Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
BadAssMcKill
Love Squad
697
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 17:36:00 -
[31] - Quote
Not quite sure I'd define 170 dudes as small gang
Jayne when you say small gang do you mean 5-10 dudes roaming or do you agree with Ripard when he says the new meta is 30-50 dudes http://i.imgur.com/6j6cIZE.gif-á |
Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
31
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 18:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:stuff
Like Ronald Reagan said GÇ£ItGÇÖs the economy, stupidGÇ¥
I like the things you have to say, but I regret to inform you that it was Bill Clinton, not Ronald Reagan, who said it. |
Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect Surely You're Joking
225
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 18:07:00 -
[33] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:Jayne Fillon wrote:Angry, simple question for you: how would you go on about introducing more small gang into 0.0 warfare? I don't think we quite need to, small gangs can already have a pretty significant effect in 0.0 warfare. A few years back, PL was very successful with their 10-12 man roaming blap titan fleets. Right now, Rooks and Kings are very successful with their 12-man small gang smartbombing battleships. More recently, the CFC was able to take all of Immensea sov within a week and a half with a small gang of about 40 supercarriers, supported by another small gang of 60ish dreads. Last week we purged every BL pos in Venal with a 50 man mixed dread/carrier small gang after another small gang of bombers and blap dreads played a key role in taking out their maelstrom fleet. So yes, small gangs are very effective right now, the people comlaining about the inability of small gangs to make an effect on 0.0 warfare need to man up and upship into things that can make a differance, or just learn to EVE better. EDIT :: THIS IS NOT A SERIOUS POST, i'll make another post actually addressing the problem later. The question I answered to was a troll from jayne, so i trolled him back.
Glad that's a joke. I was getting worried reading about a "50 man dread/carrier fleet" being considered small gang. |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
149
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 19:20:00 -
[34] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:Angry Mustache wrote:stuff
Like Ronald Reagan said GÇ£ItGÇÖs the economy, stupidGÇ¥ I like the things you have to say, but I regret to inform you that it was Bill Clinton, not Ronald Reagan, who said it.
>.< derp, right, RR's thing was "morning in america" which doesn't exactly fit here I guess.. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect Surely You're Joking
225
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 19:25:00 -
[35] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:Ranamar wrote:Angry Mustache wrote:stuff
Like Ronald Reagan said GÇ£ItGÇÖs the economy, stupidGÇ¥ I like the things you have to say, but I regret to inform you that it was Bill Clinton, not Ronald Reagan, who said it. >.< derp, right, RR's thing was "morning in america" which doesn't exactly fit here I guess..
Don't feel bad, it was James Carville. |
Louis Robichaud
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
180
|
Posted - 2014.03.11 20:14:00 -
[36] - Quote
Your analysis about the importance of the initiative is spot on. Given all the advantages the wardec corp has already, it's no wonder that they almost always win. Even when"carebears with claws" decide to fight back, 90% of the time the aggressor just isn't there...
|
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
149
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 17:25:00 -
[37] - Quote
OP has been updated with another campaign platform. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Lanctharus Onzo
Alea Iacta Est Universal Brave Collective
25
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:12:00 -
[38] - Quote
CSM9 Candidate Interview: Angry Mustache http://capstable.net/2014/03/09/csm9angrymustache Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast Twitter: @Lanctharus |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
149
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:19:00 -
[39] - Quote
Well that was quite painful for me to listen to, first ever podcast interview.
But you live and learn, and come better prepared for the next one An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
48
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 12:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
You still appear to be one of the most in touch candidates with my way of thinking then so many others. I doubt my acct votes are gonna sway things for you(they are yrs btw), but be aware you are getting some newbie highsec votes from being intelligent and articulate. Good luck! Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
|
Reija Lee
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 13:13:00 -
[41] - Quote
Hendrick Tallardar wrote:Assuming you are elected, how do you feel your contributions to the EVE community outside of your CSM role will be affected? For example, you write for an supposed Goon favoring video game news site, do you plan to use your CSM status to promote various things CSM are attempting to accomplish (assuming it were permitted under the NDA) or do you plan to maintain a tight lip while allowing for others around you to discuss the topic you may be working on with CCP? Arguably one of your CSM mentors could be Ali Aras who doesn't tend to output much in the way of articles, mostly due to her role as an editor for the same publication, on the subject of EVE and the mechanics therein. I'm curious how you'll address that sort of situation if it were to arise. Would we expect to see your take on such a publication or would it be on a non-polarized location such as a CSM9.org website? One could say it is better for "politicians" to be insulated from news sources, though that's more so about real politics and not internet spaceship pixel land dreamed up by some alcoholic Icelandic guys in the early 2000s
Do you then feel that perhaps CSM members in CSM 9 should work with such publications to put out their statements and/or opinions on changes CCP are making, so long as they are not in violation of the NDA? Much like how Two-Step commented on CCP's actions numerous times, and so forth?
