CRIME & PUNISHMENT - Notoriety Should not be limited to 10 (& possibly increase time taken for notoriety to decay)

Here are more issues.

Got a ten billion credit bounty on your Cutter? No problem. Put all the modules in storage. Sell the Cutter and take the moderate hit on the price. Buy new Cutter. Clean modules. Reinstall modules.

10 billion bounty what? And this has been possible since the current C and P came out.

But let's say you don't even care about the bounty like one of the people in my squadron. Multiple billion credit bounties across human space on his Corvette. But hey, he's careful about it and it's not like there's a lot of ways to make him pay unless you're very dedicated in hunting him down. And even if you did, he'd lose the ship, congratulate you, and then just whip out the Cutter to begin again.

And never mind that he can just menu log and switch to Solo or Private Group if he fancied it. He doesn't, but a lot of criminal types do.

Rabbit hole goes pretty deep when it comes to balancing Elite. See what I mean? :)

EDIT: Suggest nerfing mining payouts in order to punish "griefers and gankers" in Dangerous Discussion. See how quickly you get lumped in with us.
One of the thing I noticed was just by jumping out of the system I was wanted in, all sins were forgiven. All that was needed was a bit if care with making sure bounty hunters shot first.

I remember that the original idea was to have faction bounties which eventually matured into superpower bounties at a certain point. Shame a bug forced them to back off on that.
 
Then, the game is working as intended. In one of my comments, in one of the ideas threads (can't remember if it was the one about reputation, or this about crime), I said that the effect would be to force such players out of High Security systems and into the Medium, Low and Anarchy - where they rightly belong. You might make brief incursions into higher Security systems, but you wouldn't be able to stay there for as long as is possible currently.
I appreciate the "game is working as intended" comment. But with things being how they are in high security, I'd just kill a few pilots and then high wake out and back. Did you have an antidote for this? Apologies if I missed it.
 
One of the thing I noticed was just by jumping out of the system I was wanted in, all sins were forgiven. All that was needed was a bit if care with making sure bounty hunters shot first.

I remember that the original idea was to have faction bounties which eventually matured into superpower bounties at a certain point. Shame a bug forced them to back off on that.
It is necessary for bounties to go into effect jurisdiction wide (perhaps, eventually, galaxy wide) - not just system wide, or in systems where offended factions are present.
 
I appreciate the "game is working as intended" comment. But with things being how they are in high security, I'd just kill a few pilots and then high wake out. Did you have an antidote for this? Apologies if I missed it.
As I said before, the objective isn't to eliminate random murders completely - giving a little leeway to genuine pirates to kill a few difficult customers.

Here is a quote from the other suggestion thread:

...

For the legitimate pirate who only commits, generally speaking, assaults and theft, they will warrant fines and bounties - easily cleared. ART should not be unleashed on such pirates. If, however, a pirate crosses the line and starts taking out victims (murder), then, with loss of rep (4-5 murders from neutral leading to hostile) and added notoriety (to which there should not be an upper time limit for clean commander murders - currently the max expected notoriety cool-down wait time is 20 hours, regardless of murder numbers), ATR should start to intervene in that jurisdiction. This gives the pirate a little leeway as regards the more difficult 'customer'.

The fact remains, reputation needs to be rapidly lost with factions (not including criminal/Anarchy factions - except when attacking their ships or allied players) in systems where murder is committed.

View attachment 142614

And, as per my other recent suggestion, notoriety should not have a cap of 10 (related to the cool-down time for each clean kill) - 2 hour cool-down for every clean player killed (no upper limit). 20 clean players killed = 40 hour cool-down to 0 notoriety, 40 clean players killed = 80 hours cool-down to 0 notoriety, etc.

While notoriety could, effectively, still be displayed at a maximum of 10 there should be an underlying counter that records the amount of murders and this total should be added to the total cool-down time a player must wait for notoriety to settle at 0.

Reputation recovery could occur either by ceasing to commit crime (recovering over time to neutral) and doing missions - or a combination of both.
...
*See the attachment for a rough idea about how reputation is lost when killing clean commanders.
 
As I said before, the objective isn't to eliminate random murders completely - giving a little leeway to genuine pirates to kill a few difficult customers.

