Ping ~misfit~

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Dogg, Jul 19, 2004.

  1. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    Hey man,

    A friend of mine joined the nz.comp BOINC group but hasn't yet shown
    up. Is there anyway to "refresh" the group or something?
     
    Dogg, Jul 19, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dogg wrote:
    > Hey man,
    >
    > A friend of mine joined the nz.comp BOINC group but hasn't yet shown
    > up. Is there anyway to "refresh" the group or something?


    Hey Dude,

    I noticed a couple of people have joined recently.

    The servers have been playing up for a while now. I think it's just a matter
    of waiting for them to come right. I haven't been able to log into my
    account for a couple of days. I *can get to the nz.comp team page but not my
    own. (I need to change my preferences).

    Give it a while and it should come right, nothing ever happens straight away
    with Berkeley/Seti. Also, I'm not sure if he'll show up until he has some
    credit under his belt, I see the nz.comp/BOINC page is only showing users
    who have switched to BOINC and have returned units now, it used to show the
    whole of the team.

    This page:

    http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_display.php?teamid=30823

    Shows members 51 (Up from 50 yesterday) but only 15 are listed, the ones who
    have returned work. He'll show up in a day or two I'd say, once some work is
    returned and verified.

    Cheers, and pass on my 'welcome to the team' please.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 19, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:08:16 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:


    <snip>
    >
    >Shows members 51 (Up from 50 yesterday) but only 15 are listed, the ones who
    >have returned work. He'll show up in a day or two I'd say, once some work is
    >returned and verified.
    >
    >Cheers, and pass on my 'welcome to the team' please.


    He's showing up now :) MushroomNZ
     
    Dogg, Jul 19, 2004
    #3
  4. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dogg wrote:
    > On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:08:16 +1200, "~misfit~"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    > <snip>
    >>
    >> Shows members 51 (Up from 50 yesterday) but only 15 are listed, the
    >> ones who have returned work. He'll show up in a day or two I'd say,
    >> once some work is returned and verified.
    >>
    >> Cheers, and pass on my 'welcome to the team' please.

    >
    > He's showing up now :) MushroomNZ


    Cool. Hey, I went to check to see what computers you are running and you
    have them hidden. Why be that if you don't mind me asking? I was just going
    through the team, seeing what we're all running (or at least what they're
    reported as, "AMD Pentium", LOL) and noticed your's are hidden.

    Cheers,
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 19, 2004
    #4
  5. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:30:49 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    >Dogg wrote:
    >> On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:08:16 +1200, "~misfit~"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>>
    >>> Shows members 51 (Up from 50 yesterday) but only 15 are listed, the
    >>> ones who have returned work. He'll show up in a day or two I'd say,
    >>> once some work is returned and verified.
    >>>
    >>> Cheers, and pass on my 'welcome to the team' please.

    >>
    >> He's showing up now :) MushroomNZ

    >
    >Cool. Hey, I went to check to see what computers you are running and you
    >have them hidden. Why be that if you don't mind me asking? I was just going
    >through the team, seeing what we're all running (or at least what they're
    >reported as, "AMD Pentium", LOL) and noticed your's are hidden.
    >
    >Cheers,


    I can't change it even if I wanted to at the moment...

    Project is shut down for maintenance - please try again later
     
    Dogg, Jul 20, 2004
    #5
  6. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:30:49 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    <snip>
    >
    >Cool. Hey, I went to check to see what computers you are running and you
    >have them hidden. Why be that if you don't mind me asking?


    <snip>

    There now :)
     
    Dogg, Jul 21, 2004
    #6
  7. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dogg wrote:
    > On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:30:49 +1200, "~misfit~"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >>
    >> Cool. Hey, I went to check to see what computers you are running and
    >> you have them hidden. Why be that if you don't mind me asking?

    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > There now :)


    Thanks. I like to be able to see what people are running and how the
    different systems do on the benchmarks.

    Hmmm, you have a few PCs there huh? Or do some of them need 'merging'?

    Cheers,
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 21, 2004
    #7
  8. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:01:24 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    <snip>
    >Thanks. I like to be able to see what people are running and how the
    >different systems do on the benchmarks.
    >
    >Hmmm, you have a few PCs there huh? Or do some of them need 'merging'?
    >
    >Cheers,


    Not really. Got a couple of Xeon servers to get in on the act as
    well...
     