How do you plan to continue communication between the CSM and the community? What do you feel CSM 8 did wrong in the way of communicating with the player base? What do you feel they did correct? What do you feel is the biggest fault with CSM 8? What is their biggest accomplishment? i.e. "didn't communicate with the community enough" "didn't push for community proposal X enough" etc.
As an EVE player do you look towards any person and/or group as inspiration? As a potential "politician" do you have any real world experience in managing a community and the communications therein that would apply to your role on CSM? (not so much as a game designer etc. but as a "people person")
All these questions are very relevant IMHO. Did I miss the reply? |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
48
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 15:43:00 -
[42] - Quote
Oh wow I just listened to the trainwreck of the capstable podcast. Your not only NOT a politican, you have no media training. You cant say if you didnt vote for me/agree with me I dont support you and won't listen to your concerns. As an elected representive you have to accept you represent all your constituents. This is a foundation of democracy. Love of God, I can't believe you said that publically.
I'm only going to say that you talk to much, that you are unaware that people dont listen to what politicans say, they hear what they think politicans said and that I'd love to spend an hr or more just talking with you to tighten up yr speel. You have good ideas, but wow just wow! you really dont come across well. I can't get you elected to congress as is. Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
149
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 17:03:00 -
[43] - Quote
Tarojan wrote:Oh wow I just listened to the trainwreck of the capstable podcast. Your not only NOT a politican, you have no media training. You cant say if you didnt vote for me/agree with me I dont support you and won't listen to your concerns. As an elected representive you have to accept you represent all your constituents. This is a foundation of democracy. Love of God, I can't believe you said that publically.
I'm only going to say that you talk to much, that you are unaware that people dont listen to what politicans say, they hear what they think politicans said and that I'd love to spend an hr or more just talking with you to tighten up yr speel. You have good ideas, but wow just wow! you really dont come across well. I can't get you elected to congress as is.
Trust me, there was much facepalming after the fact. I took those lessons to heart for the Interview with tyrant scorn and came off somewhat better in that one when it releases. The phrasing of the reply on cap stable was extremely awkward in the "it sounded good in my head" kind of way, where the pressures of having to do the interview live botched the execution. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Tyrant Scorn
132
|
Posted - 2014.03.26 06:28:00 -
[44] - Quote
You can download the interview I had with this Angry facehairish Eve player by going to the following link:
http://mp3.legacyofacapsuleer.com/mp3/CSM9_interview_16_Angry_Mustache.mp3
I can confirm that the interview was a lot better then the Cap Stable interview because Angry Mustache was much better prepared this time... So I hope you like it and it will answer some unanswered questions anyone might have.
I apologize for the delay in the release of the interview but I have been plagued by the flu. I will release the YouTube version later today. Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast www.legacyofacapsuleer.com |
Tarojan
Tarojan Corporation
67
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 09:39:00 -
[45] - Quote
Not a bad interview, certainly better! It helped you had a sympathetic host who helped feed you. I liked how it was conversational and I think you showed your personailty abit more. You need more practise as you know :P You still talk to much for what you actually say if that makes sense? I remember being told "be witty if you can't be concise and if you can't be witty be concise"
It might help alot if you/me/someone(?) could draft a list of general questions about the csm, why your standing, what your platform is. Who do you see as your core voters, how do you see the direction of the game. Then write down your answers, not as a scripted speech, but as bullet/talking points. Then get as many people as you can to interview you over teamspeak or whatever, record it then listen back to yrself. Your in one of the most sophisticated alliances in Eve I'm sure they have media trained people who would be willing to help you, but if not give me a shout I'll be happy to help out as best I can. Sorry can't be more constructive at this point its been a rough week(end) at work and I'm shattered. I'll try to make time at some point to re listen to both interviews with a pen and paper to hand if you want?
