mrming
Member
Amazing stuff larso - thanks for coming on here and answering questions. Love the fact that you as the sailor had the balls to continue on the mountaineering part of the expedition.
Chasing Shackleton TV Series
- Thread starter Murphness
- Start date
Presuming Ed
Super Anarchist
Been done.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286870/Sailors-complete-Captain-Blighs-epic-journey-mutiny-Bounty.html
Great to hear details of this trip. Superb stuff!
phillysailor
Super Anarchist
- 9,354
- 4,117
Phenomenal accomplishment, Mr Larsen! Thanks for sharing so much here on SA.
Although intrusive, I appreciate the allowance made for modern equipment which enabled your team to remain as safe as possible and to share the experience with so many. Obviously, your lives were in jeopardy much of the time. A fall, a mistake while cooking, falling rock… many ways to get hurt at sea and on land. It would be difficult to follow the story with unalloyed enthusiasm if there was no allowance made for modern equipment and communications.
WO2 Barry Gray really came off as an impressive sort. I loved his considering the crews' disgusted reactions to the slop he'd just heroically managed to cook down below. "Yeah. It's gonna be quite tough, 16 days. Quite tough indeed." A lesser man would've told the crew they should shut up and like it. Always motivated from deep within. Quiet, no drama. I think he'd be quite comfortable with Shackleton's men.
Couldn't leave the computer for three straight episodes. Glad you're happy and safe. I'm sure Tim Jarvis and Alexandra Shackleton (I'm assuming that was her with your team toasting to Sir Ernest at the graveside scene) will always appreciate and vouch for your loyalty and fortitude. Well done, sir. Very well done!
Although intrusive, I appreciate the allowance made for modern equipment which enabled your team to remain as safe as possible and to share the experience with so many. Obviously, your lives were in jeopardy much of the time. A fall, a mistake while cooking, falling rock… many ways to get hurt at sea and on land. It would be difficult to follow the story with unalloyed enthusiasm if there was no allowance made for modern equipment and communications.
WO2 Barry Gray really came off as an impressive sort. I loved his considering the crews' disgusted reactions to the slop he'd just heroically managed to cook down below. "Yeah. It's gonna be quite tough, 16 days. Quite tough indeed." A lesser man would've told the crew they should shut up and like it. Always motivated from deep within. Quiet, no drama. I think he'd be quite comfortable with Shackleton's men.
Couldn't leave the computer for three straight episodes. Glad you're happy and safe. I'm sure Tim Jarvis and Alexandra Shackleton (I'm assuming that was her with your team toasting to Sir Ernest at the graveside scene) will always appreciate and vouch for your loyalty and fortitude. Well done, sir. Very well done!
Hi Larso
Just finished watching all the episodes...fascinating. As an MD, I was especially fascinated by the interaction that you(?) had your expedition MD. If it was not you, then I am sure you know what I am referring to. I am curious if that interaction has been settled in an amicable manner. My take was that you all were pretty comfortable back in the early 20th century, yet the accompanying MD was expected to perform in the 21st century, using all his skills to provide the best care/advice possible. Now, I am not sure if the contract you made with the authorities insisted on an MD on the expedition, which in of itself might explain the colliding of wills we saw.
This is not the first time that two eras collided in the Antarctic. The classic example to me, at any rate was the "race" between Scott and Amundsen. Scott was a brave explorer modeled on those exploits of the 19th Century. His "adversary", Amundsen was pretty much a man of the times. The clash that ensued almost had a predictable outcome...well, predictable, at any rate, with hindsight!
Congratulations again. We too, when we were in SG poured our rum ( or at least some of it) onto "The Boss'" grave...although it is rumored he is actually buried near there, but not at that exact spot. Grytviken is a pretty desolate spot, but quite beautiful.
Just finished watching all the episodes...fascinating. As an MD, I was especially fascinated by the interaction that you(?) had your expedition MD. If it was not you, then I am sure you know what I am referring to. I am curious if that interaction has been settled in an amicable manner. My take was that you all were pretty comfortable back in the early 20th century, yet the accompanying MD was expected to perform in the 21st century, using all his skills to provide the best care/advice possible. Now, I am not sure if the contract you made with the authorities insisted on an MD on the expedition, which in of itself might explain the colliding of wills we saw.
This is not the first time that two eras collided in the Antarctic. The classic example to me, at any rate was the "race" between Scott and Amundsen. Scott was a brave explorer modeled on those exploits of the 19th Century. His "adversary", Amundsen was pretty much a man of the times. The clash that ensued almost had a predictable outcome...well, predictable, at any rate, with hindsight!
Congratulations again. We too, when we were in SG poured our rum ( or at least some of it) onto "The Boss'" grave...although it is rumored he is actually buried near there, but not at that exact spot. Grytviken is a pretty desolate spot, but quite beautiful.
phillysailor
Super Anarchist
- 9,354
- 4,117
@ Fairwinds… I thought that the doctor did an admirable job keeping his cool and his patients well-informed. I know that he felt his role was incredibly awkward, and it was both insightful and a bit sad that he felt it necessary to buttress his opinion with that of European experts. He tried to show his compassion by giving the benched videographer a rather forced hug, but I don't think he'd been in the position of expedition physician before, and I now view that complicated job quite differently based on the "good ship lollipop vs true explorer" dynamic that characterized the S Georgia layover prior to the hike.
Civilian MDs believing in patient autonomy define their job as informing the patient to the best of their ability, and arriving at a plan together to best meet goals and expectations. Military MDs are trying to maintain optimum unit effectiveness. They report to their CO, not to the patient.
To whom did this MD report? It seems there was considerable confusion. That he did his job perfectly according to his own expectation doesn't mean he necessarily did the job well from the perspective of expedition success. Was he supposed to discuss his initial findings with T Jarvis first, before bluntly discussing them, on film, with the patient? Just that aspect of the interview was horrible. "Turn the camera off" the patient said, and then proceeds to share his raw emotional reaction with team members and expedition leader, while the audio continues to record? As an MD, I found that intensely disturbing, if riveting. I probably should have skipped the section, but then I am sure he had the opportunity to delete the section, and courageously decided to share.
Like I said, riveting. These absorbing details are entirely relevant to documenting the realities of expeditions of this sort.
Civilian MDs believing in patient autonomy define their job as informing the patient to the best of their ability, and arriving at a plan together to best meet goals and expectations. Military MDs are trying to maintain optimum unit effectiveness. They report to their CO, not to the patient.
To whom did this MD report? It seems there was considerable confusion. That he did his job perfectly according to his own expectation doesn't mean he necessarily did the job well from the perspective of expedition success. Was he supposed to discuss his initial findings with T Jarvis first, before bluntly discussing them, on film, with the patient? Just that aspect of the interview was horrible. "Turn the camera off" the patient said, and then proceeds to share his raw emotional reaction with team members and expedition leader, while the audio continues to record? As an MD, I found that intensely disturbing, if riveting. I probably should have skipped the section, but then I am sure he had the opportunity to delete the section, and courageously decided to share.
Like I said, riveting. These absorbing details are entirely relevant to documenting the realities of expeditions of this sort.
@phillysailor
I agree with you, mostly!
I think the key to understanding his role is to know to whom he was responsible and by whom he was appointed. If he was a "last minute" decision based upon the needs of those who gave the expedition permission, then perhaps his role was not that clearly defined. So, for example, the role of the Australis skipper in the case of preventing imminent jeopardy seemed to have been well discussed, and implemented when needed.
Your observation that "Civilian MDs believing in patient autonomy define their job as informing the patient to the best of their ability, and arriving at a plan together to best meet goals and expectations" is correct, but obviously open to interpretation, as to the best needs of the expedition. If the best "needs" is to be understood as doing all that could be done to fulfill the aim of following Shackleton's footsteps, then that would be correct. But, if the best needs were to ensure the former, but also not to put the entire expedition at risk for a very dangerous rescue, then that is another story. As I said, it really does depend upon the contract he signed, or his understanding of the terms of participation.
There is one other aspect of pt - MD relationship which clearly does not play a role here. An appeals court judge many years ago, ruled that patients have the right to refuse treatment, but do not have the right to demand bad treatment. All of us have been in that position, and often our only option for those rare but impossible patients is to suggest/demand they seek care from another MD. This was clearly not an option.
I agree with your assessment in every other aspect. It was a terrible position to be in, and being just the "doc" I suspect these detailed "what ifs" might never have been discussed. It did highlight a very true dilemma never faced by Shackleton, and maybe that is the aspect of this interaction from which we should learn?
But, I think what might have been lost is the incredible feat they achieved by just crossing Drake's passage. That alone would have made history and been an incredible achievement. But, putting aside the MD hat, watching them reach their goals, despite incredibly challenging (modern) moral and physical decisions, was just as riveting as the original rescue must have been, had Shackleton had a few Go-Pros!!!
Mind you it is interesting how both media ( a beautifully written biography, amazing photography, early cinematography ) and all the modern technologies ( HD video etc ) are equally compelling. Nature, it appears is oblivious to all.
I agree with you, mostly!
I think the key to understanding his role is to know to whom he was responsible and by whom he was appointed. If he was a "last minute" decision based upon the needs of those who gave the expedition permission, then perhaps his role was not that clearly defined. So, for example, the role of the Australis skipper in the case of preventing imminent jeopardy seemed to have been well discussed, and implemented when needed.
Your observation that "Civilian MDs believing in patient autonomy define their job as informing the patient to the best of their ability, and arriving at a plan together to best meet goals and expectations" is correct, but obviously open to interpretation, as to the best needs of the expedition. If the best "needs" is to be understood as doing all that could be done to fulfill the aim of following Shackleton's footsteps, then that would be correct. But, if the best needs were to ensure the former, but also not to put the entire expedition at risk for a very dangerous rescue, then that is another story. As I said, it really does depend upon the contract he signed, or his understanding of the terms of participation.
There is one other aspect of pt - MD relationship which clearly does not play a role here. An appeals court judge many years ago, ruled that patients have the right to refuse treatment, but do not have the right to demand bad treatment. All of us have been in that position, and often our only option for those rare but impossible patients is to suggest/demand they seek care from another MD. This was clearly not an option.
I agree with your assessment in every other aspect. It was a terrible position to be in, and being just the "doc" I suspect these detailed "what ifs" might never have been discussed. It did highlight a very true dilemma never faced by Shackleton, and maybe that is the aspect of this interaction from which we should learn?
But, I think what might have been lost is the incredible feat they achieved by just crossing Drake's passage. That alone would have made history and been an incredible achievement. But, putting aside the MD hat, watching them reach their goals, despite incredibly challenging (modern) moral and physical decisions, was just as riveting as the original rescue must have been, had Shackleton had a few Go-Pros!!!
Mind you it is interesting how both media ( a beautifully written biography, amazing photography, early cinematography ) and all the modern technologies ( HD video etc ) are equally compelling. Nature, it appears is oblivious to all.
Last edited by a moderator:
paularsen1
Member
- 110
- 0
Hi Fairwinds and Phillysailor, The role of the MD was a very interesting dynamic within this expedition. It really highlighted the problems of trying to re-create a legendary feat of survival in a modern world. I believe there was confusion and communication issues here. I don't want to say who was right or wrong as I wasn't privvy to everything that was said/agreed before the trip or even during. I can only comment on what I saw from my own perspective in the middle.Hi Larso
Just finished watching all the episodes...fascinating. As an MD, I was especially fascinated by the interaction that you(?) had your expedition MD. If it was not you, then I am sure you know what I am referring to. I am curious if that interaction has been settled in an amicable manner. My take was that you all were pretty comfortable back in the early 20th century, yet the accompanying MD was expected to perform in the 21st century, using all his skills to provide the best care/advice possible. Now, I am not sure if the contract you made with the authorities insisted on an MD on the expedition, which in of itself might explain the colliding of wills we saw.
This is not the first time that two eras collided in the Antarctic. The classic example to me, at any rate was the "race" between Scott and Amundsen. Scott was a brave explorer modeled on those exploits of the 19th Century. His "adversary", Amundsen was pretty much a man of the times. The clash that ensued almost had a predictable outcome...well, predictable, at any rate, with hindsight!
Congratulations again. We too, when we were in SG poured our rum ( or at least some of it) onto "The Boss'" grave...although it is rumored he is actually buried near there, but not at that exact spot. Grytviken is a pretty desolate spot, but quite beautiful.
The problems begin to arise when you take into account such issues as insurance and health and safety responsibilities. Members of the team were down there as paid professionals working for Discovery. If the Dr said that he had seen nerve damage and symptoms on one of the team then he felt he would be obliged to share that information if asked about it later i.e. if something went wrong on the crossing and there was an insurance claim. Alex (the Dr) would then call to find the details of the insurance policy and discuss it further with Discovery back in the UK. Once this process had begun and the responsibilities had been placed... people tend to take the safe options. You can imagine how the discussion would go at a later date if someone who was advised/warned of a pre-existing state i.e. onset of "trench-foot" went ahead and did further permanent damage and lodged a claim. So this process would be going on on the support boat and what you saw on the documentary was the point where this process was introduced to the project leader. I think that Tim had envisaged that the doctor was there to help in cases of more defined injury/emergency and as someone to be referenced on camera for the purpose of the documentary. The whole trench-foot thing kind of snuck up on us all. I actually first mentioned it on only day 2 of our sea crossing. As I massaged my white toes down below, I casually asked Baz what it was to which he gave a full description. I guess we never really thought it would affect us as swiftly as it did as we had not been through the prior ordeals that the 'originals' had. For some it just got worse as the trip went on. As Nick, Seb and I were expected to be the back-up 'mules' for the crossing of Sth Georgia, we would be wearing modern gear and go back onto the Australis whilst we waited for a weather window once we reached Sth Georgia. For that reason we were the ones to jump in the freezing water when we hit the shore. Our boots filled up and we probably spent too much time filming and celebrating on shore. It really started to hurt. this was probably the nail in the coffin for Nick and Seb. We still thought things would come good once we dried out in the warmth of The Australis.The next day we began to know we had a problem as Nick began to struggle with walking and the Dr became involved. Interestingly, when I read back on the original accounts, clear mention is made of this problem and the affect it had on the original crew. I was surprised (in hindsight) how we had figured we would naturally not have the same issue. Perhaps this highlights how similar our clothing was or that we were somewhere on the same 'line' as the original crew (They may well have been more up the bloody cold/hard,old bastard corner whilst we were at the warmer/soft, modern guy scale) but the end result was similar.
To see someone like Nick get taken out by this was disheartening. Nick would never take the soft option and I knew there was no doubt it was the real deal. I listened in to the debate and reasoning on the Australis. The Dr did what he felt was his responsibility in sharing his diagnosis... and the implications of it. Nicks case was a no-brainer. He would have physically struggled to walk. I guess when it began to cross over to slightly more vague cases that the problem arose. Once the Dr realised that other team members were suffering then he began to play a bigger role in the potential outcome of the project. I think this came as a bit of a shock to Tim. You do have to consider Tims frame of mind and focus at this point. I think he let a little bit of a "them vs us" mentality creep in. Three of the team were sitting in damp, smelly original gear still on the AS hanging off a long stern line tied off the back of The Australis whilst everyone else was very cosy, well fed and washed at the other end of the line. There were times we were sort of left feeling guilty about this. It's easy to be cold, wet, thirsty or hungry when you have no option... but to have sweet relief so near by almost waving in your face is pretty tortuous. This stage of the game needed clear leadership and communication and for a while, as we sat and waited for a weather window for the crossing, things got a bit ugly.
It was actually a fascinating part of the whole experience. If the whole support boat thing just disappeared, we would have been in a very similar place as the originals. We would have had three people suffering with trench-foot who would have been left with the boat at Peggoty Bluff whilst three would have had to make a dash across the island to get help. As it was, we had a different objectives on our hands as we did have a support boat and a Documentary to film. The focus wasn't purely on getting a team across... but also in filming and supporting it. There were effectively three teams with their own responsibilities (expedition team, support i.e. The Australis, film crew... and the Dr as well perhaps as a lone fourth).
The documentary showed the stage where Tim was made aware of the discussions from onboard The Australis and the growing empowerment of the Dr to affect the outcome of what he felt was 'his' project. Imagine you have chosen to take on one of the greatest tales of survival, courage, leadership and resilience. Your house mortgaged to the hilt just to make this happen for everyone. You've actually made it this far and completed what you thought was the most difficult bit and now there is a very real possibility that you could actually, really make it... only to be told that someone else has stepped up to say they can call the whole thing off and head back to the Falklands because someone has cold feet. This situation needs to be handled in a proper manner with clear heads. I think Tim felt as if the Dr had overstepped his position and as Philly said... he should have reported directly to Tim to explain his diagnosis and its implications i.e. both physical and to such things as ongoing liability. To have it broken to him in the way it was and on camera was obviously a shock. I could see it from both sides. I had listened to the debate on the Australis but also fully sympathised with Tims state of mind and focus on finishing his project off successfully. The problem needed communication. Eventually this is what happened. Tim called a meeting in a cave ashore and all the cards were laid on the table. He reminded everyone of the big picture and what we were doing whilst also explaining our roles. More than anything it got everyone in the one spot and helped break down the 'them and us' mentality and re-focus on the crossing.
The fact was that we were trying to do something that was bloody difficult and might result in some form of injury. In the end, and this is my belief, it had to come down to the individual in what they were willing to risk i.e. people with families to support have to be more protective of their livelihood. I felt that the damage I felt in my feet was in no way disabling but knew it wouldn't pass the Doctors inspection (he would ask you to close your eyes whilst he prodded your feet. You had to tell him when he was touching your foot or not. After many days in a warm, dry environment, this would tell him if there was ongoing nerve or circulation damage). Whilst I had big numb patches, I felt no pain walking and felt it was manageable in modern boots. I was willing to risk it and didn't want his diagnosis to affect mine or others thinking in my suitability for the crossing. Nick could barely walk so his case was black and white with or without a Dr's diagnosis. This might have made it easier to digest. Ed's case wasn't as severe but was bad enough to not only risk further, permanent damage but also likely hamper the progress of the crossing. We still wanted to do it in a fast dash as per the originals rather than a stop-start affair relying heavily on modern equipment to bivouac with. Ed also does films all sorts of extreme expeditions for a living (i.e. three times up Everest) so and permanent injury of this nature could have a significant effect on his future. These are all great, rock-solid guys so it was painful to see them have to give up on the crossing.
When the weather shut down our first attempt and left us with two guys (Tim and Baz) stuck up on a glacier in howling weather, the same scenario began to play out again. The 'Them and us' mentality crept back in only this time 'they' were far more remote. The Doctor now raised the possibility that he may make the call to evacuate Nick or Si to the Falklands on The Australis and hence end the expedition. His call was based on his diagnosis of the patient and also the current status of the crossing. In some ways he was second guessing the leadership and making his own judgements based on this. This was tough on both sides of the scratchy VHF radio used to communicate the arguments. Once again I was just sitting in the middle. To be honest... half my mind was still going "65 f*****g knots... hell yeah!!!". The fact that we had just successfully completed the whole Sailrocket thing by continually pushing on was obviously on my mind. I sympathised with Tim and the pressures he felt. I wanted to go up there, cross the 'them and us' divide and give them a big shot of confidence. I had to listen to the others as in their own fields they were a lot more experienced than me... but on the other hand, I felt I owed Baz, especially Baz, my confidence. He had calmly sat on the AS and trusted Nick and I to get them safely to Sth Georgia and now it was his rocky ocean. He's a highly experienced guy at the top of his game so if he thought it was worth a shot... then it would be a privilege to literally walk in his footsteps. It was.
Looking back, one of the things that really struck me about the whole experience was the insight you get to the day-to-day problems that face a group of people in that situation. Things aren't always clear and this is when you need solid leadership and everything that comes with it i.e. trust, communication and a sense of direction. I'm sure there were times when even Shackletons leadership was called into question. He would have made some wrong calls and this would have been discussed within groups within the team. Some of the guys probably downright disliked him at stages. In the end we see the big picture of what he achieved. Actually living through this you see it warts and all. All of those of you who have done long offshore trips will understand exactly what I'm talking about here. Forced into a tight, inescapable environment you have to ride the rollercoaster of everyones highs and lows. A person that you may have viewed with murderous intent during a late night sail change may well end up a friend for life once it's all over. We all have our good and bad moments. It's the leaders ability to deal with the small day-to-day stuff whilst keeping focus on the big picture that keeps everyone pulling in the same direction. Often they need the support of other members. I think overall we had a very good team.
The Dr's role in this trip should have been more considered and explained to all beforehand. I think, in this case, that Philly is right when he puts forward his case for how the Dr should communicate his findings. You would be naive to take on that trip and not expect there to potentially be some likelihood of physical injury. How you deal with it maybe should have been discussed in greater depth although, to be fair, despite there being tensions along the way, it all worked out fine. Some things have to be done on the hoof and some times you just have to end the discussions, rely on your ability to work it out... and go for it. We all learnt a lot from this trip and I'm happy to say that I know I will now have some new friends for life.
This ended up a lot longer reply than I expected.
Mr. Larson,
Thank you, spectacular!
Clean et al, I would subscribe for this thread or similar. But for the nominal funds I would ask not that the ads disappear but that a moderator be hired to winnow out the forum entries not at this level. Less anarchy I'm sure, just as sure that the site would have a higher valuation.
Thank you, spectacular!
Clean et al, I would subscribe for this thread or similar. But for the nominal funds I would ask not that the ads disappear but that a moderator be hired to winnow out the forum entries not at this level. Less anarchy I'm sure, just as sure that the site would have a higher valuation.
echo
Super Anarchist
Can I find it on Netflix?
Alex W
Super Anarchist
witoog
New member
Hi Larso,
Thanks very much for your thorough replies.
I was down in SG and Antarctica last year on the Russian/Australian expedition vessel the "Polar Explorer" and one of the highlights of my trip, apart from the stunning kayak excursions we did was seeing the Alexandra Shackleton when we left King Haakon Bay. We could just make the little boat out in the gathering gloom and I have never seen a boat roll and pitch like she was. It looked like you were lying to a drogue and someone came out and waved to us, possibly you. We all felt for you guys in that uncomfortable situation especially when we turned our warm little ship toward Elephant Island and left you in our wake wafting with aromas of roast pork.
Well done on a truly epic achievement, and undertaken with humility and respect.
What next?
Thanks very much for your thorough replies.
I was down in SG and Antarctica last year on the Russian/Australian expedition vessel the "Polar Explorer" and one of the highlights of my trip, apart from the stunning kayak excursions we did was seeing the Alexandra Shackleton when we left King Haakon Bay. We could just make the little boat out in the gathering gloom and I have never seen a boat roll and pitch like she was. It looked like you were lying to a drogue and someone came out and waved to us, possibly you. We all felt for you guys in that uncomfortable situation especially when we turned our warm little ship toward Elephant Island and left you in our wake wafting with aromas of roast pork.
Well done on a truly epic achievement, and undertaken with humility and respect.
What next?
- Moderator
- #73
Youtube killed it thanks to a Discovery infringement claim. It's available for free at PBS, probably in the UK on Discovery.co.uk, and widely available on Bittorrent, we'll see if we can find another free source, if anyone else catches one let us know. In this day and age you can watch pretty much anything with a little bit of work.
MSafiri
Member
Fcuk! wanted to watch it again....................;if you are looking for similar kinda fun, watch 90° South on youtube! that is a great movie from the golden age, last expedition of Scott, not much sailing though. Start looking for it on torrent sites
I had heard about this expedition but didn't know that the documentary had aired yet so downloaded all three episodes yesterday.
Wonder what Mr Shackleton would have thought about this trip since this was a personal trip and not a rescue mission like his.
Also makes you appreciate how far technology has come in just a 100 years.
Wonder what Mr Shackleton would have thought about this trip since this was a personal trip and not a rescue mission like his.
Also makes you appreciate how far technology has come in just a 100 years.
Last edited by a moderator:
Trimariner
Member
- 380
- 8
Buggar! links have been taken down and I only managed to get episode1 beforehand. 2&3??
@Larso
Thanks for that detailed "behind the scenes" look. There is nothing you said that I cannot agree with. I personally think the "interaction" we spoke about , if anything, adds to the documentary. The "modern" aspect of the expedition cannot simply be wished away, but has to be "managed" and in this case, I think was managed, in the end, extremely well. Hope you are taking a well earned respite. You have made us "armchair" adventurers jealous!
Thanks for that detailed "behind the scenes" look. There is nothing you said that I cannot agree with. I personally think the "interaction" we spoke about , if anything, adds to the documentary. The "modern" aspect of the expedition cannot simply be wished away, but has to be "managed" and in this case, I think was managed, in the end, extremely well. Hope you are taking a well earned respite. You have made us "armchair" adventurers jealous!
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
- Moderator
- #79
They're all up on various bit torrent sites in full HD under "Shackelton: Death or Glory", which was the Discovery UK title.
- Moderator
- #80