Here is a quote from the other suggestion thread:



*See the attachment for a rough idea about how reputation is lost when killing clean commanders.
OK, nice. I'm seeing that this is pretty well thought out. I appreciate you taking the time to review.

Last question, only because I can't resist, in our little thought experiment how would you address the inevitable, "Griefers in X System" type of posts?
 
All this seems pretty good and reasonably well thought out.
But as has been mentioned really has next to zero effect on the actual so called gankers but does have an extreme effect on a player defending a takeover of his system regarding BGS play.
Most especially the one comment about clean kills making you lose rep with all local factions in a system. This won't matter at all to a ganker but would be very detrimental to a BGS player.
So far that's my only disagreement.
 
OK, nice. I'm seeing that this is pretty well thought out. I appreciate you taking the time to review.

Last question, only because I can't resist, in our little thought experiment how would you address the inevitable, "Griefers in X System" type of posts?
I'm uncertain as to what you mean here. Can you provide an example, please?
 
All this seems pretty good and reasonably well thought out.
But as has been mentioned really has next to zero effect on the actual so called gankers but does have an extreme effect on a player defending a takeover of his system regarding BGS play.
Most especially the one comment about clean kills making you lose rep with all local factions in a system. This won't matter at all to a ganker but would be very detrimental to a BGS player.
So far that's my only disagreement.
I can't agree with your assessment. Ultimately, 'gankers' will be severely affected by such changes - were they ever to be implemented. They'd end up with massive wait times to reduce their notoriety, ATR engaging them in many systems (the threshold to trigger from neutral to hostile being about 5 clean commander kills). If jurisdiction bounties were triggered when enough reputation with the superpower was lost, the result would be ATR in every system belonging to the superpower. And, finally, if the bounty went galaxy wide, they'd be hunted in every superpower system (excluding Anarchy, possibly some Independent systems, too).

However, I have to wonder why BGS players such as yourself seem to think it is legitimate for you to go around killing NPC/human 'clean' commanders for the sake of the BGS, and believe you should not suffer any great punishment, or reputation loss, for your crimes. I've already stated that no loss should occur where a faction has sanctioned the killing of certain ship. Perhaps it might be possible to put into place other mechanisms to allow for scraps between BGS opponents, and factions in the system.

As the factions in the system are all rivals, it may be possible to come up with a scenario whereby your chosen faction provides some 'letter of marque' - even though no official declaration of war has been made between the rival factions in a system. However, as things currently stand, I'm afraid that your argument about BGS isn't strong enough, in my opinion, to permit you to get away with murder and maintain good standing with local factions (unless, and until they have sanctioned the action officially).
 
I'm uncertain as to what you mean here. Can you provide an example, please?
A Commander like mine might see your system as a challenge and go on the killing spree to end all killing sprees. How would you deal with the criticism that your system doesn't go far enough to address griefing and ganking?
 
However, I have to wonder why BGS players such as yourself seem to think it is legitimate for you to go around killing NPC/human 'clean' commanders for the sake of the BGS, and believe you should not suffer any great punishment, or reputation loss, for your crimes. I've already stated that no loss should occur where a faction has sanctioned the killing of certain ship. Perhaps it might be possible to put into place other mechanisms to allow for scraps between BGS opponents, and factions in the system.
It's legitimate because we're killing the enemies of our chosen faction. This activity is often expressly condoned on the mission screen by the factions themselves!

We suffer significant bounties (not our fault mining makes this a pittance) and reputation loss. Why would our chosen faction, or any faction we were not attacking, like us less for killing their enemies?
 
A Commander like mine might see your system as a challenge and go on the killing spree to end all killing sprees. How would you deal with the criticism that your system doesn't go far enough to address griefing and ganking?
Well, they may well go on a killing spree.

Currently, they regularly go on killing sprees now and, from what I've seen, to great effect - with little resistance from the NPC Police (far to slow and incompetent to take on a group of heavily armed, engineered, gankers), slow deployment of the ATR, no negative effect to their reputation in systems (little to no attempted interdictions by security forces - which are so poor they can't even interdict successfully).

The ganker of today knows full well they can kill 10 players and their notoriety will reduce to 0 after 20 hours (no more time will ever be added regardless of whether or not they kill another 10 to 20 people in an evening). The system I propose sets no upper limit to the time it will take to reduce notoriety from 10 to 0 - you kill 40 players, expect 2 hours of in-game time per player killed.

