seeking Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 more from june... Originally posted by Joker ...the idea was very clever. Though I don't think this makes him raw. Just a clever artist with guts to risk it for getting his images up. having someone give you a master key to every light box in the city, doesnt exactly leave much to 'risk', and doesnt take much 'guts'. no one is ever going to think twice about a guy unlocking a box, taking out or replacing a poster, no matter the image on it. advertising is as such that unless you know something doesnt belong, anything is possibly 'real'. im not saying that to hate, just sort of pointing out. i dont think kaws himself would ever claim it was a 'balls' operation, it was a creative one, and at the time, an incredibly creative one. when he was first doing those light boxes, (and even before that with the billboards) i loved them. i loved the idea. it was clever, amusing, funny, and genuinly poking fun at pop-culture. it was done for the reaction and satisfaction, not to make a dollar. when it became about that, i still didnt care, because we all need to eat. but what i eventually found a problem with, was the reaction and the way he seemed to completely shun graff, and totally play into the bullshit people were saying. i was at a gallery opening of his in ny in 99. my first 'opening'... hopefully my fucking last. it was the most patheticly disgusting display of industry 'cheese' imaginable. god damn i fucking hate 'art' sometimes. the next day im reading 'reviews' and im listening to these hack ass writers in the village voice praising him like he was the second coming of christ or something. i just kept thinking that if i was him, id be embaressed to be talked about that way. there are so many people, so much more deserving of 'praise' in my opinion, but they refuse to provide themselves to the public as a neatly tied package, ready for consumption. and again, if you're just about making money, then do that shit and dont apologise, but dont piss on me and tell me its raining. dont come up with the simplist, most genericaly contrived piece of pop art imaginable, and then try to pass it off as making a statement, or as being anything but you getting over. im amazed that there has yet to be a 'kambells soup' doll, fashioned after warhols painting, or a 'marilyn kawsrow' print. again, this is just the impression i recieved after reading several interviews between '95 and '02. i could be totally wrong. but when i look at his career as a writer, and then his career as an artist, i see the same thing. dude painted the same piece for 4 years, and had no problems with that. fine. he painted it alot, it took balls, no hate. but then to take one image, and do the exact same thing...i dont know. maybe its sour grapes. maybe its me being angry at a world i feel rewards the wrong people, whatever. either way, its the internet, its my opinion and its irrelivent. dude likely made more today alone, off his website, than i will make in the next 3 months. than joker will make in the same amount of time...than raven, who has made more personal and financial sacrifices than ive ever seen a single person do, in the name of providing something back to his 'culture'... i know the world isnt fair, but that doesnt mean i cant whine about it at length. seeks/i bought a very soft scarf and a new dress shirt for work, today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 Anyone know how many of these things were made? You have to factor the amount of time it takes to make these if it's not done factory, how much time it takes to sculpt the mold for the plastic, and how much the cost of supplies was. $140 may seem expensive but if there are only 500 of these things made then it is somewhat understandable. I would still never pay for one. There is a possible interesting outcome to this if these things become successful with people other than art collectors. Variety like this in the toy market could expand when fringe items like this become popular gifts and all. Right now most of the toys you find have either been standards for years or movie tie-ins. Change like this would be good, but it has to start from somewhere. Interestingly enough, I've never heard of Kaws until I was browsing one of those hip consumerist magazines while wasting time at the bookstores and I read an article about him. I guess he's making the magazine rounds with new products coming out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest im not witty Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 "ART IS.......why i get up in the morning, (but my definition ends there) ya know it doesnt seem fair, that im living for something i cant even define" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_gooch Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by AlQuds allot of umm... whats the word ? "coffee table artists"? like people that study and talk allot about art thats cool though, it would be cooler if the toy was cheaper though, like for 10 bucks, shit..id probably buy one for 10 bucks. just cause duchamps work became famous doesnt mean hes good, it just means a million people are stupid and lame as fuck. like the reason wack rappers go platinum hahahahahahaha so true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mental invalid Posted October 26, 2003 Author Share Posted October 26, 2003 "duchamp is my ultimate favorite. the philly museum of art has a banging collection. includin the bride stripped permanently installed. so banging."