Jump to content

Consistency in Multiple Series Titles (e.g. Metal Men)


Recommended Posts

One of the things I'm noticing in ComicBase is inconsistency in naming titles. I'm also providing how the Grand Comics Database (GCD) does it. Here's an example:

GCD: Metal Men (1963) / ComicBase: Metal Men 

GCD: Metal Men (1993) / ComicBase: Metal Men (Mini-Series)

GCD: Metal Men (2007) / ComicBase: Metal Men (3rd Series)

GCD: Metal Men (2019) / Comic Base: Metal Men (4th Series)

The problem comes in if you choose to use labels either for identification or pricing or even finding the title in a list if there are multiple series. Because Metal Men (Mini-Series) isn't titled as Metal Men (2nd Series), it doesn't alphabetize in the correct order with the other series. This is compounded on labels due to the lack of the date of publication not being included, so it's difficult to determine the order from the label. I see one of two solutions to this:

  1. Use the GCD style which identifies a series using the year of first publication. (I'm sure this is problematic due to legacy issues)
  2. Maintain a consistent CB style which skews towards (2nd Series), (3rd Series), (4th Series), etc.

Personally, I prefer the GCD style because, at least, there's some semblance of date on the label. If the series identification choice must be maintained, can an outlier like Metal Men (Mini-Series) be corrected?

Thanks,
Walt

 

 

 

Metal Men.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several titles that work the same way and it makes me crazy too. 

Wait until you look at Star Wars.  The first listing is Marvel from 1977 and makes perfect sense.  The following title listing is Star Wars (2nd Series) from Marvel, 2015-present although it ended in 2020.  The third series is also Marvel and started in 2020.  Never mind those pesky Dark horse series with the same titles that ran 1998-2006 and 2013-2014. 

I know CB and how to find the series I'm looking for....most of the time.  Imagine a newb looking for a book though.  There are a total of 15 series titled just "Star Wars" (16 if you count Dark Horse's "The Star Wars") with 5 of them being published by Marvel when you throw in the Canadian Edition and the Newspaper Strip books.  Granted, Metal Men is different in that they all came from DC but ultimately it's the same inconsistent cataloging.  Personally, I would prefer the title followed by the year.  My second choice is the title with the publisher in parentheses and then the year. 

More than once I have tried to enter what I sincerely believed to be a new title only to later learn that those books were already in CB just under a different publisher from the one actually listed in/on the book.  I'm struggling to name any now other than "G.I. Joe, a Real American Hero" which was Marvel's baby from #1-155.  IDW took the reins at #155.5 but it's still listed under the Marvel title.  Then you have Fantastic Comics (Image) is was literally created with the intent of being the next issue of Fantastic Comics (Fox) but received its own listing even though it was #24.  Crack Comics has two entries, one from the original Quality series and a second titled "Crack Comics (2nd Series)" even though it was the same thing that Fantastic Comics (Image) was, a part of what they called the "The Next Issue Project."  They also did Silver Streak the same way as Crack calling the single issue from Image the 2nd series.  I prefer the way CGD does it with each new publisher getting a new entry with a notation in the previous publisher's title to the effect of "numbering continues in Title X from Publisher Y." 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Douglas W. McCratic said:

Personally, I would prefer the title followed by the year.  My second choice is the title with the publisher in parentheses and then the year. 

Absolutely agree! As well as...
 

Quote

I prefer the way CGD does it with each new publisher getting a new entry with a notation in the previous publisher's title to the effect of "numbering continues in Title X from Publisher Y."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it'll be hard, if not impossible, to change any of these now, because it will mess up existing user data. It doesn't seem like inaccurate or inconsistent titles and series can be changed once they've been added, unless they are very new (I just submitted a correction to Doctor Who: Origins, which included a misspelled Orgins, but I think the first issue is still upcoming and the title can be changed without harm). Even things as simple as Batman: Black and White being rendered as Batman: Black & White for the third series only (when it appears the actual comics used "and") seem to be stuck the way they are.

I don't know the technological limitations involved here, and I know publishers don't make it easy with all the variants, reboots, and subtle title differences, but I sure wish it were possible to make title changes and have users' quantities for those titles shifted automatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Randall is correct, changing longstanding titles now makes things problematic b/c existing users' inventory data would be turned into a mess.  It's a legacy of a nomenclature decision that was made many many years ago when the re-re-re-relaunching of titles didn't happen and nobody could have predicted that it would become such a commonplace thing.  

I agree that designating repeated titles by volume # is much more cumbersome as compared to designating them by the year that they launched, and several sites already do this.  (Marvel also does this when describing the contents of their trade paperback and hardcover collections.)  

Long ago (i.e., on the old CB msg boards) I suggested that this problem could be overcome if CB's content updates would (with the user's permission) move existing inventory to newly corrected titles... for example, if CB changed the existing Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series), then the update would give a pop-up window for the user to give permission for their old SW 1st series inventory to all be moved to the new SW 1977 series title.  Nothing ever came of it, and my knowledge of programming is insignificant enough for me to have no clue as to whether my suggestion could actually be implemented.  But if it could, it would allow CB to do a lot of clean-up that would make the program much more accessible to brand new users.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gregory Hecht said:

Long ago (i.e., on the old CB msg boards) I suggested that this problem could be overcome if CB's content updates would (with the user's permission) move existing inventory to newly corrected titles... for example, if CB changed the existing Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series), then the update would give a pop-up window for the user to give permission for their old SW 1st series inventory to all be moved to the new SW 1977 series title.  Nothing ever came of it, and my knowledge of programming is insignificant enough for me to have no clue as to whether my suggestion could actually be implemented.  But if it could, it would allow CB to do a lot of clean-up that would make the program much more accessible to brand new users.  

I definitely expected as much but I still think it's sad since ComicBase is the defacto comic book database. I realize that CB is nearing 30 years old but there is so much mess in it that it makes finding some things near impossible. One has to constantly think how some might have cataloged a title. Did they:

  1. Lop it on to the same title from another publisher (eg. Blondie)
  2. Throw multiple different titles under the same pot (eg. ...
    1. Spider-Man Comics Weekly #1-157
    2. Super Spider-Man with the Super-Heroes #158-198
    3. Super Spider-Man and the Titans #199-230
    4. Super Spider-Man and Captain Britain #231-253 ( no title, number or date in the indicia)
    5. Super Spider-Man #254-310
    6. Spider-Man Comic #311-333
    7. The Spectacular Spider-Man Weekly #334-375
    8. Spider-Man and Hulk Weekly #376-424
    9. Spider-Man and Hulk Team-Up #425-449
    10. Super Spider-Man TV Comic #450-499
    11. Spider-Man #500-552
    12. Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends #553-578
    13. Spider-Man #579-633
    14. The Spider-Man Comic #634-650
    15. Spidey Comic #651-666

      All this leads to is someone creating a new title because they can't find an existing one (e.g. Super Spider-Man and The Titans)
  3. Ignore the indicia and add it to the bottom of a different title.
  4. Not pay attention to how other titles were organized. In the case of Metal Men or Star Wars or titles that have multiple series, scroll through the list hoping that the logo on the comic associated with the title is representative enough that you choose the correct before trying again. One of the selling points that Pete, himself, makes is how labeling your comics makes it easier to organize and find them -- that may be true for a few titles but this lack of consistency makes that claim nearly preposterous in quite a few cases.
  5. Not know the start of a title and just guess locking the first issue in stone and making the addition of previous issues impossible (e.g. DC Coming Comics)

And those are just a sample of the cases that I've come across. I have a monstrous collection that I want to organize and these inconsistencies make it difficult to do so. I can't believe that these issues can't be resolved in a database (which is really the point of a database and that is to resolve inconsistencies).

I'm hoping the ultimate answer is not "well it's set in stone now" so we can't do anything about it. Because then everyone is at the whim and mercy of whomever enters a new title and all everyone can do is hope that they enter it correctly. That seems like the worst possible answer.

--Walt 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  1. 57 minutes ago, Walt Grogan said:

    2.  Throw multiple different titles under the same pot (eg. ...

    1. Spider-Man Comics Weekly #1-157
    2. Super Spider-Man with the Super-Heroes #158-198
    3. Super Spider-Man and the Titans #199-230
    4. Super Spider-Man and Captain Britain #231-253 ( no title, number or date in the indicia)
    5. Super Spider-Man #254-310
    6. Spider-Man Comic #311-333
    7. The Spectacular Spider-Man Weekly #334-375
    8. Spider-Man and Hulk Weekly #376-424
    9. Spider-Man and Hulk Team-Up #425-449
    10. Super Spider-Man TV Comic #450-499
    11. Spider-Man #500-552
    12. Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends #553-578
    13. Spider-Man #579-633
    14. The Spider-Man Comic #634-650
    15. Spidey Comic #651-666

This is the one that drives me flipping insane!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be oversimplifying here but how is changing a title any different from changing a format?  Comics to magazines, comics to books, and so on have been done with relative ease.  When the changes began, it was a little confusing but now it's just routine.  The corrected title is added, information for the old one ceases to be updated or even recognized and it comes up in the "Unrecognized Items" list following an update so users know to move the items in the old title to the new one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Douglas W. McCratic said:

I may be oversimplifying here but how is changing a title any different from changing a format?  Comics to magazines, comics to books, and so on have been done with relative ease.  When the changes began, it was a little confusing but now it's just routine.  The corrected title is added, information for the old one ceases to be updated or even recognized and it comes up in the "Unrecognized Items" list following an update so users know to move the items in the old title to the new one.  

I *think* that in current practice the difference is that there is a function in the ComicBase program that allows you to change the media type of a title that you are viewing.  This has the effect of allowing the user to shift their existing inventory for the old title that was in the incorrect media category to the new title that is in the correct media category.  I suspect that this is relatively easy to program because the title name doesn't change at all, just the media category in which that title resides.  

For titles that get renamed, it's a little more complicated b/c you'd need to have a simple way for the user to point their inventory in the old version of the title to the new version since there are thousands of titles in the database... this is why I suggested that it might be easiest to do the inventory shift during the content update that actually adds the new version of the title. 

This isn't to say that the problem can't be solved, only that I am guessing that this is the reason why changing a title's name is more complicated than changing a title's format.  (If I'm way off base on that, I am sure that @Peter R. Bickford can set the record straight!)    

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Douglas W. McCratic said:

I may be oversimplifying here but how is changing a title any different from changing a format?  Comics to magazines, comics to books, and so on have been done with relative ease.  When the changes began, it was a little confusing but now it's just routine.  The corrected title is added, information for the old one ceases to be updated or even recognized and it comes up in the "Unrecognized Items" list following an update so users know to move the items in the old title to the new one.  

And, as an additional follow-up to your post:

The present arrangement for shifting a title from one media type to another works, but IMO it isn't something that works as seamlessly as you suggest.  There are plenty of users who don't check their "Unrecognized Items" list often enough to see that they need to do the work of shifting their inventory from an obsolete title to a replacement title that is in a different media category.  Or, if they do check the list, they don't necessarily realize that something on their unrecognized list is in fact in the database but is merely moved to a new media category.  
Exhibit 1A, Exhibit 1B
Exhibit 2

The current arrangement asks users to manually curate their database(s).  Ideally, users should only have to spend time curating their collections and entering them into their database(s), not curating their database contents and structure.  IMO this should be something that gets attention for the next version of ComicBase.  

EDITED TO ADD:

In fact, a wise man once said:

On 1/31/2022 at 9:46 PM, Douglas W. McCratic said:

I like the idea of CB automatically changing the category.  I may be over (or under) thinking it, but changing categories is a bit of a headache.  I typically have to rename the original category's entry to keep track of which is moving.  It seems like they move when I look them up, with the most recent usually being higher on the list. 

🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Gregory Hecht said:

The current arrangement asks users to manually curate their database(s).  Ideally, users should only have to spend time curating their collections and entering them into their database(s), not curating their database contents and structure.  IMO this should be something that gets attention for the next version of ComicBase.  

EDITED TO ADD:

In fact, a wise man once said:

🙂

I was young and foolish then!  I've grown and matured significantly over these last two months! 

It's still not easy moving across formats but the thing that makes doing that difficult would be solved in renaming the titles.  What I had difficulty with was that both the comic and the magazine version of "Rampaging Hulk" were titled identically so when it came time to change formats I had to pick from a list and didn't know which was which.  They read exactly the same, so it was/is difficult (for me anyway) to know which was which.  My solution was to name the title that would be soon deleted to "Rampaging Hulk COMIC" before transferring anything.  This is still how I do it.  It's not exactly fast but it is accurate. 

We get a notice when a new version of CB is available with a list of changes being made, why not give users a notice of a monumental shift in cataloging titles or a notice urging them to check the Unrecognized Titles list?  I agree that it should be significantly easier but that simply doesn't appear to be in the cards. 

 

 

I honestly believe I do spend more time curating my database than my collection.  Adding pics, correcting info, and so on has become a hobby unto itself. 

Edited by Douglas W. McCratic
Neglected to comment on the first sentence in the quote
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth noting that the confusion over incorrect and inconsistent titles in ComicBase cascades over to Atomic Avenue as well. So while we ComicBase users can figure things out and learn to work with them as they are, random shoppers using Atomic Avenue may not have a clue. It requires a bit extra to find issues of Donald Duck published by Gladstone, for example, if you don't realize that they will be listed under the title Donald Duck (Walt Disney's...) where the publisher is listed as Dell. I'm not yet selling on Atomic Avenue, but I imagine that more clarity and accuracy would positively affect sales.

There are also seemingly random titles that are sometimes assigned to specials and FCBD comics. I've had difficulty finding some of those in the database. My most recent example: I just picked up a copy of a Doctor Who comic book that was exclusively released for the 2015 San Diego Comic Con. The cover logo only says Doctor Who, with 2015 Exclusive San Diego Comic Con International in the bottom corner. The indicia says Doctor Who: San Diego Comic Con Exclusive. I didn't find this among the existing Doctor Who entries, so I added it with the title from the indicia to my database. Only later did I accidentally stumble upon its existing entry: it's under Doctor Who: The Twelfth Doctor as #0. There are a few problems with this: (1) There is no "#0" anywhere on the actual comic book; (2) The San Diego comic does not precede the publication of #1--it came out around the time of #10; (3) Although the San Diego comic features the twelfth Doctor and is related to that series, the words The Twelfth Doctor appear nowhere in its title, unlike the series; and (4) While I might understand an argument for keeping the San Diego comic under this series as a Special Edition instead of #0, other Doctor Who convention specials are listed under their own titles, not as special editions of regular series, so there would still be a lack of consistency. It's a problematic, hard-to-find entry, yet I don't think it can be fixed without screwing up someone else's existing inventory.

Publishers have definitely made a mess of things to untangle,  and they are not themselves consistent, so discrepancies are bound to occur. I only wish they were easier to correct when pointed out, with some mechanism to transfer users' existing quantities to the corrected title or issue number. I understand that there are technological limitations in place, and circumventing them is well beyond me, but I hope someday this can be worked out.
 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ThisGuy.gif.4a02a8a4f14aa43f8ccfcd5ba149d470.gif

Sorry, that one makes me giggle every time.

So yeah, I agree with everything above and have been bringing it up from time to time.  My personal fix has been moving the various FCBD books (the actual ones) into their respective titles, entering them as FCBD 2017 or whatever year they were released.  An alternative that I originally came up with was creating a "Free Comic Book Day" title for each year, putting all the titles in alphabetical order and then entering them 1, 2, 3,...  I'm really glad I didn't do that now as the individual issues in their respective titles works really well.  Additionally, I make it a point to add "Free Comic Book Day 20xx" to the notes so I have a fighting chance to locate all of the individual books for any given year.  I've been working on pulling together every FCBD book and have been grouping them by year in my collection.

I've struggled with Atomic Avenue as well.  I'm frustrated with myself for never thinking of trying to add it in order to make my case.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of creating a new title, porting over a user's existing stock, and then deleting the old title, I think that there might possibly be another way to accomplish the same thing.  

CB could issue a program update that (for example) looks to see if the user has the title Star Wars (1st series) in their database(s).  If they do, the update says something like: "This update will rename your existing title Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series).  All of your inventory and issue data will be preserved, only the title will be changed to match to master database.  Click "yes" to continue.  If you click "no", this update will keep your existing title and create a new, separate Star Wars (1977 series)."

For the users that click "yes", the updater will execute the "Modify Title" function to change the series title to Star Wars (1977 series).  

I imagine that something analogous could be done to change the Media Category for titles as well.  

I believe that the weekly content updates only import data into your database, so this kind of solution would almost certainly have to be done via a program update.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gregory Hecht said:

CB could issue a program update that (for example) looks to see if the user has the title Star Wars (1st series) in their database(s).  If they do, the update says something like: "This update will rename your existing title Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series).  All of your inventory and issue data will be preserved, only the title will be changed to match to master database.  Click "yes" to continue.  If you click "no", this update will keep your existing title and create a new, separate Star Wars (1977 series)."

I think it's a great idea, I'm just afraid this is going to die on the vine and I'll be complaining about it again the next time I come across a crazy title.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Douglas W. McCratic said:

So yeah, I agree with everything above and have been bringing it up from time to time.  My personal fix has been moving the various FCBD books (the actual ones) into their respective titles, entering them as FCBD 2017 or whatever year they were released.  An alternative that I originally came up with was creating a "Free Comic Book Day" title for each year, putting all the titles in alphabetical order and then entering them 1, 2, 3,...  I'm really glad I didn't do that now as the individual issues in their respective titles works really well.  Additionally, I make it a point to add "Free Comic Book Day 20xx" to the notes so I have a fighting chance to locate all of the individual books for any given year.  I've been working on pulling together every FCBD book and have been grouping them by year in my collection.

I've struggled with Atomic Avenue as well.  I'm frustrated with myself for never thinking of trying to add it in order to make my case.  


I often consider putting the correct titles in my own database and just letting them stick out as "unrecognized" titles and issues when updates happen, but then my corrected titles and issues would never get updates, as they would no longer match Human Computing's master database. As one of my reasons for cataloguing my comics is to get documented value information for insurance (and also my curiosity), I want my values to be updated, so I stick with the ComicBase standard, even when it makes me cringe a little.

I'll never be able to watch or participate in a livestream as it happens, but I've been catching up on the archived versions. This does at least have the benefit of allowing me to fast-forward the occasional conservative monologue, which I often find off-putting (no prizes for guessing that my views tend to fall toward the other end of the spectrum). Other than that, I've enjoyed the livestreams and learned a few things. I would like to see a discussion of these titling problems.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't moved on to putting my own titles in but moving the FCBD issues doesn't matter much.  Thankfully the FCBD issues don't see a lot of action in their pricing. There are a few that have climbed a little but the vast majority stay at "cover price."   I get what you're saying though.  The lack of pricing would be a complete nightmare especially on long runs.  

The FCBD issues that make me really crazy are the ones that reprint some or all of a regular issue.  The first one I remember finding (or not finding, technically) was Savage Dragon #148.  I may even have submitted the FCBD version as a correction a few times.  I understand that it has #148 on the cover but it's a FCBD issue.  I listed mine as FCBD #2009.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Randall J. Paske said:

I'll never be able to watch or participate in a livestream as it happens, but I've been catching up on the archived versions. This does at least have the benefit of allowing me to fast-forward the occasional conservative monologue, which I often find off-putting (no prizes for guessing that my views tend to fall toward the other end of the spectrum). Other than that, I've enjoyed the livestreams and learned a few things. I would like to see a discussion of these titling problems.

That's my feeling as well for the same reason.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a shame that there will be no action on this as there are remedies to fix titles. I was stunned to learn that the foreign key that links titles and items together is the title itself and not a unique identifier of some kind. I understand this is a legacy problem and sympathize but it seems strange that the answer is inaction especially for a product that emphasizes organization.

At worst, a new title field could be implemented that is curated by ComicBase following a well-defined standard and that could be activated via a preference.

Until then, if ever, I guess we'll have to live with the existing disorganization.

 ☹️

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Walt Grogan said:

I was stunned to learn that the foreign key that links titles and items together is the title itself and not a unique identifier of some kind.

I don't fully understand this statement but I believe it follows with my earlier comment about an identifier on each title that was not the title itself.  Again, I'm not a database guy but what if the titles as they are now were to become the "foreign key" on some titles?  It would only need to be done on titles that are being updated.  

I seriously doubt we are doing presenting anything that hasn't been looked at before but sometimes this kind of discussion is what it takes to come up with a new solution.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Walt Grogan said:

It's a shame that there will be no action on this as there are remedies to fix titles. I was stunned to learn that the foreign key that links titles and items together is the title itself and not a unique identifier of some kind. I understand this is a legacy problem and sympathize but it seems strange that the answer is inaction especially for a product that emphasizes organization.

At worst, a new title field could be implemented that is curated by ComicBase following a well-defined standard and that could be activated via a preference.

Until then, if ever, I guess we'll have to live with the existing disorganization.

 ☹️

I watched the archived livestream last night. I thought Pete's explanation of the problem was clear, but I'm still not sure why something couldn't be implemented (as per Gregory's suggestions above) to make changes and allow users to accept them so we wouldn't have to settle for (and compound) past errors and inconsistencies. I completely understand not wanting to make users move all their inventory after a title correction--I don't want to do that! But can't it be automated, with an option to decline for those with a reason to do so? Their titles would then stand out as "unrecognized" after updates, but currently my titles stand out as unrecognized if I correct them.

It seems somewhat analogous to the problem with OneDrive, which is something else that caused me a lot of grief. I eventually got it sorted out, but I spent a few hours going through the information, figuring out what to do, and fighting OneDrive to straighten it all out on my system. (It sounded simpler than it was.) The OneDrive situation was problematic for enough users that they've now devised a way for ComicBase to handle the move as long as you accept the action presented in a dialog box. That would have saved me some grief. Couldn't title and series corrections be handled with a similar approach? Display a dialog box and let the user decide if they want ComicBase to take action for them?

From a technological view, the inability to correct titles in software designed for organization (without causing a lot of headaches for users) is a bug that should be fixed. From an archival view, the inclusion and perpetuation of inaccurate information is a strike against the product's credibility. From a capitalistic view, information presented incorrectly or inconsistently sometimes makes buying and selling more difficult, because you can't buy what you can't find. There are multiple good reasons to find a solution to this problem. It doesn't reflect well on an otherwise great product.
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After giving this just a little bit of thought, here's a solution that could solve the problem. Caveat: I'm suggesting this without knowing the intricacies of the DB structure.

  1. Create a new field called DisplayTitle in the table that contains Title.
  2. Copy the values of the existing Title field into DisplayTitle.
  3. Use this DisplayTitle for searching and display.
  4. When a new title is created either by CB or a user, copy that value into the DisplayTitle field as well.
  5. If a DisplayTitle needs to be changed, CB changes it and voila, after the next update, the title can be found and sorted correctly.

This would require a fairly strict naming protocol using the indicia and year of first publication as the name...

something like Metal Men (1993 Series)

although even if it gets messed up, it can be easily changed.

This solution addresses some of the problems that @Peter R. Bickford brought up in the call yesterday.

  1. It doesn't violate the foreign key constraints between Title and Item.
  2. It easily allows for renaming the DisplayTitle if the indicia changes between solicitation and publication.
  3. There is no requirement to shift data around in the tables and potentially mess up a user's data, since it's simply a DisplayTitle change.

I'd love to see something like this implemented.

--Walt

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...