You enter a system and are neutral with that faction - you get possibly 5 kills of clean commanders until the system becomes outright hostile and ATR are unleashed. Jump into another system with the same superpower and murder 5 more, expect the same - however all of this is also reducing your reputation with the superpower. I haven't come up with figures for this, but at some point the ganker will lose all reputation with the superpower and all superpower systems are then hostile to that ganker - ATR in every one of their systems to greet them.

Further, the bounty will trigger a galactic bounty - meaning the Federation, the Alliance and the Empire will consider such a criminal as undesirable - reputation set to hostile in all superpowers (despite no crimes committed in the other jurisdictions) and met with ATR in all superpower jurisdictions. The only place left for such player is Anarchy, and possibly Independent.

Added to this the fact that bounties are tied to ship and Commander, changing the dirty ship to a clean ship will mean a Commander must take great care not to be scanned by stations, security or players (using a kill warrant scanner), otherwise the ship will automatically have all wanted statuses applied to it, and all bounties applied to it from the previous ship. Destruction of that ship will ensure the ship is clean (and any others for the same crimes), but the commander will have the same notoriety, and the same wait time to reduce notoriety - as well as being viewed as a hostile element in the system and run out by security forces (attacked on sight until the reputation with the superpower, or faction has recovered sufficiently - as well as notoriety reduced).

I think that's a sufficient.
 
Last edited:
It's legitimate because we're killing the enemies of our chosen faction. This activity is often expressly condoned on the mission screen by the factions themselves!

We suffer significant bounties (not our fault mining makes this a pittance) and reputation loss. Why would our chosen faction, or any faction we were not attacking, like us less for killing their enemies?
That's the point, when it's sanctioned by the faction through missions, then clearly that's acceptable - the crime and punishment system would need to take these legitimate missions issued by factions into account.

What wouldn't be right is to have no mission, and to just randomly attack ships that belong to other factions - expecting no consequences for such crimes. You need to be authorised by the faction to use lethal force so as to not lose rep with the faction.
 
Well, they may well go on a killing spree.

Currently, they regularly go on killing sprees now and, from what I've seen, to great effect - with little resistance from the NPC Police (far to slow and incompetent to take on a group of heavily armed, engineered, gankers), slow deployment of the ATR, no negative effect to their reputation in systems (little to no attempted interdictions by security forces - which are so poor they can't even interdict successfully).

The ganker of today knows full well they can kill 10 players and their notoriety will reduce to 0 after 20 hours (no more time will ever be added regardless of whether or not they kill another 10 to 20 people in an evening). The system I propose sets no upper limit to the time it will take to reduce notoriety from 10 to 0 - you kill 40 players, expect 2 hours of in-game time per player killed.

You enter a system and are neutral with that faction - you get possibly 5 kills of clean commanders until the system becomes outright hostile and ATR are unleashed. Jump into another system with the same superpower and murder 5 more, expect the same - however all of this is also reducing your reputation with the superpower. I haven't come up with figures for this, but at some point the ganker will lose all reputation with the superpower and all superpower systems are then hostile to that ganker - ATR in every one of their systems to greet them.

Further, the bounty will trigger a galactic bounty - meaning the Federation, the Alliance and the Empire will consider such a criminal as undesirable - reputation set to hostile in all superpowers (despite no crimes committed in the other jurisdictions) and met with ATR in all superpower jurisdictions. The only place left for such player is Anarchy, and possibly Independent.

Added to this the fact that bounties are tied to ship and Commander, changing the dirty ship to a clean ship will mean a Commander must take great care not to be scanned by stations, security or players (using a kill warrant scanner), otherwise the ship will automatically have all wanted statuses applied to it, and all bounties applied to it from the previous ship. Destruction of that ship will ensure the ship is clean (and any others for the same crimes), but the commander will have the same notoriety, and the same wait time to reduce notoriety - as well as being viewed as a hostile element in the system and run out by security forces (attacked on sight until the reputation with the superpower, or faction has recovered sufficiently - as well as notoriety reduced).

I think that's a sufficient.
You're underestimating the hardcore killers out there and the blow back you'd receive from your system not being perfect.

That's the point, when it's sanctioned by the faction through missions, then clearly that's acceptable - the crime and punishment system would need to take these legitimate missions issued by factions into account.

