|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| atwood wrote: |
| The comparison is inane only in your obviously uninformed opinion. |
And everyone else in this thread who isn't you. Even Smithington called it "admittedly ill-advised".
| atwood wrote: |
| The principles of leadership are fairly universal. |
Sure. Let's put Jim Harbaugh in the president's seat. He'll have Korea whipped into shape in no time I'm sure.
| atwood wrote: |
| Why not answer the questions directly, bob? |
Because I'm not a moron?
Here's a similar question for you: Are you too lazy or just too stupid to admit that you're wrong?
| atwood wrote: |
| You're the derailer here, kasey jones. |
"I know you are, but what am I?" is the best you've got? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| The comparison is inane only in your obviously uninformed opinion. |
And everyone else in this thread who isn't you. Even Smithington called it "admittedly ill-advised".
| atwood wrote: |
| The principles of leadership are fairly universal. |
Sure. Let's put Jim Harbaugh in the president's seat. He'll have Korea whipped into shape in no time I'm sure.
| atwood wrote: |
| Why not answer the questions directly, bob? |
Because I'm not a moron?
Here's a similar question for you: Are you too lazy or just too stupid to admit that you're wrong?
| atwood wrote: |
| You're the derailer here, kasey jones. |
"I know you are, but what am I?" is the best you've got? |
Ill-advised because some posters here can't understand that the concepts of leadership apply to any size of organization or group.
I'm not wrong, bob. I just answered your question. Why not show a bit of civility and answer mine?
bob, you followed in sr's tracks to derail the thread. It was about Korea's lack of progress in public safety. You've made it about your inability to grasp a relatively simple concept, intent on picking nits where none are and missing the point.
Sorry, bob, gotta go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
Ill-advised because some posters here can't understand that the concepts of leadership apply to any size of organization or group. |
Then why do some coaches fare better at the college level vs. the professional or vice-versa? If things were the same no matter what, then they should be successful wherever they are. But as any sports fan will tell you, there is an enormous difference in what makes a great pro coach vs. a college coach due to the distinct differences involved. And its not just in sports. I'll use my area of expertise, The Civil War, to illustrate this problem. Leadership in the Civil War is an often discussed topic as the generals who fought in it have been thoroughly analyzed and critiqued.
Some generals were excellent at lower levels of command (brigade or division) but when promoted to higher levels (corps, army) they performed poorly. Examples include AP Hill, superb division commander but a mediocre corps commander or John Bell Hood, who was regarded as one of Lee's best division commanders, a decent corps commander and a disastrous army commander. Conversely there were generals who were unspectacular at lower levels but excelled when given additional responsibility. An example of this would be William Mahone who was regarded as just an average brigade commander but an excellent division commander or Dick Anderson who was a solid division commander and exceeded expectations as a corps commander.
Another aspect of leadership and generalship was in the case of generals who were superb battle commanders but poor administrators or vice-versa. An example of this would be Daniel Harvey Hill who was an excellent division commander, but when placed in independent command of a military district, was unspectacular in large part because of his lack of ability in regards to administration. On the other hand you had George B. McClellan or Joseph Hooker who worked wonders in training an army and getting them the material they needed to fight, but lacked the nerve to perform well on the battlefield. The general you want to administer and train your army is not necessarily the same one you want leading it in the field. For a more modern, famous example its the difference between Herb Sobel the guy who whipped Easy Company into shape during training vs. Sobel who would get lost during a training exercise. Having Winters training them might have not given them as strong a foundation, even though Winters proved to be a better field commander.
Also, one looks at commanders who excelled in independent commands, but were poor at coordinating with others, or the other way around. An example would be John B. Magruder, who fared well in independent command around Yorktown, but did not coordinate well during the Seven Days. Or you had generals like John Sedgwick who could not handle independent command, but were solid generals when commanding their men within an army. A general you want in independent command is not necessarily the same general you want to support and coordinate an assault.
And of course, perhaps the most famous example is that of U.S. Grant, who seemingly had no aptitude for leadership during his days in the regular army and civilian life, but rose to be the man who beat Lee. However, afterward his presidency has been regarded as rather poor and riddled with corruption.
| Quote: |
| bob, you followed in sr's tracks to derail the thread. It was about Korea's lack of progress in public safety. |
We were comparing the rate of progress in Korea vs. other countries and disputing the assertion that Korea was uniquely flawed in its rate of progress given the scale and scope of the change that some people were expecting.
Anyways, there is a reason we don't elect football coaches to be President. Not all leadership is the same. Were your assertion true, Vince Lombardi would have had 2 terms in the Oval Office. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
Ill-advised because some posters here can't understand that the concepts of leadership apply to any size of organization or group. |
Then why do some coaches fare better at the college level vs. the professional or vice-versa? If things were the same no matter what, then they should be successful wherever they are. But as any sports fan will tell you, there is an enormous difference in what makes a great pro coach vs. a college coach due to the distinct differences involved. And its not just in sports. I'll use my area of expertise, The Civil War, to illustrate this problem. Leadership in the Civil War is an often discussed topic as the generals who fought in it have been thoroughly analyzed and critiqued.
Some generals were excellent at lower levels of command (brigade or division) but when promoted to higher levels (corps, army) they performed poorly. Examples include AP Hill, superb division commander but a mediocre corps commander or John Bell Hood, who was regarded as one of Lee's best division commanders, a decent corps commander and a disastrous army commander. Conversely there were generals who were unspectacular at lower levels but excelled when given additional responsibility. An example of this would be William Mahone who was regarded as just an average brigade commander but an excellent division commander or Dick Anderson who was a solid division commander and exceeded expectations as a corps commander.
Another aspect of leadership and generalship was in the case of generals who were superb battle commanders but poor administrators or vice-versa. An example of this would be Daniel Harvey Hill who was an excellent division commander, but when placed in independent command of a military district, was unspectacular in large part because of his lack of ability in regards to administration. On the other hand you had George B. McClellan or Joseph Hooker who worked wonders in training an army and getting them the material they needed to fight, but lacked the nerve to perform well on the battlefield. The general you want to administer and train your army is not necessarily the same one you want leading it in the field. For a more modern, famous example its the difference between Herb Sobel the guy who whipped Easy Company into shape during training vs. Sobel who would get lost during a training exercise. Having Winters training them might have not given them as strong a foundation, even though Winters proved to be a better field commander.
Also, one looks at commanders who excelled in independent commands, but were poor at coordinating with others, or the other way around. An example would be John B. Magruder, who fared well in independent command around Yorktown, but did not coordinate well during the Seven Days. Or you had generals like John Sedgwick who could not handle independent command, but were solid generals when commanding their men within an army. A general you want in independent command is not necessarily the same general you want to support and coordinate an assault.
And of course, perhaps the most famous example is that of U.S. Grant, who seemingly had no aptitude for leadership during his days in the regular army and civilian life, but rose to be the man who beat Lee. However, afterward his presidency has been regarded as rather poor and riddled with corruption.
| Quote: |
| bob, you followed in sr's tracks to derail the thread. It was about Korea's lack of progress in public safety. |
We were comparing the rate of progress in Korea vs. other countries and disputing the assertion that Korea was uniquely flawed in its rate of progress given the scale and scope of the change that some people were expecting.
Anyways, there is a reason we don't elect football coaches to be President. Not all leadership is the same. Were your assertion true, Vince Lombardi would have had 2 terms in the Oval Office. |
Vince Lombardi may well have made a very good president.
Some people are better skilled on one area than they are in another. That's a real revelation. You find the right people and put them in the right positions. That's how leaders solve problems.
You've gone all herr goering with the blather about scope and scale and uniquely flawed. Instead of obfuscating, either agree with my OP or show the progress that's been made in the past year. You've already tried and failed, but I'm willing to give you another shot at it.
The country is awash in problems, and the president is off riding a llama. What do you think Jim Harbaugh's doing to turn UM around? Waiting in line to ride the Hydroblaster at Michigan's Adventure?
It's called leadership, herr goering, leadership. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| Vince Lombardi may well have made a very good president. |
Why not Captain Kangaroo? Or Suge Knight? Or Ted Cruz or Elizabeth Warren or Rand Paul or David Duke? Joe Torre? Steven Spielberg? Julius Malema? Aub Bakr Al-Baghdadi? Amanda Marcotte?
For goodness sakes...
| Quote: |
| Some people are better skilled on one area than they are in another. That's a real revelation. You find the right people and put them in the right positions. That's how leaders solve problems. |
Elected officials serve terms of office, you can't just arbitrarily throw them out.
| Quote: |
| either agree with my OP or show the progress that's been made in the past year. |
I've already cited new traffic laws.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/world/asia/legacy-of-south-korea-sewol-ferry-sinking.html?ref=topics
There's still more to be done, but the allegation was " nothing has changed safety-wise in the ROK. "
| atwood wrote: |
Unfortunately, as several posters here predicted, nothing has changed safety-wise in the ROK.
|
| Quote: |
| The country is awash in problems, and the president is off riding a llama. What do you think Jim Harbaugh's doing to turn UM around? Waiting in line to ride the Hydroblaster at Michigan's Adventure? |
Jim Harbaugh is also attending banquets and doing photo ops, just like the president of Korea has to do photo ops. All world leaders do photo ops. As the president, you have to deal with a multitude of various issues and cannot focus solely on one.
| Quote: |
| It's called leadership, herr goering, leadership. |
You know, you might make more sense if you didn't compare Korea to the 49ers and if you didn't compare me to Hitler's #2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, and remember how everyone gave me a bunch of crap for saying that ordering everyone on deck might not be automatically the safest thing to do with a listing ship because it could do things like shift the weight or make things even more dangerous? Remember how everyone said I was "defending the captain" or being a blind apologist or accusing me of being a sea captain?
Anyone happen to check out that ferry disaster where all the people on deck rushed to one side as soon as the rescue ship approached, causing it to capsize? Yeah. If they had crammed themselves below deck and had come up one by one, they might have been fine. Granted, the circumstances differ in many ways, but it goes to show the dangers of everyone being on deck during a rescue, particularly when the people are untrained civilians. As I said at the time, it was a 50-50. Sometimes its the right call, sometimes its not.
Anyways, those who ripped me for saying that passengers being on deck can potentially be just as dangerous as staying below can piss off. I actually had the critical thinking skills to recognize how that could also be a potentially dangerous situation, those that tore me to shreds over it did not. I'm not some sea captain, but I do know how balance, weight, and gravity work.
| Quote: |
Korea is a representative democracy in name only. The rule of law that a democracy needs to function well does not operate in Korea, which is still ruled by a Confucian mindset. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
atwood, I've bombed a time or 10 on my time on Dave's but the track you are on is a Castle Bravo of bombs. I've done a Dresden. This is megatons worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| Vince Lombardi may well have made a very good president. |
Why not Captain Kangaroo? Or Suge Knight? Or Ted Cruz or Elizabeth Warren or Rand Paul or David Duke? Joe Torre? Steven Spielberg? Julius Malema? Aub Bakr Al-Baghdadi? Amanda Marcotte?
For goodness sakes...
| Quote: |
| Some people are better skilled on one area than they are in another. That's a real revelation. You find the right people and put them in the right positions. That's how leaders solve problems. |
Elected officials serve terms of office, you can't just arbitrarily throw them out.
| Quote: |
| either agree with my OP or show the progress that's been made in the past year. |
I've already cited new traffic laws.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/world/asia/legacy-of-south-korea-sewol-ferry-sinking.html?ref=topics
There's still more to be done, but the allegation was " nothing has changed safety-wise in the ROK. "
| atwood wrote: |
Unfortunately, as several posters here predicted, nothing has changed safety-wise in the ROK.
|
| Quote: |
| The country is awash in problems, and the president is off riding a llama. What do you think Jim Harbaugh's doing to turn UM around? Waiting in line to ride the Hydroblaster at Michigan's Adventure? |
Jim Harbaugh is also attending banquets and doing photo ops, just like the president of Korea has to do photo ops. All world leaders do photo ops. As the president, you have to deal with a multitude of various issues and cannot focus solely on one.
| Quote: |
| It's called leadership, herr goering, leadership. |
You know, you might make more sense if you didn't compare Korea to the 49ers and if you didn't compare me to Hitler's #2. |
The Korean government is more than just elected officials. Those responsible for letting the problems with the Sewol slide and with the botched rescue mission were not elected officials.
The safety measures you linked to are already being flouted. That proves my OP.
Predictable of you to defend the fuhrer, herr goering. I bet you'd be in Nero's corner too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Oh, and remember how everyone gave me a bunch of crap for saying that ordering everyone on deck might not be automatically the safest thing to do with a listing ship because it could do things like shift the weight or make things even more dangerous? Remember how everyone said I was "defending the captain" or being a blind apologist or accusing me of being a sea captain?
Anyone happen to check out that ferry disaster where all the people on deck rushed to one side as soon as the rescue ship approached, causing it to capsize? Yeah. If they had crammed themselves below deck and had come up one by one, they might have been fine. Granted, the circumstances differ in many ways, but it goes to show the dangers of everyone being on deck during a rescue, particularly when the people are untrained civilians. As I said at the time, it was a 50-50. Sometimes its the right call, sometimes its not.
Anyways, those who ripped me for saying that passengers being on deck can potentially be just as dangerous as staying below can piss off. I actually had the critical thinking skills to recognize how that could also be a potentially dangerous situation, those that tore me to shreds over it did not. I'm not some sea captain, but I do know how balance, weight, and gravity work.
| Quote: |
Korea is a representative democracy in name only. The rule of law that a democracy needs to function well does not operate in Korea, which is still ruled by a Confucian mindset. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
atwood, I've bombed a time or 10 on my time on Dave's but the track you are on is a Castle Bravo of bombs. I've done a Dresden. This is megatons worse. |
Man you must have some long arms to be able to pat yourself on the back. But sorry Gilligan you're still wrong.
SOP in cases such as the Sewol is to get the passengers on deck to be ready to evacuate. That's what should have been done. Case closed.
Korean is Confucian. Check out how the "Christian" churches are organized. Its "democracy" is influenced in the same way.
One result is the weak police and the very lax and fungible enforcement of laws. Confucianism rests on morals, not laws. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| Ill-advised because some posters here can't understand that the concepts of leadership apply to any size of organization or group. |
No. What you don't understand is that leading 53 healthy, young males who've trained to play football their entire lives to victory in the NFL - which they all want - is entirely different from leading a country of 50 million to social reform.
We're not talking about ten random Koreans vs ten random NFL players. We're not talking about general principles of leadership. We're talking about your moronic insistence that leading Korea to paradise should be easier than leading an NFL team to victory.
| atwood wrote: |
| I'm not wrong, bob. I just answered your question. Why not show a bit of civility and answer mine? |
Because they're deliberately leading questions. Of course I would like Korea to be safer. Of course I think Korea is capable of change. Of course I don't like it when people die needlessly. Of course you're going to say you're not wrong even though you clearly are. 
| atwood wrote: |
| bob, you followed in sr's tracks to derail the thread. It was about Korea's lack of progress in public safety. You've made it about your inability to grasp a relatively simple concept, intent on picking nits where none are and missing the point. |
I was on topic until you brought up your asinine analogy. And now I've spent pages trying to show you how idiotic it is: Something apparent to everyone but yourself. Just admit it: your analogy was terrible. It's OK to be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| Ill-advised because some posters here can't understand that the concepts of leadership apply to any size of organization or group. |
No. What you don't understand is that leading 53 healthy, young males who've trained to play football their entire lives to victory in the NFL - which they all want - is entirely different from leading a country of 50 million to social reform.
We're not talking about ten random Koreans vs ten random NFL players. We're not talking about general principles of leadership. We're talking about your moronic insistence that leading Korea to paradise should be easier than leading an NFL team to victory.
| atwood wrote: |
| I'm not wrong, bob. I just answered your question. Why not show a bit of civility and answer mine? |
Because they're deliberately leading questions. Of course I would like Korea to be safer. Of course I think Korea is capable of change. Of course I don't like it when people die needlessly. Of course you're going to say you're not wrong even though you clearly are.
| atwood wrote: |
| bob, you followed in sr's tracks to derail the thread. It was about Korea's lack of progress in public safety. You've made it about your inability to grasp a relatively simple concept, intent on picking nits where none are and missing the point. |
I was on topic until you brought up your asinine analogy. And now I've spent pages trying to show you how idiotic it is: Something apparent to everyone but yourself. Just admit it: your analogy was terrible. It's OK to be wrong. |
bob, why so upset? Why the insults?
The analogy was fine. That you can't see past a few numbers to look at the principle involved--good leadership can turn things around and in a relatively short time--is the only problem with it.
Thanks for answering my questions. We seem to be in agreement that with proper leadership Korea can become a safer place and in less than three to five decades. Although I don't believe, as you state, that it can become some kind of paradise. But safer, yes.
But is Korea capable of producing that type of leadership? Can it move past the corruption that seems to have infected so many of those who have been put in charge of running things? Can it rise above the populism and pandering?
What do you think, bob? And since you're an expert on the NFL, who's going to be the #1 draft pick?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
atwood, if what you're saying is true, then a CEO should be able to take an NFL team to victory and Jim Harbaugh should be able to run a major corporation.
I know, why don't we replace our Chiefs of Police, Presidents of Hospitals, Chairperson of the Federal Reserve, Surgeon General, Head of the IAEA, UN Secretary General, etc. with a bunch of sports coaches.
UN Secretary General Pete Carroll
Surgeon General Mike Kryzyweski
Chairman of the Federal Reserve Geno Auriemma
IAEA Head Bill Belichek
NYPD Commissioner Jose Mourinho
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Bruce Bochy
Director of National Intelligence Nick Saban
Environmental Protection Agency Head Tony Dungy
Attorney General Urban Meyer
Secretary of State Bobby Knight
Ambassador to the UN Earl Weaver
That is what you are advocating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| That you can't see past a few numbers... |
I can't see past them because they are relevant. Incredibly relevant. Like the most relevant thing in this discussion. The fact that you are so willing to dismiss "a few numbers" when those "few" are literally tens of millions is just ignorant. This has clearly - and highly ironically - become about you pathetically trying to save face in defiance of your utter stupidity. Maybe you hate Koreans so much because you see a part of yourself in them.
I'm through. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| That you can't see past a few numbers... |
I can't see past them because they are relevant. Incredibly relevant. Like the most relevant thing in this discussion. The fact that you are so willing to dismiss "a few numbers" when those "few" are literally tens of millions is just ignorant. This has clearly - and highly ironically - become about you pathetically trying to save face in defiance of your utter stupidity. Maybe you hate Koreans so much because you see a part of yourself in them.
I'm through. |
More insults, bob? Were they really necessary? Couldn't you have stated your opinion without them?
bob, you wouldn't by any chance teach children, would you? I ask because their bad habits seem to be rubbing off on you. It's supposed to be the other way around, bob--your good habits influencing them. In other words, leadership.
BTW bob, you might want to think those numbers through a bit more. For one thing, you're starting with the wrong number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
atwood, if what you're saying is true, then a CEO should be able to take an NFL team to victory and Jim Harbaugh should be able to run a major corporation.
I know, why don't we replace our Chiefs of Police, Presidents of Hospitals, Chairperson of the Federal Reserve, Surgeon General, Head of the IAEA, UN Secretary General, etc. with a bunch of sports coaches.
UN Secretary General Pete Carroll
Surgeon General Mike Kryzyweski
Chairman of the Federal Reserve Geno Auriemma
IAEA Head Bill Belichek
NYPD Commissioner Jose Mourinho
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Bruce Bochy
Director of National Intelligence Nick Saban
Environmental Protection Agency Head Tony Dungy
Attorney General Urban Meyer
Secretary of State Bobby Knight
Ambassador to the UN Earl Weaver
That is what you are advocating. |
Pete Carroll might be a good fit, seeing as how he had a few problems with NCAA and Ban Ki Moon looks to be involved in the Song scandal.
A better question might be why do CEOs and large organizations pay big bucks to hear coaches and athletes speak on leadership?
| Quote: |
| A legendary sports hero and phenomenally successful entrepreneur, quarterback Fran Tarkenton led the Minnesota Vikings to three Super Bowls. After his football career ended, he went on to run 12 businesses earning between $1 million and $142 million in annual revenues. Tarkenton has tasted failure as well as victory. He is a turn-around champ who shows audiences how to use their own setbacks as fuel for come-back success. Founder of GoSmallBiz.com, giving business owners access to news and resources, he offers hands-on insight into the global economy, late-breaking technological advances and the ever-changing needs of the consumer. A member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame and author of What Losing Taught Me About Winning, he is a motivational superstar. - See more at: http://www.allamericanspeakers.com/celebritytalentbios/Fran-Tarkenton#sthash.0JLltF2U.dpuf |
With the right amount of experience, I bet some coaches could run a major corporation. Your scenario of stepping right in is of course absurd on its face.
BTW, Earl Weaver is dead. Even so, he could probably make a better argument than you can. He'd certainly know when to stop defending the Sewol captain, which may well end up being your epitaph. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SHGator428
Joined: 05 Sep 2014
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I hope those families that lost loved ones have found some peace during the last year. Our grade 6 students take a "graduation" trip there every year and last year's got cancelled (as did all extra curricular activities for the remainder of 2014) because of the tragedy. This year's trip is on. Hopefully nothing else terrible happens between now and then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
