homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Fri May 26, 2017 6:28 am
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

Which resolutions are you voting for
A. Resolved: That the United States Federal Government should significantly reform its agricultural policies. 19%  19%  [ 17 ]
B. Resolved: That the United States Federal Court system should be significantly reformed. 22%  22%  [ 20 ]
C. Resolved: That the United States Federal Government should significantly reform one or more of the following programs: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. 9%  9%  [ 8 ]
A. Resolved: When in conflict, the right to individual privacy is more important than national security. 7%  7%  [ 6 ]
B. Resolved: Judicial activism ought to be valued above judicial restraint. 28%  28%  [ 25 ]
C. Resolved: A just government ought to provide for the basic welfare of its citizens. 15%  15%  [ 13 ]
Total votes: 89
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2015 9:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 3:01 am
Posts: 649
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Flying a UFO to an undisclosed location ;)
Pixiedust11 wrote:
Anybody have any suggestions or idea of what cases would look like under TP rez C. (SS/medicare/medicaid)?

Lower the funds paid
Allow young individuals to opt out of the programs
Cut the programs completely
Phase out the programs
Increase retirement age
Only give to those deemed incapable of work
Reduce welfare benefits
etc. etc.

Can someone get a link of the revised Social Security Act as of 2015? There have been lots of revisions and changes and I can't be sure I'm getting the correct version.

_________________
John Mark Porter, Alumni
Arx Axiom/Carpe Dictum/Verdict/UADC/HSDC/HSDRC

2011-12 l Porter/Thomason, Light/Porter
2012-13 l Bailey/Porter
2013-14 l Bailey/Porter
2014-15 l Folkert/Porter

2015-16 I Childs/Porter


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2015 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 9:24 pm
Posts: 10
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: I'm not at liberty to disclose that information.
All three of the resolutions suffer from some of the same problems.

Agricultural Policy (quite similar to environmental policy from 2010) is arguably less well-known than the other two as far as its appearance in current events and political discussion. That, combined with the decent-size scope of the resolution, means there's going to be a bigger need to ensure familiarity both when preparing and explaining potentially complex aspects to the judge. Granted, that could be said for most resolutions, but it's definitely not as cut-and-dry as it may first appear.
I also agree that the idea of debating 2014 and 2019 bills doesn't sound very appealing.

The Federal Court System option is much more interesting, in my opinion. It leans toward the more narrow side, but not overwhelmingly so. Offsetting whatever narrowness there may be is the complexity of the court system itself. Again, it's also quite balanced.

SS, Medicare, & Medicaid is very intriguing. It's very timely and as such it's definitely the one that will have the most recent evidence. The fact that it's a hot topic in politics makes it the most educationally beneficial.
As far as bias goes, not only can that be helped by the myriad of evidence on either side, but frankly, there's a bias to some degree behind most any resolution (e.g. Food stamps in A, potential social issues in B). Truth be told, there was one with Middle East policy, at least in my region. The fact is, if a judge is learned enough concerning whatever the topic is and maintains a consistent bias regardless of what's discussed in the round, that's going to be the case for any resolution. Plus, I've been waiting for a medical resolution for four years, so this makes me happy.

At this point, I'm torn between B and C.

_________________
Grayson Landers / R7

Landers/Peel / 2013 / UN
Landers/Peel / 2014 / Election Law
Landers/Shoemaker / 2015 / Middle East
Landers/Shoemaker / 2016 / Federal Court System
Howard/Landers / 2017 / China

"People say nothing is impossible. However, I do nothing every day." ~Winnie the Pooh


Last edited by TheGreatScott on Thu May 21, 2015 2:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 12:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 4:02 am
Posts: 55
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Florida
LDer here. Also, bias alert: I wrote LD option C. Here's what I think of the resolutions, and why I think C is the best option.

A: This one is good, but I see three problems with it.

A) Similarity to last year. Seriously. The language will be different but I feel like a lot of the same arguments will be made on both sides.

B) Way too broad. If I was neg, I'd ask one question: if the USFG were to get access to the email account of a major ISIS leader, should we look at it? It seems like Aff has to say "no" in order to remain consistent with their position, and that just won't fly in the NCFCA, as far as I can tell. Also, there are so many places where these two conflict that I feel like it'll be extremely difficult to actually defend one side consistently.

On the upside, it would be interesting to have a discussion about just what sort of a "right" an individual has to privacy. That could be interesting.

B: Oh the judge bias. It seems like all the neg would have to do is connect Roe v Wade to Judicial Activism and the debate is over. Seriously. I'd love to have this debate in a different league, but I don't think it would work in the NCFCA due to the insane bias against Judicial Activism.

C: Here's why I think this one would be good.

A) What is justice? This is a really good discussion that would be great for NCFCAers to have. There's such a rich philosophical basis that's very applicable to discussions of welfare. Aristotle, John Rawls, Robert Nozick, Adam Smith, David Hume, etc. They all had distinct conceptions of justice, and all of them apply to welfare (Rawls and Nozick address welfare directly, actually). This is a discussion that would be insanely educational, and would serve debaters well outside of discussions of welfare.

