Our super-secret and anonymous representative council - Page 4 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 7th, 2007, 07:46 PM   #61
Roadhouse
DrivewayJeeper
 
Roadhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sanford
Posts: 10,956
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post

Goodbye.

Roadhouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 7th, 2007, 07:48 PM   #62
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,104
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

The thread you linked above shows that folks on the other forums have the same problem with you that we see here. You ramble on and on with accusations. If a person on that web site said that they wouldn't reveal names, it does not reflect a charter of bylaw of the group as a whole. I don't read there where he is speaking as the voice of the entire group. Your link means nothing to me.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2007, 08:28 AM   #63
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
"..If a person on that web site said that they wouldn't reveal names, it does not reflect a charter of **bylaw** of the group as a whole. I don't read there where he is speaking as the voice of the entire group. Your link means nothing to me.
Maybe this one will 'jog your memory'....
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Ma...s_160784_7.pdf
pg. 3 under "new business"/MMRC/first sentance describing the goup's first and last public appearance ever after years operating in the shadows previously....including right on up to this date).

Again, if you guys are willing to allow folks like the above to continually insult your intelligence on matters affecting this community...more power to you.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2007, 08:37 AM   #64
TopHeavy
Yikes!
 
TopHeavy's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: New Hudson, MI
Posts: 1,415
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

CIA? Cloak and dagger? This whole thread confuses the hell out of me. Cliff notes please?
__________________
Buy My CJ7
TopHeavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2007, 08:52 AM   #65
Trail_Fanatic
Member since 1994
 
Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-25-06
Location: Muskegon and Oceana Counties
Posts: 3,175
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TopHeavy View Post
CIA? Cloak and dagger? This whole thread confuses the hell out of me. Cliff notes please?
I wish they were available!

__________________________________________________ ____________

Yes, the MMRC supported the proposal.
It addresses all 3 types of trail.

Is there any other proposal out there to support?
I don't think so, or at least, I've never seen one.

So now the only folks willing to do the WORK and actually MAKE a proposal are the bad guys?

Non-participation and lack of effort aren't going to get anything done.

Looks to me like they're the good guys.
The ONLY group who's DONE anything.
Where's YOUR proposal? . . . or ANYONE else's?

Like I said before:

The world is run by those who show up.

If you don't like it, SHOW UP!
. . .and be WORTH working WITH!

If you don't present yourself appropriately, you'll end up getting ignored (as people naturally tend to do to those who do not -- It's human nature)

Last edited by Trail_Fanatic; March 9th, 2007 at 08:58 AM.
Trail_Fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2007, 09:16 AM   #66
Roadhouse
DrivewayJeeper
 
Roadhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sanford
Posts: 10,956
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
/MMRC/first sentance describing the goup's first and last public appearance ever after years operating in the shadows previously....including right on up to this date).
You make it sound like the MMRC has been in existance for decades....didn't it just start a few years ago?
Roadhouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9th, 2007, 10:26 AM   #67
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,104
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
Maybe this one will 'jog your memory'....
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Ma...s_160784_7.pdf
pg. 3 under "new business"/MMRC/first sentance describing the goup's first and last public appearance ever after years operating in the shadows previously....including right on up to this date).

Again, if you guys are willing to allow folks like the above to continually insult your intelligence on matters affecting this community...more power to you.
The only thing pertaining to MMRC on page 3 is the following:

Michigan Motorized Recreation Council (MMRC) Proposal -- R.J. Witte said the MMRC is
comprised of various ORV user groups in Michigan, and does not have officers, directors, constitution,
bylaws or dues. The MMRC acts as a communications network and meets on an as needed basis to
discuss ORV issues. He presented a power point presentation proposing a 725 mile expansion of the
designated ORV trail system. The proposal includes: 1) Parallel the heavily used trail systems with 24
inch trail; 2) Increase the size of selected 24 inch trail to 50 inches; 3) Connect and add to the 72 inch
routes and create new 72 inch routes; and 4) Connect trail systems close to each other with a linear
trail.
Mr. Kubisiak reviewed the Departmentís trail proposal process and the need for sponsor advocates
to take a lead role in the process.
Discussion ensued regarding MMRCís proposal.
Mr. Ranney made a motion, supported by Mr. Dinsmore, to embrace the concept as presented
by the Michigan Motorized Recreation Council. Motion unanimously carried.


I guess I'm an idiot but nowhere in this do I see anything about refusing to name names. AND......... it points out that there are no bylaws.

If this is the one and only time it has been brought up at an ORV meeting, with so little said about it, why is it such a big deal. I don't get it.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2007, 08:14 AM   #68
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

"...If you don't like it, SHOW UP!
. . .and be WORTH working WITH!

If you don't present yourself appropriately, you'll end up getting ignored (as people naturally tend to do to those who do not -- It's human nature)..."


I made it a point to "show up" at every meeting that was availiable for years.

My last appearance involved outright lies by the very people you defend today; lies propagated so that my simple right to speak out as a citizen of this state was taken away immediately, rudely and without apology.

Please don't preach to me about how the citizens of this state must be "WORTH" listening to or how we will be 'ignored' if you, or any of these people you defend, choose to loudly slam the gavel down right in the middle of our public presentations at these meetings.

We have the right to speak out while demanding that our questions be answered..and we will do so whether you sit on this MMRC council comfortably insulated from the realities of public opinion....or not.

Again, don't throw these buzzwords about 'getting involved' at me, my young friend...and especially if you're a little wet around the ears, yourself.

Last edited by OneManBanned; March 12th, 2007 at 08:26 AM.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2007, 11:44 AM   #69
CreativeFab
used to be Ironman
 
CreativeFab's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12-01-05
Location: midland
Posts: 3,215
iTrader: (35)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Originally Posted by OneManBanned

Goodbye.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhouse View Post
I thouth he said he was leaving, not a man of his word I see
CreativeFab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 08:19 AM   #70
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Angry

I really hate to bring up something similiar to what you guys chose to ignore earlier (actually paying to upkeep the side of our roads) ...but without reading any of the above letters...would I be safe to say that none of them included a segment concerning exactly how each individual felt that this new system should be funded?

We just got through pushing through 750 miles of orv trail without commentary from even our all-powerful and super-secret MMRC council regarding (again) the exact same funding-based subject....so who's the 'guru' now crunching these numbers so that the public can make these decisions on a cost analysis basis?

Don't get me wrong, I'll join many on here and pay whatever it takes....yet didn't this arrogantly anonymous council claim just recently that it was MUCH to expensive to allow "over 50 inch" (or under for that matter) machines a mere 5 more inches on trails that were already cut out in most places to that width or wider?

Again, you guys are so interested in splitting this community into as many segments as you can and each with their own agenda (the above is being proposed by what umbrella group that we should all be organized under?)....that even the most basic tenants of project management (namely FUNDING and future sustainable MAINTENANCE) are merely an 'afterthought' that inconveniently gets in the way of folks unconcerned with this seemingly small detail....just about as much as they are with writing the damn letter for themselves in the first place.

You know, it's pretty sad that not two years ago; everybody was praising the CCC/AMA and all these other guys who lead you boys around by the nose...as to how it was such a good idea to start "resting portions of the nasty old system for "[I]the purpose of studying it" while re-routing these trails right around these 'raped' 4x4 areas that were "beyond repair".

Now do a little fast forward regarding this community's "concern" for this HUGE problem...How much do you hear TODAY simply fixing what we have now or the money needed TODAY to both fund this ambitious project and all the others you guys constantly dream up on a daily basis? (including what would also be a big city riding area...if you could downplay the money issue once again...and get away with it?).

TF comes on here claiming that the MMRC hasn't talked funding since he's been there.
The advisory board waits until JUST LAST MONTH to send up some kind of inept smokescreen to the general public about "gee, uhhhh...maybe we'd better form a "funding sub-committee" to make up for the "task force" on funding we formed LAST YEAR...that never met or gave a report on the exact same subject..."

This isn't leadership or anything resembling the appearance of this community actually CARING about the resource or even FIXING what we've broke in it...it's about "business as usual" with nothing but a bunch of clubs now salivating over not only these new trails...but the UNKNOWN price we will pay them to maintain them (and gosh, isn't it funny fow the CCC and all you other guys absolutely HATE the department's recommendation that we might privitize some of this activity to possibly achieve cost-saving economies of scale...with for profit-privitization being a conservative concept that bugs you southeastern big-city/suburbanite liberals...to no end?).

Put your money where your mouths are, guys....while explaining to us what the rest of these grandiose projects are going to cost me AFTER you fix my old system in shameful disrepair...and I'll write that letter.
(and by the way, explain to me how much House Bill 5343 was going to cost or how the "environmental damage" cited there was so much more than this project...and why we just don't throw that true MULTI-USE project on what is fast becomming 'the big project pile' also).

WE WILL NOT ACCEPT THE MMRC OR ANYBODY ELSE FOR THAT MATTER SIMPLY POPPING OUT OF NOWHERE AT A MEETING SOMEDAY IN THE FUTURE CLAIMING THAT "THIS IS NOW WHAT YOU WILL ALL PAY" FOR EVERY ONE OF THESE MASSIVE PROJECTS DISCUSSED 100% BEHIND CLOSED DOORS FOR YEARS.

I've had enough...it's not environmentally responsible...and I won't allow myself as an enthusiast to be portrayed in this manner with absolutely no assurances of properly funded resource stewardship.

Last edited by OneManBanned; March 21st, 2007 at 08:28 AM.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 09:49 AM   #71
Trail_Fanatic
Member since 1994
 
Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-25-06
Location: Muskegon and Oceana Counties
Posts: 3,175
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

I guess since you refuse to be polite or remotely PC, I can drop it too?

If you have a question that's one thing, but to make an accusation without doing your research first is quite another.

Actually, funding this IS in my letter, and IS a major portion of the process. Designing the system so that minimum maintenance will be required to begin with will be a primary goal. It MUST be both financially and environmentally sustainable.

The NFS has funding sources available and so do enthusiasts.
The NFS has FAR fewer trails/routes than the Forest Plan states as it's maximum density.

So, there's funding and room for more.
If there wasn't, it wouldn't be happening.
This isn't a State Route program, it's an entirely Federal initiative.

Get the facts before you assume and accuse, it makes you look a bit silly.

Instead of arm-chair quarter-backing, why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Don't post it here. Post it in a letter to the NFS.

Prehaps, because you're so poor with your communication skills that no one will listen to you? For heaven's sake, go down to your local Community College and take a Communications course!

I've stated before that I'm willing to answer any question asked in a polite tone. Have some manners. Ask in a polite tone and I'll answer in a polite tone. Ask with added accusation, innuendo, and attacks, and I too will ignore you. Complain all you want, it won't do you any good until you figure out how to work with others and the systems.

I'm done trying to answer anything for you until you start.

Good bye OMB, good luck figuring things out. I doubt it will be easy for you with that chip on your shoulder.

I ask you:
How many possible allies have turned away from you as a result of your poor behavior?

You can add one more to that count . . . me.
I've made a month long effort to inform and calm you, and don't have any more time or patience to waste on it.

If you are uninformed, it's because you won't hear the answers given.

Last edited by Trail_Fanatic; March 21st, 2007 at 02:48 PM.
Trail_Fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 05:37 PM   #72
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trail_Fanatic View Post
"...If you have a question that's one thing, but to make an accusation without doing your research first is quite another.

Actually, funding this IS in my letter...."
C'mon. Pat; I knew without even looking that 'funding' was beyond the grasp of anybody's interest or comprehension in the letters posted previously...and your letter wasn't (and still isn't) even posted to begin with.

You claim that funding of any kind hasn't even been discuused by your super-secret and anonymous MMRC to date...yet you want to take Ironman's advice in not providing the simple document that proves this. (if you haven't noticed, Ironman has been long on insults; yet short on tackling even 'one' of the scores of issues brought forth here that both he and you should certainly be up on as our representative members of that same council).

Personally?

I'm sick and tired of everybody from southeast Michigan looking to the Federal and State government to fund both their social programs and their fun on the weekends.

Please give us the details on how this new system will be funded and why you feel that funding shouldn't/hasn't nbeen discussed at your un-published MMRC meetings....and we'll all quit wondering why this information isn't availiable without bugging you... in the first place.

Last edited by OneManBanned; March 21st, 2007 at 08:33 PM.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 07:48 PM   #73
phittie1100
Senior Member
 
phittie1100's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-27-05
Location: Burton, MI
Posts: 1,866
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

OMB I am convinced after reading your numerous posts over the last month (which all say the same thing over and over and over and over again) that you really have nothing to contribute to a meaningful conversation about our public lands. You continually attack the handful of people who put forth the time and effort to get involved. You fail to engage people in manner that promotes an exchange of ideas; instead you constantly bash everyone over the head with your opinion and your views, as though your way of thinking is the only correct way to look at a problem. If you don't like the way we do things, if you don't think the efforts we make are useful or if you don't see any value in our opinions, then please go find somewhere else to make your case. You are not winning any converts here, unless they are lurking and not participating in the conversation. Ironman and others have just quit responding to you because there is nothing to be gained by it. You make some valid points every once in a while, but it gets drowned out by the rhetoric and constant accusations, allegations, and innuendos.

Do you have a plan, a proposal, a course of action? Lay it out for us, tell us why you think it will work better than something that has been tried in the past, or maybe it is something that has been overlooked, or a new idea that needs to be fleshed out through an exchange of ideas. Until then, quit clogging up this forum and potentially scaring away someone new to the sport that may be interested in helping, or an experienced user of our public lands that is looking for a way to get more involved.
__________________
Paul - 2005 Wrangler Unlimited
KD8PAV
phittie1100 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 09:32 PM   #74
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phittie1100 View Post
"OMB...Do you have a plan, a proposal, a course of action? Lay it out for us..."
#1) Open the Michigan orv advisory board back up to the general public:

The citizens of this state have been barred from offering up not one, but two applicants to this board representing orv users for over two years now; not to mention the long time period these same people were allowed to act atonommously when the search was delayed for several other sitting members for almost as long. No fresh public commentary has been allowed during that time period and to date; no new orv representive member has offered anything of substance to the meeting minutes.(an absence that actually began long before; as I can find no record of them attending before they were installed).

We cannot, for years, after repeated requests, get these people to simply publish their contact info as the snowmobilers proudly do.

We cannot force them to bring back the stenographer we had perviously to properly record who said what and when for the public record.

We cannot force them to hold meetings nor promise to publish the meeting minutes in any given time period.

We cannot force them to provide simple ground rules for public speaking at the meetings....presently forcing the public to wait 3 months before they reveal just "how it will be different" after literally years demanding that they do just that with nothing but arrogant and rude insistence that they couldn't.

There is absolutely no mechanism which forces the DNR to publish the information presented to them representing the orv community's current views on the critical matters which affect us...or do so in a timely manner. (see the MMRC document that nobody was going to by gosh publish until they were literally shamed into it).

The DNR 'gatekeeps' all requests for information regarding our representative board members; effectively allowing them to assess and quantify all interest the public may or may not have in the program itself...and pull the unannounced multi-year term extensions above off with measured risk.

This is one subject outlining exactly what you ask for.
You may not want me to continue with parts 2 through "10"...yet I think there's enough here to get you started or breed yet even more crass insults...you take your pick.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 09:37 PM   #75
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Update....well, it looks like I've been asked to leave the board permanently or be banned.

Good luck with getting your computer to work in publishing that MMRC document.

Thanks for letting me have my say.

John
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2007, 09:51 PM   #76
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,104
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

For the very first time I can say that I read and understood what onemanbanned is saying.

You spelled out that there is no form of requirement for the DNR to post meeting minutes. I agree that we should have that.

John, please, please, stop making accusations to TF. He is making progress at the NFS level and has the guidance of two different lawyers, one being the UFWDA attorney. HE IS GOING ABOUT IT THE RIGHT AND LEGAL WAY.

I really don't care if you do or don't like Dick Rany. But it irritates the S$%t out of me that you make snide remarks about him and others. You are not part of the MMRC and it pisses you off. Guess what? Neither am I. I don't know who they are and don't care. Why? Because at the end of the day I don't believe they have any voice with any clout. By making long winded posts that are 90% pissed off, it drives away others that may get involved.

I too was shut down at an ORV advisory board meeting where they refused to answer my questions. But making enemies will not get me any further.

I have a good relationship with Pete Lumborg who is the head honcho at Silver Lake. Why? Because I politely approached him after a meeting and he has continued to have dialog with me. We haven't accomplished anything but he takes the time to reply to me.

Keep in mind that this is a full size 4x4 site. Yes, there are those that use other types of ORV's for recreation but you will not get much response when discussing the 50" issues.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2007, 10:34 AM   #77
OneManBanned
Member
 
Join Date: 02-10-07
Location: Kzoo
Posts: 84
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Posted by WhiteRhino:
"...You are not part of the MMRC...I don't know who they are and don't care. Why? Because at the end of the day I don't believe they have any voice with any clout....."

Announcement by the DNR's Chairman of (quote/unquote) "our" Michigan Orv Advisory Board (AMA Legislative Director District 14):

"..Let me assure anyone reading (that)...any decisions that are major, [COLOR="yellow"]WE MAKE THEM[/COLOR] together through MMRC.
I WILL NEVER REVEAL "who" all the allies are in MMRC, some things in politics, you just don't share"


Since I've been accused of not being 'nice' to many who never deserved it....please answer me why some of you don't have the guts to loudly correct WhiteRhino on his original naieve statement....when he is obviously mis-informed?

When MMRC council members Trail Fanatic and Ironman read blatant untruths like this...and then CHOOSE to keep their mouths shut instead of simply correcting him on this council's obviously powerful and autonomous role...you can see why many of us out here have no more respect for the two of them than the blatantly arrogant author of the quote above.

Again, there are a lot of good folks out here who don't play these childish little games...and who certainly aren't shy about calling out those who DO when it affects OUR trail resource.(and before I go...where is this MMRC document expressing MY views on Michigan orv issues that TF suddenly developed this case of 'cold feet' on...or was he possibly TOLD otherwise?).

Last edited by OneManBanned; March 24th, 2007 at 10:48 AM.
OneManBanned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24th, 2007, 11:21 PM   #78
Roadhouse
DrivewayJeeper
 
Roadhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sanford
Posts: 10,956
iTrader: (5)
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Default

Onemanbanned I thought you where asked to leave the board or get banned? You are doing more damage here then good, please quit posting.
Roadhouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2007, 10:56 AM   #79
whiterhino
I'm not old, honest...
 
whiterhino's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-07-06
Location: Davisburg MI
Posts: 22,104
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Default

Well, I have officially been driven away from this forum. I refuse to respond to any thread that onemanbanned posts on. Being told that I am "misinformed" is totally wrong. I have drawn my own conclusions from my own observations. And I guess I am "naieve" also. No one is influencing me or needs to defend me.

I am done.
whiterhino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2007, 06:34 PM   #80
Trail_Fanatic
Member since 1994
 
Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-25-06
Location: Muskegon and Oceana Counties
Posts: 3,175
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
I really hate to bring up
Lack of my letter being posted is the only pertinent topic here (oversight from being busy, and always "on to the next thing that's due").

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trail_Fanatic View Post
I guess since you
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
C'mon. Pat;
Quote:
Originally Posted by phittie1100 View Post
OMB I am convinced
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
#1) Open the Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
Update...
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
For the very first time
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneManBanned View Post
Announcement by the DNR's Chairman
[quote=Roadhouse;480678]Onemanbanned [quote]

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterhino View Post
Well,
These are not pertinent to this topic, and are more closely suited to:

Our super-secret and anonymous representative council ( 1 2)
OneManBanned

This is a thread about a developing NFS Project.

Can I get you to move them, Yetti?
I'll respond over there.

Last edited by Trail_Fanatic; March 25th, 2007 at 06:42 PM.
Trail_Fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:05 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.59537 seconds with 81 queries