Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Any discussion related to ATS goes here

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby torbjon » Fri Jul 11, 2008 8:44 pm

Forestlady:

Welcome to RU. Thank you so much for coming here and sharing with us. I am looking forward to reading more of your works.

Now then, not to be a killjoy or anything, but there is another possibility as to how Johnny Canuck knew to target you other than 'he was reading my mail' and that is that some other average member 'snitched' on you... does that make sense?

For example, the person who sent you the link could have informed the powers that be or something along those lines...

Far fetched, perhaps, but a possibility that must be considered.

Regardless, I'm not seeing Anything in the information that you provided that warrants termination of your account.

You did Not post the link in open forum, correct?
You did Not ask Johnny Canuck for 'personal information', correct?

So what's the problem?

again, this is their current T&C as it pertains to Recruitment and Solicitation:

1 e.) Recruitment/Solicitation:

i) You will not use your membership at The Above Network, LLC site(s) for any type of recruitment to any causes whatsoever. You will not post, use the chat feature or use the private message system to disseminate advertisements, chain letters, petitions, pyramid schemes, or any kind of solicitation for political action, social action, letter campaigns, or related online and/or offline coordinated actions of any kind.

ii) You will not use the discussion boards, the chat system or the private message system to collect or ask for the personal information (data mining) about forum members, including email addresses and "real life" names, in any manner whatsoever, or for any reason whatsoever.

iii) You will not post, use the chat feature or use the private message system to solicit members of The Above Network, LLC on behalf of another message board, online community or competitor. You will not attempt to use your membership to encourage or lure other members in any way to other websites or discussion boards in competition with The Above Network, LLC.

Doing so will result in removal of your post(s) and immediate termination of your account.


from here:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread6688/pg1

If all you did was U2U JC and say something like "here is MY email address, please contact me to continue this discussion" how is that a violation of the above rules?

And, if it IS a violation of the above rules then that raises yet Another 'safety' issue for the ATS membership:

How is a member supposed to go about requesting an alternative form of communication with other members / staff / management if said member feels that the ATS communication system is unsafe or not secure?

Crazy stuff.

Anyway, once again, Welcome to RU and Thank You for sharing your experience with us. The "Disgruntled Ex Ats Members With An Ax to Grind" (DEAM WAAG) continues to grow...

laters
twj
Expendable Guy. The show is no good without them.
User avatar
torbjon
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:08 am
Location: New Jersey


Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby torbjon » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:14 pm

Remus wrote:
...I don't see much in the way of animosity from most of the people here, from an unbiased point of view what i see is a concerned group of intelligent people attempting to help you address some issues that may in the long run actually inprove your business model.
Free of charge.
Hell, the company i work for pay consultants thousands for this sort of critical feedback.

Ahh, perhaps that is the agenda. ;)


If that is what Billyboy is doing, milking us for ideas to be incorporated into the next upgrade of ATS in such a way as to not acknowledge us or give us credit for said ideas, well, that's FINE by me! I'd jump for joy if that were the case.

ANYTHING that improves ATS member safety is a good thing in my book.

Forestladys account sounds very similar to my own and other peoples here and elsewhere, which leads me to believe that absolutely NOTHING has changed regarding the ATS banning policies since my ATS demise despite repeated assurances by Mark and Bill to the contrary.
Expendable Guy. The show is no good without them.
User avatar
torbjon
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:08 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby JayKew » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:33 pm

I have been away for a few days celebrating the recent birth of my two identical grandchildren.

Yes, I agree a wonderful first post by ms Forestlady.

Sadly, she and me and everyone else will not get answers to their questions from Skeptic Overlord.

When I returned to this forum the other day I had a pm from him awaiting me.

He advised that he would not be returning here because his replies continually get distorted.

By their absense are S.O. and Springer effectively making these threads redundant ??

Where do we go from here now ?
User avatar
JayKew
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 8:51 pm

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby Zep Tepi » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:36 pm

Hi Forestlady, that was an interesting first post to say the least. Thanks and welcome to RU :)

Forestlady wrote:They placed a new T&C but I don't recall there being any announcement. The new T&C said that you couldn't provide links to "some" other conspiracy sites but wouldn't tell us what they were. It was clear to me that this was their way of getting rid of members they didn't like. It worked.


Did you put any links on the open forum?

Forestlady wrote:How I was banned was this: Someone mentioned "another website" on the boards. I PM'd the member and asked what website that was. (I wasn't aware of the new T&C's).


Surely the new T&C's don't state you may not PM fellow members and ask them something pertinent regarding something they have posted on the open forum?

