It is currently 20 Feb 2018, 11:03

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 595
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2004, 05:40
6
KUDOS
21
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.

(B) The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.

(C) The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.

(D) The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument's advocacy of a particular strategy.

(E) The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.

Note: There is another question with the same stimulus but different boldfaced parts. Link for discussion on that question is as follows.
http://gmatclub.com/forum/environmental ... 50141.html
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 315
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2007, 17:12

The first boldface is indeed the goal. Then the argument goes on to give a couple of strategies - buying up all the surronding land OR simply help the farmers modernize their farms.

From the strong language of the second boldface you can see that it is a judgement that supports the second strategy.

Basically the argument says the environmental organization is NOT going to be able to buy the farms outright. The developers will outbid them. The best way of encouraging the farmers to hold onto their farms is modernizing them. That will keep land away from the developers.

There is no need to change the situation of the farmers not selling their farms as mentioned in E.

sidbidus wrote:
Q8:
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the
Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development.
They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy of a particular strategy.

E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.
Director
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 546
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2008, 07:02
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development
. They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable
. But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?

A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.
Manager
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Posts: 199
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2008, 10:13
saravalli wrote:
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development
. They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable
. But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?

A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.

I think D is the only viable option.

E is incorrect because there is no endorsement of a conclusion statement, which is what the first statement is.

C is incorrect because the second bold statement isn't a "judgement" to me.

B is incorrect because the argument can be successful, as you find out throughout the rest of the passage.

A is incorrect because the second bold sentence isn't the only rejection of the goal.

I think D is correct because the second bold sentence is a particular strategy, followed by basis to accomplish that strategy.
Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 72
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2008, 10:36
E

A, B and C can be easily eliminated.

Between D and E. Second statement provides some information based on which the enviormentist came to a conclusion that they need to change their strategy if they want to meet their goal. And D says tht.
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1877
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 18:10
11. Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 239
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 18:35
sondenso wrote:
11. Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.

Would go with D.

The first boldface presents a goal(Preservation of Wilgrinn Wilderness Area) and the strategies are being evaluated in the argument. The second boldface is an opinion that serves as the basis supporting an alternative to the earlier plan, but with the same ultimate goal—preservation of Wilgrinn land.
Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 934
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2008, 18:47
Premise1: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development.
Premise2: They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it.
Conclusion1: That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders.
Premise4: On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable.
Premise5: But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires.
Conclusion2: And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
First is indeed a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained however second is not the evidence for that rejection, so this one is out.

B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
The first one is a goal, which author says can be attained so this one is out.

C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
Second is not judgment disputing that conclusion.

D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy of a particular strategy.
Second one is not a judgment.

E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.
Second is not situation which must be changed.
Second one does look a situation which should be modified from present case.

I choose E.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 313
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2008, 16:50
I am not sure but looks like B

"Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived:" ----

these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. ---the reason why goal can not be attained .
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1373
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2008, 07:45
Q23:
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development
. They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable
. But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?
A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Current Student
Joined: 11 May 2008
Posts: 553
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2008, 08:24
spriya wrote:
Q23:
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development
. They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable
. But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?
A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
the goal is not ill-concieved.plan to achieve the goal is ill concieved.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
it never says the goal cant be attained.it just says its not viable under certain circumstances.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
i feel that this is ok.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
i didnt quite understand this.. its mental langauge...
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.
the second situation, if it is changed, i.e if farming becomes unviable ,then the developers will buy it, which is against the goal..

i feel the ans is C.
Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 934
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2008, 08:34
C (1st BF): Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development.
P1: They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it.
P2 or IC: That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders.
P3 (2nd BF): On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable.
P4: But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires.
P5: A more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability. (Endorsing 1st BF)

Author of passage is endorsing 1st BF, so A, B, and C is incorrect.

As per E description of 2nd BF seems incorrect to me.

So IMO D.
Manager
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 175
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2008, 08:46
A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
The argument does not rejects the goal.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
The argument never says the the goal mentioned in first cannot be attained
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
The first part is correct but the second is not as the second is not disputing the conclusion of the argument in any way.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
This correctly identifies the two bold statements
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.
The conclusion of the argument is that the solution will be to assist the farmers financially to achieve the goal. Whereas according to choice E the second presents a situation that must be changed to achieve the goal. Which is contradicting
Intern
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 24
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2011, 09:41
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development.
They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable.
But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?
A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.

Can any one explain me what can be the answer?
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2011
Posts: 182
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2011, 01:07
my answer is B. Do let me know the OA.

Reason -- >
The plan to by the land is an idea ( goal) and also the author clearly concludes this idea is ill - conceived

Further the author gives 2 reasons why this idea is ill-conceived.

1. If farmers sell, environmentalists cant buy it
or
2. Farmers wont sell

So the first BF is a goal which the argument concludes cannot be accomplished
second BF, is one of the reasons why the goal cannot be accomplished.
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1372
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2011, 01:16
The plan is to purchase the land from the farmers who own it, and it's explicitly mentioned here that this plan is ill-conceived not the goal. so option B is incorrect.

in my opinion E ios correct...wats the OA btw?
_________________
Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Posts: 12
Concentration: General Management
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2012, 22:45
2nd Boldface : these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable

This states farmers MIGHT sell provided farming would be continued on that land.

Only E satisfies the 2nd boldface.

E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future

OA??
Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 627
Location: India
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Dec 2012, 00:53
Maverick2008 wrote:
Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn
Wilderness Area from residential development.
They plan to do this by purchasing
that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell
their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other
bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land,
provided that farming it remains viable.
But farming will not remain viable if the
farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources
modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy
would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain
viability.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following
roles?
A. The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is
evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.
B. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the
second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.
C. The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second
is a judgment disputing that conclusion.
D. The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the
argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument’s advocacy
of a particular strategy.
E. The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a
situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in
the foreseeable future.

Can any one explain me what can be the answer?

We can outright reject A and B, because the first boldface is clearly a goal which the author does not say cannot be attained or is ill-conceived. Now similarly choice C can be rejected on the basis of the second statement that the author disputes the conclusion that the goal can be achieved. The author does not say the goal cannot be attained.

It is now between D and E. If we look closely at the second statement of E, it says that the second boldface presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed which the argument obviously does not. Actually the argument wants farming the land be made viable . That leaves us with D which we can see makes perfect sense. The first boldface indeed presents a goal which the author evaluates subsequently and the second is indeed the author's judgement which is farmers will not sell the land if farming it remains viable and he indeed advocates a particular strategy based on that which is assisting the farmers to modernize their farms.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Standardized Approaches

Intern
Joined: 06 Dec 2012
Posts: 14
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 2
WE: Sales (Consumer Products)
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2012, 18:19
i think D is the answer: The first part is the the goal, with followed evalutation; the second part is the author's preference-help farmers get mordenized to achieve the goal- the first part.
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 419
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Apr 2013, 20:20
All duplicate threads on this topic have been merged.

Please check and follow the Guidelines for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum before posting anything.
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10324
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2014, 10:02
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the   [#permalink] 23 Aug 2014, 10:02

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 69 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by