Anyhow Gluck and fly safe. Erotica 1: "I would create a massive pyramid scheme in Eve to show you what it is, but I'm an honest business person, so you'll just have to find education elsewhere. Start with the wiki link that was linked by a person who didn't even read what he linked." Theres a reason I play eve XD |
Tyrant Scorn
139
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 06:20:00 -
[46] - Quote
Hello everyone,
You can find Angry Mustache's interview which he had with me at the following link:
Mp3 Download Link: http://mp3.legacyofacapsuleer.com/mp3/CSM9_interview_16_Angry_Mustache.mp3
Watch It On YouTube At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1XCN9M1Pt0
Hope you guys enjoy the interview and I hope you get to know Angry Mustache a bit better.
Greetz & thanks,
Tyrant Scorn Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast www.legacyofacapsuleer.com |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate
1316
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 07:27:00 -
[47] - Quote
Angry Mustache's should never listen to people complain about problems they don't care about. Angry Mustache's ain't got time for that. +1 vote from me, and I have no idea what you stand for hah No trolling please |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
357
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 12:54:00 -
[48] - Quote
Angry Moustache wrote:I believe there should be more consequences in general. More consequences for attackers if a dec goes bad, more consequences for the defender that cannot be avoided by merely dropping corp. More assets at risk in-space rather than docked up (POCOGÇÖs are a good example), and more rewards for conducting a successful attack/defense. I'm looking specifically at the part where you advocate for more assets at risk in-space. By logical extension, discussion about this could turn toward POSes vs Outposts.
When you park yourself at a POS, you are still in space. That POS can be attacked and can be destroyed, along with everyone inside and anything belonging to them that is stored there. Anyone watching that POS can see you're in space, can see if you're active and moving around. They know when you arrive and from what direction, and they know when you are about to leave and what direction you will be heading. At all times they know what ship you are flying and when you change ships and even change weaponry on your ship. Because of limited space in POS storage modules, you will need multiple storage modules to store large amounts of stuff; this can be easily observed in a POS, so it's easy to see that one POS might be more of a loot Pinata than another POS.
In an Outpost, all of that is gone. You are taken out of multi-player space and placed in a single-player instance environment where you are 100% safe; no one can see anything about you or your ship. If the scout does not have docking rights, they can't even confirm you are in the station unless they were present when you docked; you could be cloaked up in system for all anyone knows. If the Outpost is attacked and conquered, your stuff is safe until it changes hands again; if you left a clone in the Outpost, you can clone-jump back at any time and manipulate your assets (Black Frog, or local market, etc). You also have unlimited ship and cargo storage.
Now let's assume CCP finishes their new modular POS code, and that they remain functionally similar to the POS of today, including the proximity-based zone of protection (force field) and services accessible from within (multiplayer) space.
With that comparison in mind, would you agree that fewer Outposts and more POSes in Nullsec would place more assets at risk than the proliferation of Outposts that is seen today? |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
152
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 16:15:00 -
[49] - Quote
Meytal wrote:Angry Moustache wrote:I believe there should be more consequences in general. More consequences for attackers if a dec goes bad, more consequences for the defender that cannot be avoided by merely dropping corp. More assets at risk in-space rather than docked up (POCOGÇÖs are a good example), and more rewards for conducting a successful attack/defense. I'm looking specifically at the part where you advocate for more assets at risk in-space. By logical extension, discussion about this could turn toward POSes vs Outposts. When you park yourself at a POS, you are still in space. That POS can be attacked and can be destroyed, along with everyone inside and anything belonging to them that is stored there. Anyone watching that POS can see you're in space, can see if you're active and moving around. They know when you arrive and from what direction, and they know when you are about to leave and what direction you will be heading. At all times they know what ship you are flying and when you change ships and even change weaponry on your ship. Because of limited space in POS storage modules, you will need multiple storage modules to store large amounts of stuff; this can be easily observed in a POS, so it's easy to see that one POS might be more of a loot Pinata than another POS. In an Outpost, all of that is gone. You are taken out of multi-player space and placed in a single-player instance environment where you are 100% safe; no one can see anything about you or your ship. If the scout does not have docking rights, they can't even confirm you are in the station unless they were present when you docked; you could be cloaked up in system for all anyone knows. If the Outpost is attacked and conquered, your stuff is safe until it changes hands again; if you left a clone in the Outpost, you can clone-jump back at any time and manipulate your assets (Black Frog, or local market, etc). You also have unlimited ship and cargo storage. Now let's assume CCP finishes their new modular POS code, and that they remain functionally similar to the POS of today, including the proximity-based zone of protection (force field) and services accessible from within (multiplayer) space. With that comparison in mind, would you agree that fewer Outposts and more POSes in Nullsec would place more assets at risk than the proliferation of Outposts that is seen today?
