Progarchives.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Suggest New Bands and Artists
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: XTC
  FAQ FAQ  Forum SearchSearch  Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

XTC

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7582
Post Options Post Options   Quote ExittheLemming Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: XTC
    Posted: July 05 2013 at 10:16
^ OK, I don't have an axe to grind about any team but the forum is the designated place to discuss and debate the merit or otherwise of artists that are included in the PA database (after all, we are precluded from doing same in any reviews as per the site guidelines) You are clearly a perceptive individual, but think through what you're saying here: if anyone questions the inclusion of any artist in any sub genre then that is a negative judgement on the respective genre team: so we shouldn't do it? we shouldn't use the forums to discuss the classification criteria employed by the site? we shouldn't strive to refine and improve the process employed to classify/define artists/bands? You are kidding right?WinkWinkWink
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8329
Post Options Post Options   Quote thellama73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2013 at 12:33
Originally posted by Windhawk

Actually, I believe it's their final studio album "Boingo" from 1994 that made OB's inclusion. I didn't listen and vote myself on this one, but some google's on this disc reveals associations thrown towards the likes of Beatles, Floyd's "Animals" and bands like Idiot Flesh by those who have given it a few spins. Others will have to argue for the merits of those associations, as these are opinions voiced by people outside of this site found on the net - or RYM to be precise.

Three collaborators with normally rather different points of view did give them an aye to be included, so it's not an inclusion based on a solitary point of view as such either.


I can understand thinking that album has some prog leanings. The songs are long and the compositions complex. But since we add bands rather than albums, it seems silly to add a decidedly non-prog band based on one, only very slightly prog album.
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7582
Post Options Post Options   Quote ExittheLemming Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2013 at 13:09
^ It should be remembered that as far as fully fledged pedigree Prog goes: one bona fide Prog album is all that is required to have an artist included in our archive i.e Max has deemed that if the foregoing qualification is satisfied: all previous and subsequent albums are included irrespective of prog content. Like I said before, I ain't heard the 'Boingo' album but am advised that misgivings about any artists inclusion on PA is a direct slight on the integrity of the relevant sub genre team and is definitely NOT encouraged
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: September 03 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5417
Post Options Post Options   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2013 at 23:26
I am afraid not much progress can be made with that approach.  It seems left field suggestions as well as dissent to left field inclusions are both shot down with equal alacrity.   When a member suggesting a band has to make compelling arguments as to why they must be prog, it is surely not unreasonable to expect that the sub genre team or some members of it should be able to explain why a particular band was found to be prog according to them.  At least based on which album/tracks.  They don't have to convert anybody to their opinion but, sorry, mounting a wall is only going to prompt self same discussion again and again and again. 
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8329
Post Options Post Options   Quote thellama73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2013 at 10:06
Originally posted by ExittheLemming

^ It should be remembered that as far as fully fledged pedigree Prog goes: one bona fide Prog album is all that is required to have an artist included in our archive i.e Max has deemed that if the foregoing qualification is satisfied: all previous and subsequent albums are included irrespective of prog content. Like I said before, I ain't heard the 'Boingo' album but am advised that misgivings about any artists inclusion on PA is a direct slight on the integrity of the relevant sub genre team and is definitely NOT encouraged


I have no wish to question the integrity of any admission team. I think they all do great work. At the same time, I think the policy of never questioning previous additions is misguided, and leads to frustration among the site's members.

Consider the following situation, which happens with some regularity. Band X is clearly more progressive than Band Y. Band Y was admitted years ago, and yet Band X is denied admission. Naturally, the person who suggested Band X wants to know why. We are forbidden from saying "well, adding Band Y might have been a mistake" so we are forced to give the standard non-answer of "the presence of one band does not imply the inclusion of a similar band." From the perspective of the person submitting bands, this seems arbitrary and unfair.

I hate to see any type of discussion that could potentially improve the site squashed on the grounds that somebody's feelings might be hurt. I understand that site policies are site policies, but that does not mean they can never be changed, nor that they should never be. Dissent is a key element in any organization, necessary to keep it grounded in common sense, so I like to have these conversations even if they ultimately lead nowhere.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 27049
Post Options Post Options   Quote Slartibartfast Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2013 at 16:09
Originally posted by Dean

...Mayor of Simpleton
Geek

Does Simpleton have a web site??? LOL
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Online Status: Online
Posts: 3917
Post Options Post Options   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2013 at 17:18
Originally posted by thellama73

Originally posted by ExittheLemming

^ It should be remembered that as far as fully fledged pedigree Prog goes: one bona fide Prog album is all that is required to have an artist included in our archive i.e Max has deemed that if the foregoing qualification is satisfied: all previous and subsequent albums are included irrespective of prog content. Like I said before, I ain't heard the 'Boingo' album but am advised that misgivings about any artists inclusion on PA is a direct slight on the integrity of the relevant sub genre team and is definitely NOT encouraged


I have no wish to question the integrity of any admission team. I think they all do great work. At the same time, I think the policy of never questioning previous additions is misguided, and leads to frustration among the site's members.

Consider the following situation, which happens with some regularity. Band X is clearly more progressive than Band Y. Band Y was admitted years ago, and yet Band X is denied admission. Naturally, the person who suggested Band X wants to know why. We are forbidden from saying "well, adding Band Y might have been a mistake" so we are forced to give the standard non-answer of "the presence of one band does not imply the inclusion of a similar band." From the perspective of the person submitting bands, this seems arbitrary and unfair.

I hate to see any type of discussion that could potentially improve the site squashed on the grounds that somebody's feelings might be hurt. I understand that site policies are site policies, but that does not mean they can never be changed, nor that they should never be. Dissent is a key element in any organization, necessary to keep it grounded in common sense, so I like to have these conversations even if they ultimately lead nowhere.
 
 
That works for me......and questioning the nature of what bands are prog or not is part of the reason people post and are interested in the forum. And I don't think any of the collaborators should feel offended if their decisions are questioned.
Et In Arcadia Ego
Back to Top
AreYouHuman View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2013
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 239
Post Options Post Options   Quote AreYouHuman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2013 at 20:25
Originally posted by rogerthat

It seems left field suggestions as well as dissent to left field inclusions are both shot down with equal alacrity.   When a member suggesting a band has to make compelling arguments as to why they must be prog, it is surely not unreasonable to expect that the sub genre team or some members of it should be able to explain why a particular band was found to be prog according to them. At least based on which album/tracks. They don't have to convert anybody to their opinion but, sorry, mounting a wall is only going to prompt self same discussion again and again and again.

Originally posted by thellama73

I hate to see any type of discussion that could potentially improve the site squashed on the grounds that somebody's feelings might be hurt. I understand that site policies are site policies, but that does not mean they can never be changed, nor that they should never be. Dissent is a key element in any organization, necessary to keep it grounded in common sense, so I like to have these conversations even if they ultimately lead nowhere.

Originally posted by dr wu73

That works for me......and questioning the nature of what bands are prog or not is part of the reason people post and are interested in the forum. And I don't think any of the collaborators should feel offended if their decisions are questioned.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 32564
Post Options Post Options   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2013 at 20:41
^ you do know they were talking about questioning the addition of controversial bands, not the rejection of non-Prog bands I assume. Wink


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
maani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Founding Moderator

Joined: January 30 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2626
Post Options Post Options   Quote maani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 12:01
As the very first person to lobby for the inclusion of XTC on Progarchives, let me weigh in here.  Indeed, it is no secret that I LEFT Progarchives over the battle whether to include Queen, who I felt was an inappropriate inclusion on the site because, other than perhaps two songs (Bohemian Rhapsody, prophet's Song) and, arguably, parts of Queen II, they were no more "prog" than Elton John.  (No aspersions on the great EJ here...)

There are two arguments being made here as to why NOT to include XTC.

The first is that they are not "prog."  Yet when I asked Max and Rony what the "qualifications" were (during the battle over Queen), they indicated that even the little that Queen DID offer was enough.  This was also their defense of adding 10CC, based solely on the strength of one song (One Night in Paris).  (Again, no aspersions on 10CC, whom I LOVE - see my reviews.)

In this regard, XTC has at least half a dozen compositions that are as "proggy" as anything Queen or 10CC has done.  So by Max and Rony's OWN STANDARDS, XTC should be included.

The second argument being made against XTC's inclusion is the "reverse" of this: i.e., that other bands who ARE here don't belong here (or should at least be re-classified), so XTC should not be included.

This is a truly spurious argument.  First, those other bands ARE here (whether some of us believe they should be or not), so following that logic, XTC SHOULD be here.

As importantly, it took me a while to understand Max and Rony's logic in adding Queen.  Ultimately, it had less to do with whether Queen was actually "prog" than with increasing the number of people who visited PA: i.e., add a band, and the fans of that band might (or will) come to PA to review and/or discuss them.  And although I originally considered this cynically mercenary of them, I grew to understand that there is nothing inherently wrong with it.  After all, a site cannot maintain itself if it does not get new visitors/members.  That is, if PA were to hold to a very rigid definition of "prog," it would ultimately end up with a "stagnated" membership, and might not survive.

So Max and Rony broadened their definition, and added new categories to include proto-prog, prog-related, crossover prog, etc.  It almost does not matter which of those categories a given band fits in, or even whether those categories "make sense."  What matters is that by increasing the number of bands they can "reasonably" include on a "prog" archive, they bring in new visitors and new members, allowing the site to continue to be viable.

So...given that that is their philosophy (and, again, I have learned to understand and accept it), then XTC should UNQUESTIONABLY be included on PA.

As an aside, I had suggested a new category called "progressive pop" (though not meaning the more pejorative definition of "pop").  I would include in that category 10CC, Queen, XTC, Supertamp, ELO, Styx, Klaatu, and other similar groups.

In any case, I continue to be mystified by PA's refusal to include XTC given that (i) they qualify as "prog" in the same way that bands like 10CC and Queen do (and even MORESO than bands like Talking Heads), and (ii) even if that were not the case, they include as many or more prog elements in more of their music than bands like Queen, Talking Heads, et al.

Max?  Rony?  Don't you think it's time to give XTC their due - to add another popular "prog-related" band (and their fans), and give current members a chance to review their extensive catalog, and discuss them in prog forums?

Peace.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 32564
Post Options Post Options   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 12:56
The attracting new visitors argument doesn't really float when we confine the additions to single artists or bands, for example we didn't see a marked influx of Metallicacaca, Ironing Maiden or Hendrix fans when those three "biggies" were added to Prog Related and there aren't a mass of Talking Heads fans marauding the forum dressed in over-sized suits. The people who visit here are Prog fans who, like all of us, listen to other music as well, perhaps they see Queen or Muse listed here and think, 'oh, that's curious', (or not), but I would say very few, if any, came here looking for Queen and found Caravan or Harmonium (speak up if you did). The people who like XTC and Prog are probably already here.
 
I think it possibly does work when we broaden our remit to include whole subgenres of artists, such as Math Rock, but the times we can do that are rare and I can't see how we can shoe-horn a made-up post-punk progressive subgenre into the current scheme of things along side Neo Prog to account for all those 80s bands that did clever things with music, because I don't see how XTC can be justified without including The Stranglers, Magazine, The Sound,  PIL, Random Hold, Comsat Angels, Icicle Works, Slow Children, The Cure, The Banshees, Passage, Tuxedomoon, World Of Twist, Dukes Of The Stratosphere, Head Of David, Chrome, Gentlemen Without Weapons, The Psychedelic Furs and The Punishment of Luxury (to name a few - there's plenty more where they came from).


Edited by Dean - July 08 2013 at 16:04


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8329
Post Options Post Options   Quote thellama73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 13:03
^Queen and 10CC are here as prog related artists, not as prog artists, so I'm not sure what that has to do with XTC being considered as a prog artist.

Lobbying for the inclusion of prog related artists is never going to be a winning proposition, because the admins think that category is getting too big as it is and want to keep the site focussed on genuinely prog artists.
Back to Top
akamaisondufromage View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Online Status: Online
Posts: 6152
Post Options Post Options   Quote akamaisondufromage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 13:13
A new catagory of 'PeopleWhoLikeProgAlsoLike'.  Great band though! 
Help me I'm falling!
Back to Top
yam yam View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 16 2011
Location: UK (West Mids.)
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3003
Post Options Post Options   Quote yam yam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 15:30
^^^^ (@maani) Thank you very much for this post. This certainly adds a whole new dimension to my perception of how progarchives has developed into its current format. If the site wasn't already struggling to cope with a seemingly exponential rise in the number of new band/artist suggestions (both prog and otherwise) then the creation of a 'progressive pop' (or similar) category would definitely provide a means of dealing with these controversial artists that seem to crop up all too regularly on here, but as Dean says - there would be a hell of lot of them to take into consideration, and as things stand at the moment there just wouldn't be the resources available to be allocated to the task. Interesting idea though... Smile
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site and Forum Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Eel Castle (DK)
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12389
Post Options Post Options   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 15:57
I see both sides actually, but no matter how much I believe that the real progressive rock and indeed progressive music mostly was outside of prog from ca 1976 and onwards, PA as of now is still about prog rock and its affiliates(Krautrock, Zeuhl, RIO, Avant and the electronic music that helped shape a lot of these branchings.)
The danger of opening up to a progressive artist like XTC who popped up with post-punk, is that you would have to include so many others, just like Dean says. XTC weren't half as experimental as say Wire or Chrome - and they don't really fit in here either. Prog is not a badge of honour - it's a style of music, which this particular website deals with. If it dealt with progressive music then sure we could have Infected Mushroom, Ol' Dirty b*****d, Scott Walker, Prokofiev, Rage Against The Machine, Sun Ra, Boris, Edith Piaf, Sarah Vaughn, Sonic Youth, FSOL, F*ck Buttons, Pharoah Sanders, AMM(Music), Edgar Varese, Sergio Leone, Stravinsky, Mano Chao, Prodigy, Bob Marley, Type O Negative, Aphex Twin, Cannibal Corpse, Velvet Underground, Bob Dylan, Cream, Funkadelic, Flamin Lips, James Brown, Cocteau Twins, Wu Tang Clan, The Trashmen, The Orb, John Lennon, Neelix, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band, Neil Young and indeed XTC up in this mother........but then again we might as well call it Music Archives without Mariah Carey and Sha-na-na.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Smurph View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2407
Post Options Post Options   Quote Smurph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 18:17
Originally posted by Guldbamsen

I see both sides actually, but no matter how much I believe that the real progressive rock and indeed progressive music mostly was outside of prog from ca 1976 and onwards, PA as of now is still about prog rock and its affiliates(Krautrock, Zeuhl, RIO, Avant and the electronic music that helped shape a lot of these branchings.)
The danger of opening up to a progressive artist like XTC who popped up with post-punk, is that you would have to include so many others, just like Dean says. XTC weren't half as experimental as say Wire or Chrome - and they don't really fit in here either. Prog is not a badge of honour - it's a style of music, which this particular website deals with. If it dealt with progressive music then sure we could have Infected Mushroom, Ol' Dirty b*****d, Scott Walker, Prokofiev, Rage Against The Machine, Sun Ra, Boris, Edith Piaf, Sarah Vaughn, Sonic Youth, FSOL, F*ck Buttons, Pharoah Sanders, AMM(Music), Edgar Varese, Sergio Leone, Stravinsky, Mano Chao, Prodigy, Bob Marley, Type O Negative, Aphex Twin, Cannibal Corpse, Velvet Underground, Bob Dylan, Cream, Funkadelic, Flamin Lips, James Brown, Cocteau Twins, Wu Tang Clan, The Trashmen, The Orb, John Lennon, Neelix, The Paul Butterfield Blues Band, Neil Young and indeed XTC up in this mother........but then again we might as well call it Music Archives without Mariah Carey and Sha-na-na.


Nomeansno I think deserves to be here more than any of these people.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Albion
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 32564
Post Options Post Options   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 19:09
Ermm 


If you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would - Neil Gaiman
Back to Top
Smurph View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2407
Post Options Post Options   Quote Smurph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 19:30
I didn't mean to make it sound like that.

What I mean is, if we included xtc, then we would basically have to take many of those bands, and nomeansno included. Blergh. I'm half asleep.
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7582
Post Options Post Options   Quote ExittheLemming Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 21:29
Originally posted by thellama73

^Queen and 10CC are here as prog related artists, not as prog artists, so I'm not sure what that has to do with XTC being considered as a prog artist.

Lobbying for the inclusion of prog related artists is never going to be a winning proposition, because the admins think that category is getting too big as it is and want to keep the site focussed on genuinely prog artists.


Perceptive post. I too found Maani's argument to be serious flawed but would need to ask if both Queen and 10cc were admitted to the archive before there was a Prog Related category, and if so were they under say, Art Rock? Both seem entirely plausible from my limited understanding of the latter (as would Talking Heads, XTC, Wall of Voodoo, Magazine,Television and Pere Ubu etc)
Art-Rock wasn't a hybrid of proto and Prog related definitions surely?
It also seems entirely plausible that several artists included on PA that would qualify as Art-rock would not have sufficient credentials for proto-Prog or Prog related.
However, the idea of Proto and Related being created as mere window dressing to entice casual music fans to the site does not I'm sure, sit easily with many of us and seems palpably untrue.
Does anyone really give a discarded fig what Max and Rony's 'own standard' of any particular classification may or may not have been if its purpose was only that of a flimsy disingenuous ruse? The site has now taken a lot of time and trouble to have arrived at (broad and overlapping) ongoing definitions for the many sub genres. Both Proto and Prog related submissions are ultimately sanctioned and tightly controlled by the Admins, so there is precisely ZERO chance of such categories swelling to unacceptable levels and very, very few of the many Queen, 10cc, Black Sabbath, NIN, Robert Plant, Led Zep, David Bowie, Talking Heads, John Cale or XTC fans I know, would come anywhere within a million miles of PA. Apart from filling Max's pockets, I can't see what benefit there is to be gained from clogging up our relatively clean air with Sunday driver traffic Ouch


Edited by ExittheLemming - July 08 2013 at 21:56
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7582
Post Options Post Options   Quote ExittheLemming Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 08 2013 at 22:02
Originally posted by thellama73


I have no wish to question the integrity of any admission team. I think they all do great work. At the same time, I think the policy of never questioning previous additions is misguided, and leads to frustration among the site's members.

Consider the following situation, which happens with some regularity. Band X is clearly more progressive than Band Y. Band Y was admitted years ago, and yet Band X is denied admission. Naturally, the person who suggested Band X wants to know why. We are forbidden from saying "well, adding Band Y might have been a mistake" so we are forced to give the standard non-answer of "the presence of one band does not imply the inclusion of a similar band." From the perspective of the person submitting bands, this seems arbitrary and unfair.

I hate to see any type of discussion that could potentially improve the site squashed on the grounds that somebody's feelings might be hurt. I understand that site policies are site policies, but that does not mean they can never be changed, nor that they should never be. Dissent is a key element in any organization, necessary to keep it grounded in common sense, so I like to have these conversations even if they ultimately lead nowhere.



Originally posted by Windhawk

it's kind of hard to not regard this phrase, placed in a paragraph of it's very own, as a negative judgment of that very team.

I'll leave this minor storm in a minuscule cup of water now, as far as I'm concerned there's nothing more to be gained by this particular debate.


I agree wholeheartedly with thellama73 as debate should be encouraged but the trouble is, any expression of a differing view from those of the genre teams can give rise to the sort of paranoid defensiveness above Ermm


Edited by ExittheLemming - July 08 2013 at 22:06
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.69
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.281 seconds.