Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

LiveFirstDieLater

The Three-Eyed-Crow is Old Nan, not Bloodraven

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I disagree.

Fair enough.  I feel we could have got there sooner but there we are

3 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I’ve been told by the moderator it is abusive and against the rules to ask you not to post anymore.

So I’ll just say, I’m not interested in discussing with you any more... since it will just get me banned.

Fine.  You don't have to debate me.  I've ignored users periodically when I've found them exasperating for one reason or another.  The function is there for a reason

5 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

It’s a shame people have to ruin what should be a fun and entertaining discussion and debate.

That on the other hand sounds accusatory but I won't bite.

Good day to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please stop, you two. This could be an interesting discussion. Please just agree to disagree and stop engaging each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have anything at stake in this discussion and I didn't get any sense of the Children or Bloodraven having any sinister motives but it these books it is certainly possible.  When the Warg King was defeated by the Kings of Winter the Starks are known to have killed the Greenseers who were allied with him.  Maybe the children of the forest have harboured a resentment and thirst for revenge ever since in which case they might not have entirely good plans for Bran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 7:07 PM, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I disagree.

I’ve been told by the moderator it is abusive and against the rules to ask you not to post anymore.

So I’ll just say, I’m not interested in discussing with you any more... since it will just get me banned. 

It’s a shame people have to ruin what should be a fun and entertaining discussion and debate.

I encourage dissension, that’s why I post at all... but those who can’t base their opinions in the text and insist on taking a stance directly contradicted by the text but won’t let it go, then run to the moderators, aren’t worthy of being taken seriously nor the respect of repeated explanations. Sorry

Wait a minute, you edited this didn't you, just when I thought you were prepared to let it go............

And your edit is defamatory and requires a rebuttal so:

1) I never contacted a moderator so you are plain wrong there in making a typically unfounded and inflammatory accusation. 

2) All my opinions are derived from the text and do not directly contradict it.  You may disagree but of course the rub is I found your arguments to be distortions, semantic obfuscations, supposition or attempts at distraction and to largely rely on an intrepretation of one character, Bloodraven, that rested on material outside the text

3) You made me repeat myself over and over so to allege that I required (but was not worthy of the respect of) repeated explanations is ironic and a glaring distortion

Your conduct and insults are unpleasant and, however keen you may believe your comprehension is, simply portray you in a bad light.

Having reread a lot of this thread since the dust has settled I found your treatment of Lady Blizzardborn for disagreeing with you to be appalling and you to have approached disagreement with her in the same way you did with me, in a patronising, insulting and aggressive manner that rests on the false belief in your superior understanding.  I advised you to take a look in the mirror at how you have approached dsicussion in this thread and what you accuse others of and seeing your edit would advise you to do so again....

:thumbsdown:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

Wait a minute, you edited this didn't you, just when I thought you were prepared to let it go............

And your edit is defamatory and requires a rebuttal so:

1) I never contacted a moderator so you are plain wrong there in making a typically unfounded and inflammatory accusation. 

2) All my opinions are derived from the text and do not directly contradict it.  You may disagree but of course the rub is I found your arguments to be distortions, semantic obfuscations, supposition or attempts at distraction and to largely rely on an intrepretation of one character, Bloodraven, that rested on material outside the text

3) You made me repeat myself over and over so to allege that I required (but was not worthy of the respect of) repeated explanations is ironic and a glaring distortion

Your conduct and insults are unpleasant and, however keen you may believe your comprehension is, simply portray you in a bad light.

Having reread a lot of this thread since the dust has settled I found your treatment of Lady Blizzardborn for disagreeing with you to be appalling and you to have approached disagreement with her in the same way you did with me, in a patronising, insulting and aggressive manner that rests on the false belief in your superior understanding.  I advised you to take a look in the mirror at how you have approached dsicussion in this thread and what you accuse others of and seeing your edit would advise you to do so again....

:thumbsdown:

 

I don’t care about your opinion of me or the series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I don’t care about your opinion of me or the series

You have a lot to say for someone who doesn't. 