Forestlady wrote:The member PM'd me back and gave me the new link, but in code. About 2 days later, I received a PM from Johnny Canuck asking me what the website was. I had never PM'd him and to this day I don't know how he knew that I had asked about the other website. The only way would be that he was reading my PM's - without my permission or knowledge and I had never given anyone a reason to be suspicious about my PM's, but it was read by him, it's the only way he would have known about me asking about the other website. I responded to Johnny Canuck by asking him to email me at my own email address. I did this so I could ask him a question; namely, how did you know to ask me about the other site? I didn't feel safe enough on ATS at that time to ask him on the boards or thru PMs. Within minutes, I was completely banned. No explanation, no warning, nothing. This is an insulting and degrading way to treat one's customers.


I completely agree. I would be very interested in hearing what Mark or Bill have to say about that.

Forestlady wrote:]This is a really mean and petty way for any business to treat one's customers/clients.

{snip}

They have exploited people's writing/research talents and then toss these very same people into the streets after they've made their contribution to the site. Then they try to tell everyone that the members are what is important at ATS.


I hate to say it but it appears ATS no longer care about the individual member anymore. When I was "stealthily banned", a direct contact with Bill got me back on board. Sure, I was given a runaround as to what happened but who cares, right? I was back on board and everything was hunky dory. Would the same thing happen today? Who knows...

Seeing as this seems to be happening a lot (stealth banning), maybe Bill or Mark or someone should amend their T&C's to reflect this, i.e

Stealth Banning: Any member who pisses us off in any way whatsoever will find that they can no longer login to the site. In some cases, said (ex) members will not even be able to view the site and all trace of your existence on ATs will be removed. These members will receive no notification that they have been banned, nor will they receive an answer to any queries made either via the contact form or email. We do this because we can. Remember folks, Deny Ignorance!

Damn, I can't find a tongue-in-cheek emoticon...

Cheers,
Steve
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby torbjon » Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:21 am

JayKew wrote:
He advised that he would not be returning here because his replies continually get distorted.


Now ain't that just like the pot calling the kettle black?
Expendable Guy. The show is no good without them.
User avatar
torbjon
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:08 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby ryguy » Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:06 am

Yes...the investigators are always the ones "distorting" things...

wcbstv story on Enron

"His testimony, defending against criminal fraud and conspiracy charges that could send him to prison for the rest of his life, represented an extraordinary moment in an era in which Lay and Enron, fairly or not, have come to be seen as symbols of corporate scandal.

Lay, 64, a former chairman and chief executive of the company, said he was eager to tell the truth about what happened at Enron, a story he said was distorted by overzealous federal investigators and bad publicity."
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby Chorlton » Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:53 am

JayKew wrote:Where do we go from here now ?


We do as always intended. Keep our eyes on what is happening over there and report it here.

They are allowing fools and idiots to expound idiotic and ridiculous theories in their desire for money.
They are making Ufology and the unexplained look ridiculous and as such, that rubs off on every other site.
Some sites like GLP and OM deserve all the ridicule they get, they make no claims about their greatness and are just alughed off as a collection of fools.

But (in the case of ATS) by allowing (and encouraging) fools and the deluded to post their stupidity, and making them feel important by doing it, all in the name of money, they encourage others to do the same, making those feel important and part of some exclusive club, all in the name of profit.
Just take the supposed Roswell Papers that Herr Grupenfuhrer Springer went to get. They then ask ATS members to revue them ??? They have people who post about eating aliens and god only knows what and they ask these halfwits to examine stuff?. If that isnt an attempt to make cabbages feel important I dont know what is.

So, SO And Springer arent coming back? Whoopee. There was little point in them being here in the first place other than to keep publicising themselves although at times it seemd that Bill was trying more to convince himself than others. SO was obtuse, pedantic and unable to understand, at the most basic level what people were saying.
He DESERVES ATS, he's with his type of people.
I have become that which I always despised and feared........Old !

My greatest wish, would be to own my own scrapyard.
User avatar
Chorlton
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:02 pm

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby Forestlady » Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:26 pm

Thank you all for such a warm thank you. The 3 2 Stooges over at ATS admin have long hated me. I don't really know why, but it's very obvious to me. I dont know, but it is possible that me being here was the last straw for them. They know I won't back down and I stick to my guns. Whatever the reason for them leaving RU, I'm VERY happy to hear it. Of course, now they will use sock puppets and simply read the site, but I'm glad we don't have to put up with their lies, distortions and dishonesty any more.

Unfortunately, I did not save any copies as evidence - I never expected to be banned like that so never thought about it. I don't know if the thread is still up, can't remember the name of it, but will try to Google to see if I can find it. But yes, my story is like many others you can find here and at other forums.

To clarify: I posted absolutely nothing on the forum about any other forums. Nor did I post anything in as a PM that alluded to names of any other forums. And no, the person who sent me the site addy wouldn't have/didn't snitch on me. They dislike ATS as much as I do.

Re: Jacques Vallee - this was 1 or 2 years ago that this incident happened. I would never ask him to be on any forum at this point, especially one I'm not familiar with. I've seen how people were treated on ATS and he is a very fine gentleman who I would not want to put through an insulting ordeal. Not saying that would happen here, but I'm brand new here and at this point he doesn't do many interviews. This is off topic: but I have tried to find his Unicorn papers on Google and can't find one single thing. Does anyone know if they're on the internet or not? Have they been taken down?

Anyway, thanks for all the support from everyone I really appreciate it. Jaykew, congratulations on your new twin grandkids, that is quite exciting!

Now I will go and post an introduction about myself on the introduction forum. I'm looking forward to being on this forum.
Forestlady
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 7:52 pm

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby Access Denied » Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:51 pm

Hi Forestlady, welcome to RU and thank you for sharing your experience at ATS with us. Needless to say, your experience mirrors that of my own and many others.

It would seem Mark and Bill don’t want to share the stage with anybody else unless they have complete control over it and they clearly don’t have any control over you. :)

I find it hilarious that every time somebody posts an interesting pic or video that they took, Mark immediately jumps in and asks for the originals to be sent to him so Biedny and Ritzmann can “analyze” it… as if they’re some kind of undisputed experts and the members of ATS aren’t capable of making up their own minds.

If they do give it to him, you can be sure they won’t share it… at least not right away. Thankfully, I think most people are aware by now what he’s really trying do is get an exclusive so he can ATS brand it and cash in on it. All that does is encourage hoaxers looking to make a buck.

I trust the community will try to warn the unsuspecting individual who’s simply looking for answers and opinions and wants to share what they found and stumbles onto ATS… of course using the U2U system to do it could prove to be fatal. :)

Given the way they treat their own members and how much publicity their unethical behavior is getting here and elsewhere, why would anybody in their right mind want to do with business with them?

Anyway, I think we may have butted heads over Marcel Jr. at some point on ATS so in case you don't remember, I should warn you I’m a vocal opponent of the Roswell Myth. :) I would insist on being able to ask him some pretty tough questions so I'm not sure he would be up to that?

Now as far as interviewing Vallee goes, I think that would be fascinating and I know Ryan would be delighted to do it and would treat him with the same respect he does with everyone he encounters.

It was a pleasure to read Vallee’s recent comments on the alleged UN Meeting as discussed here…

viewtopic.php?p=16284#p16284
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Touching On a Few ATS \"Issues\"

Postby PhotographicMemory » Sun Jul 13, 2008 4:21 pm

Forest Lady,

This might take suspicion off of Johnny Canuck and help you remember what happened before the banning:

Boondock, Rasobasi, could one of you please U2U me and let me know what this new website is? I\'ve been looking for a good alternative for quite awhile now...


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4240300

Boondock was publicly recruiting ATS members to the other site in that thread and you publicly asked him to U2U you the link. Since Boondock was already banned Johnny probably went to you to ask for the link after seeing you talking about it on that thread. That\'s more likely than anything else.

This also from Amkon:

Boondock, I just checked, I\'m still on that other site, though who knows how long, but if you want me to PM anyone there that you miss, just let me know and I\'ll be happy to do so. You could PM to me your email and I\'ll PM it to whoever you want.


-PhotographicMemory.
Last edited by PhotographicMemory on Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhotographicMemory
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:58 am

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby Access Denied » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:30 pm

I noticed recently “Rasobasi420” (now banned apparently) expressed some concern over the seemingly arbitrary censorship of links to other web sites which was first raised in one of the (now closed) threads on ATS discussed earlier in another thread here at RU…

Are we limiting the information available to ATS? *Warning*
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread367790/pg1

It should be noted that repeated calls for the management of ATS to post an official list of web sites that are “black listed” have been ignored. This is the response he got…

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4560221

Crakeur wrote:We allow our members to link to sites and we allow them to post information from other sites, provided they properly credit the site for the content. We do not allow our members to link to sites that contain content that is questionable in nature. The site you are referring to contains more discussion on illegal activity than we allow on this site. If we want to alert our readers on the best way to crush up our meds and snort them, then we will allow linking to that site, much like, if we wanted to allow our members to view child pornography, we'd allow linking to those sites.

That’s obviously a thinly veiled reference to AmKon where a number of banned ATS members (some who are also members here) have gathered and when another member (Forestlady's sock I believe, now banned) pointed this out, this was Bill’s response…

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4560674

SkepticOverlord wrote:
endrun wrote:And the reference to child porn is just, well, in bad taste,.

If we're correct about the site in question, some time ago a member had provided us a link to a waist-down naked child on a toilet posted to the site used for jokes. Perhaps "child pornography" might be a minor stretch, but not inaccurate.

Given these less than transparent responses by the management of ATS attempting to “smear” another discussion site, it would appear ATS is more concerned about possible defections than actual content…

What is the justification for banning established members for joining other websites and then "recruiting" people (e.g. their friends) to join other discussion sites in private or public? Why can't they be members of both?

Is this not the type of behavior one would expect from a cult?

Certainly this has nothing to do with Bill’s justification given here in this thread for banning people under the guise of “harvesting professional contacts”…
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby jah » Sun Jul 13, 2008 8:29 pm

There was a thread authored today by Skeptic Overlord regarding 'freedom of speech'.

I'm sure some have read it, but I thought y'all at reality uncovered would appreciate reading it:

Freedom Of Speech, ATS, and Ending The Eternal September

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Or: Our responsibilities under the banner of free expression and how to end the September that never ended before its 15-year anniversary.


I've decided to launch a new "ATS Issues" type thread to contain all comments and criticism specific to free expression here on ATS. This is in response to a thread created by NovusOrdoMundi last night, titled: Freedom of Speech: ATS Style.


Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Is ATS an arena for freedom of speech?

With absolute and unqualified certainty, yes.


Does freedom of speech have limitations on it that I am not aware of?

"Limitations" is not the appropriate word, and (no offense to NovusOrdoMundi, but using his words to establish an example) in my opinion represents an increasingly common misconception or selfish interpretation of what free expression really means. The appropriate word, or better yet, the ideal state-of-mind, is that of responsibility. Free expression is not a license to offend, obfuscate, or lie; it's an opportunity to stimulate, challenge, and transform.


Expressing your opinion about the death of an individual is not a threat against a human being.

First... while some may not accept this rationale, the thread was not closed for that reason. The thread was closed because of the high-rate of posts that were attacking other members well-outside the boundaries of the Terms & Conditions. If not for the rapid-fire attacks, the thread would have remained open. There are dozens (if not hundreds) of examples of intense threads that have been closed for this reason.

However, hiding behind freedom of speech to cast denigrating aspersions on the recently deceased demonstrates a selfish lack of prudence. It cheapens the lofty ideal of free expression and it's unfortunate for those who would "go there," but informative for the rest of us to witness.


It needs to be made clear now: Is ATS an arena for freedom of speech or not?
If it is, then in my opinion, no matter how classless or insensitive a post is, it should not be warned, removed or be subjected to moderator intimidation.

We do not, will not, and should not remove posts or threads purely on a subjective measure of classlessness or insensitivity. We prefer to leave this entirely up to our members in their responses and flags. However, when members cross the line defined by the Terms & Conditions, we need to consider an appropriate response.

That being said, your statement establishes a rather selfish and ignoble point of view regarding the idea of free expression. Certainly, it's completely your right to feel this way, and I support your ability to do so. But it defines a self-centered ideal that is divorced from the true intent of free expression.


And this, in my opinion, is a core problem with contemporary user-generated commentary online. Too many are selfishly hiding behind "freedom of speech" as a license and not using it as the virtuously insightful tool it's intended to be. As we approach the 15-year anniversary of the "September that never ended," we have no hope of moving to October unless we begin to truly grok the responsibility of free expression, what it means, what it offers, and how to use it as an agent of change.


NovusOrdoMundi, you have an exceptionally articulate and nuanced writing style that should be the envy of many. If you apply that talent toward challenging us to examine provocative and important issues, it will be one small example of what's needed to ultimately end that 15-year September.


What is everyone's take? Freedom of speech or censorship?

I personally believe Tony Snow as a mouthpiece for the Bush administration's war crimes, and nothing more than a media puppet. Does that make it reality? Or is reality that he was an honest journalist trying to do the best job possible?

Once a neocon, always a neocon.
jah
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:44 am

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby remus » Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:17 am

PhotographicMemory wrote:Forest Lady,

This might take suspicion off of Johnny Canuck and help you remember what happened before the banning:

Boondock, Rasobasi, could one of you please U2U me and let me know what this new website is? I\'ve been looking for a good alternative for quite awhile now...


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4240300

Boondock was publicly recruiting ATS members to the other site in that thread and you publicly asked him to U2U you the link. Since Boondock was already banned Johnny probably went to you to ask for the link after seeing you talking about it on that thread. That\'s more likely than anything else.

This also from Amkon:

Boondock, I just checked, I\'m still on that other site, though who knows how long, but if you want me to PM anyone there that you miss, just let me know and I\'ll be happy to do so. You could PM to me your email and I\'ll PM it to whoever you want.


-PhotographicMemory.


How is that an acceptable reason to ban someone? If thats what your implying.
If i'm following this correctly forestlady offered to PM some friends of a banned member so that they could keep in touch.
She may have PM'd those folks and gave them an email address and not a link to another site. How is that breaking the T&C?
How would you know unless you read her PM's which Bill has unequivocally stated does not happen.
And why is it bannable to contact some "friends" using a private message system to allow those friends to keep in touch with each other.
I would have thought that a site like ATS that throws the word "community" around in everything they say and do would be appreciative of their members forming friendships, isnt that what happens in a community?
Dont they have a "friends" section in their member profiles to promote members forming friendships, seems like hypocrisy of the highest order if you then ban people for forming friendships and sharing information via a private messaging service.


Access Denied wrote:
Crakeur wrote:We allow our members to link to sites and we allow them to post information from other sites, provided they properly credit the site for the content. We do not allow our members to link to sites that contain content that is questionable in nature. The site you are referring to contains more discussion on illegal activity than we allow on this site. If we want to alert our readers on the best way to crush up our meds and snort them, then we will allow linking to that site, much like, if we wanted to allow our members to view child pornography, we'd allow linking to those sites.

That’s obviously a thinly veiled reference to AmKon where a number of banned ATS members (some who are also members here) have gathered and when another member (Forestlady's sock I believe, now banned) pointed this out, this was Bill’s response…

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4560674

SkepticOverlord wrote:
endrun wrote:And the reference to child porn is just, well, in bad taste,.

If we're correct about the site in question, some time ago a member had provided us a link to a waist-down naked child on a toilet posted to the site used for jokes. Perhaps "child pornography" might be a minor stretch, but not inaccurate.

Given these less than transparent responses by the management of ATS attempting to “smear” another discussion site, it would appear ATS is more concerned about possible defections than actual content…

What is the justification for banning established members for joining other websites and then "recruiting" people (e.g. their friends) to join other discussion sites in private or public? Why can't they be members of both?

Is this not the type of behavior one would expect from a cult?

Certainly this has nothing to do with Bill’s justification given here in this thread for banning people under the guise of “harvesting professional contacts”…


The "child porn" jibe seems to be a fairly dirty tactic, i searched a number of threads there and havent been able to find anything resembling porn, although there are quite a lot of risque images used to derail topics.
Drug refferences seem to be fairly common but no more so than i have seen on sites like GLP and OM and apparently you can mention those sites on ATS.
it seems to me to be a purely personal vendetta by Bill and crakeur to attack that other site and discredit them, seemingly with tactics that they claim other sites use against them.
User avatar
remus
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:32 am

Re: Touching On a Few ATS \"Issues\"

Postby PhotographicMemory » Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:16 am

How is that an acceptable reason to ban someone? If thats what your implying.


Remus,

That is not what I am implying because I am an uninterested party and non staff member.
Many members could not recall what led up to their banning and in this one case I remember seeing what happened on that thread and thought it would help Forest Lady remember.
I do not want to be involved in this matter further than that but only sought to defend Johnny Canuck.

Johnny most likely saw the comments on that thread and u2u\'d Forest Lady for the link since Boondock had already been banned and he could not u2u Boondock.
Johnny Canuck is also a regular member but Forest Lady keeps referring to him as a staff member.
Johnny could not have read the u2u\'s even if the rumor is true staff members can read u2us.
Then after seeing Forest Lady on Amkon publicly offer to u2u Boondock\'s friends for him after she knew people were getting banned for that from ATS was probably what led to her banning.
I do not want to get involved in the debate of whether or not it was a justifiable banning but only sought to help Forest Lady remember what happened because she apparently forgot.
I would hope someone would do the same for me if my time ever came and I could not remember the events leading up to my banning.

-PhotographicMemory
PhotographicMemory
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:58 am

Re: Touching On a Few ATS "Issues"

Postby remus » Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:02 pm

@photographicmemory, my apologies. misinterpreted your post. :)

remus.
User avatar
remus
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:32 am

PreviousNext

Google

Return to ATS Watch

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron