Jump to content

Deatramentis Ink - Contamination Warning



Recommended Posts

Wow... I hope that the situation gets resolved. In the meanwhile, I feel the need to get some Sterilink.

My thoughts are as scattered as the frozen winds of November swept across the harvested fields of my mind. ~ Justin - damaging things since 1973

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • SamCapote

    18

  • Margana

    5

  • LisaN

    3

  • voop

    3

Top Posters In This Topic

Well it is certainly difficult to kill spores, and this filter paper I used is finer pore than coffee filter, but not at a level to block spores. I also did not autoclave the bottles. But certainly my expectation from talking to Giovani is that his Sterilink should have been strong enough to prevent a startup of fungal growth from spores, since spores are everywhere, floating around in dust, etc. Especially when he heard that I put 3 drops, rather than his recommended 1 drop--he is shocked that anything could grow. I am absolutely certain when the inks were transferred back to the cleaned bottles that it was pure, and crystal clear. I'll see what Giovani says, but I may try to find out what Nathan uses for antifungal with his Noodlers to see if I can get a stronger cidal agent. It's a damn shame that the lab grade Phenol I have is in some kind of oil vehicle, and is not miscible in the inks.

 

I'm now going to try Sporocidin which is widely used for killing everything. This is kind of like working on a good mystery, trying to solve it.

Edited by SamCapote

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is certainly difficult to kill spores, and this filter paper I used is finer pore than coffee filter, but not at a level to block spores. I also did not autoclave the bottles. But certainly my expectation from talking to Giovani is that his Sterilink should have been strong enough to prevent a startup of fungal growth from spores, since spores are everywhere, floating around in dust, etc. Especially when he heard that I put 3 drops, rather than his recommended 1 drop--he is shocked that anything could grow. I am absolutely certain when the inks were transferred back to the cleaned bottles that it was pure, and crystal clear. I'll see what Giovani says, but I may try to find out what Nathan uses for antifungal with his Noodlers to see if I can get a stronger cidal agent. It's a damn shame that the lab grade Phenol I have is in some kind of oil vehicle, and is not miscible in the inks.

 

I'm now going to try Sporocidin which is widely used for killing everything. This is kind of like working on a good mystery, trying to solve it.

Hopefully you won't create an unkillable ink-eating mutant! :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dang nature, you scary. But how did that happen? Is it some sort of genetically altered supermold that is hell-bent on taking over mankind? Well, your inks...

 

Good luck with this! I want to know everything that happens. I'll make popcorn! This is quite interesting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

ooooh. super mold! If it can kill Sterilink, maybe it can work on other thinks such as wastewater contaminants (which is a research project I'm working on, but we use shiitakes)

Sometimes the cat needs a new cat toy. And sometimes I need a new pen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lava Fountain

Hey Sam just came across this thread of your by chance & man am I ever amazed :yikes: @ your unsettling discovery :gaah: & thank you for your dedication & perseverence :clap1: in weeding this out & tryin gto get to the bottom of it so to speak. :ltcapd:

 

I don't have any of the DA Ink but was thinking about getting a few bottles of the Scented Ink, but now I am totally off them, maybe will consider the Herblin instead or just avoid them altogether & stay with my standard tried & true Inks from my usual fav brands as you know well what I speak thx the stars for that. :P

 

Great job & thx for taking the time, effort & expense to find out the cause & save us all the headache, hassle & expense you've experienced.

 

The only thing I want flowing from My Fountains is Lava :bunny01:

 

Cheers,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is certainly difficult to kill spores, and this filter paper I used is finer pore than coffee filter, but not at a level to block spores. I also did not autoclave the bottles. But certainly my expectation from talking to Giovani is that his Sterilink should have been strong enough to prevent a startup of fungal growth from spores, since spores are everywhere, floating around in dust, etc. Especially when he heard that I put 3 drops, rather than his recommended 1 drop--he is shocked that anything could grow. I am absolutely certain when the inks were transferred back to the cleaned bottles that it was pure, and crystal clear. I'll see what Giovani says, but I may try to find out what Nathan uses for antifungal with his Noodlers to see if I can get a stronger cidal agent. It's a damn shame that the lab grade Phenol I have is in some kind of oil vehicle, and is not miscible in the inks.

