logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

3 Pages123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Linus Solanki  
#1 Posted : 20 October 2012 08:11:28(UTC)
Linus Solanki

Rank: Member of the Movement

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 628
Location: NYC

Thanks: 59 times
Was thanked: 1024 time(s) in 648 post(s)
http://www.nme.com/news/new-order/66742

New Order's Bernard Sumner has said that Peter Hook's decision to tour Joy Division's albums "opened the gateways of hell".

Hook's band The Light have recently been touring Joy Division's classic albums 'Unknown Pleasures' and 'Closer' in full and, in an interview with Billboard, Sumner said his old bandmate's shows had prompted him to work with New Order again.

When asked if he would have carried on with New Order if Hook hadn't played his 'Unknown Pleasures' tour, Sumner responded: Twenty million dollar question, that is. I don't know. But we did think, why should we hold back if he's doing that? He opened the gateways of hell.
Sumner also gave his opinion on the bassist's recent announcement that he will tour the first two New Order albums with The Light in January next year, stating: "I think it sucks to be honest. We found out that he was touring 'Unknown Pleasures' through the press. He didn't tell us, which we thought was pretty low. It just seems like a real commercial thing to do.

"He seems to be doing it for the money," he added. "To me, Joy Division and New Order were never about that. I thought it was disrespectful to the rest of us. But I must admit that once he started doing it, we did think, 'What are we doing holding back with New Order?' So, in a way - if you'll excuse the pun - he showed us the light."

Speaking about his future plans with New Order, meanwhile, he said: "I'd just like to make another album. I'm getting a creative itch that I need to scratch. Playing live is great, but it's not a creative thing, really. It's a reproductive thing. I'd quite like to make an electronic record, because we've not made one for quite a while really."

Peter Hook revealed that The Light would tour New Order's first two albums last month. The newly announced performances, incorporating albums 'Movement' and 'Power, Corruption & Lies' plus classic singles dating from 1981 to 1983, will take place at London's Koko on January 17 and Manchester Cathedral the following day.

Hook recently published an autobiography, Unknown Pleasures – Inside Joy Division, in which he shares memories of his time in the band. Speaking to NME in the video which you can watch below, Hook revealed that he also plans to write a tell-all memoir of his time in New Order too, and promises plenty of "naughtiness" within.
I promise to make you so alive that the fall of dust on furniture will deafen you. Nina Cassian
thanks 5 users thanked Linus Solanki for this useful post.
NewOrderFan1990 on 20/10/2012(UTC), steven on 20/10/2012(UTC), ersatz01 on 20/10/2012(UTC), Silvina Hernandez on 20/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Sponsor
NewOrderFan1990  
#2 Posted : 20 October 2012 08:21:55(UTC)
NewOrderFan1990

Rank: Member of the Village

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/08/2012(UTC)
Posts: 50
Man

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 66 time(s) in 51 post(s)
Really looking forward to the new album!!
thanks 1 user thanked NewOrderFan1990 for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
68Pontiac  
#3 Posted : 20 October 2012 08:32:22(UTC)
68Pontiac

Rank: Young Offender

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 47
Location: Murrieta, California

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 53 time(s) in 47 post(s)
Been stating this from the beginning... that Barney reformed NO just to get back at Hooky.
I do find it interesting that Barney states they were "holding back" constantly. Holding back from what exactly? Not touring, not going overseas in tours often, not playing older music than what was on a common setlist?

I don't condone many of the words Hooky has used over the past few years, but it does go to show why they broke up...
thanks 1 user thanked 68Pontiac for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio  
#4 Posted : 20 October 2012 10:00:57(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 316
Man
Location: São Luís - Brasil

Thanks: 26 times
Was thanked: 346 time(s) in 318 post(s)
This is why New Order upsets me Clown
Finsbury Park 2002
Brasilia 2006
Sao Paulo 2006 1st Night
Sao Paulo 2006 2nd Night
Sao Paulo 2011
Lima 2013
Bogota 2013
thanks 1 user thanked Big Mouth Julio for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
effect returned  
#5 Posted : 20 October 2012 10:17:42(UTC)
effect returned

Rank: Young Offender

Groups: Registered
Joined: 27/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 47

Thanks: 7 times
Was thanked: 73 time(s) in 48 post(s)
being sent to hell would be bad enough without paying for a meet and greet.
thanks 2 users thanked effect returned for this useful post.
M1 on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
79order  
#6 Posted : 20 October 2012 11:31:29(UTC)
79order

Rank: Member of the Republic

Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 205
Location: PORTSMOUTH

Thanks: 638 times
Was thanked: 247 time(s) in 217 post(s)
This is all now quite terribly sad now.


