Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > There's Moore: Roy, AL, & the Election

There's Moore: Roy, AL, & the Election
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2017, 06:43 PM
 
Figured he needs his own thread since news keeps happening. I think I missed two more women coming forward, one with a worse story? That he was such a nuisance he got banned from a mall? That when a young girl didn't given him her number he called her at school such as she had to be pulled out of class to take the call!

Best part is Trump's silence. It's a total no win on several fronts. He's already pissed he was talked into backing Strange who then lost, shattering the illusion that he has the power to choose winners and losers. Now he has the choice of backing a man accused of sexual assault (which would also open him up to more questions about his own past) or go against him and risk looking dumb again when he's likely elected.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 08:39 PM
 
https://twitter.com/DomenicoNPR/stat...12670490443776
Gov. Kay Ivey says, “I have no reason to disbelieve any of them” [the women] and yet is going to vote for Moore bc "We need to have a Republican in the United States Senate" to vote for Supreme Court justices #2017
"He may be an alleged pedophile, but he's our alleged pedophile"
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 08:59 PM
 
I’d phrase it as “if we don’t get significantly conservative justices on the court, America will be destroyed.

If those are the stakes, this gets overlooked.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 09:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’d phrase it as “if we don’t get significantly conservative justices on the court, America will be destroyed.

If those are the stakes, this gets overlooked.
There's no vacancies. Though between this and the White House releasing an updated list of candidates, maybe RBG should get a food taster.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 09:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’d phrase it as “if we don’t get significantly conservative justices on the court, America will be destroyed.

If those are the stakes, this gets overlooked.
So they will overlook everything in perpetuity? Or until they successfully rig the court system?
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 09:05 PM
 
The fact that Trump got elected already proved that point. "We will elect an incontinent tourrette monkey as long as he will put conservatives on benches."
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2017, 09:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’d phrase it as “if we don’t get significantly conservative justices on the court, America will be destroyed.

If those are the stakes, this gets overlooked.
Triple-post:

Isn't this an example of asymmetrical polarization?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 03:13 AM
 
I’m not sure I understand.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 03:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
So they will overlook everything in perpetuity? Or until they successfully rig the court system?
Everybody is going to have their limits.

At least she’s being straightforward about it, as opposed to rationalizing the unlikely conclusion he’s innocent, or thinking he’s guilty and lying.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 03:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
There's no vacancies. Though between this and the White House releasing an updated list of candidates, maybe RBG should get a food taster.
There could very easily be one or two between now and 2020.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 04:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m not sure I understand.
If one side is willing to disregard their morals in order to gain power and the other isn't, that is asymmetric polarization, is it not?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 06:01 PM
 
The whole point is she’s not abandoning her morals. These are her morals. Her morals consistently prioritize what she thinks will keep American society together.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 06:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Everybody is going to have their limits.
This is gobbledygook.

'Everybody is going to have there limits' Isn't this a truism? The contention isn't that there are limits. The contention is that the current limits don't reflect the image they they project. The contention is that they are blatantly hypocritical. That if Doug Jones was an alleged pedophile, they would deem that as disqualifying.


Originally Posted by subego View Post
At least she’s being straightforward about it, as opposed to rationalizing the unlikely conclusion he’s innocent, or thinking he’s guilty and lying.
This isn't laudable – its symptomatic of how polarized we've come – we no longer even lie that we're disregarding our own ethics and morals for political gain. This isn't honesty because they hold truthfulness in such high regard, it's honesty through a lack of shame.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 06:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
There could very easily be one or two between now and 2020.
There could always be a vacancy. Which goes back to:
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
So they will overlook everything in perpetuity?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 07:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The whole point is she’s not abandoning her morals. These are her morals. Her morals consistently prioritize what she thinks will keep American society together.
I'm dizzy.

"Keep American society together" isn't a moral, that's a goal.
"Pedophilia is wrong" is a moral.
"Pedophilia is less important than keeping American society together" is a rationalization.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 07:03 PM
 
This is the moment where I have to ask, at the risk of insulting you, do you really believe this or are you just playing devil's advocate?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 18, 2017, 07:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
The fact that Trump got elected already proved that point. "We will elect an incontinent tourrette monkey as long as he will put conservatives on benches."
Since we're knee deep in philosophy my vocabulary is really struggling here; There's probably a term for this our friends here in academia know that I can't come up with.

It lowers their morality to a level I don't think they'd profess to endorse. Instead of "How many babies would you kill to cure cancer" the question has become "How many women will you assault to stop abortion?"
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 05:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I'm dizzy.

"Keep American society together" isn't a moral, that's a goal.
"Pedophilia is wrong" is a moral.
"Pedophilia is less important than keeping American society together" is a rationalization.
and destroying your society in order to protect it is a madness.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 08:45 AM
 
Am I the only one here who were I in a swing state, would still vote for Hillary even if it came out she had sexually forced herself on minors?

I consider this a better option than Trump.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 09:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Am I the only one here who were I in a swing state, would still vote for Hillary even if it came out she had sexually forced herself on minors?

I consider this a better option than Trump.
voting for someone who had comprehensively PROVED themselves fundamentally suited to any office as well as having behaved in a way contrary to all human standards of decency vs someone who you PERCEIVE to be a bad choice. That seems like a bad move.

Also you have other choices. Not to vote for either? Vote for a.n. other?
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 09:36 AM
 
In a swing state, voting* for neither or a third party is letting Trump win.

Do you mean fundamentally unsuited?


*Autocorrect somehow thought I meant Virgin Galactic.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 11:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In a swing state, voting* for neither or a third party is letting Trump win.

Do you mean fundamentally unsuited?


*Autocorrect somehow thought I meant Virgin Galactic.
a) yes. sorry

b) but everyone has the same choice as you. Also if I don't someone else will is never a good argument for morality based decision making.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 12:07 PM
 
How is this “if I don’t someone else will”?

Not voting for Hillary in a swing state aids Trump. There’s no other way to look at this.
( Last edited by subego; Nov 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM. )
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 05:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Am I the only one here who were I in a swing state, would still vote for Hillary even if it came out she had sexually forced herself on minors?

I consider this a better option than Trump.
This is an awfully big hypothetical, with lots of possible complications, but if I was convinced Hillary had sexually forced herself on minors, then no, I would not vote for her under any reasonable circumstances.

i.e., Her not running against someone as bad or worse then a pedophile.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 05:32 PM
 
Then I’d be here trying to convince you to vote for her anyway.

And we thought this timeline was strange.

Can I pry and ask what state is your home away from home?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 05:38 PM
 
It just occurred to me Hillary sexually forcing herself on minors may have put Illinois into play, thus causing me to vote for her.

In other words, the way she earns my vote is by raping someone.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 07:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
How is this “if I don’t someone else will”?
It's the same thing. You keep your hands clean. It's up to others to do the same. If they don't it's their votes that aid "Trump", not yours.

I'm with Paco. The situation you describe it's simply not morally conscionable to vote for that person.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 07:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Then I’d be here trying to convince you to vote for her anyway.

And we thought this timeline was strange.

Can I pry and ask what state is your home away from home?
Swing state, although trending blue for a while now. Virginia.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 09:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Am I the only one here who were I in a swing state, would still vote for Hillary even if it came out she had sexually forced herself on minors?

I consider this a better option than Trump.
If the two choices are Hillary and Trump then the forcing themselves on minors cancels out since we know he has done it too, or we know he has done very close to it so we can be reasonable confident he has done that too. So she still beats him hands down on all other issues and therefore remains the sensible choice.

Voting for neither is a vote for Trump.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2017, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In other words, the way she earns my vote is by raping someone.
What if she just raped Trump?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 12:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
It's the same thing. You keep your hands clean. It's up to others to do the same. If they don't it's their votes that aid "Trump", not yours.
In reality, Hillary isn’t a pedo, and I voted for neither.

If I was in a swing state, would that be helping Trump?
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 01:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
If the two choices are Hillary and Trump then the forcing themselves on minors cancels out since we know he has done it too, or we know he has done very close to it so we can be reasonable confident he has done that too. So she still beats him hands down on all other issues and therefore remains the sensible choice.

Voting for neither is a vote for Trump.
Yeah lets not get TOO bogged down on the specifics, H and T were just analogues representing possible behaviours.

As far as I think, there is no justifiable reason for voting for anyone who has abused children, whatever the unintended effects.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 01:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Yeah lets not get TOO bogged down on the specifics, H and T were just analogues representing possible behaviours.

As far as I think, there is no justifiable reason for voting for anyone who has abused children, whatever the unintended effects.
This is different than claiming a person isn’t responsible for the unintended effects of their actions.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
If the two choices are Hillary and Trump then the forcing themselves on minors cancels out since we know he has done it too, or we know he has done very close to it so we can be reasonable confident he has done that too. So she still beats him hands down on all other issues and therefore remains the sensible choice.

Voting for neither is a vote for Trump.
I was talking Roy Moore style.

Whatever faults one can attribute to Trump, he doesn’t have a rep for this.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 09:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I was talking Roy Moore style.

Whatever faults one can attribute to Trump, he doesn’t have a rep for this.
Except he does.

He's been accused by multiple women of deliberately walking into the dressing rooms of teen Miss World Pageants when he knew they were changing. Something he has admitted doing I believe in regards to the adult version so its not really any kind of stretch.

He was accused of being present and "involved" at those Jeffrey Epstein parties and was facing a lawsuit on the matter until he won the presidency and who can criticise a frightened abuse victim for changing her mind about going up against a billionaire president with no apparent moral code whatsoever?

Then theres all the creepiness around his own daughter. My guess is it will come out after he's dead. At least to her therapist.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 10:24 PM
 
I bet I can find a hundred people who would go on the record saying Moore has always liked them young, along with however many people who were actually young who have come forward.

No dots have to be connected with Moore.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 04:28 PM
 
There we go, Trump finally couldn't hold it and all but endorsed the pedophile
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 07:21 PM
 
No responses to my posts?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 07:43 PM
 
Well, I kinda shifted gears a bit with my Hillary scenario, but I felt it was still addressing the fundamental question.

It looks like I’d cut Hillary way more slack than anyone here because I feel that’s still better than Trump.

So, no one agrees with me, but I’m assuming my thought process isn’t from outer space.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 07:59 PM
 
Well, I feel like you made several bad points, so it's up to you to either defend or concede them. Changing the scenario just irritates me further because it feels like you're trying to slip away from what looked like some really strange thinking.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 08:20 PM
 
I’m trying to defend those points.

I’m arguing the thinking I’m displaying in the Hillary scenario is equivalent to the thinking on display by Ivey.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 09:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I bet I can find a hundred people who would go on the record saying Moore has always liked them young, along with however many people who were actually young who have come forward.

No dots have to be connected with Moore.
Are you saying they do with Trump?

At this point its all allegations. The only reason Trump's court case went away is because he people knew what he was like and voted him POTUS anyway. He was never going to lose that case even if he didn't resort to some underhand abuse of power. Same would be true of Moore if there wasn't a higher (national rather than state media) power watching. If his senate race was less important and these details were kept more local, he'd likely win and then his cronies on the bench and in law enforcement would help him brush it all under the carpet. And thats assuming Trump won't pardon him.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2017, 01:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Are you saying they do with Trump?
To make the case he’s a pedo?

Yes.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2017, 01:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Changing the scenario just irritates me further because it feels like you're trying to slip away from what looked like some really strange thinking.
I want to respect the amount of time you have available to dedicate to the forum, but my response to this personal attack demands your attention.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2017, 01:43 PM
 
Dakar, why are you treating me like a piece of shit?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2017, 10:39 AM
 
I shall consider this obvious indication you do not consider me worth your time.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2017, 06:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m trying to defend those points.

I’m arguing the thinking I’m displaying in the Hillary scenario is equivalent to the thinking on display by Ivey.
Let me break this down into the points I made that I feel got washed away with the question change.

1.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Everybody is going to have their limits.
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Isn't this a truism?

2.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
At least she’s being straightforward about it
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
[Isn't this] honesty through a lack of shame[?]

3.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
There could very easily be [a supreme court vacancy] between now and 2020.
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
So they will overlook [their morals] in perpetuity?

4.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Her morals consistently prioritize what she thinks will keep American society together.
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
"Keep American society together" isn't a moral, that's a goal.
"Pedophilia is wrong" is a moral.
"Pedophilia is less important than keeping American society together" is a rationalization.
Is my summary in #4 incorrect?


5.
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Isn't [abandoning your morals for political expediency] an example of asymmetrical polarization?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2017, 06:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
It lowers their morality to a level I don't think they'd profess to endorse. Instead of "How many babies would you kill to cure cancer" the question has become "How many women will you assault to stop abortion?"
To clarify this point, what I'm saying is there is a string contingent (such as Ted Cruz) who view themselves as Christians first, Republicans second. I do not believe a Christian would knowingly out a child predator in a position of power, no matter the reason. A republican would.

My contention is these people who are willing to dismiss Moore's (and Trump's) faults would likely identify as Christians first, but their actions do no match the rhetoric. Agree?



Originally Posted by subego View Post
Am I the only one here who were I in a swing state, would still vote for Hillary even if it came out she had sexually forced herself on minors?

I consider this a better option than Trump.
There is a few differences here, and a few similarities.

1. AFAIK you do not profess to be a Christian first and foremost.
2. As someone who I believe leans towards pragmatism, making a politically expedient choice here doesn't fundamentally violate who you portray yourself to be. It actually reinforces it.

That lets me restate my point: Christians who abandon their morals for politics are ideologically inconsistent, IMO. Within the political history of their group within this country, they are also an anomaly.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2017, 10:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I want to respect the amount of time you have available to dedicate to the forum, but my response to this personal attack demands your attention.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Dakar, why are you treating me like a piece of shit?
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I shall consider this obvious indication you do not consider me worth your time.
Turns out this was me overreacting as usual. My apologies.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2017, 08:20 PM
 
Forgot about this joke on twitter:
1970s gay teachers? they'll molest kids!
1980s gays in your home? they'll molest kids!
1990s gays adopting? they'll molest kids!
2000s gay marriage? they'll molest kids!
2010s transfolk using restrooms? they'll molest kids!
2017 What's the big deal with politicians molesting kids
Lays out the hypocrisy even further.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum 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
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:05 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,