 

I'm now going to try Sporocidin which is widely used for killing everything. This is kind of like working on a good mystery, trying to solve it.

 

Now that we *are* in a rather particular community, with some with access to rather - ahm - potent lab facilities, just a thought: if it is fungal, wouldn't a good dose of radiation of the closed bottle get rid of matters (a dose strong enough to kill, rather than make them mutate into something even more "interesting" .....)

 

Note, i am not an expert on these matters by any stretch of imagination, but at a place where I worked some years back there was a legitimate use for various high-dose radiation sources. One of the techs working with those was an avid photographer and collector of old photo gear. Occasionally, he would acquire collectible camera lenses, where the coating and glass in the optical elements were attacked by fungus - something which he told me would infect other lenses if kept nearby. He found that some "after-hours-lab-work" with longish radiation exposures would completely wipe out any life and risk of both further fungus growth and propagation to other lenses....

 

Considering the diversity here on fpn, i would not be surprised if we had someone who had a more informed opinion on that matter than I. (my physics knowledge dates from classes taken before the electron was invented....or something...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow what an amazing thread. I am particularly impressed by how thorough the OP is, and by our shared interest in flashlights. He busted out the word "lumens" - LOVE IT!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for responses. The gamma radiation was a thought I had, as it would kill spores and everything, and I could likely get access to it, but I had concerns about the effect radiation can have on the various dye/pigment elements, chemicals, plastic lid, seal material, etc. The same concern is why I ruled out using heat or microwaves. I know there are filters with small enough pores to filter out spores (which are very difficult to kill), but you really need a vacuum pump and more elaborate setup to force the ink through that small pore size filter. I'm also trying to do this in a way that would be more practical and inexpensive for a fellow ink enthusiast.

 

Giovani has one of the DeAtramentis Yellow-Orange pie shaped bottles that I filtered, treated with 3 drops Sterilink, and after 2 months failed to prevent re-growth. Because my confidence is now shaken in his Tryphon Sterilink, I ordered the 22oz bottle of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution from American Air & Water, Inc here. Note several things about this product. It is only $11 (+ shipping), it contains 1.56% Phenol & 0.06% Sodium Phenate, and kills everything. MSDS Sheet here. (Note this is not the "Sporicidin Sterilizing & Disinfecting" solution which has glutaraldehyde added, and would likely be harmful to fountain pens.) I don't actually know what is in Tryphon's Sterilink, or what other ink makers use, but being able to add drops of a disinfectant to an ink would be the most economical & promising tool for long term preservation of our inks.

 

I just had a nice chat with Steven Leung who is the Director of Development, Contec, Inc., Sporicidin Division, about his product. He thought it would be a wonderful idea to try using Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution for this purpose, and wants me to keep him updated. He said there is a bit of surfactant also added, and was not sure of the impact that may have on fountain pen ink, but I told him that many inks already have that added to improve flow and lubrication. He did not feel that the Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution would be harmful in small doses to the ink. The amount of phenol used is the same as in their Chloraseptic Throat Spray (which I verified), so there is a hyped fear over the use of Phenol. He also reported that there are some ongoing studies where they sprayed this Sporicidin on various building surfaces, let dry and with exposure to moisture has been very effective at stopping growth of Black Mold and other types of mold for at least 6 months.

 

Here is what I'm going to do for the next step. I'm going to again filter the 35ml bottle of Deatramentis Yellow-Orange so it is clear, with the same filter paper & disposable funnel. Then will transfer 3 ml amounts to 10 of Dillon's (cleaned) plastic Ink Sample vials shown here. I will then add various disinfectants, and cap vials with airtight lid, invert once to mix, and watch them undisturbed on a shelf at room temp (but not in direct sunlight) for another 1-2 months. I'm gonna try the Sterilink again at doses that would represent 10, 20, 30 times the one drop Giovani recommended for a 35ml bottle (since these are only 3 ml amounts), and see if his works at higher concentration.