What wouldn't be right is to have no mission, and to just randomly attack ships that belong to other factions - expecting no consequences for such crimes. You need to be authorised by the faction to use lethal force so as to not lose rep with the faction.
The mission boards, when there are no missions available, literally tell you to go kill people.
 
You're underestimating the hardcore killers out there and the blow back you'd receive from your system not being perfect.



The mission boards, when there are no missions available, literally tell you to go kill people.
It'll never be good enough for some people, but it'd be better than what we have at the mo.

I've never noticed the mission boards tell me to 'go kill people'. I've obviously seen assassination missions, and missions saying to kill so many of such and such ship. But again, somehow crime and punishment would need to be designed in such a way as to permit such massacre missions (usually in a Civil War - thus why different rules should apply in War and Civil war states, as per my other suggestion).

However, where you are working for an Anarchy faction in a system, and they send you into another system on a massacre mission involving civilian ships - which is still illegal despite being sanctioned by your own faction - it would probably be necessary to continue to have 'special modifiers' that 'slow or stop the arrival of System Authority ships when engaging mission targets' (https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Mission_Board#Massacre ). There would probably also need to be special modifiers to reduce the damage done to reputation while undertaking such faction sanctioned missions.
 
firstly, the difference between a system controlling faction is negligible and near irrelevant, but any invader faction that expands into the system is just that, an invader and are often there to take control, this is in opposition to the current hopefully well balanced system and as in many cases is between 2 pmfs, there are times when they kill and we kill each others ships in order to lower INF.
This is often the case because there are fewer tools for the invader to use to gain inf and if the invader has more players than the defender, then the defender may have to resort to the same in order to keep things stable, its basic rules of war aka conflict that is not friendly
So as I already said there is nothing in place for factions to realize any difference between factions for any special treatment other than inf and rep gain or loss, and as I am the one defending their system for them, I see no reason that I should lose rep for doing so, unless I am foolish enough to attack or otherwise inflict grief on their stations or ships or trade
and as I and Phisto have both said, none of the things you are after have any real effect on a ganker
being wanted and having high notoriety are meaningless for the most part, they have not once ever affected my game play in any way at all
and if my only concern was ganking, rep would also be just as meaningless

The only real point here that would even come close to hurting ganking is to take away easy money as you have said, and it will likely happen as it always has, fdev always nerfs gold rushes,
but it will only hurt some, not all

ask yourself how do you hurt a player that is doing what fdev allows and sees as content of the game and the player is worth tens of billions and has allied rep in hundreds of systems and owns more ships than you can put in 20 stations?
You are in reality asking for a form of punishment for a specific type of gameplay that is allowed and are then making your stance clear, that each player should not be able to blaze their own trail.

So, like I said, lets not paint all crime with the same brush, and lets also realize proper terminology for a violent culture of billions in space with no real govt or control anywhere, other than what we as players inflict. and that is the truth of it, all the npc's and the powerplay and all the factions are simple pawns, we are the players and as such gathering players together to perform actions is the only law of any type and right or wrong in anyone's eyes is all about perspective to any given mix of player interaction.

In a bgs case like I describe, I commit crimes in the invaders eyes, and the invader commits crimes in my eyes, to all the other present factions, they are oblivious to
it all.
So the entire situation is from a perspective, the perspective is simple from who ever looks at it, and this is the entire elite universe take on everything
 
firstly, the difference between a system controlling faction is negligible and near irrelevant, but any invader faction that expands into the system is just that, an invader and are often there to take control, this is in opposition to the current hopefully well balanced system and as in many cases is between 2 pmfs, there are times when they kill and we kill each others ships in order to lower INF.
This is often the case because there are fewer tools for the invader to use to gain inf and if the invader has more players than the defender, then the defender may have to resort to the same in order to keep things stable, its basic rules of war aka conflict that is not friendly
So as I already said there is nothing in place for factions to realize any difference between factions for any special treatment other than inf and rep gain or loss, and as I am the one defending their system for them, I see no reason that I should lose rep for doing so, unless I am foolish enough to attack or otherwise inflict grief on their stations or ships or trade
and as I and Phisto have both said, none of the things you are after have any real effect on a ganker
being wanted and having high notoriety are meaningless for the most part, they have not once ever affected my game play in any way at all
and if my only concern was ganking, rep would also be just as meaningless

The only real point here that would even come close to hurting ganking is to take away easy money as you have said, and it will likely happen as it always has, fdev always nerfs gold rushes,
but it will only hurt some, not all

ask yourself how do you hurt a player that is doing what fdev allows and sees as content of the game and the player is worth tens of billions and has allied rep in hundreds of systems and owns more ships than you can put in 20 stations?
You are in reality asking for a form of punishment for a specific type of gameplay that is allowed and are then making your stance clear, that each player should not be able to blaze their own trail.