WE Knocked on the Doors of Hells startled chambers
thanks 1 user thanked 79order for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Cranelane  
#7 Posted : 20 October 2012 11:43:58(UTC)
Cranelane

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 378
Location: Cork

Thanks: 144 times
Was thanked: 513 time(s) in 388 post(s)
Quote:
I'd just like to make another album. I'm getting a creative itch that I need to scratch. Playing live is great, but it's not a creative thing, really. It's a reproductive thing. I'd quite like to make an electronic record, because we've not made one for quite a while really


This is good news anyway, I like the fact that when he talks about making new music his motivation is to get creative again, regardless of whether or not it is a commercially viable proposition in the age of illegal downloading..
thanks 4 users thanked Cranelane for this useful post.
ersatz01 on 20/10/2012(UTC), Eimi on 20/10/2012(UTC), Rorschach on 22/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
ersatz01  
#8 Posted : 20 October 2012 12:38:27(UTC)
ersatz01

Rank: Member of the Village

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 76
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Thanks: 55 times
Was thanked: 112 time(s) in 75 post(s)
Cranelane wrote:
Quote:
I'd just like to make another album. I'm getting a creative itch that I need to scratch. Playing live is great, but it's not a creative thing, really. It's a reproductive thing. I'd quite like to make an electronic record, because we've not made one for quite a while really


This is good news anyway, I like the fact that when he talks about making new music his motivation is to get creative again, regardless of whether or not it is a commercially viable proposition in the age of illegal downloading..


Yes indeed.

thanks 1 user thanked ersatz01 for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio  
#9 Posted : 20 October 2012 13:37:35(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 316
Man
Location: São Luís - Brasil

Thanks: 26 times
Was thanked: 346 time(s) in 318 post(s)
Of course Bernard Sumner will try do something different to avoid comparisons with the "other" New Order. And a more based on electronics album is the right way to do that indeed.
Finsbury Park 2002
Brasilia 2006
Sao Paulo 2006 1st Night
Sao Paulo 2006 2nd Night
Sao Paulo 2011
Lima 2013
Bogota 2013
thanks 1 user thanked Big Mouth Julio for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
CTB  
#10 Posted : 20 October 2012 17:11:21(UTC)
CTB

Rank: Member of the Village

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 58
Location: Australia

Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 109 time(s) in 59 post(s)
68Pontiac wrote:
Been stating this from the beginning... that Barney reformed NO just to get back at Hooky.
I do find it interesting that Barney states they were "holding back" constantly. Holding back from what exactly? Not touring, not going overseas in tours often, not playing older music than what was on a common setlist?

I don't condone many of the words Hooky has used over the past few years, but it does go to show why they broke up...


Yes, you have held that line - and it's still not right. Read the original interview - Barney did not reform the band. Hooky left, and Barney lays this our pretty clearly (and it's getting tiresome to keep pointing this out). When Barney is asked point blank if The Light's Unknown Pleasures tour prompted him to start touring with NO again (which is not the same thing as reforming the band, you can't reform if there was no split), he says "I don't know" initially. It's a very selective interpretation of this meaning "Barney reformed NO just to get back at Hooky".
As for the holding back comments, my take is that he means he acknowledges it is different without Hooky being there, but if Hooky feel entitled to perform JD as the only member of the the original band, surely the remaining 4 members of New Order have an even greater entitlement to tour if they want?

Notice the difference - that's my interpretation of Barney's quote - I'm not stating it as a fact...
thanks 4 users thanked CTB for this useful post.
effect returned on 20/10/2012(UTC), Eimi on 20/10/2012(UTC), ersatz01 on 20/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
markreed  
#11 Posted : 21 October 2012 01:04:14(UTC)
markreed

Rank: Member of the Republic

Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 229
Location: Somewhere, GB

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 353 time(s) in 229 post(s)
Let us not forget that he also stated that Stephen Morris needed a break, which considering Gillian's health at the time, is understandable.
thanks 3 users thanked markreed for this useful post.
Eimi on 21/10/2012(UTC), CTB on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
68Pontiac  
#12 Posted : 21 October 2012 07:41:07(UTC)
68Pontiac

Rank: Young Offender

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 47
Location: Murrieta, California

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 53 time(s) in 47 post(s)
CTB wrote:
68Pontiac wrote:
Been stating this from the beginning... that Barney reformed NO just to get back at Hooky.
I do find it interesting that Barney states they were "holding back" constantly. Holding back from what exactly? Not touring, not going overseas in tours often, not playing older music than what was on a common setlist?

I don't condone many of the words Hooky has used over the past few years, but it does go to show why they broke up...


Yes, you have held that line - and it's still not right. Read the original interview - Barney did not reform the band. Hooky left, and Barney lays this our pretty clearly (and it's getting tiresome to keep pointing this out). When Barney is asked point blank if The Light's Unknown Pleasures tour prompted him to start touring with NO again (which is not the same thing as reforming the band, you can't reform if there was no split), he says "I don't know" initially. It's a very selective interpretation of this meaning "Barney reformed NO just to get back at Hooky".
As for the holding back comments, my take is that he means he acknowledges it is different without Hooky being there, but if Hooky feel entitled to perform JD as the only member of the the original band, surely the remaining 4 members of New Order have an even greater entitlement to tour if they want?

Notice the difference - that's my interpretation of Barney's quote - I'm not stating it as a fact...


Not sure why so many automatically run to Barney's defense. Now maybe my words "reform" weren't the best... but the band had F'ed off like they did in the past after WFTSC... so it wasn't "reformed" like in a long split, but rather after putting the band on ice that I was referring to.

Why not discuss the blaring contradiction with Barney's statement. How were the other band members "holding back" when the band was on ice and they weren't touring that much for WFTSC (at least to Hooky's standards)?
thanks 1 user thanked 68Pontiac for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
World Domination: Complete  
#13 Posted : 21 October 2012 07:59:45(UTC)
Baggie Boiler

Rank: Member with Technique

Groups: Registered
Joined: 24/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 793
Man
Location: in a house

Thanks: 894 times
Was thanked: 1022 time(s) in 811 post(s)
Hooky could not replace Tom ! let him carry on his tribute band I say !
Let's all wave our arms about !
thanks 2 users thanked Baggie Boiler for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC), wordsmith on 26/10/2012(UTC)
markreed  
#14 Posted : 21 October 2012 08:29:34(UTC)
markreed

Rank: Member of the Republic

Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 229
Location: Somewhere, GB

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 353 time(s) in 229 post(s)
"Holding Back"? Well, if one member of the band who isn't even in the band anymore wants to tour all the JD songs, why can't the remaining four members play the material they wrote and performed together? If The Light had gone off and done their own stuff, it is possible BL would still be a going concern. Though I understand taking back the JD/NO legacy and working with it instead of letting it go into the hands of Hooky.
thanks 1 user thanked markreed for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
68Pontiac  
#15 Posted : 21 October 2012 08:44:07(UTC)
68Pontiac

Rank: Young Offender

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 47
Location: Murrieta, California

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 53 time(s) in 47 post(s)
markreed wrote:
"Holding Back"? Well, if one member of the band who isn't even in the band anymore wants to tour all the JD songs, why can't the remaining four members play the material they wrote and performed together? If The Light had gone off and done their own stuff, it is possible BL would still be a going concern. Though I understand taking back the JD/NO legacy and working with it instead of letting it go into the hands of Hooky.


But you aren't answering the question... all you are mentioning is some anger you have at Hooky for leaving NO because th rest of NO didn't want to tour and when they did a limited tour, play the same songs (most sequenced and not "rocking out") and not revisit most of the back catalog...

WHAT was Barney holding back on? If anything, they were doing the exact opposite of holding back... it seems to me that Hooky was doing far more holding back and he got tired of doing it.... thus his reason for leaving and touring with the Light.

So again, what was Barney & Co. "holding back" on?
thanks 1 user thanked 68Pontiac for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
markreed  
#16 Posted : 21 October 2012 09:49:26(UTC)
markreed

Rank: Member of the Republic

Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 229
Location: Somewhere, GB

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 353 time(s) in 229 post(s)
Holding Back? Well, I presume the easy option would've been to just plough on with New Order regardless once Hooky went, and carry on anyway. Maybe Barney was 'holding back' because it was just him & Phil, as Stephen and Gillian had a health issue. Stephen came back first and played drums in BL and then with GG given the all clear....?
thanks 2 users thanked markreed for this useful post.
Eimi on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Johnny James  
#17 Posted : 21 October 2012 13:16:26(UTC)
Johnny James

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 451
Location: UK

Was thanked: 1040 time(s) in 451 post(s)
Isn't it obvious what he means?

He declared right from the start that New Order weren't 'split up' (as Hooky was telling the world). However, they didn't actually do anything with New Order since that point, until eventually they did. In other words, they stopped holding back.
thanks 3 users thanked Johnny James for this useful post.
Eimi on 21/10/2012(UTC), CTB on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Eimi  
#18 Posted : 21 October 2012 14:07:42(UTC)
Eimi

Rank: Member of the Movement

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 688
Woman
Location: Japan

Thanks: 528 times
Was thanked: 875 time(s) in 688 post(s)
Johnny James wrote:
Isn't it obvious what he means?

He declared right from the start that New Order weren't 'split up' (as Hooky was telling the world). However, they didn't actually do anything with New Order since that point, until eventually they did. In other words, they stopped holding back.


Agreed.
thanks 1 user thanked Eimi for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
CTB  
#19 Posted : 21 October 2012 14:38:09(UTC)
CTB

Rank: Member of the Village

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 58
Location: Australia

Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 109 time(s) in 59 post(s)
Johnny James wrote:
Isn't it obvious what he means?

He declared right from the start that New Order weren't 'split up' (as Hooky was telling the world). However, they didn't actually do anything with New Order since that point, until eventually they did. In other words, they stopped holding back.


Yes, spot on. Not sure how this could be interpreted any other way.
thanks 2 users thanked CTB for this useful post.
Eimi on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Rogue Warrior  
#20 Posted : 21 October 2012 14:57:35(UTC)
Rogue Warrior

Rank: Candidate

Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/08/2012(UTC)
Posts: 8
Location: Canada

Was thanked: 10 time(s) in 8 post(s)
*/rant on

The thing that pisses me off most is this..... This band is NOT NEW ORDER, their name should be "The rest of New Order featuring so and so...." when a member leaves for what ever reason, those remaining persons should not be called "that Bands original name"

Sumner even stated in 2009 that he no longer wished to make music as New Order.

*/rant off

I am going to see New Order for the first time on October 23rd in Toronto, I am pissed that Peter Hook is not part of the band!(I missed my chance to see Hooky a few years ago with his band "The Light") Why can't these two or three, or whatever grow up for the Fans, stop hiding behind lawyers, and get over it!!!
thanks 2 users thanked Rogue Warrior for this useful post.
Big Mouth Julio on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
68Pontiac  
#21 Posted : 21 October 2012 15:15:44(UTC)
68Pontiac

Rank: Young Offender

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 47
Location: Murrieta, California

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 53 time(s) in 47 post(s)
68Pontiac wrote:
Johnny James wrote:
Isn't it obvious what he means?

He declared right from the start that New Order weren't 'split up' (as Hooky was telling the world). However, they didn't actually do anything with New Order since that point, until eventually they did. In other words, they stopped holding back.


But that doesn't put in context Barney's full quote:

"He seems to be doing it for the money. To me, Joy Division and New Order were never about that. I thought it was disrespectful to the rest of us. But I must admit that once he started doing it, we did think, 'What are we doing holding back with New Order?' So, in a way - if you'll excuse the pun - he showed us the light."

In his quote really seems to be discussing one of two things:
1- doing it "for the money." Hooky was doing it, so why can't they. As that is the direct context of the quote mentioned.
2 - They were holding back because they didn't want to do anything with the band, but once Hooky was "doing it for the money" they weren't going to hold back and allow him to do it without pissing in his Cheerios. Trying to show how the Light was not NO.


Either way, its not at all what many on this board see Barney... as if he's a victim in this mess.
Hooky left, there were reasons for it. He didn't discuss it with the band, there were reasons for it. Barney & Co started up NO because of Hooky leaving, there are reasons for it. Trying to paint one with a black hat and another with a white hat is silly... they both have a hand in this.

JHC
thanks 1 user thanked 68Pontiac for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio  
#22 Posted : 21 October 2012 18:06:45(UTC)
Big Mouth Julio

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 316
Man
Location: São Luís - Brasil

Thanks: 26 times
Was thanked: 346 time(s) in 318 post(s)
Don't you remember Hooky's phrases on his boxes during the South America Tour in 2006, finishing with "The End"???

This story just began after Waiting for the Sirens Call was released!
Finsbury Park 2002
Brasilia 2006
Sao Paulo 2006 1st Night
Sao Paulo 2006 2nd Night
Sao Paulo 2011
Lima 2013
Bogota 2013
thanks 1 user thanked Big Mouth Julio for this useful post.
ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Eimi  
#23 Posted : 21 October 2012 20:44:49(UTC)
Eimi

Rank: Member of the Movement

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 688
Woman
Location: Japan

Thanks: 528 times
Was thanked: 875 time(s) in 688 post(s)
Rogue Warrior wrote:
*/rant on

The thing that pisses me off most is this..... This band is NOT NEW ORDER, their name should be "The rest of New Order featuring so and so...." when a member leaves for what ever reason, those remaining persons should not be called "that Bands original name"

Sumner even stated in 2009 that he no longer wished to make music as New Order.

*/rant off

I am going to see New Order for the first time on October 23rd in Toronto, I am pissed that Peter Hook is not part of the band!(I missed my chance to see Hooky a few years ago with his band "The Light") Why can't these two or three, or whatever grow up for the Fans, stop hiding behind lawyers, and get over it!!!


If you want to believe that they aren't New Order, OK. I don't care. But many fans are willing to accept this lineup as another version of New Order. And don't you know that people change their minds? Just because Bernard said in an interview a few years ago, that he didn't want to make music as New Order any more, doesn't mean his feelings would stay the same forever.

By your logic, I suppose the lineup without Gillian in the early 2000s wasn't New Order as well? That's rubbish! I disagree with your simple-minded attitude that bands should change their name once a member leaves for whatever reason. Lots of bands continue (whether we like it or not) under the same name, even if one member leaves. Friendships and personal relationships are complicated and we would never know what the issues are. I don't think it's as simple as 'grow up'...you sound more immature and childish than the quotes I've read from Bernard and Hooky in lots of interviews in the recent years. I may be a young person, but I'm not naive to think that they are hiding behind lawyers, or that they need to 'get over it'. No If you have such a problem with the current New Order, why the hell are you even going to see them in the first place?
thanks 2 users thanked Eimi for this useful post.
Rorschach on 22/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
BizarreBlueMonday  
#24 Posted : 21 October 2012 21:04:08(UTC)
BizarreBlueMonday

Rank: Candidate

Groups: Registered
Joined: 22/08/2012(UTC)
Posts: 6
Location: Singapore

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 6 post(s)
Rogue Warrior wrote:
*/rant on

The thing that pisses me off most is this..... This band is NOT NEW ORDER, their name should be "The rest of New Order featuring so and so...." when a member leaves for what ever reason, those remaining persons should not be called "that Bands original name"


Hm let's see...

Barney's distinctive unsure and still-boyish sounding vocals still there? Check.
All of the synths and beats I love about the band still there? Check.
Stephen's incredible drumming still there? Check.
The unique, distinctive bass sound still there? Check.

I'm sorry but this band is still New Order to me. No name change needed. I went to their concert in Sept and it's clear that the very things that make me like the band so much are still present. Hooky's bass lines can be replicated. The sound can be replicated. Tom has proven it. It may not be a 100% true replication, but it's damn near it.


thanks 2 users thanked BizarreBlueMonday for this useful post.
Eimi on 21/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
El Jarvo  
#25 Posted : 22 October 2012 00:27:21(UTC)
El Jarvo

Rank: Member of the Brotherhood

Groups: Registered
Joined: 01/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 313
Location: No.18

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 443 time(s) in 313 post(s)
BizarreBlueMonday wrote:
Barney's distinctive unsure and still-boyish sounding vocals still there? Check.
All of the synths and beats I love about the band still there? Check.
Stephen's incredible drumming still there? Check.
The unique, distinctive bass sound still there? Check.


You've just described Re-Order to a tee. Nod
thanks 2 users thanked El Jarvo for this useful post.
Rorschach on 22/10/2012(UTC), ROCKET MICK on 25/10/2012(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
Guest (5)
3 Pages123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 2.1.1 | YAF © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.020 seconds.