 

1) Original contaminated ink, unfiltered & untreated (control)

2) Filtered but untreated ink (2nd control)

 

3) Filtered, 1 drop of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution

4) Filtered, 2 drops of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution

5) Filtered, 3 drops of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution

6) Filtered, 4 drops of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution

7) Filtered, 5 drops of Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution

 

8) Filtered, 1 drop Tryphon Sterilink

9) Filtered, 2 drops Tryphon Sterilink

10) Filtered, 3 drops Tryphon Sterilink

I'll take a photo of my test station once I have this setup.

Edited by SamCapote

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but you really need a vacuum pump and more elaborate setup to force the ink through that small pore size filter. I'm also trying to do this in a way that would be more practical and inexpensive for a fellow ink enthusiast.

 

You can usually do just fine with a 60 ml plastic syringe and a syringe filter (and the syringe full of ink on the other side), if you want to "vacuum" it through and not "blow". A 0.22 micron filter should be fine)

 

By the way what about a small amount of sodium azide?

Edited by LisaN

Sometimes the cat needs a new cat toy. And sometimes I need a new pen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sodium azide would probably be great for the purpose but please remember that it is approximately as toxic as sodium cyanide, and unlike cyanide, it forms explosive compounds with certain metal ions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but you really need a vacuum pump and more elaborate setup to force the ink through that small pore size filter. I'm also trying to do this in a way that would be more practical and inexpensive for a fellow ink enthusiast.

 

You can usually do just fine with a 60 ml plastic syringe and a syringe filter (and the syringe full of ink on the other side), if you want to "vacuum" it through and not "blow". A 0.22 micron filter should be fine)

 

By the way what about a small amount of sodium azide?

 

Lisa, I do know about the use of a syringe & syringe filter, and there is a pack of them on the table in my first OP post image. My simple funnel filtration was to remove the bulk of the contamination in a reaonably fast manner. The syringe filter discs are not a practical answer for several reasons. First and foremost, since I have 115 bottles of DeAtramentis ink, that is a physically difficult, and time consuming task that has a high likelihood of spilling when pulling the plunger to draw suction with a hand-held 60 ml syringe--and assuming they don't clog easily. Depending on quantity, the filters are quite expensive (sold typically in minimum quantities of 50, 250, 1,000) -- at $3 to $5 each (including postage, minimum quantity syringe cost), and assuming you mostly keep reusing the same syringe. You need the 0.2 µm x 25mm diameter to have adequate surface area to process 35-50 ml volumes, which are the more expensive ones. They require you to know which inks are contaminated, which is very hard to see other than yellow/orange and some light reds. You still need a way to sterilize the original bottle if you are eventually putting the ink back, and to deal with the spores that are also in the cap sealing liner. Recontamination could develop easily from just a few overlooked remaining spores, not to mention new, airborne spore contamination ongoingly whenever we open a bottle. Having 750-1,000 total bottles of ink, I need something to inhibit growth for long term storage perservation and peace of mind. Spore filtration is not really the answer. We need an affordable, practical, and effective biocidal & prophylactic agent.

 

If you are asking about sodium azide as a biocidal agent, I am not familiar with it, but it looks to be highly toxic--especially on an inhalation route, and explosively reactive with various metals, (also note table 3 in this link) some of which are likely being used in ink dyes. We know that phenol was used extremely effectively as a fountain pen ink biocide for many years until government regulations freaked out all the manufacturers and they pulled it. We also know that the concentration of Phenol in Sporicidin Disinfectant Solution is the same as that used in Chloraseptic throat spray, so I'm comfortable in recommending it to ink users if indeed it works at stopping this re-infection that Tryphon's Sterilink did not prevent.

 

This thread has blossomed (so to speak) beyond the QA failure of DeAtramentis ink contamination into finding a workable biocide.

 

If anyone reading this has Nathan Tardiff's phone number, please PM it to me. I spoke to him at length when I first started this topic, but lost his number, and Luxury Inks is on vacation. I want to see what other suggestions he may have. (I did also send him a PM--but not sure how often he is online).

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lennart Wennberg

This is a huge thread so I apologize if this has been said before:

 

The OP has made an impressive work to detect the contamination of this particular brand of ink. No doubt about that, but being in the medical field I wounder about the "clinical significance" of this finding.

 

I mean, can anyone claim that they have got mold in the pen because of this particular brand of ink?

 

An example:

To get a communicable disease a certain amount of bacteria, an "infection dose", is often needed to in fact become ill. In meat you buy in the shop there are bacteria, but if you buy fresh meat the dosage of bacterias is too low become ill. Therefore the qualitative finding of bacterias in the meat is not enough to be of clinical signigificance.It's also a question of quantity.

 

Secondly:

 

Fungal spores are always surrounding us. When opening a bottle of ink you can always get a certain amount of spores in it. The important question is: Can the fungus in fact grow in the ink?

 

To conclude:

 

Can anyone claim that they have got mold in a single pen due to DeAtramentis ink?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a huge thread so I apologize if this has been said before:

 

The OP has made an impressive work to detect the contamination of this particular brand of ink. No doubt about that, but being in the medical field I wounder about the "clinical significance" of this finding.

 

I mean, can anyone claim that they have got mold in the pen because of this particular brand of ink?

 

An example:

To get a communicable disease a certain amount of bacteria, an "infection dose", is often needed to in fact become ill. In meat you buy in the shop there are bacteria, but if you buy fresh meat the dosage of bacterias is too low become ill. Therefore the qualitative finding of bacterias in the meat is not enough to be of clinical signigificance.It's also a question of quantity.

 

Secondly:

 

Fungal spores are always surrounding us. When opening a bottle of ink you can always get a certain amount of spores in it. The important question is: Can the fungus in fact grow in the ink?

 

To conclude:

 

Can anyone claim that they have got mold in a single pen due to DeAtramentis ink?

 

Lennart, good and thoughtful points and questions. My original concern was with the fibrous tenacity of the contaminants that were substantial in amounts, and did not tear even as I slid them with fine tweezers to try and macerate for better visualization. It made me wonder if they used something with cotton in a final filtering process. The original filtering removed those fibers, but there was still the additional cloudy fungal growth that became a secondary concern confirmed on KOH exam--especially when the two separate replacement sets of bottles shipped all the way from Germany again had obvious contamination easily visualized with a bright LED.

 

I do not know what amount of fungal growth is enough to block a feed or cause damage of a fountain pen, and perhaps there can be what you call "subclinical infections" that may be of questionable significance. I know I am not able to dismiss the amount of visualized growth that has reappeared in a 2 month period to feel comfortable or dismiss the issue. I really hoped I could finally use some of the 56 colors of ink I bought 6 months ago, because there are beautiful colors. I'm not sure this is comparable to a human receiving an infective dose that overwhelms their leukocytic/lymphocytic/phagocytic response to cause actual pathogenic symptoms. Rather I see this as an issue of a contaminant changing the density, flow, and physical characteristics of the ink and its homogeneous transfer through your pen's feed. I don't know enough about what molds can do to fountain pens to make any claims about that. I just know there is a significant amount of clumping, stranding, particulate formation, cloudiness, and a slimy layering/adhering to glass sides that are in almost every one of the light colored ink bottles, and I don't feel comfortable using it in my fountain pens. Maybe you would be willing to, but I'm not. It will also be interesting to hear from Giovani at Tryphons to get his opinion from seeing it in person.

 

I don't know if this problem just started recently with their manufacturing, but my findings were confirmed by a senior staff member at Art Brown's in May when she personally inspected some of the lighter colored round bottles I suggested. They were quite perplexed as to what they should do as a retailer, and were not sure when those bottles had arrived, but claims they had been selling it. The last I spoke with them, they had not received a satisfactory explanation/response from Dr. Jansen in Germany. Again, I am trying to be objective and factual and not have this appear to be anything personal against DeAtramentis or their founder, who I know nothing about. It has expanded into finding a reliable way to protect inks for long term storage. The scientist in me finds this an intriguing scenario. I even ordered some Sabouraud Agar fungal culture plates to see what is growing.

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but you really need a vacuum pump and more elaborate setup to force the ink through that small pore size filter. I'm also trying to do this in a way that would be more practical and inexpensive for a fellow ink enthusiast.

 

 

You can usually do just fine with a 60 ml plastic syringe and a syringe filter (and the syringe full of ink on the other side), if you want to "vacuum" it through and not "blow". A 0.22 micron filter should be fine)

 

By the way what about a small amount of sodium azide?

 

Lisa, I do know about the use of a syringe & syringe filter, and there is a pack of them on the table in my first OP post image. My simple funnel filtration was to remove the bulk of the contamination in a reasonably fast manner. The syringe filter discs are not a practical answer for several reasons. First and foremost, since I have 115 bottles of DeAtramentis ink, that is a physically difficult,

115 bottles! Wow. OK.

 

A fellow ink enthusiast, though, would usually be fine with 1 syringe filter and 2 syringes, I think.

 

Sorry I missed the whole thing about the syringe filter in your OP- I have been following this thread for a long time.

As far as azide goes, it would have to be used in minuscule amounts, the solutions prepared and dispensed in a fume hood (because of the possible danger of formation of a gas). Good lab technique in handling the solid is essential- (not to minimize the issue here- yes NaN3 is poisonous, and not appropriate for ink that may end up in your mouth, even in the small amounts that would be added to kill the mold). The explosion hazard with metal is not present in these low aqueous concentrations. At most you might get a bubble of nitrogen. The danger is using a metal spatula with the solid.

 

It was just a thought.

 

Another way to handle it, which might help you, would be to dilute the inks 50% with alcohol (of some type), and then after a time evaporate under reduced pressure, or by passing a stream of filtered dry air over the container.

 

Also, for a small amount of ink, you can make a very good filter by using glass or cotton wool in a glass pasteur pipet and packing it down tight with another pipet. This can be baked in an oven to sterilize it.

 

I think the issue really is that if you have a set of contaminated unopened ink bottles, then the ink manufacturers need better hygiene, or better formulations.

 

If one's ink bottles contaminate after opening, then one should minimize that by filling pens from a secondary container. I don't know that better and better biocides for the end user are the answer.

Sometimes the cat needs a new cat toy. And sometimes I need a new pen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but you really need a vacuum pump and more elaborate setup to force the ink through that small pore size filter. I'm also trying to do this in a way that would be more practical and inexpensive for a fellow ink enthusiast.

 

 

You can usually do just fine with a 60 ml plastic syringe and a syringe filter (and the syringe full of ink on the other side), if you want to "vacuum" it through and not "blow". A 0.22 micron filter should be fine)

 

By the way what about a small amount of sodium azide?

 

Lisa, I do know about the use of a syringe & syringe filter, and there is a pack of them on the table in my first OP post image. My simple funnel filtration was to remove the bulk of the contamination in a reasonably fast manner. The syringe filter discs are not a practical answer for several reasons. First and foremost, since I have 115 bottles of DeAtramentis ink, that is a physically difficult,

115 bottles! Wow. OK.

 

A fellow ink enthusiast, though, would usually be fine with 1 syringe filter and 2 syringes, I think.

 

Sorry I missed the whole thing about the syringe filter in your OP- I have been following this thread for a long time.

As far as azide goes, it would have to be used in minuscule amounts, the solutions prepared and dispensed in a fume hood (because of the possible danger of formation of a gas). Good lab technique in handling the solid is essential- (not to minimize the issue here- yes NaN3 is poisonous, and not appropriate for ink that may end up in your mouth, even in the small amounts that would be added to kill the mold). The explosion hazard with metal is not present in these low aqueous concentrations. At most you might get a bubble of nitrogen. The danger is using a metal spatula with the solid.

 

It was just a thought.

 

Another way to handle it, which might help you, would be to dilute the inks 50% with alcohol (of some type), and then after a time evaporate under reduced pressure, or by passing a stream of filtered dry air over the container.

 

Also, for a small amount of ink, you can make a very good filter by using glass or cotton wool in a glass pasteur pipet and packing it down tight with another pipet. This can be baked in an oven to sterilize it.

 

I think the issue really is that if you have a set of contaminated unopened ink bottles, then the ink manufacturers need better hygiene, or better formulations.

 

If one's ink bottles contaminate after opening, then one should minimize that by filling pens from a secondary container. I don't know that better and better biocides for the end user are the answer.

 

Lisa, thanks for sharing your expertise and knowledge about things that I am not educated about. You give many good suggestions, but part of my going through all this experience is trying to have it end up contributing a practical, simple, & safe procedure for the average fountain pen user in preserving their inks. I just had a long conversation with Nathan Tardiff (Noodlers), and to paraphrase my memory of his opinion, he basically feels that an ink should come with an adequate, persisting biocide to not have the consumer ever worry about a contamination. He also described scenarios where certain ink/dye components were found to attack and break down particular biocides, and that it took a period of time and warmer environments for this to happen. Once the biocide was effectively neutralized, the growth would happen easily. The other effect of the contamination is that it attacks the dye color, essentially feeding off of it or changing its chemical composition. There were a number of other things we discussed that I'm not at liberty to discuss since I gave him my word.

 

It does appear that there is aggressive searching for an adequately performing biocide, since exaggerated EU studies led to Phenol being pulled out of inks. In this case, yes it appears to me that the problem rests with DeAtramentis, but that does not mean it can not be solved after the fact. Those that are collecting large rainbows of diverse inks, need to know there is something they can safely add to keep inks from degrading due to contamination/infections. I have at least 500 bottles of ink that I have not yet opened or used, some of which are no longer made or sold. In some ways they are "museum inks," and I want to know that when I get to them years from now, they have been protected as much as could be done. You have to assume opening a bottle once has introduced possible airborne spores. Filling a pen that has touched paper--dramatically increases the likelihood of innoculating your ink bottle with a host of pathogens. I don't see that it is practical, or reliable (since people are not going to use sterile transfer pipettes) to always move ink to a secondary container and use that for filling the pen.

 

Here is what I would consider a workable, easy insurance policy on long term storage of inks. Find a reliable, affordable biocide that is not toxic with normal use, not harmful to the ink or pen, and that can be put in ink bottles with drops. Another aspect I am considering is making sure it works atthe wide variety of pH's we see in our inks.

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems at this point, that not much else is going to happen with regards to what happened with the DeAtramentis inks. I don't forsee that any other steps will be taken, or feedback given after this period of time by Deatramentis, nor Art Brown. I think it makes sense to ask the mods to close this topic, because this case has spurred me towards trying to find an adequate biocide to give effective short term eradication, and long term ink storage peace of mind. That is really a separate topic.

 

When I have feedback from Giovani at Tryphon, I will use my contaminated ink to set up the experiment I described 3-4 posts back with various biocides to see what works, and post about it in a new thread.

 

If the mods feel this topic should stay open for reasons I am not aware of, that's OK too.

 

Thanks for everyone's interest and participation!

With the new FPN rules, now I REALLY don't know what to put in my signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Sodium azide would probably be great for the purpose but please remember that it is approximately as toxic as sodium cyanide, and unlike cyanide, it forms explosive compounds with certain metal ions.

 

I am going off on a tangent here....but....

 

I am sure I am not the only one who immediately thought "007" when reading this. In a pen, it would make a perfect Q-branch weapon: writes, to the casual observer; as a toxin a drop in the glass of wine of no. 1 from Spectre or with an XF nib for injection; poured into the metal coated barrel, it forms an explosive to get mr. Bond out of a jam. And, of course, the seductive power of a real writing instrument to seduce the opposite sex ......

 

....gotta go, I have to prepare my bank for the huge deposit I am expecting from the franchise for that plot-idea :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

A friend of mine wrote me a letter with De Atramentis Ruby Red just the other day. What a beautiful color and I don't usually like "red" inks, but was thinking about looking into purchasing a bottle. Now, I'm not so sure. I wonder if they have taken care of this contamination problem.

Link to post
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







×
×
  • Create New...