Nonetheless, you should avoid false or malicious accusations.  And when made aware of such the decent thing to do is retract or apologise....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, the trees have eyes said:

You have a lot to say for someone who doesn't. 

Nonetheless, you should avoid false or malicious accusations.  And when made aware of such the decent thing to do is retract or apologise....

 

I find your incessant lecturing hysterical, get over the fake outrage and come to grips with the fact that it doesn’t matter and no one cares, least of all me.

We’re talking about reader theories on the internet about a work of fiction, have some perspective.

My only apology is to Seams, who actually seemed to be interested in discussing ideas, and anyone else interested in content who was put off by this nonsense. It’s a shame, but I’d rather be banned then fold to a troll like you.

Unfortunately, I don’t subscribe to the philosophy it’s ok to ignore conflict, nor that it’s ok to run to authority when someone makes you feel sad. I’m not a child, and ignoring bullies like you only encourages abuse and harassment like this.

Go ahead, report me again for not being nice and standing up to you, or grow up and respect someone’s request you leave them alone, it’s your choice. 

But guess what, when you can’t present your thoughts in rational way, and are unable to support them using anything more than repetition in the face of evidence which directly contradicts you, your opinions should be dismissed and do not deserve any respect or further consideration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 1:54 PM, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Amen!

The Saan family pops up at interesting times including as a member of the band of nine.

I’ve wondered if Serenei of Lys (after all, Sargaso Saan had the interesting title of The Last Valyrian, but we know Valyrian features are more common in Lys then elsewhere, so dunno) was a Saan, as well as Illyrio’s Serra... 

The First Keeps Gargoyals are super interesting, especially since it was presumably constructed by Bran the Builder while also fitting with Valyrian architecture.

Let me fixate on the tower/gargoyle/Targaryen  thing for a moment...

because Ive never felt I really understood Nan’s story about the broken tower (not the same as the first keep with the gargoyals, but right next to it, and Bran’s destination when he fell).

Old Nan told him a story about a bad little boy who climbed too high and was struck down by lightning, and how afterward the crows came to peck out his eyes. Bran was not impressed. There were crows' nests atop the broken tower, where no one ever went but him, and sometimes he filled his pockets with corn before he climbed up there and the crows ate it right out of his hand. None of them had ever shown the slightest bit of interest in pecking out his eyes.

And also,

His favorite haunt was the broken tower. Once it had been a watchtower, the tallest in Winterfell. A long time ago, a hundred years before even his father had been born, a lightning strike had set it afire. The top third of the structure had collapsed inward, and the tower had never been rebuilt. Sometimes his father sent ratters into the base of the tower, to clean out the nests they always found among the jumble of fallen stones and charred and rotten beams. But no one ever got up to the jagged top of the structure now except for Bran and the crows.

So it seems Nan wasn’t just trying to scare Bran, since the tower which was struck by lightning is right there and seems to be evidence of something... not sure what though...

Ned was born in 263 AC... let’s assume that the hundred years before he was born is a rough estimate, we have plenty of interesting things happen wing around then. 

In 153 the last Targaryen dragon died... also, Aegon the Unworthy (Son of Larra Rogare of Lys) married his sister despite her supposed love for their brother Aemon the Dragonknight.

In 170 Daemon Waters (Blackfyre) was born. In 172 Aegon was crowned after the sudden death of his father. In 175 Brynden Rivers (Bloodraven) is born.

As just a few examples of what we know... but what was happening in Winterfell? We don’t know that much about the time except that Cregan Stark (who served as Hand during the hour of the wolf in 131) was Lord of Winterfell until at least 157. He also made but never saw fulfilled the so called Pact of Ice and Fire, where a Targaryen was promised to marry into the Stark family.

And I’ll conclude this post with a section of the world book I find particularly relevant and interesting. Especially if we consider the contradictions and unreliable narrator we have...

We can dismiss Mushroom's claim in his Testimony that the dragon Vermax left a clutch of eggs somewhere in the depths of Winterfell's crypts, where the waters of the hot springs run close to the walls, while his rider treated with Cregan Stark at the start of the Dance of the Dragons. As Archmaester Gyldayn notes in his fragmentary history, there is no record that Vermax ever laid so much as a single egg, suggesting the dragon was male. The belief that dragons could change sex at need is erroneous, according to Maester Anson's Truth, rooted in a misunderstanding of the esoteric metaphor that Barth preferred when discussing the higher mysteries.

Within its walls, the castle sprawls across several acres of land, encompassing many freestanding buildings. The oldest of these—a long-abandoned tower, round and squat and covered with gargoyles—has become known as the First Keep. Some take this to mean that it was built by the First Men, but Maester Kennet has definitively proved that it could not have existed before the arrival of the Andals since the First Men and the early Andals raised square towers and keeps. Round towers came sometime later.

Hot springs such as the one beneath Winterfell have been shown to be heated by the furnaces of the world—the same fires that made the Fourteen Flames or the smoking mountain of Dragonstone. Yet the smallfolk of Winterfell and the winter town have been known to claim that the springs are heated by the breath of a dragon that sleeps beneath the castle. This is even more foolish than Mushroom's claims and need not be given any consideration.

If I understand correctly, you're brainstorming? Looking for an explanation of Old Nan's fixation on the dangerous crows at the broken tower? And then looking at the potential for literal connections among Targaryens, Great Bastards (at least Bloodraven and Seastar), Starks and the Saan family? Finishing off with the hearsay about possible dragon eggs or dragon under Winterfell.

I will be interested to see whether any of this turns out to be worth pursuing, of course. If I were doing the sleuthing, I would look for a small detail that fits or doesn't fit, or connects or contrasts with another detail.

For instance, one of your earlier ideas was that Bloodraven might represent ravens, and Old Nan, if she is Shiera Seastar, could be associated with crows. One of Old Nan's famous lines is that all crows are liars. In the story about the broken tower, she seems to see crows as a malevolent presence, pecking out the eyes of boys who climb too high. On the other hand, in her view, maybe the boy deserves the punishment. I'm not feeling a match there between Old Nan and crows, but maybe more evidence will be revealed in related passages.

The lightning strike on the tower sounds like an act of the storm king. It was a watchtower, so there might be an allusion to the Night's Watch (which could bring us back to crows again).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seams said:

If I understand correctly, you're brainstorming? Looking for an explanation of Old Nan's fixation on the dangerous crows at the broken tower? And then looking at the potential for literal connections among Targaryens, Great Bastards (at least Bloodraven and Seastar), Starks and the Saan family? Finishing off with the hearsay about possible dragon eggs or dragon under Winterfell.

Sorry I see how that all got mushed together...

On the one hand we have Old Nan telling what appears to be a lesson about a child climbing too high, while at the same time we have physical evidence of lightning destroying the tower and even rough dates to work with... a hundred years before Ned’s Birth is remarkably close to both the death of the last dragon and the reign of Aegon the Unworthy.

But yes, I’m trying to connect dots...

At the same time there is the odd fact that next to this lightning struck old watchtower is the First Keep... which is round and covered in gargoyles. A maester claims this means it was built after the arrival of the Andals, but we can almost immediately dismiss this as nonsense... since Winterfell long predates the arrival of Andals, and there are other examples to corroborate this, like Storms End (also said to have been built by Bran) and the Fist of the First Men has a Ringwall. So the question becomes, why was our attention drawn to these details if we can dismiss the conclusion we are presented with?

Quote

I will be interested to see whether any of this turns out to be worth pursuing, of course. If I were doing the sleuthing, I would look for a small detail that fits or doesn't fit, or connects or contrasts with another detail.

For instance, one of your earlier ideas was that Bloodraven might represent ravens, and Old Nan, if she is Shiera Seastar, could be associated with crows. One of Old Nan's famous lines is that all crows are liars. In the story about the broken tower, she seems to see crows as a malevolent presence, pecking out the eyes of boys who climb too high. On the other hand, in her view, maybe the boy deserves the punishment. I'm not feeling a match there between Old Nan and crows, but maybe more evidence will be revealed in related passages.

The lightning strike on the tower sounds like an act of the storm king. It was a watchtower, so there might be an allusion to the Night's Watch (which could bring us back to crows again).

The fact that there is rumor of a dragon leaving eggs at Winterfell, roughly during the time period the ruined Tower was destroyed, also presents the possibility it was destroyed by a dragon and not a lightning strike at all... a boy who climbed to high, could this be a metaphors for the Dance of Dragons... where Jacaerys was the rider of Vermax who came to Winterfell, he also had an incident on Dragonstone as a youth involving the putting out of Prince Aemond’s eye... and then there is Aemond’s death... from the wiki:

On the twenty-second day of the fifth month of 130 AC, Aemond and Daemon, mounted on their dragons, engaged in the battle above the Gods Eye, which ended with the two dragons crashing to the floor while Prince Daemon stabbed Aemond in his eye with the Valyrian steel sword Dark Sister. Aemond's body, chained to Vhagar's saddle, sank into the lake. His body (along with Vhagar's skull) was recovered only years later, with Dark Sister still through his eye-socket

Just trying to connect dots!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Sorry I see how that all got mushed together...

On the one hand we have Old Nan telling what appears to be a lesson about a child climbing too high, while at the same time we have physical evidence of lightning destroying the tower and even rough dates to work with... a hundred years before Ned’s Birth is remarkably close to both the death of the last dragon and the reign of Aegon the Unworthy.

But yes, I’m trying to connect dots...

At the same time there is the odd fact that next to this lightning struck old watchtower is the First Keep... which is round and covered in gargoyles. A maester claims this means it was built after the arrival of the Andals, but we can almost immediately dismiss this as nonsense... since Winterfell long predates the arrival of Andals, and there are other examples to corroborate this, like Storms End (also said to have been built by Bran) and the Fist of the First Men has a Ringwall. So the question becomes, why was our attention drawn to these details if we can dismiss the conclusion we are presented with?

The fact that there is rumor of a dragon leaving eggs at Winterfell, roughly during the time period the ruined Tower was destroyed, also presents the possibility it was destroyed by a dragon and not a lightning strike at all... a boy who climbed to high, could this be a metaphors for the Dance of Dragons... where Jacaerys was the rider of Vermax who came to Winterfell, he also had an incident on Dragonstone as a youth involving the putting out of Prince Aemond’s eye... and then there is Aemond’s death... from the wiki:

On the twenty-second day of the fifth month of 130 AC, Aemond and Daemon, mounted on their dragons, engaged in the battle above the Gods Eye, which ended with the two dragons crashing to the floor while Prince Daemon stabbed Aemond in his eye with the Valyrian steel sword Dark Sister. Aemond's body, chained to Vhagar's saddle, sank into the lake. His body (along with Vhagar's skull) was recovered only years later, with Dark Sister still through his eye-socket

Just trying to connect dots!

This is all so interesting! Lots of parallels for the Great Bastards (the eye being put out in combat with a brother or other blood relative), the fall from a great height, Dark Sister.

I was reading The Sworn Sword this morning and the description of Osgrey's Standfast has elements in common with the ruined watchtower and/or old keep at Winterfell. (I mention that because I assume any Dunk & Egg detail tells us something about Bloodraven's mileau.) The Jacaerys and Aemond stories from the Dance include several sites that will become ruins, if they don't already qualify: Harrenhal (I always assume this is part of any God's Eye reference), Driftmark, Spicetown, High Tide.

Your post led me to refresh my memory about Jacaerys by checking the wiki, and I found that King Viserys ordered that his grandson / heir share a wetnurse with his newborn son, in the hope that the boys would grow up with a positive bond between them, but the strategy does not work. So there is the nursemaid thing again, foreshadowing the Missy's Teats / Barbra's Teats rivalry and, possibly, tying in Old Nan to this motif of the battling brothers (nephew, uncle) that we see in Bloodraven / Bittersteel as well as Jacaerys / Aemond or Lucerys / Aemond or Daemon / Aemond, as you note.

So this Old Nan thing may really be gaining some momentum in connection with the Great Bastards. It's been years since she would have been a literal wetnurse, but I think the connection is implied. But why?

And what do all the other common details from the Dance, the Blackfyre rivalry and the current stories tell us about stories that are still unfolding?

Should we be comparing Gilly to Old Nan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Seams said:

This is all so interesting! Lots of parallels for the Great Bastards (the eye being put out in combat with a brother or other blood relative), the fall from a great height, Dark Sister.

I was reading The Sworn Sword this morning and the description of Osgrey's Standfast has elements in common with the ruined watchtower and/or old keep at Winterfell. (I mention that because I assume any Dunk & Egg detail tells us something about Bloodraven's mileau.) The Jacaerys and Aemond stories from the Dance include several sites that will become ruins, if they don't already qualify: Harrenhal (I always assume this is part of any God's Eye reference), Driftmark, Spicetown, High Tide.

Your post led me to refresh my memory about Jacaerys by checking the wiki, and I found that King Viserys ordered that his grandson / heir share a wetnurse with his newborn son, in the hope that the boys would grow up with a positive bond between them, but the strategy does not work. So there is the nursemaid thing again, foreshadowing the Missy's Teats / Barbra's Teats rivalry and, possibly, tying in Old Nan to this motif of the battling brothers (nephew, uncle) that we see in Bloodraven / Bittersteel as well as Jacaerys / Aemond or Lucerys / Aemond or Daemon / Aemond, as you note.

So this Old Nan thing may really be gaining some momentum in connection with the Great Bastards. It's been years since she would have been a literal wetnurse, but I think the connection is implied. But why?

And what do all the other common details from the Dance, the Blackfyre rivalry and the current stories tell us about stories that are still unfolding?

Should we be comparing Gilly to Old Nan?

There is Wylla to consider of course when talking about milk brothers (re: Jon and Edric Dayne)!

but I’m not at all sure what to think of Gilly and Monster... or how that parallel may play in except as the current timeline example of a baby switch.

Which of course begs the question about all those past nurse maids and if there was a baby switch potential in any of those situations.

I also raise the story of the Dance because not only did a prince die young, a prince have an eye plucked out for reaching (mounting Vhagar), and was cast down with Dark Sister in his socket (a voice as sharp as swords almost certainly refers to a woman’s voice, Cersei’s voice is described this way for instance).

The relation to old man Osgrey and his tower with its blackberries is interesting as well... especially if the blackberries are a reference to Blackfyres... it begs the question, was there more to Bran’s visit with the man who gave him a blackberry from the glass garden’s then first met the eye?

This is all stuff I’m very much still trying to muddle through, and welcome the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I find your incessant lecturing hysterical, get over the fake outrage and come to grips with the fact that it doesn’t matter and no one cares, least of all me.

Look, pal, if you keep jabbing at me I will jab back.  If you breach certain norms of behaviour and make false accusations in public you will get called out for it.  Saying you don't care is of little interest to me if your actions speak differently and your conduct is in bad faith: it calls for a response.

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

We’re talking about reader theories on the internet about a work of fiction, have some perspective.

If you could have taken your own advice we would have never got into this conversation.  I invite you to do so and approach disagreement maturely.  Hopefully that's not too hsyterical for you.

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

My only apology is to Seams, who actually seemed to be interested in discussing ideas, and anyone else interested in content who was put off by this nonsense. It’s a shame, but I’d rather be banned then fold to a troll like you.

I'm sure he's duly grateful.  But easy on the insults, champ.  Some yougsters find the easy route to deal with differing opinions and not getting their own way is to start name calling but I thought you were older.  Whether you are banned or not (good heavens) depends on your conduct but if a discussion that doesn't go the way you want it to makes you dig your heels in and risk getting banned then it seems you don't take your own advice.  You were talking about perspective a moment ago, remember?

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Unfortunately, I don’t subscribe to the philosophy it’s ok to ignore conflict, nor that it’s ok to run to authority when someone makes you feel sad.

Good for you.  I think.  If your words could be taken at face value.  I am sure you didn't miss the point where I told you I never contacted a mod so to see you reiterate it really sums up your m.o.: deliberate distortion, even pretence you did not hear what the other person said, in order to construct an argument you are comfortable tackling.  It's dishonest but it's how you choose to behave.

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

 I’m not a child, and ignoring bullies like you only encourages abuse and harassment like this.

I guess it's all in where we're standing.  I have debated in good faith but you choose to see it otherwise.  But a word of advice in a non-hysterical and non-lecturing sort of way: don't interact the way you have with me or LB and then talk about being bullied, you haven't a leg to stand on.

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Go ahead, report me again for not being nice and standing up to you, or grow up and respect someone’s request you leave them alone, it’s your choice.

I can only take this as dishonest and deliberately malicious as you are repeating on a public forum an accusation I have said is not true. 

If only you had not put in that inflammatory edit I would quite happily have let this lie  And you tell me to respect someone's request to leave them alone after you open it up all up again?  That is hypocrisy.

6 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

But guess what, when you can’t present your thoughts in rational way, and are unable to support them using anything more than repetition in the face of evidence which directly contradicts you, your opinions should be dismissed and do not deserve any respect or further consideration. 

This is how you would like to think of it and I guess if that conceit makes you comfortable then go ahead and wallow in it but this is a public forum and everyone can make their own mind up about what is rational, supported or contradicted and what deserves further consideration.  Like you said, we're talking about a work of fiction on the internet so get some perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

There is Wylla to consider of course when talking about milk brothers (re: Jon and Edric Dayne)!

but I’m not at all sure what to think of Gilly and Monster... or how that parallel may play in except as the current timeline example of a baby switch.

Which of course begs the question about all those past nurse maids and if there was a baby switch potential in any of those situations.

I also raise the story of the Dance because not only did a prince die young, a prince have an eye plucked out for reaching (mounting Vhagar), and was cast down with Dark Sister in his socket (a voice as sharp as swords almost certainly refers to a woman’s voice, Cersei’s voice is described this way for instance).

The relation to old man Osgrey and his tower with its blackberries is interesting as well... especially if the blackberries are a reference to Blackfyres... it begs the question, was there more to Bran’s visit with the man who gave him a blackberry from the glass garden’s then first met the eye?

This is all stuff I’m very much still trying to muddle through, and welcome the company.

I am just at the beginning of my Sworn Sword re-read, but I noticed a couple of references to willows growing along the dried up stream bed. My initial guess is that the stream bed represents the end of a hereditary line - House Osgrey is about to die out and Rohanne Webber has diverted all of their water to her own fertile fields. If "willow" and "Wylla" are intended to be part of a motif, the meaning could have to do with the flow associated with the stream and with the wetnurse's breast milk.

There seems to be a theme throughout ASOIAF of "will" names, though - Will with Gared and Ser Waymar in the opening scene; Willas Tyrell; Wylla the wetnurse; a Willow Heddle at the inn at the crossroads and other Willows including a Great Bastard daughter of Aegon IV and one of Ramsay's hounds / murder victims. For the most part, these will characters tend to be people who are not on screen - people talk about them but we don't often see them. I don't see a "flow" connecting all of them, so I'm not sure whether that will turn out to be the common factor.

Gilly seemed to be an echo of Lyanna in a couple of scenes - she tries to get Jon Snow to take her away from Craster's Keep in order to save her baby. Jon refuses, of course, but Sam Tarly steps up. I have seen one theory that Old Nan is Walder Frey's sister, married to Lord Butterwell in The Mystery Knight. If she is supposed to be compared to Wylla or Gilly, maybe she went to Winterfell as a young mother and found employment as a wet nurse. But I don't know how to bring this back to link Old Nan to Bloodraven or the other Great Bastards.

As for blackberries, Brienne and Nimble Dick find them blocking their path into the ruin at The Whispers. My guess is that they are not so much a symbol of the Blackfyres but of crossing over into the Otherworld. I think Shagwell and his companions have stripped the bushes of berries during their time hanging out at the Whispers.

There is a lot of muddling to be done, to be sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×