So, like I said, lets not paint all crime with the same brush, and lets also realize proper terminology for a violent culture of billions in space with no real govt or control anywhere, other than what we as players inflict. and that is the truth of it, all the npc's and the powerplay and all the factions are simple pawns, we are the players and as such gathering players together to perform actions is the only law of any type and right or wrong in anyone's eyes is all about perspective to any given mix of player interaction.

In a bgs case like I describe, I commit crimes in the invaders eyes, and the invader commits crimes in my eyes, to all the other present factions, they are oblivious to
it all.
So the entire situation is from a perspective, the perspective is simple from who ever looks at it, and this is the entire elite universe take on everything
It's quite evident that there are certain rules that come into play where a faction has provided missions for a human player to engage in. My previous post pointed out that 'special modifiers' come into effect when a player undertakes certain missions for a faction - that happens in the game now. Obviously, in light of some of the issues surrounding the BGS, it's evident that further 'special modifiers' would need to be applied when undertaking murder missions for a faction(e.g., limiting reputation loss).

However, I cannot see why actions taken independently of the faction mission system should warrant any special treatment. All crimes committed when not undertaking faction sanctioned actions should result in normal crime and punishment effects.

What you appear to be saying is that if I, as a sole trader, decided to trade in 'your' system and work for faction you're opposed to - running missions for them, etc., you should be able to murder me (even though I'm clean) and have no severe effects from your own faction for this murder - because you 'did it for them' - and perhaps not rapidly lose rep with the other factions, bring the authorities down on you like a ton of bricks. Because of the BGS you seem to feel entitled to behave like a ganker - but call it legitimate game-play because you are doing it for the BGS, whilst other gankers do it 'for the fun of it'...

If your faction has sanctioned your actions to kill clean players - providing you with a mission to blockade such player as I, fair enough - 'special modifiers' come into effect. No faction sanctioned mission - you're a lone wolf, acting without authority and deserve to be punished severely.

EDIT: One of the issues is, I guess, that NPC ships are identifiable as belonging to such and such a faction - human players are not. In PowerPlay, it is possible to identify who a human player is allied with - and I think, under certain circumstances, it is legitimate for one PowerPlay allied player to engage another in combat.

What may be needed to resolve the issues your highlighting around the BGS is to be able to identify whether or not a human player is linked to some other faction(s) in the system, and working against your own.

Generally speaking, I work for most factions - doing missions for all (or the highest paying), not favouring one over another. I could potentially be allied with several factions in one system. I'm never forced to pick a side in a conflict.

At the end of the day, I'm focused more on PvP crime and punishment - and am not that bothered what happens to NPC ships...
 
Last edited:
It'll never be good enough for some people, but it'd be better than what we have at the mo.

I've never noticed the mission boards tell me to 'go kill people'. I've obviously seen assassination missions, and missions saying to kill so many of such and such ship. But again, somehow crime and punishment would need to be designed in such a way as to permit such massacre missions (usually in a Civil War - thus why different rules should apply in War and Civil war states, as per my other suggestion).

However, where you are working for an Anarchy faction in a system, and they send you into another system on a massacre mission involving civilian ships - which is still illegal despite being sanctioned by your own faction - it would probably be necessary to continue to have 'special modifiers' that 'slow or stop the arrival of System Authority ships when engaging mission targets' (https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Mission_Board#Massacre ). There would probably also need to be special modifiers to reduce the damage done to reputation while undertaking such faction sanctioned missions.
Next time you see a mission board where the faction has no missions to give you read the text. It says something to the effect of, "We don't like to talk about it, but you can lower the influence of our enemies by destroying their ships."
 
