents ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:


No, I know that the Adult Hub have civilised and productive meetings where people come up with new ideas and get things done without the assistance of LL, and I'm certain that the ZA and the Zexpo and the Vortex groups do too.   


Sorry Innula for the misunderstanding there, I wasn't referring to all meetings in SL, I was referring to most of the ones I have attended for the Adult Content group.  I know many groups that have productive and civilised meeting, and I am glad to hear the Adult Hub does, it is a pity that one particular one that was covering some important stuff isn't.  Well ok, should say wasn't, but it is now apparently running fairly smoothly, but does not have a very wide or representative range of thinking and ideas.  This means plenty of stuff is going through that others certainly would not want, but they have no voice.

Their fault they have no voice, partly, because the don't go and add at.  Why not?  Because when all personalities are there it all turns to chaos, when some are there they are ignored.  The purpose of the meetings is great, but some are so into 'winning' that they have become pointless, and the 'winning' attitude is shown again and again in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a problem of expectations.   To my mind, things only go through, as you put it, if LL want them to, and, by the same token, if LL want them to go through, then that's what's going to happen.   Furthermore, to my mind, nothing has changed in that respect; it's just Blondin was content to pretend to listen and then go off and (generally) not do anything about stuff he didn't want to, or wasn't allowed to, do anything about.

There's things I wish were on the table but it's clear they're not, or at least not at the moment, so I don't waste time and effort trying to force the issue, because I know it'll go nowhere.  I'd  far rather work with LL on things they're prepared to do, particularly now we've got so much that we were pushing for so long, rather than try to get them to do something else.

I think the really big change is that we no longer have to fight with Blondin about getting LL to take any sort of official notice of adult content other than in LL-sponsored events.   We're now in the Destination Guide, and new accounts get encouraged to verify so they can access our content.  There's now so much more we can do that doesn't need much, if any, LL involvement, so it's not surprising that now most discussions are happening in fora other than ACUG.    And, I'm willing to bet, more people are actually now involved in the various discussions and projects than was the case when ACUG was the only game in town and things only happened if we could persuade Blondin they ought to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mouse is mashing an imaginary "AGREE" button to that whole post, but especially this:


There's things I wish were on the table but it's clear they're not, or at least not at the moment, so I don't waste time and effort trying to force the issue, because I know it'll go nowhere.  I'd  far rather work with LL on things they're prepared to do, particularly now we've got so much that we were pushing for so long, rather than try to get them to do something else. 

The current environment is so "target-rich"--so many opportunities emerged with the recent changes--there's plenty to do now that can advance Adult Content in general and individuals' interests, too.  There are lots of topics that simply don't matter anymore, or not enough to retain focus -- even topics that at one time may have been the most important, representing the best available path forward, back when options for advancement were much more limited.

A question keeps getting asked: Is it okay that some once-committed participants now don't want to be involved?  If I really felt that way, I would not spend time posting to the thread.  At some point, however, patience wears thin.  There's a host of opportunities, and eventually either you see them or you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Gavin wrote: 'I am sorry you feel that the meetings are pointless, and then, perhaps, your best bet is to not participate.'..

That's indicative of the mindset that Huntress and many others are confronting. Feeling frustrated, then go away.

That is the exact opposite of inclusiveness and that is the exact problem that a small minority has been working for months to create more divisiveness than ever before. 

This is how dsenfranchisement is often enacted. Instead of taking away the vote 'directly', take away any incentive for the voter to show up, take away her voice and shut her down. At present, we have a long list of the disenfranchised.

It's very simple: the proper response to someone like Huntress should be: 'Feeling frustrated? Pointless meetings? How can we help? How can we make your experience better?' Suggesting she not participate is a nagative answer to her question and only continues the alienation. Technically, suggesting she not participate IS alienation.

It may be more work, but the proper approach is to listen, to find common ground, to develop plans that help everyone and to track your happiness index so the PR is good every day. Currently, none of that is happening.

It would be a strange character indeed that wouldn't want to bring more voices to the table, and would prefer to reduce the pool. One would have to think such a character was trying to shut down communication. Of course, that could never be happening here.

POSITIVE STEPS:

We have been consulting w/ many residents over past few weeks, some of the more 'busy' residents in SL: People that dont have time for inworld meetings or forums, who dont have real interest or dislike those formats, or have grown disillusioned with them. The goal? To gather ideas and devlop a 3rd communication system that really benefits them. It's not enough to talk w/ meeting-goers or forum-posters......there is an entrie world out there of very caring residents (who care about Adult Sl, Zindra, etc) and they NEVER get their voices heard. We believe we can develop something innovative that will bring involvement opportunity to those who have mostly never been heard before. We believe that this type of system will give someone like Huntress and many others an exciting and very inclusive alterantive to what has become a insular situation in the existing 2 formats.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Nicci Winsmore wrote:

try to embrace the very democratic model espoused by the General Assemblies of Occupy Wall Street.


Might help if we knew what that was lol.  Is it posted online somewhere?

I managed to sleep through the latest meeting , I was online though lol.  Best as I can tell, I fell asleep just after 8am sl time, and woke up just before 1pm sl time.  Now as I sit eating my breakfast, I try to find the meeting notes, but see no link to them as yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Huntress Catteneo wrote:


Nicci Winsmore wrote:

try to embrace the very democratic model espoused by the General Assemblies of Occupy Wall Street.


Might help if we knew what that was lol.  Is it posted online somewhere?

I managed to sleep through the latest meeting , I was online though lol.  Best as I can tell, I fell asleep just after 8am sl time, and woke up just before 1pm sl time.  Now as I sit eating my breakfast, I try to find the meeting notes, but see no link to them as yet.

Xiola posted a thread linking to the transcript, but apparently overlooked making the link in the ACUG wiki article, so I just did that.  While I was in there, I set the next meeting for two weeks ahead, on the assumption that 23 January is not some obscure California holiday or anything.

(To me, the "model espoused by... Occupy" evokes three things: First, the Human Microphone; second, real-time opinion feedback based on whimsical hand gestures; and third, a notorious lack of clear, agreed-upon message.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...