    Dogg, Jul 21, 2004
    #8
  9. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dogg wrote:
    > On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:01:24 +1200, "~misfit~"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >> Thanks. I like to be able to see what people are running and how the
    >> different systems do on the benchmarks.
    >>
    >> Hmmm, you have a few PCs there huh? Or do some of them need
    >> 'merging'?
    >>
    >> Cheers,

    >
    > Not really. Got a couple of Xeon servers to get in on the act as
    > well...


    Good man, lets get crunching!

    Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.........
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 22, 2004
    #9
  10. Dogg

    Divine Guest

    On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

    > Good man, lets get crunching!
    >
    > Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.


    I'm presently crunching classic seti.


    Divine

    --
    "Microsoft don't need any moral right to be a hypocrite. It's an oxymoron.
    They will do what they can get away with. Of course this makes it difficult
    for their advocates to occupy any high moral ground."
     
    Divine, Jul 23, 2004
    #10
  11. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Divine wrote:
    > On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >
    >> Good man, lets get crunching!
    >>
    >> Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.

    >
    > I'm presently crunching classic seti.


    Same here, running BOINC as well, waiting for it to get some WU's.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 23, 2004
    #11
  12. Dogg

    Dogg Guest

    On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:17:18 +1200, "~misfit~"
    <> wrote:

    >Divine wrote:
    >> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>
    >>> Good man, lets get crunching!
    >>>
    >>> Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.

    >>
    >> I'm presently crunching classic seti.

    >
    >Same here, running BOINC as well, waiting for it to get some WU's.


    All my machines got some during the weekend. They're having trouble
    returning results at the moment.
     
    Dogg, Jul 26, 2004
    #12
  13. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dogg wrote:
    > On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:17:18 +1200, "~misfit~"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Divine wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Good man, lets get crunching!
    >>>>
    >>>> Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.
    >>>
    >>> I'm presently crunching classic seti.

    >>
    >> Same here, running BOINC as well, waiting for it to get some WU's.

    >
    > All my machines got some during the weekend. They're having trouble
    > returning results at the moment.


    Yep, same here. My machines grabbed WUs in the weekend. However, now they
    can't return result or get more units. I set u BOINC on another machine the
    night before last and it hasn't managed to get a WU yet, despite contacting
    the server 80+ times. They're still ironing things out at Berkeley, they
    generated 400,000 WUs over the weekend and distributed them, then started on
    more upgrading/maintenance.

    Funny, the 'new' machine still hasn't got any units but another of my
    machines grabbed a half-dozen overnight. Hopefully that means they've nearly
    got it sorted.

    Cheers,
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 27, 2004
    #13
  14. Dogg

    Divine Guest

    On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:47:10 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

    > Dogg wrote:
    >> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:17:18 +1200, "~misfit~"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Divine wrote:
    >>>> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Good man, lets get crunching!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm presently crunching classic seti.
    >>>
    >>> Same here, running BOINC as well, waiting for it to get some WU's.

    >>
    >> All my machines got some during the weekend. They're having trouble
    >> returning results at the moment.

    >
    > Yep, same here. My machines grabbed WUs in the weekend. However, now they
    > can't return result or get more units. I set u BOINC on another machine the
    > night before last and it hasn't managed to get a WU yet, despite contacting
    > the server 80+ times. They're still ironing things out at Berkeley, they
    > generated 400,000 WUs over the weekend and distributed them, then started on
    > more upgrading/maintenance.
    >
    > Funny, the 'new' machine still hasn't got any units but another of my
    > machines grabbed a half-dozen overnight. Hopefully that means they've nearly
    > got it sorted.


    My 64bit box has managed to fill it's cache again, and upload all the
    recent results that it couldn't upload during the time that the project
    was shut down.

    The other box that I'm crunching SETI on (lloyd.home - what is to become
    my new network server) has a few WUs in it's cache, has had no
    difficulties getting WUs or uploading results since I sorted out its
    massive hardware problems.

    I've replaced the MOBO with a more recent version that has an nforce-2
    chipset. Turns out that the fault with the RAM. I found that out by
    swapping the RAM from james.home into lloyd.home. It then started working
    perfectly.

    Oh well, back to the shop tomorrow with the old MOBO, and the defective
    RAM - both under warranty.


    Divine

    --
    Micro$oft Knowledge Base: "This problem was first corrected in Windows 2000
    Service Pack 2."
     
    Divine, Jul 27, 2004
    #14
  15. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Divine wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:47:10 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >
    >> Dogg wrote:
    >>> On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:17:18 +1200, "~misfit~"
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Divine wrote:
    >>>>> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:12:26 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Good man, lets get crunching!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Now, if only I could get some work units downloaded.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'm presently crunching classic seti.
    >>>>
    >>>> Same here, running BOINC as well, waiting for it to get some WU's.
    >>>
    >>> All my machines got some during the weekend. They're having trouble
    >>> returning results at the moment.

    >>
    >> Yep, same here. My machines grabbed WUs in the weekend. However, now
    >> they can't return result or get more units. I set u BOINC on another
    >> machine the night before last and it hasn't managed to get a WU yet,
    >> despite contacting the server 80+ times. They're still ironing
    >> things out at Berkeley, they generated 400,000 WUs over the weekend
    >> and distributed them, then started on more upgrading/maintenance.
    >>
    >> Funny, the 'new' machine still hasn't got any units but another of my
    >> machines grabbed a half-dozen overnight. Hopefully that means
    >> they've nearly got it sorted.

    >
    > My 64bit box has managed to fill it's cache again, and upload all the
    > recent results that it couldn't upload during the time that the
    > project was shut down.


    Just this afternoon all my machines have filled their caches and returned
    results. Yay! Berkeley have got it together (hopefully for a while).

    > The other box that I'm crunching SETI on (lloyd.home - what is to
    > become my new network server) has a few WUs in it's cache, has had no
    > difficulties getting WUs or uploading results since I sorted out its
    > massive hardware problems.
    >
    > I've replaced the MOBO with a more recent version that has an nforce-2
    > chipset. Turns out that the fault with the RAM. I found that out by
    > swapping the RAM from james.home into lloyd.home. It then started
    > working perfectly.


    Shame it turned out to be the RAM after you replaced the mobo. At least you
    have a better mobo now.

    > Oh well, back to the shop tomorrow with the old MOBO, and the
    > defective RAM - both under warranty.


    Cool. Team nz.comp BOINC was back up to position 122 when I looked a few
    days ago after dropping back to 140. I doubt we'll stay there long though,
    there are some *big* teams out there. The highest I saw us reach was P 100.
    Just checked, position 126 at present. I'm doing my best to stay up there,
    four machines on the job now. I figured most of the power a PC consumes is
    released as heat so I'm using PC's to heat my house. ;-)
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 27, 2004
    #15
  16. Dogg

    Divine Guest

    On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:59:58 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

    >> I've replaced the MOBO with a more recent version that has an nforce-2
    >> chipset. Turns out that the fault with the RAM. I found that out by
    >> swapping the RAM from james.home into lloyd.home. It then started
    >> working perfectly.

    >
    > Shame it turned out to be the RAM after you replaced the mobo. At least you
    > have a better mobo now.


    And more RAM, AND a faster CPU.

    That box was Athlon XP2400+

    Now is Athlon XP2600+ - which is, I believe a Barton. :eek:)

    Pay week next week. Skint until then.


    > Cool. Team nz.comp BOINC was back up to position 122 when I looked a few
    > days ago after dropping back to 140. I doubt we'll stay there long though,
    > there are some *big* teams out there. The highest I saw us reach was P 100.
    > Just checked, position 126 at present.


    Currently sitting at 130...


    > I'm doing my best to stay up there,
    > four machines on the job now. I figured most of the power a PC consumes is
    > released as heat so I'm using PC's to heat my house. ;-)


    The AMD Athlon XP 2600+ does not produce much heat at all. Sustained full
    CPU loading using only the supplied heatsink and fan and NO case fan
    results in a heatsink that is mildly warm to touch. The power supply
    produces much more heat than the CPU - as does my monitor.

    Shortly after typing the above I added a case fan. Just before adding this
    sentence I checked the temperature of the heatsink. Barely noticable above
    ambient case temprature - which I hadn't noticed as being anything
    different from the room temprature.

    A 1-gig Intel Coppermine produces more heat than a 2-gig Athlon.

