Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done

The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.


The alleged harasser in these cases was Sean Patrick Fannon, President of Evil Beagle Games, Brand Manager for Savage Rifts at Pinnacle Entertainment Group, as well as being a game designer and developer with a long history in the tabletop role-playing industry.

There is a long and untenable policy of harassment at conventions that stretches back to science fiction and fantasy fandom in the 1960s. Atlanta's Dragon*Con has been a lightning rod in the discussions about safety at geeky conventions after one of the convention's founders was arrested and pled guilty to three charges of molestation. We have also covered reports of harassment at conventions such as Paizo Con, and inappropriate or harassing behavior by notable industry figures. It is clear that clear harassment policies and firm enforcement of them is needed in spaces where members of our community gather, in order that attendees feel safe to go about their hobby. Some companies, such as Pelgrane Press, now refuse to attend conventions where a clear harassment policy is not available.

Several women have approached me to tell me about encounters with Fannon. Some of them asked not to be named, or to use their reports for background verification only. We also reached out to Sean Patrick Fannon for his comments, and he was willing to address the allegations.

The women that I spoke with had encounters with Fannon that went back to 2013 and 2014 but also happened as recently as the summer of 2017. Each of the locations were in different parts of the country, but all of them occurred when Fannon was a guest of the event.

The worse of the two incidents related to me happened at a convention in the Eastern part of the United States. In going back over texts and messages stretching back years the woman said that it "is frustrating [now] to read these things" because of the cajoling and almost bullying approach that Fannon would use in the messages. She said that Fannon approached her at the con suite of the convention, and after speaking with her for a bit and playing a game with a group in the suite he showed her explicit photos on his cellphone of him engaged in sex acts with a woman.

Fannon's ongoing harassment of this woman would occur both electronically and in person, when they would both be at the same event, and over the course of years he would continue to suggest that she should engage in sexual acts, either with him alone, or with another woman.

Fannon denies the nature of the event, saying "I will assert with confidence that at no time would such a sharing have occurred without my understanding explicit consent on the part of all parties. It may be that, somehow, a miscommunication or misunderstanding occurred; the chaos of a party or social gathering may have created a circumstance of all parties not understanding the same thing within such a discourse. Regardless, I would not have opened such a file and shared it without believing, sincerely, it was a welcome part of the discussion (and in pursuit of further, mutually-expressed intimate interest)."

The second woman, at a different gaming-related event in another part of the country, told of how Fannon, over the course of a day at the event, asked her on four different occasions for hugs, or physical contact with her. Each time she clearly said no to him. The first time she qualified her answer with a "I don't even know you," which prompted Fannon after he saw her for a second time to say "Well, you know me now." She said that because of the multiple attempts in a short period of time that Fannon's behavior felt predatory to her. Afterwards he also attempted to connect with her via Facebook.

Afterwards, this second woman contacted the group that organized the event to share what happened and they reached out to Fannon with their concerns towards his behavior. According to sources within the organization at the time, Fannon - as with the first example - described it to the organizers as a misunderstanding on the woman's part. When asked, he later clarified to us that the misunderstanding was on his own side, saying "Honestly, I should have gotten over myself right at the start, simply owned that I misunderstood, and apologized. In the end, that's what happened, and I walked away from that with a pretty profound sense of how to go forward with my thinking about the personal space of those I don't know or know only in passing."

Both women faced ongoing pressure from Fannon, with one woman the experiences going on for a number of years after the initial convention meeting. In both cases he attempted to continue contact via electronic means with varying degrees of success. A number of screen shots from electronic conversations with Fannon were shared with me by both women.

Diane Bulkeley was willing to come forward and speak on the record of her incidents with Fannon. Fannon made seemingly innocent, and yet inappropriate comments about her body and what he wanted to do with her. She is part of a charity organization that had Fannon as a guest. What happened to her was witnessed by another woman with whom I spoke about that weekend. As Bulkeley heard some things, and her witness others, their experiences are interwoven to describe what happened. Bulkeley described this first encounter at the hotel's elevators: "We were on the floor where our rooms were to go downstairs to the convention floor. I was wearing a tank top and shirt over it that showed my cleavage. He was staring at my chest and said how much he loved my shirt and that I should wear it more often as it makes him hot. For the record I can't help my cleavage is there." Bulkeley went on to describe her mental state towards this "Paying a lady a compliment is one thing, but when you make a direct comment about their chest we have a problem."