--hesh the philly musuem was my first real taste for him...i was absolutely floored...the different styles, the motive and ideas behind it...the bride in person is just engrossing, as is that whole room...nude descending is one of my schemas of motion... check out the cy twombly section while youre there too... i guess the reason behind me starting this thread is that i just dont happen to like the piece...i looked at it as art to begin with, not a toy...i mean its neat, theres just other stuff ive seen from him that i like more...the $140 is just icing on the cake for me... but what ive noticed is that the main defense of this piece is the benefit of investment...raven used harring, and the original misperception of harrings work then and its value today as an example... i heard a few positive remarks, but most made an attempt to legitamize the cost by saying in three years your money double... i guess the title of thread makes cost an issue, and investment is a solid answer to the question of cost and a reason to buy it.... but my language aside, i havent heard a defense of cost based on merit of the piece... i dont hear anyone saying, holy shit thats awesome, i gotta buy that...falling over themselves in a attempt to get one.... look in the canvas thread to see example of people wanting art, for the sake of it...there are people putting canvases up that in my opinion are better pieces of art...i know we can split hairs, but for agrument sense lets just say all all art is art, and not get stuck on canvas vs sculpture(loose term)...and people can easily just go and check it out the work and the desire to work out deals... i guess ill pose this, for 140 id take some of those in there before a kaws doll... are any of those guys a good investment..who knows, like mams mentioned, you may be suprised...but i doubt it...but as far as just art as art, i like some of em more.. which goes back to original motive of the thread, which was, i just didnt care for the doll....its always the most basic of emotion when you boil it down... some will feel the opposite and what Mams said is kind of what level of cynicism i was on....to me it felt a little to much cable infomercial, ACT NOW! TIME IS RUNNING OUT! i have blood on my hands, im in marketing... and all of these factors, mainfested themselves into this thread...and my overall distaste... so maybe the discussion should fall on the merit of it, and not the market value...my tounge has gotten me in trouble again.. we should have a sunday morning talkshow on tv.....the 12 oz hour.... rotating host and roundtable participants.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_El Mamerro Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 I was writing a response last night and had to split before I finished... now I come back and see Mental has touched upon some things I wanted to clarify... I still feel the same way about the piece. I had thought, as seeking pointed out, that production costs for a limited run of a large object such as this toy would run high, especially since it seems to be manufacture-on-demand. But the first thing that runs through my mind isn't "Oh, that explains the price tag". It's actually "Why the hell did he go ahead with it then?" There's obviously better ways to go around producing limited-edition art, and I have to give props to KAWS for choosing a rather difficult path to do so and producing a relatively unique (emphasis on "relatively") piece... but that won't gather enough sympathy votes from me to shell out the money for something I don't really think is that special. By the way, in all honesty, I wouldn't shell that same money for a Futura or a Phase 2 if the art doesn't speak to me at all. I think than in terms of looking for a way to gain profit, these dolls aren't such a great idea, since the vast majority of people will still see a product instead of art, a product whose value doesn't match its cost. There isn't enough in the piece to reference its being an art object, so it will be hard to convince people. People still bring up the whole "this will double/triple/billionuple in price in a few years" thing. Honestly, if I was the artist involved, I wouldn't cater to a market that will treat my art as a piece of real estate. If I buy art, I could care less how much it'll resell for, I buy it because it means something to me and I want it to be part of my life, not because I can make money off it later. I'd be insulted if my consumers did that with my art. It's inevitable for art to become a potential investment upon purchase, but that shouldn't be a primary consideration when choosing artwork to buy. As much as that type of treatment increases the cost of art, it cheapens the value. All in all, I hope very much that KAWS proves my assumptions wrong, and that enough people do purchase these, because it either speaks to them as art, or because they see its value as a product, or even because they're investing for profit. Like I said, I appreciate his risk-taking and would love to see him succeed because of that, but I just don't think he executed it very smartly. Oh, and I'm not even get into Duchamp's illness, or how "Nude Descending a Staircase" is my favorite painting of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by El Mamerro If I buy art, I could care less how much it'll resell for, I buy it because it means something to me and I want it to be part of my life, not because I can make money off it later. I'd be insulted if my consumers did that with my art. what we've got here is two different arguments. 1.is this art that is worth spending $140 on? 2.is this worth spending $140 dollars on? the first one is completely subjective. if you're real into kaws, and think he makes bitchin shit, then you probably do. or, if you're a sucker that follows the herd and thinks because a writer did it, that that somehow gives it intrinsic value, then you'll think its worth it to also. if you collect every short-run toy made in the world, you're gonna be stoked. you cant look at it as if it was merely a 'toy', because it isnt. it's inteded to be a piece of art, regardless of anything else. now, if you're not feeling it, then you're not feeling it, the consumer price vs. production cost, is irrelivent (even though im assuming its fairly high). sheppard fairy makes a whole hell of alot more money of of prints that cost him a dollar to run, but no ones crying about the mark up there. if this is a just a toy, then the mona lisa is just a piece of rag with a bunch of dirt and pigment smeared on it. i think the bottom line, is what both mams and roe touched on; the vast majority just arent feeling it, period. were getting caught on semantics, but thats what it boils down to. which of course, makes the price