|
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:37:41 -0500, Vinnie S.
wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:01:31 -0500, Dave Hall wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 04:51:23 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 05:26:14 -0500, Vinnie S. wrote in : snip Holy crap, that might have done it. While I did not spreak the coil, it appeared to be pushed or slanted to one side. I just straightened it out a bit. Seems to work. Will still do alignment. I will get back to you ! That should stroke Dave's ego a little bit -- he needs it right about now. No need. I am confident in my abilities. My past accomplishments tell the story. Insecurity is not one of my foibles. I'll be damned. Rogerbird was right. I added a mica insulator between the final and heatsink, with the heatsink compound. It worked. At first, I thought Jim was right. But the problem reoccured. I am still going to bias it. There are a combination of "things" which can cause, or add to, the oscillation. Moving the coil, isolating the final, and changing the bias are all things that reduce the potential. I'm glad it worked. Keep an eye on it, though as it might just be on the hairy edge and could come back. Dave |
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 16:41:19 -0500, Vinnie S.
wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 04:51:23 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 05:26:14 -0500, Vinnie S. wrote in : snip Holy crap, that might have done it. While I did not spreak the coil, it appeared to be pushed or slanted to one side. I just straightened it out a bit. Seems to work. Will still do alignment. I will get back to you ! That should stroke Dave's ego a little bit -- he needs it right about now. Frank, I have nothing against you or Dave. Dave has helped me quite a lot. I appreciate that, who ever the person is that helps me. But I would like to point out one thing. There in an underlying feeling in this group, that there is some sort of prize, if you know more than someone. Almost like there is a contest to one up someone else. I just don't get it. Are people that insecure? With a couple of killfiles, I have cleaned most of the garbage of this group. I don't kill file you or anyone, that can be informative or helpful. Regardless of what side of the line you fall on. But this is a perfect example. Dave did nothing but try to solve a problem for me, and you take a swipe at him. Maybe you know more than him, or maybe he knows more than you. But once you leave the area of the keyboard, who the hell really cares? Does you wife care, do you friends care? Probably not. So why is it so important that everyone here knows? It's a matter of ego, saving face, and pride. Hell, I never professed to "know all". I've learned in life that no matter how strong you are, no matter how smart you are, no matter how cool you are, there will always be someone stronger, smarter, or cooler. This is not a contest for me. All I want to do is offer help when and where I can. I do find it curious when others attack my suggestions. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:13:31 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote: Frank, I have nothing against you or Dave. Dave has helped me quite a lot. I appreciate that, who ever the person is that helps me. Then let me stop you right there. Dave does know his CB radios, and he knows them a lot better than most people in this group, including (and especially) myself. Thanks for the flowers (i think). But if you really felt that way, why are you intently arguing with me about my experience with the UPD 858 SSB chassis radios, based on nothing more than a single service manual? Now I should apologize because it was not my intent to attack you. Dave was my target. That much was obvious. Why I should be anyone's "target" sheds light on their true motives. In case you haven't noticed already, a lot of people in this group are basically full of ****, regardless of how much they know or don't know about radio. I can see why that happens because it's easy for geeks, nerds and social misfits to make up imaginary lives while hiding behind a keyboard. No one is exempt from that. The ones with the most imaginary lives are also the same ones who hide behind anonymous pseudonyms. But once in a while a person like Dave gets to thinking that he is some sort of alpha male, sometimes manifested as a delusion of intellectual superiority just like you describe. Let's address this curious accusation. First off, I do have some "seniority" on this group, so I have been around for a while. But that alone does not mean anything. But you are right, alot of people here are full of crap, and try to promote "CB science" radio myths. I try to set them straight. If that makes me an "alpha male", then it applies to you as well, as you've done the same thing. So is what you're saying essentially, is that you are now challenging my position as "alpha male", by utilizing a more aggressive form of the same traits you attribute to me? Remember, YOU made this personal. Anytime you want to stop your silly crusade against me and attacking every point I make on various threads, I can resume some form of civility with you. The response he receives is nothing more than a normal societal reaction to put him back in his place. And what "place" is that? Either he gets the message and starts behaving himself "Behave myself"? In what way have I ever "misbehaved? Disagreeing with your political ideology doesn't count. (which rarely happens), bails from the newsgroup in shame (like so many have done in recent years), or goes insane and becomes a troll (which is why you will see heavy trolling here from time to time). My problem with Dave will probably end soon because a person can only make up so many excuses when the facts remain the same. Yep, you can only repeat the same tired excuses that you "have the facts" for only so long before you get placed back on the discount rack. The facts are that you are chasing me. I'm not chasing you. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:06:32 -0500, Dave Hall wrote:
I'll be damned. Rogerbird was right. I added a mica insulator between the final and heatsink, with the heatsink compound. It worked. At first, I thought Jim was right. But the problem reoccured. I am still going to bias it. There are a combination of "things" which can cause, or add to, the oscillation. Moving the coil, isolating the final, and changing the bias are all things that reduce the potential. I'm glad it worked. Keep an eye on it, though as it might just be on the hairy edge and could come back. Dave One other thing can cause. Seems when I had it connected to a dummy load, or in my car to the amp, it didn't happened. Which means a perfect match eliminated the problem. So high SWR can cause it. Even though mine was about 1.3-1.5 across the band. Can't wait to get that IMAX in the trees. Vinnie S. |
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:26:35 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:13:31 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: Frank, I have nothing against you or Dave. Dave has helped me quite a lot. I appreciate that, who ever the person is that helps me. Then let me stop you right there. Dave does know his CB radios, and he knows them a lot better than most people in this group, including (and especially) myself. Thanks for the flowers (i think). But if you really felt that way, why are you intently arguing with me about my experience with the UPD 858 SSB chassis radios, based on nothing more than a single service manual? I said you know your CB radios. I didn't say you know the theory behind their function. Everything you have said so far proves that, in fact, you don't. Now I should apologize because it was not my intent to attack you. Dave was my target. That much was obvious. Why I should be anyone's "target" sheds light on their true motives. I agree. Which explains why you jumped my **** when I criticized Bush. In case you haven't noticed already, a lot of people in this group are basically full of ****, regardless of how much they know or don't know about radio. I can see why that happens because it's easy for geeks, nerds and social misfits to make up imaginary lives while hiding behind a keyboard. No one is exempt from that. The ones with the most imaginary lives are also the same ones who hide behind anonymous pseudonyms. I won't speculate on how elaborate these people are with their lies. Suffice it to say that such people exist in abundance. But once in a while a person like Dave gets to thinking that he is some sort of alpha male, sometimes manifested as a delusion of intellectual superiority just like you describe. Let's address this curious accusation. First off, I do have some "seniority" on this group, so I have been around for a while. But that alone does not mean anything. It doesn't mean anything -- period. But you are right, alot of people here are full of crap, and try to promote "CB science" radio myths. I try to set them straight. If that makes me an "alpha male", then it applies to you as well, as you've done the same thing. So is what you're saying essentially, is that you are now challenging my position as "alpha male", by utilizing a more aggressive form of the same traits you attribute to me? Hardly, and I can prove it by merely proposing that we take this to email. But I have already made that proposal and you rejected it. Remember, YOU made this personal. WRONG. I made some comments about Bush that -YOU- took personally, which is where this all started. Anytime you want to stop your silly crusade against me and attacking every point I make on various threads, I can resume some form of civility with you. But I -don't- attack every point you make, Dave. I attack only the points that are in direct contradiction to the claim that you base your conclusions on facts and logic. The response he receives is nothing more than a normal societal reaction to put him back in his place. And what "place" is that? As one of the more intellectual people on this group. Either he gets the message and starts behaving himself "Behave myself"? In what way have I ever "misbehaved? Disagreeing with your political ideology doesn't count. You misbehaved when you started practicing fallacious logic and disregarding indepentantly verifiable facts in favor of your "core beliefs". (which rarely happens), bails from the newsgroup in shame (like so many have done in recent years), or goes insane and becomes a troll (which is why you will see heavy trolling here from time to time). My problem with Dave will probably end soon because a person can only make up so many excuses when the facts remain the same. Yep, you can only repeat the same tired excuses that you "have the facts" for only so long before you get placed back on the discount rack. Which is exactly what the prevalent social order did to Galileo, Columbus, Aristotle, and a host of other people who -did- have the facts but were dismissed in favor of "core beliefs". The facts are that you are chasing me. I'm not chasing you. Because it's my "core belief" that you really -are- intelligent, and unless someone challenges that intelligence you will just ignore it (like you ignore facts and logic) until your gray matter falls into disrepair. That would be a waste, IMHO. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 07:03:18 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote: On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:26:35 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:13:31 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: Frank, I have nothing against you or Dave. Dave has helped me quite a lot. I appreciate that, who ever the person is that helps me. Then let me stop you right there. Dave does know his CB radios, and he knows them a lot better than most people in this group, including (and especially) myself. Thanks for the flowers (i think). But if you really felt that way, why are you intently arguing with me about my experience with the UPD 858 SSB chassis radios, based on nothing more than a single service manual? I said you know your CB radios. I didn't say you know the theory behind their function. Everything you have said so far proves that, in fact, you don't. A conclusion that is yours alone. My reputation and experience speaks for itself in this arena. Now I should apologize because it was not my intent to attack you. Dave was my target. That much was obvious. Why I should be anyone's "target" sheds light on their true motives. I agree. Which explains why you jumped my **** when I criticized Bush. Is that what you think? You need to go back and seriously re-read that stuff again. Yes, I disagreed with you, but it wasn't a malicious personal attack followed by a vendetta of smear. But once in a while a person like Dave gets to thinking that he is some sort of alpha male, sometimes manifested as a delusion of intellectual superiority just like you describe. Let's address this curious accusation. First off, I do have some "seniority" on this group, so I have been around for a while. But that alone does not mean anything. It doesn't mean anything -- period. But you are right, alot of people here are full of crap, and try to promote "CB science" radio myths. I try to set them straight. If that makes me an "alpha male", then it applies to you as well, as you've done the same thing. So is what you're saying essentially, is that you are now challenging my position as "alpha male", by utilizing a more aggressive form of the same traits you attribute to me? Hardly, and I can prove it by merely proposing that we take this to email. But I have already made that proposal and you rejected it. When? Besides, I told you before, there's nothing you can tell me that you haven't already littered this group with. Most of it is B.S. left wing, "hate-Bush-at-all-counts" propaganda. Remember, YOU made this personal. WRONG. I made some comments about Bush that -YOU- took personally, which is where this all started. No, I'm not the one chasing you and interjecting berating comments and attempting to make hay of the simplest statements. YOU took it personally and have been chasing me since. Anytime you want to stop your silly crusade against me and attacking every point I make on various threads, I can resume some form of civility with you. But I -don't- attack every point you make, Dave. I attack only the points that are in direct contradiction to the claim that you base your conclusions on facts and logic. Which is most things. I also use statistics and probability. The response he receives is nothing more than a normal societal reaction to put him back in his place. And what "place" is that? As one of the more intellectual people on this group. As defined by whom? Either he gets the message and starts behaving himself "Behave myself"? In what way have I ever "misbehaved? Disagreeing with your political ideology doesn't count. You misbehaved when you started practicing fallacious logic and disregarding indepentantly verifiable facts in favor of your "core beliefs". In your opinion. But in any case, how is that any different from anyone else here? Which is exactly what the prevalent social order did to Galileo, Columbus, Aristotle, and a host of other people who -did- have the facts but were dismissed in favor of "core beliefs". Without principles, you have nothing. The facts are that you are chasing me. I'm not chasing you. Because it's my "core belief" that you really -are- intelligent, and unless someone challenges that intelligence you will just ignore it (like you ignore facts and logic) until your gray matter falls into disrepair. That would be a waste, IMHO. It's not your job to be my nanny, so stop applying for the job, and get back to the one you supposedly have. Dave "Sandbagger" |
|
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:09:44 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 07:03:18 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:26:35 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:13:31 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: Frank, I have nothing against you or Dave. Dave has helped me quite a lot. I appreciate that, who ever the person is that helps me. Then let me stop you right there. Dave does know his CB radios, and he knows them a lot better than most people in this group, including (and especially) myself. Thanks for the flowers (i think). But if you really felt that way, why are you intently arguing with me about my experience with the UPD 858 SSB chassis radios, based on nothing more than a single service manual? I said you know your CB radios. I didn't say you know the theory behind their function. Everything you have said so far proves that, in fact, you don't. A conclusion that is yours alone. My reputation and experience speaks for itself in this arena. Your reputation is that you are familiar with radio mods. Your experience reflects only your reputation, and seriously detracts from any claims about your education. Now I should apologize because it was not my intent to attack you. Dave was my target. That much was obvious. Why I should be anyone's "target" sheds light on their true motives. I agree. Which explains why you jumped my **** when I criticized Bush. Is that what you think? You need to go back and seriously re-read that stuff again. Yes, I disagreed with you, but it wasn't a malicious personal attack followed by a vendetta of smear. Not at first. But after a few civilized posts you started implying that I was some sort of left-wing fanatic, culminating in a blatant accusation that I was a half-baked, fully-biased liberal. And by your own admission about what you think about left-wingers and liberals, that was most definately a smear. You started it, Dave -- don't go putting the blame on me just because you have a warped perspective. But once in a while a person like Dave gets to thinking that he is some sort of alpha male, sometimes manifested as a delusion of intellectual superiority just like you describe. Let's address this curious accusation. First off, I do have some "seniority" on this group, so I have been around for a while. But that alone does not mean anything. It doesn't mean anything -- period. But you are right, alot of people here are full of crap, and try to promote "CB science" radio myths. I try to set them straight. If that makes me an "alpha male", then it applies to you as well, as you've done the same thing. So is what you're saying essentially, is that you are now challenging my position as "alpha male", by utilizing a more aggressive form of the same traits you attribute to me? Hardly, and I can prove it by merely proposing that we take this to email. But I have already made that proposal and you rejected it. When? When you said, "I have no need or desire to take this to E-mail." Besides, I told you before, there's nothing you can tell me that you haven't already littered this group with. Most of it is B.S. left wing, "hate-Bush-at-all-counts" propaganda. Yet I have said good things about Bush. Has your memory been distorted by your "core beliefs"? Remember, YOU made this personal. WRONG. I made some comments about Bush that -YOU- took personally, which is where this all started. No, I'm not the one chasing you and interjecting berating comments and attempting to make hay of the simplest statements. YOU took it personally and have been chasing me since. It takes two to tango, Dave. If you didn't have something to prove (or defend), then why bother to reply to my posts? If your "facts" were indeed facts then they could stand on their own merit. But they aren't facts at all, hence your need to watch over them like a house of cards and defend them against every little puff of smoke I blow in their direction. Anytime you want to stop your silly crusade against me and attacking every point I make on various threads, I can resume some form of civility with you. But I -don't- attack every point you make, Dave. I attack only the points that are in direct contradiction to the claim that you base your conclusions on facts and logic. Which is most things. You said it, Dave! LOL! I also use statistics and probability. So do I, but not when facts and logic best define the truth. And unlike you, I -don't- use stats or probability to disuade -against- facts and logic. The response he receives is nothing more than a normal societal reaction to put him back in his place. And what "place" is that? As one of the more intellectual people on this group. As defined by whom? By me. It's clear that you are quite intelligent. It's a shame you abuse it so much because you could really make a difference in the world if you could use your brains instead of abusing them. Either he gets the message and starts behaving himself "Behave myself"? In what way have I ever "misbehaved? Disagreeing with your political ideology doesn't count. You misbehaved when you started practicing fallacious logic and disregarding indepentantly verifiable facts in favor of your "core beliefs". In your opinion. Your logical fallacies are not subject to opinion, Dave. They are documented fact. But in any case, how is that any different from anyone else here? Because you are more intelligent than most, which means you are held to a higher standard. Was this not explained to you when you were a child? Which is exactly what the prevalent social order did to Galileo, Columbus, Aristotle, and a host of other people who -did- have the facts but were dismissed in favor of "core beliefs". Without principles, you have nothing. You have mighty warped principles if any of their precepts is to conceal truth. The facts are that you are chasing me. I'm not chasing you. Because it's my "core belief" that you really -are- intelligent, and unless someone challenges that intelligence you will just ignore it (like you ignore facts and logic) until your gray matter falls into disrepair. That would be a waste, IMHO. It's not your job to be my nanny, so stop applying for the job, and get back to the one you supposedly have. But you -like- it, Dave. If you didn't you wouldn't be responding to my every post. I provide you with mental challenges, which are evidently missing from your off-line life. There's no shame in admitting that life is really friggin boring when you're smart. You just have to get past the overcompensated ego thing and you'll be all set for some -real- challenges! ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:03:13 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote: I said you know your CB radios. I didn't say you know the theory behind their function. Everything you have said so far proves that, in fact, you don't. A conclusion that is yours alone. My reputation and experience speaks for itself in this arena. Your reputation is that you are familiar with radio mods. Your experience reflects only your reputation, and seriously detracts from any claims about your education. Actually, mods are not my area of expertise. I did mods for people willing to pay for them. Personally I like to keep a radio basically stock. My expertise, though, is in the area of repair. I would get the radios that the other techs gave up on, or the ones that people hopelessly butchered in a vain attempt at making a few more watts. Now I should apologize because it was not my intent to attack you. Dave was my target. That much was obvious. Why I should be anyone's "target" sheds light on their true motives. I agree. Which explains why you jumped my **** when I criticized Bush. Is that what you think? You need to go back and seriously re-read that stuff again. Yes, I disagreed with you, but it wasn't a malicious personal attack followed by a vendetta of smear. Not at first. But after a few civilized posts you started implying that I was some sort of left-wing fanatic, culminating in a blatant accusation that I was a half-baked, fully-biased liberal. I asked you if you were a liberal, which you initially never denied, and beat around the bush about. When I pressed you hard for a straight-up answer, you then denied it. But it wasn't an easy answer. And by your own admission about what you think about left-wingers and liberals, that was most definately a smear. I feel that liberals are extremely naive, idealistic, and misguided. But only if applies to you should you find it offensive and a "smear". You started it, Dave No, I didn't. Hardly, and I can prove it by merely proposing that we take this to email. But I have already made that proposal and you rejected it. When? When you said, "I have no need or desire to take this to E-mail." Which was only a day or so ago. What's your excuse for the last 3 months? Remember, YOU made this personal. WRONG. I made some comments about Bush that -YOU- took personally, which is where this all started. No, I'm not the one chasing you and interjecting berating comments and attempting to make hay of the simplest statements. YOU took it personally and have been chasing me since. It takes two to tango, Dave. Remember that Frank. If you didn't have something to prove (or defend), then why bother to reply to my posts? I can ask you the exact same thing Frank. That's the really hilarious part of all this. You can't see your role as the flip side of the same coin, and equally culpable. If your "facts" were indeed facts then they could stand on their own merit. But they aren't facts at all, hence your need to watch over them like a house of cards and defend them against every little puff of smoke I blow in their direction. A good choice of words. "Smoke" is about all that you can blow in my direction. I also use statistics and probability. So do I, but not when facts and logic best define the truth. And unlike you, I -don't- use stats or probability to disuade -against- facts and logic. The logical process is beyond reproach. You cannot argue with a logical conclusion based on a solid set of premises. But what I question, and use other methods to validate, are the likelihood that those premises are faulty. The response he receives is nothing more than a normal societal reaction to put him back in his place. And what "place" is that? As one of the more intellectual people on this group. As defined by whom? By me. It's clear that you are quite intelligent. It's a shame you abuse it so much because you could really make a difference in the world if you could use your brains instead of abusing them. And you called ME ego driven "Alpha Male"? Either he gets the message and starts behaving himself "Behave myself"? In what way have I ever "misbehaved? Disagreeing with your political ideology doesn't count. You misbehaved when you started practicing fallacious logic and disregarding indepentantly verifiable facts in favor of your "core beliefs". In your opinion. Your logical fallacies are not subject to opinion, Dave. They are documented fact. Frank, you have made your share of fallacies as well. The truth by repetition, bifurcation, denial of the antecedent, are what comes to mind. But I'm not really keeping score. That this constitutes "misbehaving" is a matter for debate Because you are more intelligent than most, which means you are held to a higher standard. Really? Again, who are you (alpha male) to be placing yourself in a position to make that judgement? Was this not explained to you when you were a child? No. The only people held to higher standards are those who are in the public eye, are paid to perform a service which requires a higher standard, or those who are recognized as leaders in one vocation or another. I fall into none of those categories. The facts are that you are chasing me. I'm not chasing you. Because it's my "core belief" that you really -are- intelligent, and unless someone challenges that intelligence you will just ignore it (like you ignore facts and logic) until your gray matter falls into disrepair. That would be a waste, IMHO. Thank you for your concern, but I have more than my share of "challenges", that I'm paid for. This is recreation for me. It's not your job to be my nanny, so stop applying for the job, and get back to the one you supposedly have. But you -like- it, Dave. If you didn't you wouldn't be responding to my every post. I guess you must like it too then as you respond to my every post. I provide you with mental challenges, which are evidently missing from your off-line life. Back at you. There's no shame in admitting that life is really friggin boring when you're smart. You just have to get past the overcompensated ego thing and you'll be all set for some -real- challenges! So we finally get a glimpse into the real world of Frank Gilliland. Hey, there's no shame in admitting boredom. I'm glad that I can help you pass your time, until a another job which challenges you, comes your way. I hope it happens soon. But projection is one of the most easy to spot psych issues. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:01:22 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : snipapalooza I also use statistics and probability. So do I, but not when facts and logic best define the truth. And unlike you, I -don't- use stats or probability to disuade -against- facts and logic. The logical process is beyond reproach. You cannot argue with a logical conclusion based on a solid set of premises. But what I question, and use other methods to validate, are the likelihood that those premises are faulty. Gee, that sounds familiar..... brev-ka-bob Was this not explained to you when you were a child? No. The only people held to higher standards are those who are in the public eye, are paid to perform a service which requires a higher standard, or those who are recognized as leaders in one vocation or another. I fall into none of those categories. You sell yourself short, Dave. You set the expectations of yourself too low. What a waste. schnipe I provide you with mental challenges, which are evidently missing from your off-line life. Back at you. Ok, so those challenges are missing from your on-line life, too. There's no shame in admitting that life is really friggin boring when you're smart. You just have to get past the overcompensated ego thing and you'll be all set for some -real- challenges! So we finally get a glimpse into the real world of Frank Gilliland. Hey, there's no shame in admitting boredom. I'm glad that I can help you pass your time, until a another job which challenges you, comes your way. I hope it happens soon. I never run short of challenges, Dave. If one doesn't present itself then I'll go looking for a challenge. But at least I don't fool myself into believing that such challenges are nothing but 'recreation'. But projection is one of the most easy to spot psych issues. And you are the expert on that subject, Dave. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com