Later on in the same day, while unloading some boxes for the convention there was another incident with Fannon. Bulkeley described this: "Well, [the witness and her husband] had to move their stuff from a friends airplane hangar (we all use as storage for cars and stuff) to a storage until next to their house. Apparently Sean, while at the hanger, made grunt noises about my tank top (it was 80 outside) while Tammy was in the truck. I did not see it. But she told me about it. Then as we were unloading the truck at the new facility Sean kept looking down my shirt and saying I have a great view etc. Her husband said to him to knock it off. I rolled my eyes, gave him a glare and continued to work. I did go and put on my event day jacket (light weight jacket) to cover up a little."

The witness, who was in the truck with Fannon, said that he "kept leering down at Diane, glancing down her shirt and making suggestive sounds." The witness said that Fannon commented "'I'm liking the view from up here.'"

Bulkeley talked about how Fannon continued his behavior later on in a restaurant, having dinner with some of the guests of the event. Fannon made inappropriate comments about her body and embarrassed her in front of the other, making her feel uncomfortable throughout the dinner.

Bulkeley said that Fannon also at one point touched her hair without asking, and smelled it as well. "[Fannon] even would smell my long hair. He begged me to not cut it off at a charity function that was part of the weekend's event." She said that he also pressed his pelvis tightly against her body while hugging her. These incidents occurred at a convention during the summer of 2017.

Fannon denies these events. "The comments and actions attributed to me simply did not happen; I categorically and absolutely deny them in their entirety."

When asked for comment, and being informed that this story was being compiled Fannon commented "I do not recall any such circumstance in which the aftermath included a discourse whereby I was informed of distress, anger, or discomfort." He went on to say "The only time I recall having ever been counseled or otherwise spoken to about my behavior in such matters is the Gamers Giving/Total Escape Games situation discussed above. The leader of the organization at that time spoke to me specifically, asked me to be aware that it had been an issue, and requested I be aware of it in the future. It was then formally dropped, and that was the end of it until this time."

There were further reports; however, we have respected the wishes of those women who asked to remain anonymous for fear of online harassment. In researching this article, I talked to multiple women and other witnesses.

About future actions against the alleged behaviors he also said "It is easy, after all, to directly attack and excise obviously predatory and harassing behavior. It is much more difficult to point out and correct behavior that falls within more subtle presentations, and it's more difficult to get folks to see their actions as harmful when they had no intention to cause harm, based on their assumptions of what is and isn't appropriate. It's good for us to look at the core assumptions that lead to those behaviors and continue to challenge them. That's how real and lasting change within society is achieved."

Fannon's weekly column will no longer be running on E.N. World.

Have you suffered harassment at the hands of someone, industry insider or otherwise, at a gaming convention? If you would like to tell your story, you can reach out to me via social media about any alleged incidents. We can speak confidentially, but I will have to know the identity of anyone that I speak with.

This does open up the question of: At what point do conventions become responsible for the actions of their guest, when they are not more closely scrutinizing the backgrounds of those guests? One woman, who is a convention organizer, with whom I spoke for the background of this story told me that word gets around, in the world of comic conventions, when guests and creators cause problems. Apparently this is not yet the case in the world of tabletop role-playing game conventions, because there are a growing number of publishers and designers who have been outed for various types of harassing behavior, but are still being invited to be guest, and in some cases even guests of honor, at gaming conventions around the country. The message that this sends to women who game is pretty clear.

More conventions are rolling out harassment policies for guests and attendees of their conventions. Not only does this help to protect attendees from bad behavior, but it can also help to protect conventions from bad actors within the various communities that gather at our conventions. As incidents of physical and sexual harassment are becoming more visible, it becomes more and more clear that something needs to be done.

additional editorial contributions by Morrus
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Well...not exactly. No right is absolute- rights are always in a balancing act with other rights & duties.

The right to confront your accusers exists, but it is limited by State & Federal Crime Victim Anonymity statutes, most of which include first and foremost victims of rape and sexual assault.

Those statutes typically forbid the nonconsentual release of the alleged voctim’s identity as well as their past and present sexual history. In addition, while they may be called on in court to testify and be cross-examined, most such statutes allow them to do so with an alias like “John/Jane Doe”. In extreme cases, other measures may be taken.

Addendum: should have mentioned in my post quoted above that violations of crime victim anonymity statutes can lead to criminal and civil penalties. That is, not only could the person who publicizes information the court orders to remain secret face contempt of court fines or jail time, they could also be sued in civil court. In some jurisdictions, such damages are limited, but not in all.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
If the identities of the accusers were kept anonymous in order to protect them from online hatred, why wasn't the identity of the accused also kept anonymous for the same reason?

Something like 400+ combined years of UK/USA precedent in which criminal indictments are considered public records.
 

RedJenOSU

First Post
A few facts before I get to my actual response.
  • I am a female gamer
  • I've personally known Sean Patrick Fannon since 1997
  • I've played tabletop games, LARP'd, attended conventions with Fannon
  • I count Fannon as one of my friends
Sean Patrick Fannon is a human being and as such not perfect. He is however someone who strives to better not only himself, but everyone he comes into contact. He is a passionate, artistic, unabashed romantic, who's expression of joy and affection could easily come out of a historical romance novel.

The person described as Sean Patrick Fannon in the original article is a highly vilified, one-dimensional caricature of the person I met over 20 years ago on his worst day.

Sean is one of the most sincere people I have ever met when in comes to apologies. Yes, I've seen him act with all the grace of a bull in a china shop, but I've also seen him fight back tears upon realizing that he may have acted out of line or hurt someone unintentionally. He's constantly evolving and always fighting for the underdog. I've watched Sean grow from the person he described as one acting from blind privilege to someone who is much more aware of the world in which he moves and how his movements affect the other people around him.

I would love to see a discussion on harassment in gaming and how we as a whole can work to make this an inclusive activity, but there are so many polarizing things that would need to be set aside in order to have an open and honest conversation. There are places on the internet that will vilify women for speaking out and saying #MeToo. There are places that will post alt-facts as truths, when the alternative to a binary fact is a falsehood.

I don't think I've ever posted here, but I seriously considered created a new account in order to shield myself from any backlash. If you want to talk about harassment policies, then do it. Vilifying a single individual based on allegations does not equate to an article about harassment policies.
 

Particle_Man

Explorer
ok, I do not post much on here

That is quite the understatement since that is your first post, at least under that user id.

If a person wants to be anonymous, guess what YOU can't use that information, a person has a right to face their accuser and if it can't be corroborated do not use it.

I don't think your alleged 21 years in law have served you well here.

It boils down to a he said she said, like I said not cool if it is true. If you are a "journalist" I guess you skipped the part about liability and defamation of character. I hope you got a lawyer, because that train might a be a coming.

More like he said vs. she said and she said and she said. Multiple accusers, multiple incidents. And if I were the OP, I would say "bring it!" with respect to a potential libel lawsuit, since it would certainly fail. Again, I don't think your alleged 21 years in law are serving you well here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Particle_Man

Explorer
Citation seriously needed (because considering the massive volume of threats of violence, rape, and death women get on the internet when they speak out is pretty clear evidence that this statement is ridiculously untrue.)

A woman that accused Judge Moore of sexual abuse/harrassment had her house burned to the ground. Judge Moore merely lost an election for senator.
 

Chris Clinch

First Post
Addendum: should have mentioned in my post quoted above that violations of crime victim anonymity statutes can lead to criminal and civil penalties. That is, not only could the person who publicizes information the court orders to remain secret face contempt of court fines or jail time, they could also be sued in civil court. In some jurisdictions, such damages are limited, but not in all.
the problem with your post is that the anonymous person still has to appear in a court of law and give testimony, the name is only protected from the public by not being given or using an alias, the accused still has the chance to face the accuser. This is also not a crime what we are talking about here, the term Harassment is used, but in a criminal standpoint does not fit the standard for evidence.
 

Chris Clinch

First Post
That is quite the understatement since that is your first post, at least under that user id.



I don't think your alleged 21 years in law have served you well here.
probably because it used my FB account not my normal ID.


More like he said vs. she said and she said and she said. Multiple accusers, multiple incidents. And if I were the OP, I would say "bring it!" with respect to a potential libel lawsuit, since it would certainly fail. Again, I don't think your alleged 21 years in law are serving you well here.
Multiple accusers does not make it true, There is a thing called innocent until proven guilty. As for my experience, actually it serves me quite well, but thanks for asking. As for libel, look it up, if the man loses so much as a dime it fits the bill once he can show damages.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
The fact that he didn't blink at the plausability that he might have shared perverted videos with random woman at a convention says everything. Perverts gonna perv, and if a Con doesn't want a reputation as a hive of scum and villainy, it has to purge them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

S

Sunseeker

Guest
People seem to be taking a lot of issue with the article, which I find strange, because I found the article fairly neutral in tone, maybe I missed that.

The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.
This is fairly boiler-plate article introduction, no names are named, and it sets the stage for what is about to be talked about.

The alleged harasser in these cases was Sean Patrick Fannon, President of Evil Beagle Games, Brand Manager for Savage Rifts at Pinnacle Entertainment Group, as well as being a game designer and developer with a long history in the tabletop role-playing industry.
If there's something vilifying Sean in this line please someone point it out. At best there's "alleged harasser". I'm struggling to think of a good alternative term here. It's certainly not positive term, but alleged is accurate and harasser is what Sean is being accused of being.

There is a long and untenable policy of harassment at conventions that stretches back to science fiction and fantasy fandom in the 1960s. Atlanta's Dragon*Con has been a lightning rod in the discussions about safety at geeky conventions after one of the convention's founders was arrested and pled guilty to three charges of molestation. We have also covered reports of harassment at conventions such as Paizo Con, and inappropriate or harassing behavior by notable industry figures. It is clear that clear harassment policies and firm enforcement of them is needed in spaces where members of our community gather, in order that attendees feel safe to go about their hobby. Some companies, such as Pelgrane Press, now refuse to attend conventions where a clear harassment policy is not available.
This doesn't seem to be about Sean at all, but gives some backstory on bad things in the past.

Several women have approached me to tell me about encounters with Fannon. Some of them asked not to be named, or to use their reports for background verification only. We also reached out to Sean Patrick Fannon for his comments, and he was willing to address the allegations.
If there's something vilifying here please point it out.

The women that I spoke with had encounters with Fannon that went back to 2013 and 2014 but also happened as recently as the summer of 2017. Each of the locations were in different parts of the country, but all of them occurred when Fannon was a guest of the event.
Seems fairly neutral, the author is stating what he was told by "the women".

The worse of the two incidents related to me happened at a convention in the Eastern part of the United States. In going back over texts and messages stretching back years the woman said that it "is frustrating [now] to read these things" because of the cajoling and almost bullying approach that Fannon would use in the messages. She said that Fannon approached her at the con suite of the convention, and after speaking with her for a bit and playing a game with a group in the suite he showed her explicit photos on his cellphone of him engaged in sex acts with a woman.
This is the author relaying what they were told.

Fannon's ongoing harassment of this woman would occur both electronically and in person, when they would both be at the same event, and over the course of years he would continue to suggest that she should engage in sexual acts, either with him alone, or with another woman.
And its a summary of the above and indication that there is more without going into explicit detail. Again, relaying what the author was told.

Fannon denies the nature of the event, saying "I will assert with confidence that at no time would such a sharing have occurred without my understanding explicit consent on the part of all parties. It may be that, somehow, a miscommunication or misunderstanding occurred; the chaos of a party or social gathering may have created a circumstance of all parties not understanding the same thing within such a discourse. Regardless, I would not have opened such a file and shared it without believing, sincerely, it was a welcome part of the discussion (and in pursuit of further, mutually-expressed intimate interest)."
Now the author is relaying what Fannon told them.

The second woman, at a different gaming-related event in another part of the country, told of how Fannon, over the course of a day at the event, asked her on four different occasions for hugs, or physical contact with her. Each time she clearly said no to him. The first time she qualified her answer with a "I don't even know you," which prompted Fannon after he saw her for a second time to say "Well, you know me now." She said that because of the multiple attempts in a short period of time that Fannon's behavior felt predatory to her. Afterwards he also attempted to connect with her via Facebook.
Again, relaying what the author was told.

Afterwards, this second woman contacted the group that organized the event to share what happened and they reached out to Fannon with their concerns towards his behavior. According to sources within the organization at the time, Fannon - as with the first example - described it to the organizers as a misunderstanding on the woman's part. When asked, he later clarified to us that the misunderstanding was on his own side, saying "Honestly, I should have gotten over myself right at the start, simply owned that I misunderstood, and apologized. In the end, that's what happened, and I walked away from that with a pretty profound sense of how to go forward with my thinking about the personal space of those I don't know or know only in passing."
Still just relying information....

Both women faced ongoing pressure from Fannon, with one woman the experiences going on for a number of years after the initial convention meeting. In both cases he attempted to continue contact via electronic means with varying degrees of success. A number of screen shots from electronic conversations with Fannon were shared with me by both women.
Honestly this article is so dry I'm getting tired just reading it. More information relay.

So far, as far as I can tell, there has been no "vilification". For the record, vilification is not a relaying of what someone else tells you, and it is fairly obvious when you read it, because you'll notice emotionally charged words, loaded phrases or even just outrightly disparaging remarks.

I'm not sure if people's definition of "vilification" means "Sean told the author it was puckey, therefore it is!" but that's not vilification.

Diane Bulkeley was willing to come forward and speak on the record of her incidents with Fannon. Fannon made seemingly innocent, and yet inappropriate comments about her body and what he wanted to do with her. She is part of a charity organization that had Fannon as a guest. What happened to her was witnessed by another woman with whom I spoke about that weekend. As Bulkeley heard some things, and her witness others, their experiences are interwoven to describe what happened. Bulkeley described this first encounter at the hotel's elevators: "We were on the floor where our rooms were to go downstairs to the convention floor. I was wearing a tank top and shirt over it that showed my cleavage. He was staring at my chest and said how much he loved my shirt and that I should wear it more often as it makes him hot. For the record I can't help my cleavage is there." Bulkeley went on to describe her mental state towards this "Paying a lady a compliment is one thing, but when you make a direct comment about their chest we have a problem."
Again, the author is relaying the information he was told.

Later on in the same day, while unloading some boxes for the convention there was another incident with Fannon. Bulkeley described this: "Well, [the witness and her husband] had to move their stuff from a friends airplane hangar (we all use as storage for cars and stuff) to a storage until next to their house. Apparently Sean, while at the hanger, made grunt noises about my tank top (it was 80 outside) while Tammy was in the truck. I did not see it. But she told me about it. Then as we were unloading the truck at the new facility Sean kept looking down my shirt and saying I have a great view etc. Her husband said to him to knock it off. I rolled my eyes, gave him a glare and continued to work. I did go and put on my event day jacket (light weight jacket) to cover up a little."
This is almost entirely made up of quotes from Bulkeley.
EDIT: corrected Bulkeley's name spelling...

The witness, who was in the truck with Fannon, said that he "kept leering down at Diane, glancing down her shirt and making suggestive sounds." The witness said that Fannon commented "'I'm liking the view from up here.'"

Bulkeley talked about how Fannon continued his behavior later on in a restaurant, having dinner with some of the guests of the event. Fannon made inappropriate comments about her body and embarrassed her in front of the other, making her feel uncomfortable throughout the dinner.

Bulkeley said that Fannon also at one point touched her hair without asking, and smelled it as well. "[Fannon] even would smell my long hair. He begged me to not cut it off at a charity function that was part of the weekend's event." She said that he also pressed his pelvis tightly against her body while hugging her. These incidents occurred at a convention during the summer of 2017.
Again, the author is relaying what they were told. There isn't even author commentary here like in many modern news articles.

I mean, if we can't relay to the public what we were told by other people, we've basically eliminated the entire concept of journalism.

Fannon denies these events. "The comments and actions attributed to me simply did not happen; I categorically and absolutely deny them in their entirety."

When asked for comment, and being informed that this story was being compiled Fannon commented "I do not recall any such circumstance in which the aftermath included a discourse whereby I was informed of distress, anger, or discomfort." He went on to say "The only time I recall having ever been counseled or otherwise spoken to about my behavior in such matters is the Gamers Giving/Total Escape Games situation discussed above. The leader of the organization at that time spoke to me specifically, asked me to be aware that it had been an issue, and requested I be aware of it in the future. It was then formally dropped, and that was the end of it until this time."
This looks like entirely quotes from Fannon, so....pretty dry here.

There were further reports; however, we have respected the wishes of those women who asked to remain anonymous for fear of online harassment. In researching this article, I talked to multiple women and other witnesses.
The author says there's more, don't think we need a mile-long paper here, we get the jist. But there's still no judgement in this summary of "more content exists" it's just "it's out there". Pretty vague, but non judgemental.

About future actions against the alleged behaviors he also said "It is easy, after all, to directly attack and excise obviously predatory and harassing behavior. It is much more difficult to point out and correct behavior that falls within more subtle presentations, and it's more difficult to get folks to see their actions as harmful when they had no intention to cause harm, based on their assumptions of what is and isn't appropriate. It's good for us to look at the core assumptions that lead to those behaviors and continue to challenge them. That's how real and lasting change within society is achieved."
Looks like this is just Fannon's words here.

Fannon's weekly column will no longer be running on E.N. World.
A statement of facts, not a statement of judgement.

Have you suffered harassment at the hands of someone, industry insider or otherwise, at a gaming convention? If you would like to tell your story, you can reach out to me via social media about any alleged incidents. We can speak confidentially, but I will have to know the identity of anyone that I speak with.
Okay, and we're not even talking about Fannon here.

This does open up the question of: At what point do conventions become responsible for the actions of their guest, when they are not more closely scrutinizing the backgrounds of those guests? One woman, who is a convention organizer, with whom I spoke for the background of this story told me that word gets around, in the world of comic conventions, when guests and creators cause problems. Apparently this is not yet the case in the world of tabletop role-playing game conventions, because there are a growing number of publishers and designers who have been outed for various types of harassing behavior, but are still being invited to be guest, and in some cases even guests of honor, at gaming conventions around the country. The message that this sends to women who game is pretty clear.

More conventions are rolling out harassment policies for guests and attendees of their conventions. Not only does this help to protect attendees from bad behavior, but it can also help to protect conventions from bad actors within the various communities that gather at our conventions. As incidents of physical and sexual harassment are becoming more visible, it becomes more and more clear that something needs to be done.

additional editorial contributions by Morrus
And I don't see anything here talking negatively about Fannon.

I mean come on people, if you're going to call out an article for attacking someone, at least have an idea of what an attack looks like! To call out the author as some kind of muck-raking yellow journalist with nothing better to do than attack a "good guy" or whatever when the article is this ridiculously dry is patently absurd.

Aside from a boilerplate statement that "harassment is bad" and "cons need to work harder" there isn't a single judgement upon Fannon at all. Not once does the author say "If true, this is a pretty damning indictment of Fannon's character." or "It's unbelievable that someone could be so disgusting." I mean, at least know what you're looking for when you're claiming vilification and that sort of thing.

I mean heck, this is probably the most boring bit of reporting I've read in years. And that's GOOD. It's News. It's "Hey guys, I heard about this thing that happened from these people and here's what they told me." That's it.

By all means if you think I'm missing where the author crucifies Fannon, please point it out to me, because I'm not seeing it.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top