ridiculous, because it holds no other value to us. complaining that its an 'expensive toy' is the wrong way to look at it though. it's not a toy, its a piece of art that looks like a toy and may or may not make you happy to look at, touch and sit at your tea-party table and pretend its a person. now, as far as it being worth spending 140 bucks on? if you've got the extra money, then yes, without a doubt. why? cause it will be worth more, bottom line. i dont care that its supposed to be art, i care that i can get over and make a buck. is that me cheapening the piece? maybe. is it me potentially adding to the overall message that dude may or may not have trying to express? maybe. but either way, i'm too old to rack all my paint. poor people work, rich people invest. seeks/i should know, i'm an accountant there were 13 million model T cars built in the early 1900's, but if you still have one today, i'd give you $140 for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by StarzAbove Whos going 2 pay $140 for the small ass crap??? I could sculpt one myself with clay n plaster! This is one of the biggest problems with Channel 0. Nobody reads shit anymore except for the Veterans and people who have been around for a while. These damn new people mistake this forum for a fuckin Chat Room. They think they know the subject matter simply by reading the first two lines in the first post. This is old news for all of us, but damnit it gets me heated. If this retard would've just read any of the posts they would have had a damn good idea as to why someone might just pay 1,000,000 dollars for this toy... I'm anti-toy, but I have my own reasons, and will keep them to myself..nuff said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by ClueTwo I'm anti-toy, but I have my own reasons... why all the self hate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_El Mamerro Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by seeking now, as far as it being worth spending 140 bucks on? if you've got the extra money, then yes, without a doubt. why? cause it will be worth more, bottom line. i dont care that its supposed to be art, i care that i can get over and make a buck. is that me cheapening the piece? maybe. is it me potentially adding to the overall message that dude may or may not have trying to express? maybe. but either way, i'm too old to rack all my paint. poor people work, rich people invest. Agreed*. I personally feel that if his intention was to see people treat the object as an investment, then there should be something in the piece that references this, however vague it is, so that when you do purchase and resell, you are furthering the message. I see a lot of references in it, but none to the whole investment thing, which makes me feel that it wasn't KAWS intention to do so, and therefore buying-to-sell won't further his message. I'm not saying I don't feel it, I think it's cool. But obviously, I don't think it's cool enough. Hopefully more people think it IS cool enough, and the man gets paid. *Edit: had doubts before, but now I get what you're saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_El Mamerro Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 I just wrote the word "intention" like, 17 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by seeking why all the self hate? My purpose for that statement was really a summed up version of: I do not thik this toy is worth 140.00, but I didn't want to say exactly that. I can completely understand why someone else would possibly want to buy it, but not me. Plus, I'm fuckin broke and that might have alot to do with my criticism..Good arguements ecspecially in promotion for the "piece of art"/toy, but my wallet could not justify spending/investing in something that is possibly going to appreciate in value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Originally posted by El Mamerro I'm not saying I don't feel it haha, i am. i'm just kind of trying to tip toe around the whole thing and not completely slam dude, because i dont know him. also, ive learned that 'seeking', no matter how right he thinks he is, is better off not getting in over his head, and bashing peoples hero's (no matter how right, or innocent his intentions are.) regardless of just admitting i dont know dude, still, i honestly dont think he's doing it for the money. why? fuck if i know, i just dont. i think he makes enough off of prints and other shit, that he doesnt really need to. his light box paintings sell for thousands and thousands of dollars. after this is all said and done, i'll bet dude doesnt make more than 25-50k off it. which is alot to us, but when you're selling single prints for 5-10k, thats nothing. i think that this is, for him, is just amusement. it's getting to be a kid, and live out fantasies. its making your own toys, in your own images. unfortunitely though, once i accept that he isnt doing it to make money, im left with the sad fact that i just think its contrived, boring, and a waste of effort. i think something much, much more interesting could have been made, and even if it costed more money simply based on production, it would still be something to show a bit more pride in. seeks/the only toys in this office are the one at the keys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 cluetwo, "i'm anti-toy, but i have my own reasons" "why all the self hate?" get it? seeks/i was making fun of you, silly :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Ok, now I do get it, and you can kiss my ass....Don't let your Crew/Veteran status or whatever let you feel superior in any way. Your arrogance is backed by what? A huge post count? Your moderators ability to edit my post or maybe even a banning? :confused: I'm not impressed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 with a name like yours, i'd expect you to atleast have one. it was a joke. relax a bit my dear, we're all friends here. (except for the australians, they're like termites.) seeks/it's not arrogance it's a french accent, tooooottally different things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClueTwo Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Alright no offense taken.. I just got done calling Hans Solo a damn Wanna-be and 2 seconds later I check back and I'm one now. Clue/Bad timing gets no love... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daze One Million Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 personal opinion imo art should be free, although i do understand that art is some peoples only means for survival thus meaning they have no other choice but to charge in order for them to live, if thats the case with kaws then i dont really see a problem, but if hes only charging a 140 price because he thinks he can get away with it than thats just really fucked, i do art not for self profit but for other people, if it was soley for my self there would be no need for me to even create it, its all in my head allready, no one else would need to see it if it was only for myself, but then again thats my personal idea of what art is, i dont really like the idea that this doll or what ever it is aint really that original of an idea, at least make something original for a price that high reguardless if the money is needed or not, size of it doesnt really hold any weight in my eyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffie Crave Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 ok girls its 28 inches tall , and it prolly cost more to make the figure than to sell it...i dont think he is makeing that much profit so its 140..you dont want it dont buy it there is only a few made...they will proly be on e-bay in a year for 200-300 come on use your brains...this is art....not toys r us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kido Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Exceeds spenditure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mikro137 Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 after seeing a lecture with rona pondick(sp im sure) this weekend , i am obligated to chime in on this. during her lecture , many arrogant , "superior" art students chimed in with drawn out over sophistocated questions , so as to prove their self worth in the art community through poor use of big words , to an already famous artist (although i had never heard of her until the lecture was booked) her responce to all of this pretentious jibber jabber , was summed up in maybe 2 sentences in almost all cases. this was not to be rude in any manner , but to say , jesus christ what the fuck are all of you trying to read so deeply into here. this was not however to say that she was a one demensional artist with no purpose to her work , but to say that she wasnt this premadonna that she was made out to be. she makes art because she like to , not because shes making a huge social statement through it necissarily. the social statment is only made if you make it for you self while veiwing it. i dunno , it was intresting to listen to , and i related to her in alot of ways , to the point where i felt as if i could be in her shoes at some point in my life , giving a similar speech. there is no point to this rant per sey , but i think seeking touched on many good points here , and although may not be "god" has a very valid opinion on where kaws may have been comming from with this , to retrospect on the whole kaws "legacy". i am a kaws fan , bbut i see where he is comming from with the satements he has made here. mikro137/supreme retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sTress Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 there is nothing scandalous, an artist selling a limited edition toy derived from his work is pretty normal and boring, whats more interesting is that he made a website with his tag as the domain name especially to sell his stuff and theres zero graffiti or street art... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sTress Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 also, i think that KR did the best in graff merchandising because selling an indelible ink with your name is great, its like Yves Klein and the YKB, its like "meta-graffiti" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Originally posted by 10 km there is nothing scandalous, an artist selling a limited edition toy derived from his work is pretty normal and boring, whats more interesting is that he made a website with his tag as the domain name especially to sell his stuff and theres zero graffiti or street art... This is one of the things that gets me about Kaws. I believe it was about two years ago, I read an article about him where he came across as completely dismissing graffiti. As if his time there was wasted and not worth the effort. He made writing seem childish and boring. Yet... he still uses the name. Another incident that left a sour taste in my mouth with him was at one of his shows. I walked up to him with a book in my hand and asked for him to catch a quick tag in it. This was about three or four years ago. He looked at me and said to come back in about twenty minutes. Okay... that's odd. I found him twenty minutes later (For some reason I actually hung out in this small gallery waiting...) and asked again. He sighed and asked if I had a pen. Of course. He opened my book, started flipping through the pages, realized who I was and his attitude completely changed. At that moment I wanted snatch the book out of his hands and tell him to take a hike. Granted, dude had to probably sign a gazillion books but to act a retard like that was sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HESHIANDET Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Originally posted by Joker This is one of the things that gets me about Kaws. I believe it was about two years ago, I read an article about him where he came across as completely dismissing graffiti. As if his time there was wasted and not worth the effort. He made writing seem childish and boring. Yet... he still uses the name. Another incident that left a sour taste in my mouth with him was at one of his shows. I walked up to him with a book in my hand and asked for him to catch a quick tag in it. This was about three or four years ago. He looked at me and said to come back in about twenty minutes. Okay... that's odd. I found him twenty minutes later (For some reason I actually hung out in this small gallery waiting...) and asked again. He sighed and asked if I had a pen. Of course. He opened my book, started flipping through the pages, realized who I was and his attitude completely changed. At that moment I wanted snatch the book out of his hands and tell him to take a hike. Granted, dude had to probably sign a gazillion books but to act a retard like that was sad. thats about par for the course. its also why your cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mental invalid Posted October 27, 2003 Author Share Posted October 27, 2003 oh to be a fly on the wall and see that interaction happen.... well that about wraps it up for me....more icing on my cake good thread gang.....good thread...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeking Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Originally posted by Joker This is one of the things that gets me about Kaws. I believe it was about two years ago, I read an article about him where he came across as completely dismissing graffiti. As if his time there was wasted and not worth the effort. He made writing seem childish and boring. Yet... he still uses the name. bingo. ive read several articles expressing such sentiments. and i know he doesnt owe 'graff' shit, but i felt betrayed. like... heres a dude that sort of got over, and now he's gonna just leave us in the cold. and infact, he's gonna do us one better, and act like he was never stuck out here with us, even though its his vague association with us, that people are interested in. haha. kaws is the 'house nigga' of graffiti. (oh man, did i just say that?) for a little while i had started to feel the same way about twist. i saw him making all this money off graff, and it just seemed like he didnt give a shit about where he came from anymore. then i read some interview with him and while i honestly dont even remember exactly what he said, in about two sentences, he dispelled my entire fear, and gave me an extra level of respect for dude. which is not to say that he needs to make 'me' happy, or justify himself to 'me', but for all intents and purposes, i am 'graffiti', and im not a whole hell of alot different than him....well, except my hand sucks, im broke, and ill never change the art world, but i mean...we're both old and we both like writing on shit, so there :) anyway, it just really made me respect dude a ton more, for aknowledging what got him to where his is, the unlikelyhood of the path, and how much he still respected, and even wished he could be out steady doing illegal shit. integrity is the difference between respect and 'fame'. seeks/all i have is my balls and my (48billion) word(s) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest beardo Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 indeed, i remember that kaws article as well. i had forgotten why i lost interest in his work till yall just reminded me as for the toy.. rock on. not my bag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bored Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Interesting reading... I've been reading this board and feel that I wanted to address the post by Joker, "This is one of the things that gets me about Kaws. I believe it was about two years ago, I read an article about him where he came across as completely dismissing graffiti. As if his time there was wasted and not worth the effort. He made writing seem childish and boring. Yet... he still uses the name." I've never, in any article dismissed graffiti as being childish or something that I was never really involved in. I'm not sure what article you're talking about, but I can tell that I've always been really careful to separate the stuff I'm currently doing from the term graffiti. Time and time again, I've had journalists coming to my studio, looking at bus stops or a Simpsons painting, and calling it graffiti. And that's how the work gets labelled as. I do make it really clear that the work I am producing now has nothing to do with graffiti. And labelling as such is inaccurate. You have to understand, what you're reading is a journalist's/editor's point of view of what I do. Most times after I read an article after the fact, it's been cut down and edited to a point where I feel like I wasn't even there. and then, you have other journalists who read these articles and regurgitate the same things. (in the same post) "Another incident that left a sour taste in my mouth with him was at one of his shows. I walked up to him with a book in my hand and asked for him to catch a quick tag in it. This was about three or four years ago. He looked at me and said to come back in about twenty minutes. Okay... that's odd. I found him twenty minutes later (For some reason I actually hung out in this small gallery waiting...) and asked again. He sighed and asked if I had a pen. Of course. He opened my book, started flipping through the pages, realized who I was and his attitude completely changed. At that moment I wanted snatch the book out of his hands and tell him to take a hike. Granted, dude had to probably sign a gazillion books but to act a retard like that was sad." A lot of times at openings, I'll see friends I haven't seen in a long time and I try to get a few minutes to talk to them. At the same time, you get a lot of writers who approach with black books. Some of them will wait until I'm done talking to someone, to ask me to sign their book. Most don't wait and just interrupt. I don't know what the case was with you 'cause I don't remember meeting you. And to be honest, I am not familiar with your work, so I can't imagine acting differently after opening your book and finding out who you were. I'm not saying this to diss you or what you've done, I'm just being totally honest. After writing this, I'm not sure if it really clears up anything. I just needed to include my point of view. KAWS.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPiTA Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 ...whoa... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.