I believe you are also missing my main point due to the thinking that pvp or in the case of this thread portions of it is about what is being referred to as ganking and somehow it is not in your perspective, or seems to not be, that to you and to many this is not right, unlawful, illegal, unfair , unkind, etc..
Yet it is, and to the extent that fdev lets it be because it is a very big part of what player interaction is. it is not a be nice and friendly to everyone game, that was never the intent.
player interaction happens on many levels in many ways, players killing players over and over is actually what almost all interactive gaming is, one player beating all the other players and being the best at it, often being the goal.
That said , it is the content and there just happens to be numerous ways in this game to accomplish that goal.
So as has been said by me and others is that in reality the best option is to learn from it all, and as they say git gud.
The losers of any variation of any conflict style in any game are almost always going to have hurt feelings and many will add unfairness to it and many will try to see ways to resolve it. yet it always comes down to the same thing, skills and ability and attitude.
And this variation called Elite Dangerous, there is only a very small portion of it that is for the care bares as they seem to be called, and that again is where solo and PG come in. So Fdev has already gone to great lengths to protect those that cannot or will not protect themselves.
 
I believe you are also missing my main point due to the thinking that pvp or in the case of this thread portions of it is about what is being referred to as ganking and somehow it is not in your perspective, or seems to not be, that to you and to many this is not right, unlawful, illegal, unfair , unkind, etc..
Yet it is, and to the extent that fdev lets it be because it is a very big part of what player interaction is. it is not a be nice and friendly to everyone game, that was never the intent.
player interaction happens on many levels in many ways, players killing players over and over is actually what almost all interactive gaming is, one player beating all the other players and being the best at it, often being the goal.
That said , it is the content and there just happens to be numerous ways in this game to accomplish that goal.
So as has been said by me and others is that in reality the best option is to learn from it all, and as they say git gud.
The losers of any variation of any conflict style in any game are almost always going to have hurt feelings and many will add unfairness to it and many will try to see ways to resolve it. yet it always comes down to the same thing, skills and ability and attitude.
And this variation called Elite Dangerous, there is only a very small portion of it that is for the care bares as they seem to be called, and that again is where solo and PG come in. So Fdev has already gone to great lengths to protect those that cannot or will not protect themselves.
Thanks for the comments.

Firstly, Frontier, I suspect, did not intend for Elite Dangerous - PvP - to be a 'free for all' without consequences. Elite has a crime and punishment system - clearly designed to punish wrong behaviour. Destroying another clean commander is criminal behaviour - it's as simple as that (thus the fine, bounty, etc.). Otherwise, there would be no consequences and no punishment system.

Of course, there is a legitimate place for engaging in crime within the Elite universe - but not without consequences.

What you have described - wanting to be able to destroy any ship you disapprove of entering systems you consider as belonging to you and your faction, is, in fact, ganking. You hide behind the BGS as an excuse. If you have faction missions that enable you to engage in such activities, fair enough. However, you should not expect the right to camp behind the Nav Beacon of a star and murder any human player ship simply for coming into the system - and then suffer no loss of reputation, have no police force seek to interdict and destroy you, and not to be fined.

You're attempting to make things personal, referring to 'care bears' and suggesting players 'git gud' as well as referring to 'losers' with 'hurt feelings' etc. But all that, to me, is nonsense and irrelevant. I'm interested only in an effective crime and punishment system - balanced, while still permitting crime as a career, but discouraging the idiot players who think it's fun to attack and destroy a solo trader for 'the fun of it' (not an attempt to pirate the ship) while they are in a FDL, probably in a wing too. Yeah, the poor trader needed to 'git gud'. Somehow that Type 7 or Type 9 stood a chance against the attackers in that High Security system if only they had gotten good! Honestly, how ridiculous.

You just don't want to have negative consequences for your actions. You want all the positives to be able to manipulate the BGS in your favour, but are pushing back against anything you perceive as a threat to this.

Fact is, PvP crime and punishment is not fit for purpose, it needs fixing. I believe what I proposed is a fair means of limiting the damage done by the gankers and griefers, while still allowing players to commit murder, engage in piracy, and various other crimes (including supporting factions via massacre missions, etc., with existing mechanics and safeguards maintained and a mechanism to protect reputation levels when players engage in such missions).

EDIT: Anarchy systems are the place where lawlessness does not, or should not, exist. If all of your faction systems are anarchy, carry on - all is good.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom