Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
Post a reply

PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 13:22:29

Mod Split from
Let's Talk About Sex

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('entropyfails', '
')Perhaps INTJ's who have overcome your natural difficulties can expand on this further.

We INTP types can pick up a horny mate from a room away, long before they themselves even become aware that they are horny for us. We all get Einsteinian amounts of sex for the same reason he did. I'd tell you more about my sex life but you wouldn't believe me. That's my favorite form of bragging. *laugh*
INTP vs. INTJ? What about ENTJ, ESTP? These psychological categorization schemes are fascinating, but they remind me of the I Ching. You know, the 64 stacks of six with their mystical meaning to show reality. Carl Jung was fascinated by it and wrote the foreword to my copy of it. Maybe your idea that reality is easier to see regarding sexual attraction and it's dynamics for the INTPs is true, or maybe your notion of the chaos involved is more to the point. I don't know, but I do believe that [ENFP] [INFP] [ENFJ] [INFJ] [ESTJ] [ISTJ] [ESFJ] [ISFJ][ENTP] [INTP] [ENTJ] [INTJ] [ESTP] [ISTP] [ESFP] [ISFP] is probably bogus. Reality for humans is too complex especially regarding ourselves and you might as well use six sticks, three punctuated, three solid, and watch their random orders of fall when cast on the ground and trust in a historical set of interpretations. Similar things have been done with bones and entrails. Tarot is fascinating too. My guess is this wasn't what you were looking for. For someone to say, I'm an INTJ, is absurd. What do they call people who desire to render the continuum discrete? who would render what cannot be categorized into specific categories? And what do they call people who accept such nonsense?[s][/s]
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby SevenTen » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 15:08:50

I'd love to look up the links for you, PMS, but on our own board there are at least two personality type polls, which show what other Internet message boards have shown for a while, and what they show is that INTx types tend to "get" message boards by a wide margin over other personality types.

You obviously took the time to put in those four-letter personality descriptors. Did you take the time to take a test? Read the explanations afterward? Read the explanations for a different type other than your own?

Is it so hard to understand that some people are more perceptive than judgmental? That some people are more introverted than extroverted? And that EJs, EPs, IJs, and IPs might have other shared outlooks or beliefs?

The "humans are too complex to be categorized thusly" response can also be used for categories of gender, age, sexuality, social status, education, country of origin, and level of resource wealth.

True, no one measure tells us everything, and personality type won't tell us everything, either.

But it does tell us something.
User avatar
SevenTen
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat 07 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 15:25:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SevenTen', '
')The "humans are too complex to be categorized thusly" response can also be used for categories of gender, age, sexuality, social status, education, country of origin, and level of resource wealth.

True, no one measure tells us everything, and personality type won't tell us everything, either.

But it does tell us something.
Yes, I was anticipating a response like this. My point is that attempts to categorize personality types such as IJTP, etc, are futile. I like the point that Jung made that while we can dimly perceive these opposite tendencies that we seem to have as humans (and he was very much connected in this scheme that we have here, I know because I read them and they go way back) that we should try to detect ourselves and try to cultivate our opposites to become more whole. It all comes down to a spiritual project. The grandfather of the modern self-help movement. The irony is that many of these supposed personality types would not have the slightest interest in doing what the Jungian Project supposes.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 15:38:57

I mean, what is this? Jung proposed four basic traits in humans. Emotion, Intellect, Intuition, and Sensuality. He proposed these as the human four prime movers. Guess what, you combine these and you get 16 primary human types. Just what the scheme is based on. As Freud said, Jung is too mystical. I would say he he was too human. We don't fit those schemes of interpretation.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby entropyfails » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 15:47:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'M')y point is that attempts to categorize personality types such as IJTP, etc, are futile.


In the sense that ultimately we are all unique individuals so no 4 letter label can hold our personality, I agree. In the sense that these tests measure "nothing" (i.e. are futile), I completely disagree. The Introvert vs Extrovert distinction is a well known, well researched psychological phenomena. Even if that is the only bit of information that you want to count, then the test still measures SOMETHING.

I think that the other dichotomies that the test presents are fairly valid. But they are valid along a continuum. The label INTP means that I prefer perception over judging. It does not mean that I refuse to judge things. Likewise for the other dichotomies.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'I') like the point that Jung made that while we can dimly perceive these opposite tendencies that we seem to have as humans, we should try to detect ourselves and try to cultivate our opposites to become more whole.


Which, of course, was the point of my post.

Do you have anything germane to add to the topic at hand, namely the sex lives of PeakOil.com folks? Otherwise, you can take your distaste of the labels and create a different topic on that.
EntropyFails
"Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes." -- Friedrich Nietzsche
User avatar
entropyfails
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Wed 30 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 16:05:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('entropyfails', '
')In the sense that ultimately we are all unique individuals so no 4 letter label can hold our personality, I agree. In the sense that these tests measure "nothing" (i.e. are futile), I completely disagree. The Introvert vs Extrovert distinction is a well known, well researched psychological phenomena.
Is it? Is it really? Are you absolutely positive about that, and what those terms mean? I'm not so sure as you are.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he label INTP means that I prefer perception over judging. It does not mean that I refuse to judge things. Likewise for the other dichotomies.
I don't want to belabor the point but how to do you know who is perceiving and who is judging?
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby entropyfails » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 16:43:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'I')s it? Is it really? Are you absolutely positive about that, and what those terms mean? I'm not so sure as you are.


And I'm not certain that you've read any psychology beyond Jung. ;)

Are you really saying that the introvert vs extrovert distinction has no validity? If so, you have a LOT of explaining of psychological research results to do.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'I') don't want to belabor the point but how to do you know who is perceiving and who is judging?


Are you asking if I know in a specific particular instance which style of thought someone is using?

In a sense, perception is a judgment so that dichotomy seems somewhat less important than introverts vs extroverts. But I do see real differences in thinking style for those who tend to label themselves as J's vs P's. However, It is much more of a normal distribution than the Myers-Briggs people like to admit. We can probably agree on that point.
EntropyFails
"Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit that the laws of nature are constantly broken for their sakes." -- Friedrich Nietzsche
User avatar
entropyfails
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Wed 30 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby mmasters » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 21:42:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'I') mean, what is this? Jung proposed four basic traits in humans. Emotion, Intellect, Intuition, and Sensuality. He proposed these as the human four prime movers. Guess what, you combine these and you get 16 primary human types. Just what the scheme is based on. As Freud said, Jung is too mystical. I would say he he was too human. We don't fit those schemes of interpretation.

I disagree, I see everyone falling into one of the 16 types and it's helpful for reading people and better understanding yourself. It is powerful stuff when understood properly which is very rare.

So here's MMASTERS advanced lesson on myers-briggs!

You got three of the 4 traits right, Feeling, Thinking, Intuition. However the fourth isn't sensuality, it's sensing. That is, being in touch with the physical world through your sensing.

So each of the 16 types has 4 letters and two possibilities for each.

1) Introvert/Extrovert
2) Intuitive/Sensor
3) Thinker/Feeler
4) Judger/Perciever

We all feel, intuit, sense and think. And some of our abilities are naturally much stronger than others. Of the 16 types they can be generalized or divided into blocks of 4 based on the dominant 2 tendencies. The four basic groups are the NTs, the SPs the SJs and the NFs. Here's an excerpt from a website that can articulate it better than I can on the fly:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')P - Action: These people like activity. All the best athletes are SPs. Soldiers are usually SPs (but officers are usually SJs). The best salesmen are SPs. Lots of really good programmers are SPs - they're they guys that just love programming, I call them computer jocks. To be really good at something, you have to love to do it over and over again, only SPs are capable of this.

SJ - Order: These people love to make order out of chaos. They love directing things, planning things, organizing things. A lot of bosses are SJs. Good secretaries are SJs. Most schoolteachers are SJs. Lots of good programmers are SJs - they're the ones that will research and plan before methodically carrying out the task.

NT - Ideas: These people like thinking about ideas. They like solving problems (not the administrative kind), inventing algorithms, and architecting solutions. Most scientists and engineers are NTs (though a lot of engineers are SJs). Lots of good programmers are NTs (I'm one of those), but they're likely to view programming as a means to an end rather than an end in itself (in contrast to SPs).

NF - Empathy: These people like to help people and express themselves (to people). Naturally, they gravitate to the helping professions: teaching, medicine, social work, social advocacy. They also fill the ranks of artists, writers, journalists. I once saw a claim that they make the best salespeople, and I believe it, but few NFs are interested in sales. NFs are not likely to be interested in programming, but when they are they're motivated by the notion of helping people by what they write, or pleasing the boss.

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003474.html


For fun, on average the types that get laid the most to the least are:

1) SPs -- most
2) NFs
3) NTs
4) SJs -- least

Now more specifically what distinguishes each of the 16 types is orientation of the 4 basic traits? Again they are: Thinking, Feeling, Intuition and Sensing. Thinking is the polar opposite of Feeling and Sensing is the Polar opposite of Intuition.

Now let's expand on the core types of NT, NF, SP and SJ and discuss Perciever/Judger. Most people do not understand what this really means beyond its literal definition which is quite misleading.

Intuition and Sensing are both Percieving functions. Some percieve the world starkly through their senses like a stunt car driver. Or some percieve the world through subconscious abstraction like Einstien and aren't as in touch with the physical world (Einstein would walk into Trees and walls often. He wasn't as in touch with the outer physical world as most people).

On the other hand Thinking and Feeling are Judging functions. I don't think I have to explain these.

When somebody is a Judger that means their main judging function (whether it's Thinking or Feeling) is an EXTROVERTED ability. And in turn their, their main percieving function is INTROVERTED. Lets do some examples to illustrate:

So in the case of an NTJ:
Because of the J for Judger, their judging function of thinking is extroverted while on the other hand their intuition is introverted.

If they're an NTP then:
Because of the P for Perciever, their percieving function of intution is extroverted while on the other hand their judging ability of thinking is introverted.

If they're an SFJ then:
Because of the J for Judger, their judging function of Feeling is extroverted while on the other hand their percieving function of sensing is introverted.

Get the idea?

Now, the variable of Introversion/Extroversion tells us which oriented trait is DOMINANT.

To repeat the same example above:

If they're an SFJ then:
Because of the J for Judger, their judging function of Feeling is extroverted while on the other hand their percieving function of sensing is introverted.

Now lets say this person is an ISFJ, In that case introverted sensing is their most dominant trait. If they were an ESFJ their most dominant trait would be the extroverted Feeling. Get it?

Might have to read it a few times for it to click.

To illustrate further here's what an ENFP looks like:

Image

NF is their type and P distinguishes that Intuition is the extroverted trait (and correspondingly Feeling the introverted trait). And then Extroverted denotes that the extroverted trait is dominant which would make Intuition the dominant. Then extrapolating a little further, the pattern goes that whatever your dominant trait is the polar opposite is your weakest trait. While your secondary and third traits are polar opposite.

Here's the orientation for all the types:
Image

http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/tt/t-ar ... -dynam.htm

and here's the INTP (my type)
http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/myers-briggs/intp.htm

Another interesting thing is our "dark side" consists of the exact mirror image of the orientations pictured above. And whenver we have sex our dark sides actually become of us temporarily. ;)

Our dark sides are our driving force towards balance. The ideal being all 4 traits strong and balanced.
Last edited by mmasters on Tue 26 Jun 2007, 21:52:43, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby mmasters » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 21:43:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ferrelgiraffe', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'I') mean, what is this? Jung proposed four basic traits in humans. Emotion, Intellect, Intuition, and Sensuality. He proposed these as the human four prime movers. Guess what, you combine these and you get 16 primary human types. Just what the scheme is based on. As Freud said, Jung is too mystical. I would say he he was too human. We don't fit those schemes of interpretation.



Jung was an paid shill. He was tearing down social moores so society could be conquered and ruled by his religion

You shouldn't criticize what you don't understand.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 22:41:54

Let us add a fifth category: demonstrative vs reticent, a sixth category: abstemious vs profligate, a seventh category: tasters vs hearers, an eight category: empathetic vs indifferent. This can go on and on. This idea of 16 categories, 16 basic human types is absurd.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 23:15:16

Then we also have this to contend with: is one intuitive or non-intuitive, emotional or non-emotional, sensual or non-sensual? Does one either think rationally or not think rationally? You get my drift? Shed this voodoo thinking. If you need this kind of thing, take up the I Ching. At least they have 64 categories. 2*6 vs 2*4.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby SevenTen » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 04:12:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'L')et us add a fifth category: demonstrative vs reticent, a sixth category: abstemious vs profligate, a seventh category: tasters vs hearers, an eight category: empathetic vs indifferent. This can go on and on. This idea of 16 categories, 16 basic human types is absurd.

The idea of two genders is equally absurd, as is the idea that one can make inferences based on knowing what gender a person is. :)

If you can't make use of the tool, I don't see how it's helpful to anyone if you continually criticize those who can. It's almost like when a cornucopian troll tries to convince us all that peak oil is a scam.

Put it in the realm of astrology, tarot cards, and tea leaves, if you think it's a waste of time. And move on with your life. Because if it's a waste of time, with peak-oil-related chaos around the corner, then it's certainly a waste of time to spend time pointing out that it's a waste of time.

Surely you have some peak-oil-related prepping to do? :)
User avatar
SevenTen
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat 07 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 13:58:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SevenTen', '
')Surely you have some peak-oil-related prepping to do? :)
right! gotta go buy a few bags of flour. and ferrelgiraffe, you said it better than I could, well done. (though I don't agree that Freud was worse you could make the point that he was arguing 2*1)
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby mmasters » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 15:02:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ferrelgiraffe', 'J')ung placed a "scientific" footing under occult phenomenaa and mystical experience. Jung was deeply involved in the occult and did his doctoral thesis on parapsychology. He also was interested in Cathulic mysticizm and conducted seminars on the teachings of Ignashius Luyola

And what does that have to do with anything? Many prominent people from George Washington to Einstien have taken part in the occult. It doesn't mean they're BAD people or looney. Before universities existed the occult orders were the secret schools of the world. They were the Universities.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')e was a paid shill like I said before.

Maybe you're a paid shrill.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')onder this for a moment. When Carl Jung was three years old a “spirit guide” named Philemon contacted him. The spirit was one of his teachers and tutored him all of his life. Other spirits came to him as well and he made this observation about them: “Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. Philemon represented a force that was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. [?] Psychologically, Philemon represented supeerior insight." There was no reason for Jung to believe that his visitors were benevolent spirits; nevertheless he chose to believe they were.

2 options:

1. He was crazy.
2. Dealt directly with the devil, and yes it seems like a genius. All it was, was plagiarism from the devil. You want to touch that? Not I.

If you don't believe in the devil then to you he has to be crazy.

Carl Jung has been called the “Father of Neo-Gnosticism and the New Age Movement” and rightly so. Dr. Satinover comments, "One of the most powerful modern forms of Gnosticism is without question Jungian psychology."

Further, Jung believed not that good should overcome evil; good should be integrated with evil in order to achieve wholeness. “The homosexual who has the courage to ‘come out’, for example, is welcoming and integrating the darker and 'opposite-sex side of the personality. There can be no moral condemnation when wholeness is achieved

Amazingly, Jung believed that "It is possible for a man to attain totality, to become whole, only with the co-operation of the spirit of darkness..." [this is the star wars religion] Also can you think of others? Lord of the Rings?, Hare Krishna? Hindu? All the alternate religions. They will all do the dirty deed and confuse. [By the way this is modern satanism also] Jung said that opposites always balance one another and “onesideness, though it lends momentum, is a sign of barbarism." [In ohter words, sooner or later, they are going to have to kill the christians again They do this every few hundred years.


Um, how about plagerism? http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi ... ead=151534

That aside, that is misinterpretation of the truth by someone that has an infantile understanding of psychology. This reads like the disinformation on 9-11 or the federal reserve. Do you think it's worth my energy to debate this unevolved view of the world? or your crappy stealing of other's ideas?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen you play with this garbage you will never get out from under it again, after permanent brain/character changes. Don't touch, or soon you will be putting out the two finger NWO hand sign.
Freud was worse. Nuff said.

Ooohh the boogie man will come get me. :rolleyes:

Go post your crap disinformation somewhere else.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby Atlantean_Relic » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 15:09:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ferrelgiraffe', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mmasters', '
')You shouldn't criticize what you don't understand.



Amazingly, Jung believed that "It is possible for a man to attain totality, to become whole, only with the co-operation of the spirit of darkness..." [this is the star wars religion] Also can you think of others? Lord of the Rings?, Hare Krishna? Hindu? All the alternate religions. They will all do the dirty deed and confuse. [By the way this is modern satanism also] Jung said that opposites always balance one another and “onesideness, though it lends momentum, is a sign of barbarism." [In ohter words, sooner or later, they are going to have to kill the christians again They do this every few hundred years. ]



Lord of the Rings??? 8O How has that have any element of Balance? The whole point of the Adventure was to dispose of the greatest source of Evil in the world.
Was a long and dark December
When the banks became cathedrals
And the fog
Became God
User avatar
Atlantean_Relic
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon 24 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: North of Id, west of Oz, and infront of the damned rabbit
Top

Re: Let's Talk About Sex

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 15:34:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mmasters', '
')Ooohh the boogie man will come get me. :rolleyes:
You seem to be really committed to this idea that there are 16 basic human personality types. It's astounding and I have to wonder what it means. My guess is that it is the same as the religious impulse. It is the same as the reason why we tell stories, write novels, make movies. We have to make sense of the senseless.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby mmasters » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 16:22:01

I think it's just because it's a very abstract subject and it's not natural for non-abstract types to easily understand, therefore some don't trust it and want to equate it to astrology. Myself, Jung is one who's theories I understand and have expanded upon. I find it valuble knowledge and it's helped me in life.

Anyhow, General Relativity is an abstract subject too. And some like ferrellgiraffe say it's nonsense. I guess if it doesn't make sense then you can't exactly trust it and that's understandable. On the other hand, most trust that General Relativity is true because it's widely accepted by the scientific community. How is that much different from trusting hydrogen and ethanol are the future by media/public official consensus?
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: PMS's Rebuttal to Myers-Briggs Types

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 27 Jun 2007, 17:02:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mmasters', 'I') think it's just because it's a very abstract subject and it's not natural for non-abstract types to easily understand, therefore some don't trust it and want to equate it to astrology.
Really. I appreciate your overall respectful tone to my criticism of this goofy idea that there are 16 basic human types, but maybe there are 17. Or maybe there are 128, 2*7. Come on, I like Jung, I like Freud too. For that matter, E. O. Wilson is appealing. I love the insights of Conrad Lorentz and have entertained my kids with the stories of his insights about animal behavior. But this idea about 16 basic human types is something that must be disposed of.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top
Next
Post a reply

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest