Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Wed Nov 13, 2024 12:44 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
Lenny's Xanga and ILB copyright issues
Moderators: imbri, ndemeter
View previous topicView next topic
Page 2 of 4 [59 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
SuperJerms
Unfettered


Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 537
Location: indiana

 		Re: copyright issues
rawr.

rose wrote:
(By the way, we don't get an educational exemption just for making a guide. It doesn't apply. I can't create a guide to the Metropolitan Museum and copy lots of images of art objects they own just because it may help people understand the museum.)


Actually, i really think you could, so long as you don't try to sell it. Not to mention that most art is public domain.

Wikipedias would absolutely be covered under fair use.
_________________
"If we could make your toaster print something we would." - Jordan Weisman

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 3:37 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
rose
...and then Magic happens


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 4117

 		copyright
Quote:
Actually, i really think you could, so long as you don't try to sell it. Not to mention that most art is public domain.


The more we discuss this the more obvious our lack of knowledge is - even if we assume that ever piece of art owned by the Museum is in the public domain -the images of it posted on the Museum's website are not. Neither are the images or text on the ilovebees website.

Wikipedia has an extensive discussion of copyright law and fair use here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights .

bill wrote:
Quote:
In response to Phaedra's verbose ranting regarding Lenny Xanga, I think she has gone way past any pretense of objectivity.


I agree. I wondered if the copyright issues were raised in part because of the cold reception recieved by the "rants" about the names of the characters in the game. I was trying to less directly raise this point by pointing out instances of use of copyrighted material - the wikis, ilovebeer and, as someone else mentioned, creeepy. No one complained about those. This did make me wonder if the campaign against Lenny's Xanga had other agendas.

I had hope that someone else would raise this point, as I posted the thread about proposed regulation of video games and free speech. But since they haven't here goes:

We evidence hypocrisy when we argue that games we like should not be regulated --like Halo2 and GTA3 which many other people find hugely objectionable and offensive because of their content--
and at the same time "self-police" by objecting to a game based on its content.
_________________
I love this site for being free, in every sense of the word~Spacebass

Mankind was my business, the common good was my business.~ Dickens

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:58 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
weephun
Entrenched


Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 908
Location: Fuquay Varina, NC

 		Re: copyright
rose wrote:
We evidence hypocrisy when we argue that games we like should not be regulated --like Halo2 and GTA3 which many other people find hugely objectionable and offensive because of their content--
and at the same time "self-police" by objecting to a game based on its content.


True, too true. Maybe as was stated before, the best way to bring people here and keep them here is not by screening/policing ARGs, but by providing an environment where people will stay in the community based on their first impression of the community rather than their first impression of whatever ARG they happened to come across first.

Quality of the ARGs will probably just be a by-product of a larger influx of interest. But hey, don't we still all have our favorite "B" movie too?
_________________
- Sean Stewart: "generally people like seeing their names on TV, although probably no one has had a more mixed experience with that then weephun, God bless him.
- Currently assisting Epic Games in their quest for world domination

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:58 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously
bill wrote:
In response


Hello, bill. I don't think we've ever corresponded directly before. I generally prefer to start more cordially, but <shrug> whatever, I guess.

Quote:
to Phaedra's verbose ranting regarding Lenny Xanga, I think she has gone way past any pretense of objectivity.


I don't think I ever claimed to be objective about this.

And as far as the "verbose," those posts, like most of my posts in which I touch on controversial subjects, was that long PRECISELY BECAUSE the argument I was making (regarding "policing") was nuanced.

As usual, however, people seem to have ignored the nuances.

My post has apparently become "CALL IN THE LAWYERS! HAVE THEM SIT HERE AND WATCH EVERY ARG THAT SO MUCH AS MENTIONS A CHARACTER FROM ANYTHING!"

On another thread, when I said, essentially, "I am uncomfortable with the symbols/stock characters being employed here. They have an unhappy history, and their use brings in subtext that makes me uneasy. I do not see a good way for the PMs to resolve this safely." (I even added a disclaimer, in caps, noting that I was not trying to make a statement about the PMs or game, merely about the symbols they had employed.)