When you take that comparison one step further, Nullsec outposts can be taken and deadzoned by enemies, while all storage in NPC stations is 100% safe and always accessible. In fact, Pandemic Legion has most of their assets in lowsec/NPC null because stuff kept there is safe forever, and only bring the minimum to Outposts. Every "single player, low risk" part you said about outposts, applies infinitely more to NPC stations.
So what am I saying? Players will always want their assets to be safe, and will put them in the safest place possible that is accessible at the time. If an NPC station is accessible, they will put it there. Failing that, they put it in an outpost. Failing that, they put it in a POS or a bookmarked GSC in a safe. You will never be able to change that aspect of player behavior.
This is one of the arguments against "destructible outposts", in that while it is "cool" to burn down everything someone else owns (The moment destructible outposts happen, provi is being burned into the ground), all that does is force less use of outposts in favor of indestructible NPC stations. Players will put even less assets in POS's or Outposts, and more in NPC stations, becoming even less interactive than even outpost mechanics.
Now if NPC's charged for access to their hanger space, say, a set amount of isk for use of item/ship hanger space in their stations, upgradable in tiers (oh, you want to put a carrier in our station? pay 10mil/month or find your own place to park it, want to part 2? that's 20mil), then increase the storage capacity of POS/Outposts so that it becomes cheaper and more accessible, then people might think about putting their assets in risky locations because there is reward.
I'm by no means proposing this as a "fix" for the problem you mentioned, but rather a demonstration of principles that "nerfing" one activity to promote another is extremely ineffective when there is a third option that is better than both of the aforementioned. In this case, nerfing outpost storage to increase use of tower storage doesn't work because NPC stations provide much better long-term storage anyways. Other things include nerfing local to "increase" the probability of ratters being caught, when FW and incursions are already vastly more profitable and safe. Ratter's won't stay and get slaughtered en-masse to provide content for gankers, they'll leave for places with better risk/reward ratios and make their money there instead (I've already started, FW is so much better money than ratting and so much less investment, it's great). An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
152
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 16:24:00 -
[50] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:Angry Mustache's should never listen to people complain about problems they don't care about. Angry Mustache's ain't got time for that. +1 vote from me, and I have no idea what you stand for hah
Damn right An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
|
Scooter McCabe
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
402
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 05:01:00 -
[51] - Quote
I just wanted to drop in and formally endorse Angry Mustache for the CSM. If you're like me you like good journalism, mustaches and someone who takes the time to get the facts straight before making a judgement call. Angry Mustache is that person. You have a quality writer with the integrity to get the story right the first time. That means you have someone with integrity and sound judgement helping to shape your game play. That's something we can all get behind. |
CYL0N72
Eve Corporation 125335887 EVE Alliance 1236539078
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:03:00 -
[52] - Quote
Hello Angry Mustache ,
I only have 1 short, pointed question, so this should be a pretty easy "yes" or "no" answer. Everyone has their own reasoning / logic, so I don't want to know why, just a clear answer to whether or not you support a ban.
Do you support banning players, for actions, like Erotica 1 ? |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
155
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 17:37:00 -
[53] - Quote
CYL0N72 wrote:Hello Angry Mustache ,
I only have 1 short, pointed question, so this should be a pretty easy "yes" or "no" answer. Everyone has their own reasoning / logic, so I don't want to know why, just a clear answer to whether or not you support a ban.
Do you support banning players, for actions, like Erotica 1 ?
I'm conflicted, but i'm going to say "no", not for this particular case with the bonus room, but I think he should have been banned for some of the things I saw on Goonfleet.com, notably the cases where he convinced people to scrawl "Erotica1 for CSM" on their bodies and post the pictures. That is crossing the line, verbal harassment, not so much.
I would prefer the EVE community be "self policing". Better player education about scams would do much more than banning scammers. Since scamming is a "valid" activity in EVE mechanics, there should be official warning that it is a valid activity and treat everyone with a healthy dose of skepticism. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
CYL0N72
Eve Corporation 125335887 EVE Alliance 1236539078
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 17:43:00 -
[54] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:CYL0N72 wrote:Hello Angry Mustache ,
I only have 1 short, pointed question, so this should be a pretty easy "yes" or "no" answer. Everyone has their own reasoning / logic, so I don't want to know why, just a clear answer to whether or not you support a ban.
Do you support banning players, for actions, like Erotica 1 ? I'm conflicted, but i'm going to say "no", not for this particular case with the bonus room, but I think he should have been banned for some of the things I saw on Goonfleet.com, notably the cases where he convinced people to scrawl "Erotica1 for CSM" on their bodies and post the pictures. That is crossing the line, verbal harassment, not so much. I would prefer the EVE community be "self policing". Better player education about scams would do much more than banning scammers. Since scamming is a "valid" activity in EVE mechanics, there should be official warning that it is a valid activity and treat everyone with a healthy dose of skepticism.
Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question. |
Ssabat Thraxx
Dominion Tenebrarum
270
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 07:18:00 -
[55] - Quote
Angry,
Do you believe that the TOS and EULA extend outside of the game and can be applied to things said and done in a private setting away from the game or other CCP-owned / sponsored platforms?
Either the rules apply to everyone, or they don't justly apply to anyone.
|
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
157
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 19:40:00 -
[56] - Quote
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:Angry,
Do you believe that the TOS and EULA extend outside of the game and can be applied to things said and done in a private setting away from the game or other CCP-owned / sponsored platforms?
Beating on deceased equines here.
Ultimately, CCP hold ultimate power over who to ban and who not to ban, and they can ban anyone for any reason. Their current policy is that if an EVE player did something "bad" that has direct in-game consequences, it's a bannable offense. I'm fine with it being this way. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1090
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 20:39:00 -
[57] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them.
The Rules: 10. Discussion of warnings and bans is prohibited.
Such matters shall remain private between CCP and the involved user. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through email or private messaging. CCP respect the right of our players to privacy and as such you are not permitted to publicize private correspondence (including petition responses and emails) received from any of the aforementioned parties. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
14
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 02:28:00 -
[58] - Quote
Hello.
Currently the Serpentis are the only pirate faction in the game that don't have a rated 6/10 and 9/10 DED complex available to be run. These sites have been on the "coming soon" list for quite a few years, but no further news or information has been released. Would you be willing to request that CCP introduce these sites to the game so that areas like syndicate that rely on running sites as the main form of income can continue to grow and prosper? |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 03:44:00 -
[59] - Quote
Elmnt80 wrote:Hello.
Currently the Serpentis are the only pirate faction in the game that don't have a rated 6/10 and 9/10 DED complex available to be run. These sites have been on the "coming soon" list for quite a few years, but no further news or information has been released. Would you be willing to request that CCP introduce these sites to the game so that areas like syndicate that rely on running sites as the main form of income can continue to grow and prosper?
I don't get what asking CSM candidates this question might accomplish, but from what i see CCP doing, this is not "very high" on their priority list. The most that can be done from the CSM perspective is to suggest a band-aid that might ameliorate this situation with very little dev work.
Said band-aid would probably be to just copy over the guristas 6/10 + 9/10's, then swap the rat spawns on a 1 to 1 basis with their serpentis equivalents. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
vote Angry Mustache for CSM9-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326509&find=unread |
Abla Tive
Serpent.Sisters.of.Eve
43
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 15:12:00 -
[60] - Quote
Question about mining activity to all candidates |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |