ctpp-news

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

2560 discussions

hprawiranata has invited you to use Google Talk

by hprawiranata mitcrpc.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------ hprawiranata has invited you to sign up for Google Talk so you can talk to each other for free over your computers. To sign-up, go to: http://www.google.com/accounts/NewAccount?service=talk&sendvemail=true&skip… Google Talk is a downloadable Windows* application that offers: - Free calls over your computer anytime, from anywhere, and for as long as you want - A simple and intuitive user interface for sending instant messages or making calls--no clutter, pop-ups or ads - Superior voice quality through just a microphone and computer speaker - Fast file transfers with no restrictions on file type After signing-up, download Google Talk and sign in with your new Google Account username and password. You can then begin inviting anyone you want to talk to for free. Google Talk works with any computer speaker and microphone, such as the ones built-in to many PC laptops today, as well as with wired and wireless headsets and USB phones. Google Talk also works across all firewalls. Google Talk is still in beta. Just like with Gmail, we're working hard to add features and make improvements, so we might also ask for your comments and suggestions periodically. We appreciate your help in making it even better! Thanks, The Google Talk Team To learn more about Google Talk before signing up, visit: http://www.google.com/talk/about.html (If clicking the URLs in this message does not work, copy and paste them into the address bar of your browser). * Not a Windows user? No problem. You can also connect to the Google Talk service from any platform using third-party clients (http://www.google.com/talk/otherclients.html).

11 years, 7 months

ACS: The Means of Transportation Question

by Ken.Cervenka＠dot.gov

Hello again! Rather than summarize all previous listserv emails and off-line discussions on this topic, I will instead present the latest set of desired changes to the three “rail transit” categories: __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley (a change from the current “Streetcar or trolley car”) __ Rail: subway or elevated (a change from the current “Subway or elevated”) __ Rail: commuter or long-distance railroad (a change from the current “Railroad”) I can’t state these are “official U.S. DOT recommendations” just yet, but we will need to either come to this decision in early June or identify something else (or just “give up” again, which is not what anyone of us want to do!) Other changes (e.g., additional transit and non-transit mode groups, some type of “list all modes used” question, a switch from the “usual” specification, etc. etc.) do have merit, but there is a strong consensus that adding complexity to a U.S. DOT recommendation could jeopardize the opportunity for ANY changes to be subjected to a formal “content change” test. I should also note that even if this is approved for a formal “content change” test, we don’t yet know, of course, the findings from those tests. If you work for a transit agency that operates multiple rail modes (or at least a “light rail” mode), or an MPO that covers a region with multiple rail modes, and you see value in your future planning if these changes were implemented, please send me an email (Ken.Cervenka(a)dot.gov<mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov>), or give me a call early next week (202/493-0512) and I will let you know how your interests can be recognized. For those who may want to review the full ACS question, with the proposed changes to the three “rail transit” modes included, I am showing below. ************************ 31. How did this person usually get to work LAST WEEK? If this person usually used more than one method of transportation during the trip, mark (X) the box of the one used for most of the distance. __ Car, truck, or van __ Bus or trolley bus __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley __ Rail: subway or elevated __ Rail: commuter or long-distance railroad __ Ferryboat __ Taxicab __ Motorcycle __ Bicycle __ Walked __ Worked at home __ Other method Ken Cervenka FTA Office of Planning and Environment 202/493-0512 p.s., I am sure everyone knows that Memorial Day is Monday, and let’s not ever under-estimate the value of the personal sacrifices that have been made.

11 years, 7 months

The Case for ACS, the Economic Census, sampling and Federal data-gathering

by Jonathan Lupton

The loss of Census sampling (today the ACS), the Census of Agriculture, the Economic Census, etc., would be disastrous in so many ways I find it hard to believe anyone - even deeply partisan politicians - would advocate their demise. The small gain to the Federal government's bottom line would be undercut by huge (albeit hidden) losses to the private and public sectors. The loss would be especially acute for small businesses. 1. There can be no serious doubt that Federal sample products leverage their cost many times over in benefits to the economy. The benefits are so widespread, and so implicit, that the burden of proof must lie on anyone attempting to undo Federal data-gathering. And they will find no such proof. 2. The U.S. government has, in the past, set the world standard for data-gathering. The widespread availability of free, accurate data runs hand-in-hand with upholding the standard as the world's foremost democratic society. To surrender the ACS and related products is not just a bad idea, it is a retreat from leadership. 3. Answering ACS forms, or any other Federal questionnaire, is a matter of personal responsibility. To survive, democracy depends not just on the protection of personal rights; it also demands a sense of responsibility by its citizens. 4. I have never heard of anyone going to prison, or even being fined, for failing to provide data to Census takers. Everyone knows that there are people and businesses which refuse to cooperate; the practice of non-compliance is already tolerated. But compliance is the law, and this sets a tone of legality which allows the ACS and other projects to gather the necessary data. 5. If the data business becomes mostly private in nature, the cost of obtaining data will largely limit its availability to large corporations that could afford to purchase it, creating another disadvantage to small businesses and business start-ups. 6. Here in Little Rock we host one of the country's largest data-gathering agencies, the Acxiom Corporation. It's an open secret that Acxiom, and other companies like it, hold vast amounts of data about just about everybody. While Census data is protected by confidentiality laws, disturbingly intimate corporate data can be sold to the highest bidder. 7. While the anti-census anti-government lobby argues unconvincingly about government as "Big Brother," there is therefore another, less accountable version of "Big Brother," existing in secret corporate data-gathering. Such data could become the only basis for information about our society. Without Federal laws, and Executive and Congressional oversight, who could prevent this private data from being falsified? Without the credibility of ACS and related programs as a "cross-check," false information could be fed into the system, and could be manipulated by private power brokers. 8. Here in Little Rock we have a small spinoff company which has used Acxiom data to attempt census-like products. Around 2009, they privately gave me a total for the state's largest county (Pulaski) that disagreed with my careful estimates. They ended up being high by about 7 percent, compared with the Census 2010 count that appeared a few months later. My own estimate, based on housing records, was within 1 or 2 percent. A corporate representative thought their figures were inarguably correct; I thought their methods for counting people were flawed. Guess who was right. 9. Data-gathering by the Census Bureau and related agencies isn't perfect, but it has oversight through the democratic process. I'll trust a process that's been around since 1790 before I trust a private company that answers first to shareholders. It is my earnest hope that the effort to kill the ACS is so blatantly foolish that it will never make it to a vote by the U.S. Congress or Senate. I ask those who keep their ear to Congress to please keep the data community well-informed about this disturbing development. Jonathan Lupton AICP Research Planner Metroplan Little Rock, Arkansas 501-372-3300

11 years, 7 months

Training Opportunity - CTPP2000 refresher webinar Wed. May 22, 2013 - 3:00 Eastern

by Weinberger, Penelope

Hello Data People, Training Opportunity - CTPP2000 refresher webinar Wed. May 22, 2013 - 3:00 Eastern In anticipation of the release of CTPP 5 year data based on 2006 to 2010 ACS (with which we know you will want to do trend analysis...) CTPP is presenting a refresher on accessing, using and understanding the CTPP2000 data package. This webinar is free to attend, does not require registration, and will be recorded for future posting. The webinar room and phone line are limited to 100 participants, so please attend this technical training if you would like a refresher course on CTPP2000, and plan to arrive on time. We will discuss the contents and caveats of the data set, and show a demo of accessing the data through the embedded software. The web address for this training is: https://connectdot.connectsolutions.com/ctpp1 The call in number is: 1-888-675-2535 Pc = 5860415# Penelope Z. Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 ctpp.transportation.org

11 years, 7 months

Update on the 5-year CTPP

by Weinberger, Penelope

Hi All, The CTPP five year data product is coming, here is some information on it. Updates and info will be published at: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/5-Year-Info.aspx What: CTPP based on 5-year ACS - 2006 - 2010; residence based, workplace based, and flow data for geographies ranging from the Census TAZ or tract to the nation. Tables include means of transportation univariate and crossed with travel time, household income, vehicle availability, age, time leaving home, and (new) presence of children, minority status, number of workers in household and median household income. A complete list of available tables can be found here: http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/5-Year-Info.aspx There are plans for an API, and plans to download large files (entire states, for example) are under development. How: A new data access software is being developed for the 5-year data, it will include the 3-year data, and eventually, we hope to include both older and future data sets, so they can be found in one easy place. The software will allow for table manipulation - so you can get a table looking the way you like before download, download formats will include tables, .shp files, .gml and .TAB files. The software has a robust mapping component. When: A fully executed product is expected around August 2013. As of this writing, the US Census Bureau has delivered data to the software vendor and the vendor is processing it. Beta testing of the data and software is scheduled to begin in June with comments and modifications processed in July. Please feel free to contact me on or off list with any questions. Penelope Z. Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 ctpp.transportation.org

11 years, 7 months

5 Year ACS 06-10 and PUMA

by Birat Pandey

My apology if someone had posted this question before, but I could not find an easy way search in the achieve ( http://ryoko.chrispy.net/pipermail/ctpp-news/). Could somebody reconfirm If 5 year ACS 06-10 is still uses 2000 PUMA boundary/code-number? If yes, then I am curious to know if is there is any plan to sink these data into the new 2010 based PUMA/code. Birat Pandey, PE Senior Transportation Engineer/Modeler Baltimore Metropolitan Council Offices @ McHenry Row 1500 Whetstone Way, Suite 300 Baltimore, MD 21230 Ph: 410-732-0500 x1050 bpandey(a)baltometro.org www.baltometro.org

11 years, 7 months

ACS: Means of Transportation Categories

by Ken.Cervenka＠dot.gov

Hello Tom and all, Agencies must send justification for proposed revisions or new content to OMB and the Census Bureau by June 14, 2013. The intent is for U.S. DOT (via BTS) to formally submit the "please include light rail" request. Based on various discussions that have taken place (particularly those on this listserv), here are the (current) proposed modifications to the three rail transit categories in the Means of Transportation Question 31 (with all other modal groups to be unchanged): __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley (a change from the current "Streetcar or trolley car") __ Rail: subway or elevated (a change from the current "Subway or elevated") __ Rail: long-distance commuter service (a change from the current "Railroad") Assuming OMB approves a "cognitive testing" program, the exact wording of whatever eventually goes "final" will of course depend on the test results. I sure don't want to stretch this out to the point of missing the June 14 deadline, but it may be useful to subject this to another round of public vetting on the CTPP listserv. So: what do you all think? Ken Cervenka FTA Office of Planning and Environment From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of TMarchwinski(a)njtransit.com Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 2:38 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Penelope- I found this email from a few months ago, and would like to let you know that NJT uses CTPP 3 year data to show broad county to county flows for Trans-Hudson transit planning. We used the 2006-08 data to show trends since 2000 in where commuting to Manhattan and other key areas has changed. We also saw that there was a shift to bus and rail commuting, vs. auto for this market in most counties. The 3 year is helpful for understanding broad trends, and specific changes. I noticed with the 5 year flow data at the county level that we saw changes related to the Great Recession. Since the 5 year data has the 3 year data imbedded as part of the 5 year data, I have looked at the difference between the 5 year and 3 year data to surmise changes between 2008 and 2010. I know statistically this may not be totally accurate, but we have seen a drop in total work trips from some counties from the 3 year to the 5 year data, and some increases in others. The numbers made sense because close in, more urban counties still increased the number of work trips to Manhattan, while mostly further out areas which were hit hard in the recession by defaults, and aging population showed a decline compared to 3 year data, but still an increase compared to 2000. The new procedure to make CTPP continue as a research project is a good one. Also I am happy to see Light Rail will be tested for inclusion in the Census. I brought this up back in 2007/2008 with Elaine Murakami of FHWA who was supportive, but we could not get FTA interested. I had and extensive conversation and email exchange with FTA on this issue (Ken Cervanka), and was involved in an online debate on this. My understanding is that the census will not allow an increase in the number of modes, but will allow Light Rail to be added. The issue was how do you classify all of the other modes, and my point was that railroad should be changed to commuter or regional rail (including Intercity), then there was bus; Light rail , Trolley, or streetcar; subway or elevated; and then Ferry I believe. Can you tell me of the status of when Light Rail will be tested, and also how it will be shown, as a separate mode, or with trolley or streetcar (which is where it belongs in my opinion). Some of the federal types wanted streetcar as a separate mode, which I did not believe made sense given its small amount of ridership, and also the fact that its more like light rail and Light Rail is much bigger in usage. Thanks for any information you can provide. Thomas Marchwinski Senior Director, Forecasting and Research NJ Transit, Newark, NJ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:54 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows As Liang said, the next CTPP is due in mid 2013. It will be based on five year ACS from 2006 - 2010 and include small area data. In answer to the larger question; the CTPP program at AASHTO was recently transformed to an ongoing technical services program. As you rightly point out, this follows the change at CB to an ongoing survey methodology. The CTPP is historically user directed and wishes to continue to be so. So I have two things to throw out there: One, please share the value of the program with your decision makers - when we come for funding, help them get to yes! Two, please let me know how you have used the three year data and if it is useful to have along with the planned five year data - the difference between the sets is the three year is more frequent, while the five year covers all geography. Thanks! Penelope Z. Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 ctpp.transportation.org From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Estersohn Dan Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 9:55 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Is there any information about production of the CTTP or the county-to-county commuting flows more than once every ten years? Since they are based on the annual ACS there is an opportunity for more frequent updates than in the past. What are the current plans? Dan Estersohn Senior Demographer [cid:image001.jpg@01CE50D8.E18F5C70] Arbitron Inc 9705 Patuxent Woods Drive Columbia, MD 21046 410-312-8434 Dan.Estersohn(a)Arbitron.com<mailto:Dan.Estersohn@Arbitron.com>

11 years, 7 months

Re: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories

by Gorski, Susan (MDOT)

My staff general agrees with Alan Pisarski' s comment below that the third option should include railroad and long distance commuter rail, but for a different reason. If the question is left as shown in Ken Cervenka' s message we think the few people in Michigan who take Amtrak may be confused because they probably don't think of it as "long distance commuter rail". [cid:image001.jpg@01CE514B.D6E6F3A0]<https://www.research.net/s/ZKC9H99> Susan A. Gorski, Section Manager Statewide & Urban Travel Analysis Section Michigan Department of Transportation Van Wagoner Building - B340 425 W. Ottawa Street P.O. Box 30050 Lansing, MI 48909 E-mail: gorskis(a)michigan.gov<blocked::mailto:gorskis@michigan.gov> phone: 517-335-2958 cell: 517-243-0734 fax: 517-373-9255 From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of wendell cox Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:13AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories Havn't been in this discussion... but this issue with respect to railroad is, in my view, irrelevant with respect to carrier. An Amtrak commuter from Baltimore is, from a transportation perspective, no different than a MARC commuter, for example. Hope the question can be framed to make that clear. Could have the same problem, obviously, especially in the Phila, and Boston areas. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM, <alanpisarski(a)alanpisarski.com<mailto:alanpisarski@alanpisarski.com>> wrote: Ken: re Railroad I would make it both railroad and long distance commuter rail service. people in Balt take Amtrak to DC as well as MARC. use a comma. Alan -----Original Message----- From: Ken.Cervenka(a)dot.gov<mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov> [mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov<mailto:Ken.Cervenka@dot.gov>] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 07:59 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] ACS: Means of Transportation Categories Hello Tom and all, Agencies must send justification for proposed revisions or new content to OMB and the Census Bureau by June 14, 2013. The intent is for U.S. DOT (via BTS) to formally submit the ?please include light rail? request. Based on various discussions that have taken place (particularly those on this listserv), here are the (current) proposed modifications to the three rail transit categories in the Means of Transportation Question 31 (with all other modal groups to be unchanged): __ Rail: light rail, streetcar, or trolley (a change from the current ?Streetcar or trolley car?) __ Rail: subway or elevated (a change from the current ?Subway or elevated?) __ Rail: long-distance commuter service (a change from the current ?Railroad?) Assuming OMB approves a ?cognitive testing? program, the exact wording of whatever eventually goes ?final? will of course depend on the test results. I sure don?t want to stretch this out to the point of missing the June 14 deadline, but it may be useful to subject this to another round of public vetting on the CTPP listserv. So: what do you all think? Ken Cervenka FTA Office of Planning and Environment From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net>] On Behalf Of TMarchwinski(a)njtransit.com<mailto:TMarchwinski@njtransit.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 2:38 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Penelope- I found this email from a few months ago, and would like to let you know that NJT uses CTPP 3 year data to show broad county to county flows for Trans-Hudson transit planning. We used the 2006-08 data to show trends since 2000 in where commuting to Manhattan and other key areas has changed. We also saw that there was a shift to bus and rail commuting, vs. auto for this market in most counties. The 3 year is helpful for understanding broad trends, and specific changes. I noticed with the 5 year flow data at the county level that we saw changes related to the Great Recession. Since the 5 year data has the 3 year data imbedded as part of the 5 year data, I have looked at the difference between the 5 year and 3 year data to surmise changes between 2008 and 2010. I know statistically this may not be totally accurate, but we have seen a drop in total work trips from some counties from the 3 year to the 5 year data, and some increases in others. The numbers made sense because close in, more urban counties still increased the number of work trips to Manhattan, while mostly further out areas which were hit hard in the recession by defaults, and aging population showed a decline compared to 3 year data, but still an increase compared to 2000. The new procedure to make CTPP continue as a research project is a good one. Also I am happy to see Light Rail will be tested for inclusion in the Census. I brought this up back in 2007/2008 with Elaine Murakami of FHWA who was supportive, but we could not get FTA interested. I had and extensive conversation and email exchange with FTA on this issue (Ken Cervanka), and was involved in an online debate on this. My understanding is that the census will not allow an increase in the number of modes, but will allow Light Rail to be added. The issue was how do you classify all of the other modes, and my point was that railroad should be changed to commuter or regional rail (including Intercity), then there was bus; Light rail , Trolley, or streetcar; subway or elevated; and then Ferry I believe. Can you tell me of the status of when Light Rail will be tested, and also how it will be shown, as a separate mode, or with trolley or streetcar (which is where it belongs in my opinion). Some of the federal types wanted streetcar as a separate mode, which I did not believe made sense given its small amount of ridership, and also the fact that its more like light rail and Light Rail is much bigger in usage. Thanks for any information you can provide. Thomas Marchwinski Senior Director, Forecasting and Research NJ Transit, Newark, NJ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 10:54 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: Re: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows As Liang said, the next CTPP is due in mid 2013. It will be based on five year ACS from 2006 ? 2010 and include small area data. In answer to the larger question; the CTPP program at AASHTO was recently transformed to an ongoing technical services program. As you rightly point out, this follows the change at CB to an ongoing survey methodology. The CTPP is historically user directed and wishes to continue to be so. So I have two things to throw out there: One, please share the value of the program with your decision makers ? when we come for funding, help them get to yes! Two, please let me know how you have used the three year data and if it is useful to have along with the planned five year data ? the difference between the sets is the three year is more frequent, while the five year covers all geography. Thanks! Penelope Z. Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556<tel:202-624-3556> ctpp.transportation.org<http://ctpp.transportation.org> From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Estersohn Dan Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 9:55 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] County Commuting Flows Is there any information about production of the CTTP or the county-to-county commuting flows more than once every ten years? Since they are based on the annual ACS there is an opportunity for more frequent updates than in the past. What are the current plans? Dan Estersohn Senior Demographer [cid:image002.jpg@01CE514B.D6E6F3A0] Arbitron Inc 9705 Patuxent Woods Drive Columbia, MD 21046 410-312-8434<tel:410-312-8434> Dan.Estersohn(a)Arbitron.com<mailto:Dan.Estersohn@Arbitron.com> _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)ryoko.chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news@ryoko.chrispy.net> http://ryoko.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- -- Wendell Cox +1.618 632 8507 Demographia | Wendell Cox Consultancy - St. Louis Missouri-Illinois MSA Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris Contributing Editor newgeography.com<http://www.newgeography.com/> www.demographia.com<http://www.demographia.com> | www.publicpurpose.com<http://www.publicpurpose.com> | www.rentalcartours.net<http://www.rentalcartours.net> BOOKS & PUBLICATIONS War on the Dream demographia.com/wod1.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/wod1.pdf> International Housing Affordability Survey demographia.com/dhi.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf> The Wal-Mart Revolution (with Richard Vedder) Demographia World Urban Areas demographia.com/worldua.pdf<http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf>

11 years, 7 months

Public Access to Federally-Supported Research and Development Data and Publications: Two Planning Meetings

by Krishnan Viswanathan

Apologies for the cross-posting. This meeting/webcast is tomorrow and Friday and invites comments on access to data and publications and thought it might interest members of these lists.The data portion is tomorrow and the day after and the publication portion was yesterday and today. http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CurrentProjects/DBASSE_082378#.UZ… Krishnan

11 years, 7 months

does anyone know if the 2013 1-year ACS data will use the 2010 MSA definitions?

by Nancy Reger

Does anyone know if the 2012 ACS 1-year estimates to be released in September will be using the new 2013 MSA definitions? Thanks, Nancy Nancy Reger | nreger(a)morpc.org Deputy Director, Transportation | Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission T: 614.233.4154 | | F: 614.233.4254 111 Liberty Street, Suite 100 | Columbus, OH 43215 [cid:image001.png@01CE5161.9ED57570]<http://www.morpc.org/> [cid:image002.png@01CE5161.9ED57570] <http://www.facebook.com/morpc> [cid:image003.jpg@01CE5161.9ED57570] <http://www.twitter.com/morpc>

11 years, 7 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

ctpp-news