A few posts later, the interpretation had become that I had called the PMs antisemitic, and a page or so later, someone (in what I believe was a reference to my post) threw out the term "neophyte neo-Nazi." Rolling Eyes

(As a side note, this is starting to confuse me. I refrain from name-calling, personal attacks, swears, insults, and the like; I read people's posts fully before responding and arguing; I consider and acknowledge the context in which remarks are made; and if I post something that, upon reexamination, appears overly harsh, I usually follow it shortly thereafter with an apology.

And people (no, not any of you, obviously, this is a general statement) shrug off the people who do engage in name-calling, personal attacks, swears, insults, take things out of context, etc. and then declare that I'm "mean" or "scary."

I do not understand.)

bill wrote:
Off the cuff judgements and indignation combined with a generally negative attitude poison the experience for everyone involved.


Pray tell, does this statement refer to my comments on LX, or to me in general? That phrase "generally negative attitude," if the latter, strikes me as egregiously unfair.

bill wrote:
We've had our bouts of negativity in the past and it wasn't pretty. If you don't care for someone elses effort, who are you to invalidate the experience for everyone else?


This was why I posted it in a thread where I was reasonably sure that new players (and for that matter, pretty much anyone other than hardcore beekeepers who were also playing on XBL) were unlikely to venture into. I also posted a warning, before I began my rant, identifying what it was, warning that it was strongly worded, and spoiler-covered it.

In other words, you had to come looking for it (until, of course, it was posted here). I'm not the one who posted it here in a more general forum. I took those precautions precisely to avoid ruining the experience of the people who were playing it. My comments outside that one, carefully placed post were far more moderated.

Quote:
As was stated in another thread, who are we to judge what is theft without really knowing the actual circumstances? What do the people who matter (namely Microsoft, Bungie, and 4orty2wo) consider a fair boundary. None of us really knows, do we?


No, I suppose we don't. On the other hand, I repeat what has disturbed me the entire time about this: the ILB PMs had no idea what was going on. These are not the Wachowski brothers. They're easily accessible. If you email Sean (at the email address given, for all the world to see, at his website, which is, I believe, the first thing that comes up when you google his name) he usually responds within an hour. They have evinced nothing but eagerness to form and maintain good relationships with players.

The fact that they were unaware of LX suggests three possibilities:

1. Despite the ease of contacting 4orty 2wo, the LX PMs didn't think of trying to do so.
2. They intentionally didn't do so.
3. They were intending to do so, but the premature launch of the game happened before they got around to it.

This isn't just fanfic. It's a work in the same medium, with another audio drama (!). This isn't like writing a little story about the X-Files and posting it on your website. It's akin to making and airing publically your own movie version of Kill Bill.

Requesting permission of such easily accessible and generally accomodating people (and since the PMs of LX are clearly very familiar with ILB, one would think they would be aware of the foregoing characteristics) seems a simple but important step to take for a work that was as heavily derivative as LX.

bill wrote:
The forums are organized so that you can conveniently ignore any game you don't find interesting. That's one option. Feel free to maintain whatever pedestal you wish to honor the experience you had, but don't use it to diminish the efforts of others.


"Pedestal"? Have you been talking to Krystyn?

Let me clarify again what I mean by "policing" as the term appears to have everyone all hot and bothered.

By policing, I mean exactly what you and Krystyn have just done here. You feel my comments have been inappropriate, and you are expressing that.

The consensus seems to be that the PMs of LX have done nothing wrong. I disagree, but my opinion clearly differs from that of the community as a body. Ergo, no policing.

I admit, I am highly protective of people for whom I have affection. Possibly overly so.

But what if they had done something about which the consensus was that it had crossed the line?

krystyn wrote:
POLICING?????


Oh, dude. That opens up the whole can of worms about what RULES there are, and blah blah blah, and I so just wanna drag you all to Zanzibar and wash your heads in the shore water before I sticky you.

You would all glow so pretty, I swear.


Thanks, but I think it will be a few more weeks until I'm back on Live. I still jump when someone shuts a door, so I think I'll avoid the guns and grenades for a little while longer. But I promise that when I come back, you may sticky me to your heart's content. Razz
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:18 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
weephun
Entrenched


Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 908
Location: Fuquay Varina, NC
krystyn wrote:
POLICING?????


Oh, dude. That opens up the whole can of worms about what RULES there are, and blah blah blah, and I so just wanna drag you all to Zanzibar and wash your heads in the shore water before I sticky you.

You would all glow so pretty, I swear.


AAAAAHHHH run away! (she's dangerous with the blue spiders Wink )

Questions that come to my mind from all this:

1 - OK then, if not policing, then what can we do to create an overall better experience for new ARGers? Are there ways that we can promote more and better ARGs? What is currently preventing this from happening? money? time? experience? If the current pace of a major ARG every 3-5 years intermixed with a bunch of the more "home-grown" ARGs continues, I have a very hard time seeing how this new form of "revolutionary entertainment" will really ever go anywhere beyond the couple thousand truly hardcore players. Is that what we want?

2 - At what point do we "shun" a truly bad ARG? Are we responsible at all for doing this, or do we just worry about playing the games and leave the lawyering up to the lawyers?

My answers:

1 -
A - create the best community here possible, so even if the ARG fails, maybe the new friendships will last.
B - As far as the $/time/exp problem ... hmm, not sure, but there must be some way to create those things for PMs that want to run a good game.

2-
A - I don't think I'd like to live in a society where no one cares what the "rules" are and just leaves all those things up to the police and/or lawyers. Now, there are lots of issues where the common citizen should just stay out of things, but I think in order to have a decent society there has to be some form of self policing going on. Where that line lies in this society I have no idea. Nor do I think I'm the best to decide as I seem to be really good at crossing lines that others think are fairly obvious to see Embarassed Wink

What say ye?
_________________
- Sean Stewart: "generally people like seeing their names on TV, although probably no one has had a more mixed experience with that then weephun, God bless him.
- Currently assisting Epic Games in their quest for world domination

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:36 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
krystyn
I Never Tire of My Own Voice


Joined: 26 Sep 2002
Posts: 3651
Location: Is not Chicago
weephun wrote:
krystyn wrote:

You would all glow so pretty, I swear.


AAAAAHHHH run away! (she's dangerous with the blue spiders Wink )

Questions that come to my mind from all this:

1 - OK then, if not policing, then what can we do to create an overall better experience for new ARGers?


Do what you would in any community: reinforce the positive, give as little attention as possible to the things that don't trip your trigger.

Not every ARG will be the same. There is no REAL definition of ARG, anyhow. We have a 'feeling' about what ARGs are, and we all have our own likes and dislikes. I tried to play Plexata, but I think there was too much math or something, so I didn't play. And that was that. I moved on.

Reinforce the good things. That's really the simplest, best way.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:56 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
vector
Unfettered


Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Posts: 721
Location: Portland OR
weephun wrote:


1 - OK then, if not policing, then what can we do to create an overall better experience for new ARGers? Are there ways that we can promote more and better ARGs? What is currently preventing this from happening? money? time? experience? If the current pace of a major ARG every 3-5 years intermixed with a bunch of the more "home-grown" ARGs continues, I have a very hard time seeing how this new form of "revolutionary entertainment" will really ever go anywhere beyond the couple thousand truly hardcore players. Is that what we want?


If you build it, they will come.


Quote:

2 - At what point do we "shun" a truly bad ARG? Are we responsible at all for doing this, or do we just worry about playing the games and leave the layering up to the lawyers?


who wants to be a layer? Let us play the games, thats what we are here for.

Alright heres the thing, believe me when i say you do not want to start legislating your own fun. I have done it, it sucks, it pisses people off and destroys friendships.

As for copyright issues. This really began because we were worried about 4orty2wo being hurt by some form of copyright infringement. Lets take a step back here. If 4orty2wo gets its reputation or is financially hurt by a disgruntled 15 year old, then maybe they need to rethink their business structure. But as i am certain that they are better than that i dont think they had anything to worry about. and neither should we.
_________________
The bookworm is just the larval form of the barfly

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:19 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
water10
Unfettered


Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 712
Location: EvadeEvadeEvade

 		The term policing is scary! I agree with people that say this will scare newcomers away! Yes, the community is self-policing, but that's mostly because we are a group of people that think alike! So, there's very little of policing going on actually and it's almost like a silent agreement. People that don't fit in, just leave ... And let's not forget moderators are here when it's necessary!

The whole discussion about copyright should be above gamers. Yes, we all have opinions, but I don't believe we should discuss without knowing all the facts. And since we're talking about ARGs, few people know all the facts! Let them straight these things out! I'm sure actions will be taken when necessary.


Regarding the quality of the ARG, it's easy to understand how angry people can become when their beloved characters are taken into something one disapproves! But "bad" ARG's won't survive much, simply because they need attention from people! If it's really bad, people will just ignore it and it'll suffer a horrible death!! Now, if you think an ARG is really bad, but there are lots of followers, then maybe it's not actually bad, just not your taste. The best way to show your discontent with an ARG is to stop following it. Sure, there's demand/offer here. And people might be so eager for a new ARG that they will accept anything new! Well, people around here are smart enough to keep expectations at a reasonable level!
_________________
You’d better not mess with Major Tom!

Gamertag: Waters100

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:24 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
Wolf
Decorated


Joined: 26 Sep 2002
Posts: 292

 		As somebody pointed out earlier (I think it was Steve), if the copyright holder has a problem with the way their properties/characters/whatever are being portrayed, they will find a way to let the violator know.

In this particular discussion, it's not like the ILB people don't know where to find the LX people.

We were very fortunate that the Wachowski Brothers and Warner Brothers chose to look the other way (and luxuriate in all the warm, bubbly free publicity we brought their way) and we have no doubt that had they chosen to do so, they would have been able to contact us to issue a cease and desist.

If nobody BTS at LX has been given such a notice, that's their business and the rest of us should be content to carry on--and play, or ignore, LX as we choose. Which is what I'd say about any other game.
_________________
You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:42 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously

 		Re: copyright
rose wrote:
We evidence hypocrisy when we argue that games we like should not be regulated --like Halo2 and GTA3 which many other people find hugely objectionable and offensive because of their content--
and at the same time "self-police" by objecting to a game based on its content.


On the contrary, my position is consistent. I am fine with regulating the content of video games, in the sense of having ratings and age limits. I just don't feel that they should be banned because of content or because of spurious "research" that attempts to prove that they cause violence. I feel the current ratings system should be more specific, however.

In any case, objecting to the nature of the original content of a work, and objecting to what appears to be (yes, at this point, subjectively!) possibly actionable appropriation of someone else's work are two different issues.

And I resent, strongly, the use of the word "hypocrisy." That is an insult.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:16 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
rose
...and then Magic happens


Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Posts: 4117

 		hypocrisy
It wasn't my intention to single any person or subgroup out with my mention of "hypocrisy" - I was referring to the people here at unfiction as a whole and I include myself in that. Advocating free speech means that you have to let people say things that you don't like, agree with or support. And that can be really difficult to do.
_________________
I love this site for being free, in every sense of the word~Spacebass

Mankind was my business, the common good was my business.~ Dickens

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:06 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Phaedra
Lurker v2.0


Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 4033
Location: Here, obviously

 		Re: hypocrisy
rose wrote:
It wasn't my intention to single any person or subgroup out with my mention of "hypocrisy"


Really?

rose wrote:
I had hope that someone else would raise this point, as I posted the thread about proposed regulation of video games and free speech. But since they haven't here goes:

We evidence hypocrisy when we argue that games we like should not be regulated --like Halo2 and GTA3 which many other people find hugely objectionable and offensive because of their content--
and at the same time "self-police" by objecting to a game based on its content.


I note that besides me, there are three other people who posted on both threads: DreamOfTheRood, SuperJerms, and Water10.

None of them were for objecting to the game based on its content, and therefore none of them would fall under the rubric you describe as "hypocritical."

So, to whom else could you have been referring?

Quote:
I was referring to the people here at unfiction as a whole and I include myself in that.


And yet you don't fit under that rubric, as you had no objection to the use of ILB material in Lenny's Xanga.

Which leaves me. So please don't insult my intelligence in addition to my integrity.

Quote:
Advocating free speech means that you have to let people say things that you don't like, agree with or support. And that can be really difficult to do.


Really?

I'm saying things you don't like, agree with, or support.

And yet I'm being told that if I have a negative opinion about something, I should remain silent about it, because it upsets people when I speak.

Hmm. Something seems rather inconsistent there.

We'll leave aside, for the moment, the point that plagiarism is not protected speech. And whether or not you agree that what happened was plagiarism, the fact remains that it is perceived plagiarism, and not any form of protected speech, to which I objected. I'm not attempting to stifle speech, here. In fact I'm advocating more of it.
_________________
Voted Most Likely to Thread-Jack and Most Patient Explainer in the ILoveBees Awards.

World Champion: Cruel 2B Kind

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:35 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address
 Back to top 
vector
Unfettered


Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Posts: 721
Location: Portland OR

 		Puppies....Kittens....Rainbows......Bunnies with pancakes on head... Long distance sticky....Flowers...
_________________
The bookworm is just the larval form of the barfly

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:46 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
SuperJerms
Unfettered


Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 537
Location: indiana
Quote:
The more we discuss this the more obvious our lack of knowledge is - even if we assume that ever piece of art owned by the Museum is in the public domain -the images of it posted on the Museum's website are not. Neither are the images or text on the ilovebees website.


I'll see your link and raise you a quote. And I'll assume that you didn't mean that first part the way I interpreted it.

wikipedia fair use entry wrote:
Fair use under United States law
The legal concept of "copyright" was first ratified by Britain's the Statute of Anne of 1709. As room was not made for the unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted content within this newly formulated statutory right, the courts gradually created a doctrine of "fair abridgement," which later became "fair use," that recognized the utility of such actions. The doctrine only existed in the U.S. as common law until it was incorporated into the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107, excerpted here:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.



I agree that policing is a scary word. Really, we have mods for that anyway. I think the marketplace of ideas will really do all the policing we need anyway. If anything was so offensive that it needed more dire action than us simply ignoring it, we would discuss it a bit and the mods would do their job. Neurocam comes to mind, how SpaceBass did a bit of policing to change sensitive, G-Man inducing terms in posts. Policing is an extreme measure for extreme situations. I will go ahead and say that I wouldn't want UF ARGs that concentrate on goat.se, tubgirl, slash fic or child porn. Hopefully you will all agree. Short of that, ARGs will die their own natural deaths if they are done poorly.

I say that to point out that policing is (very occasionally) necessary above and beyond simple economics of attention. The debate seems to be on where that line is.

This seems to be getting personal on a level that is unnecessary. Please remember that you are talking in a computer mediated context, and you are missing a host of signifiers that would let you know if something is an insult or not. We are always going to be prone to misunderstanding and misinterpretations, blowing things out of proportion, etc. Even words that semantically are not attacking can serve as a signifier of attack. And we can lose arguments by winning them.

Is anyone here really out to get anyone else? I don't think so. 'Cept for weephun. Hate that guy. He killed the sleeping princess. Wink
_________________
"If we could make your toaster print something we would." - Jordan Weisman

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:10 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
aliendial
Unfictologist


Joined: 29 Sep 2002
Posts: 3438
Location: Far Far Away. Nowhere Near You. Really.

 		Borrowing just a snippet of a good post from the first page:

dmon_man wrote:
Policing, I believe, will make new players feel that they are unwelcome. This great site will become like so many other places on the Internet a clique that welcomes some and shuns, degrades and lambastes others. I would hate to read somewhere, "don't go to the forums at unfiction, they're a bunch of assholes."

Let the games, bad or good, keep coming. Welcome them and welcome the new players they attract. If a game is bad and the players recognize it, try to coax them to another game the really rocks. They will appreciate it and so will the good PM's who see more and more dedicated players visiting their sites. This way the rotten fruit will fall off the tree.


Well said, dmon_man. I've seen it before. NOTHING turns off players and community members more than judgmental dissection of games. There's a difference between polite criticism ("Hmm, sucky game.") and running them off with personal attacks ("Hey you crook! Put back those copyrighted materials that I don't even know for sure are copyrighted or by who!"). We can express concern, but ultimately the responsibility is not ours. We're not their parents or the police. Just other people hanging out in the same community. 4orty2wo and MS can take care of themselves. Good games survive; weak ones don't, even without editorial intervention from people who've been here a little longer. Nobody learns if nobody tries. If you don't like a game, don't play. There's plenty else to do.

And if you have a real problem with something/someone - including trolls, porn spam etc - tell an Admin (definition: the people whose job IS to police the boards). They've been around a lot longer and can handle it without causing this kind of discussion.

(Mob, you say?! We were the nicest group of Halo fanatics you could ever want to meet!)

Is it time to put word limits on posts?
_________________
aliendial

PostPosted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:31 pm
Last edited by aliendial on Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:50 pm; edited 2 times in total
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 2 of 4 [59 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Meta » General META Discussion
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group