    Of course I have not been over-clocking it. ;o)


    Divine

    --
    Micro$oft Knowledge Base: "When you try to shut down your Microsoft Windows
    XP-based or Microsoft Windows 2000-based computer, the computer may stop
    responding, and you may receive the following error message: It is now safe
    to turn off your computer."
     
    Divine, Jul 28, 2004
    #16
  17. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Divine wrote:
    > On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:59:58 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >
    >>> I've replaced the MOBO with a more recent version that has an
    >>> nforce-2 chipset. Turns out that the fault with the RAM. I found
    >>> that out by swapping the RAM from james.home into lloyd.home. It
    >>> then started working perfectly.

    >>
    >> Shame it turned out to be the RAM after you replaced the mobo. At
    >> least you have a better mobo now.

    >
    > And more RAM, AND a faster CPU.
    >
    > That box was Athlon XP2400+
    >
    > Now is Athlon XP2600+ - which is, I believe a Barton. :eek:)


    Indeed, at least all the XP2600+'s made in the last six months.

    > Pay week next week. Skint until then.


    I bet.

    >> Cool. Team nz.comp BOINC was back up to position 122 when I looked a
    >> few days ago after dropping back to 140. I doubt we'll stay there
    >> long though, there are some *big* teams out there. The highest I saw
    >> us reach was P 100. Just checked, position 126 at present.

    >
    > Currently sitting at 130...
    >
    >
    >> I'm doing my best to stay up there,
    >> four machines on the job now. I figured most of the power a PC
    >> consumes is released as heat so I'm using PC's to heat my house. ;-)

    >
    > The AMD Athlon XP 2600+ does not produce much heat at all. Sustained
    > full CPU loading using only the supplied heatsink and fan and NO case
    > fan results in a heatsink that is mildly warm to touch. The power
    > supply produces much more heat than the CPU - as does my monitor.
    >
    > Shortly after typing the above I added a case fan.


    Good move, insurance.

    > Just before adding
    > this sentence I checked the temperature of the heatsink. Barely
    > noticable above ambient case temprature - which I hadn't noticed as
    > being anything different from the room temprature.
    >
    > A 1-gig Intel Coppermine produces more heat than a 2-gig Athlon.
    >
    > Of course I have not been over-clocking it. ;o)


    Now if I was you I would have bought the XP2500+ instead of the 2600 and
    just run it on a 200Mhz FSB. It might need a very slight vcore increase but
    then you'd basically have an XP3200+. The 2500 and the 3200 both have an 11x
    multiplier, (locked these days unfortunately) only the default FSB is
    different (166 and 200 respectively). We have done this with my fiancee's
    machine and it's running perfectly fine with the standard HSF. It's not so
    simple with the 2600 as the multi is higher and they are hard to get to run
    on 200FSB without after-market cooling.

    The XP2500+ coupled with an nForce2Ultra400 mobo and a FSB increase to 200
    is where the power/dollar ratio is highest. After all, all the Bartons are
    pretty much the same silicon, just with a different default multiplier.

    Still, you have a nice machine there.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 28, 2004
    #17
  18. Dogg

    Divine Guest

    On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:49:28 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

    > Now if I was you I would have bought the XP2500+ instead of the 2600 and
    > just run it on a 200Mhz FSB. It might need a very slight vcore increase but
    > then you'd basically have an XP3200+. The 2500 and the 3200 both have an 11x
    > multiplier, (locked these days unfortunately) only the default FSB is
    > different (166 and 200 respectively). We have done this with my fiancee's
    > machine and it's running perfectly fine with the standard HSF. It's not so
    > simple with the 2600 as the multi is higher and they are hard to get to run
    > on 200FSB without after-market cooling.
    >
    > The XP2500+ coupled with an nForce2Ultra400 mobo and a FSB increase to 200
    > is where the power/dollar ratio is highest. After all, all the Bartons are
    > pretty much the same silicon, just with a different default multiplier.


    I'm presently running it on a 166 FSB with a multiplier of 11.5 - all of
    which is configurable in the BIOS.

    I haven't tried it, but I would imagine that I could run it on a 200mhz
    FSB with a lower multiplier.

    However, I bought the 2600+ because it had the extra cache and the
    increased clock speed.

    for 32bit stuff the Athlon 2600+ performs well enough.

    My 64bit box is limited for SETI due to the fact that the SETI@home client
    STILL does not compile on the x86_64 platform. So SETI is not using the
    full capabilities of that box. :eek:(


    Divine

    --
    The Queen's Mother: "Well I don't know what all you queens are doing,
    but this old Queen wants a drink."
     
    Divine, Jul 28, 2004
    #18
  19. Dogg

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Divine wrote:
    > On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:49:28 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >
    >> Now if I was you I would have bought the XP2500+ instead of the 2600
    >> and just run it on a 200Mhz FSB. It might need a very slight vcore
    >> increase but then you'd basically have an XP3200+. The 2500 and the
    >> 3200 both have an 11x multiplier, (locked these days unfortunately)
    >> only the default FSB is different (166 and 200 respectively). We
    >> have done this with my fiancee's machine and it's running perfectly
    >> fine with the standard HSF. It's not so simple with the 2600 as the
    >> multi is higher and they are hard to get to run on 200FSB without
    >> after-market cooling.
    >>
    >> The XP2500+ coupled with an nForce2Ultra400 mobo and a FSB increase
    >> to 200 is where the power/dollar ratio is highest. After all, all
    >> the Bartons are pretty much the same silicon, just with a different
    >> default multiplier.

    >
    > I'm presently running it on a 166 FSB with a multiplier of 11.5 - all
    > of which is configurable in the BIOS.
    >
    > I haven't tried it, but I would imagine that I could run it on a
    > 200mhz FSB with a lower multiplier.


    I think you'll find that the multiplier on the CPU is locked. The option to
    change it will still show in BIOS but as of about week 34 last year all AMD
    Athlon/Bartons have been multilier-locked. To date nobody (that I know of)
    has been able to defeat the lock. Changing it in BIOS will either make no
    difference (probably) or cause the machine to not boot, then re-set to 'safe
    settings' next boot so you can reconfigure.

    That's why most people who want to overclock Bartons buy 2500's, with an 11x
    multi 95%+ of them will run on a 200Mhz FSB with minimal (if any) increase
    in vcore giving you the equivalent of a 3200 without the need for radical
    cooling. In fact the stock cooler usually handles it fine. Also 2500's are
    cheaper than 2600's.

    Some 2600 will also run on a 200 FSB but usually this requires quite an
    increase in vcore and corresponding temperature rises. Some just won't do
    it. Pretty much all Bartons will do 2.2Ghz relatively easilly. The nForce
    chipset locks the PCI and AGP busses so you can always run a 2600 on a
    190-odd FSB for around 2.2Ghz but it won't be as fast as a CPU on a 200FSB.

    > However, I bought the 2600+ because it had the extra cache and the
    > increased clock speed.
    >
    > for 32bit stuff the Athlon 2600+ performs well enough.


    Indeed.

    > My 64bit box is limited for SETI due to the fact that the SETI@home
    > client STILL does not compile on the x86_64 platform. So SETI is not
    > using the full capabilities of that box. :eek:(


    Yeah. I'm sure they'll get around to fixing that, especially as more and
    more people get 64bit CPUs.

    Berkeley haven't handed out any credit for a long time now, I think they are
    having problems with that side of things presently. Look for some big jumps
    in credits soon.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Jul 28, 2004
    #19
  20. Dogg

    Divine Guest

    On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 00:28:52 +1200, ~misfit~ wrote:

    > Also 2500's are
    > cheaper than 2600's.


    By $25 only.

    And they run faster.


    Divine

    --
    Micro$oft Knowledge Base: "This problem was first corrected in Windows 2000
    Service Pack 2."
     
    Divine, Jul 28, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. GL

    ping ~misfit~

    GL, Oct 6, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    415
    ~misfit~
    Oct 6, 2003
  2. ~misfit~

    ping ~misfit~

    ~misfit~, Oct 21, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    642
    T.N.O.
    Oct 24, 2003
  3. Collector_NZ

    Ping ~Misfit~

    Collector_NZ, Jul 4, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    389
    ~misfit~
    Jul 4, 2004
  4. Collector_NZ

    Ping Misfit Time for F1 to overtake COMP

    Collector_NZ, Sep 10, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    481
    ~misfit~
    Sep 10, 2004
  5. Collector-NZ

    (OT) Ping Misfit F1 overtaking

    Collector-NZ, Sep 11, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    550
    ~misfit~
    Sep 12, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page