B) What sort of welfare? This would make LDers deal with the more real world side of LD. They're going to have to work out a nuanced position that's ready to go. They're going to have to know welfare policy really well. That's not a bad thing at all. At the same time, the resolution is phrased to that it would be exceptionally hard to get into an example debate, so that's good.

C) This resolution would be easy for novices to get a grip on, because it has a clearly defined direction and cases that immediately spring to mind, but has so much depth for advanced LDers. Even aside from the very rich literature surrounding justice, debaters could get into question of what "ought" means, what a government's duty is, etc.

Downside? Sloppy debating would lead to a bit of judge bias against the aff. But not much, I don't think.

Also, question for TPers: Is there any reasonable way that someone could figure out how to make a "Defund Obamacare" case topical under TP Resolution C? Because that would stink.

_________________
–Chris

2012-2013: LD, 14th at Regionals
2013-2014: LD, 2nd at Nationals
2014-2015: LD, 1st at Regionals

https://contendacademy.com


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 1:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:19 pm
Posts: 123
Home Schooled: Yes
mountain dude wrote:
But please, Please, PLEEEASE nobody vote for TP B. It's narrow, boring, narrow, irrelevant, boring, narrow, irrelevant, boring, and narrow. Did I say it was boring?


To me the court system sounds much more interesting than retirement programs. C isn't much broader than B and it is far less interesting in my opinion. I think A is interesting and is probably the broadest one but it has some bias problems. C also has problems with judge bias and is flat out boring. B is interesting and doesn't have much judge bias on either side. I think B is the best but might vote for A if that's what most people are voting for so that C doesn't win. I think everyone would be bored to death by the end of the year with Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 3:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:50 pm
Posts: 390
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Falling at a 60° angle, defying physics
My knee-jerk reactions to the TP resolutions:

Agricultural policy: Eh, no. I liked this resolution upon first glance, but then I realized how skewed AFF this is if you pick the right case. There's lots of discussion to be had, and I don't think the year will be boring by the end of the year at all, should this resolution be picked - but it's too one-sided of a resolution for my liking. Although I have my issues with it, I do, however, find that I wouldn't mind too much if this option were picked.

Federal courts: Probably the best. I do see plenty of overlap from CJS year, but I don't really care seeing as how I didn't debate that year, and I don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that most who will be debating next year also didn't. With this resolution, there's certainly no shortage of literature, and no ideas come to mind that are unbeatable like ethanol subsidies (though one probably exists :P ). I find this rez quite similar to election law, in that it's not something that excites everyone initially but still turns out quite fun and enjoyable (at least it did for me).

Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid: PLEASE NO. I get that judge bias never really turns out to be as large a deal as people are worried about at the start of the year, but this is on a while different level than even voter ID and Iran Sanctions were. I will feel sorry for people in places like Texas who have to go against the beliefs of conservative judges with a topic as politically charged as entitlement programs. While Social Security, Medicare, and Medicare are extremely important issues, that doesn't mean they translate into a good homeschool debate topic, and I don't think they will.

B is a little better than A, both of which are far superior to C.

_________________
Andrew

Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2012-13
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2013-14
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2014-15
Barndt/Blacklock | Arete, R10 | 2015-16
Barndt/Cuddeback | 2016-17

JohnMarkPorter1 wrote:
I'm inclined to think like Andrew does.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 4:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 2440
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Omaha, NE
JohnMarkPorter1 wrote:
Pixiedust11 wrote:
Anybody have any suggestions or idea of what cases would look like under TP rez C. (SS/medicare/medicaid)?

Lower the funds paid
Allow young individuals to opt out of the programs
Cut the programs completely
Phase out the programs
Increase retirement age
Only give to those deemed incapable of work
Reduce welfare benefits
etc. etc.

Don't forget any number of cases that increase coverage.

My opinion:
TP- Agriculture>Welfare>Court system
LD- Activism>Just government>privacy

_________________
-Bryan
Assistant Mock Trial Coach, University of Nebraska at Omaha


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:13 am 
Offline
Forerunner
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:45 am
Posts: 1090
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Locations are too mainstream
LocutusofBorg wrote:

My opinion:
TP- Agriculture>Welfare>Court system
LD- Activism>Just government>privacy


Same.

_________________
Former NCFCA debate and speech competitor
Former homeschooler
Joel Thomas


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:57 am
Posts: 124
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Check your fridge.
LocutusofBorg wrote:
My opinion:
TP- Agriculture>Welfare>Court system
LD- Activism>Just government>privacy


Agreed on both counts.

_________________
Ben Vincent, R II
South Sound Speech and Debate
www.lifeinthesunrise.com

I have won things. No really, I promise.

"Everything in this world is either a potato... or not a potato."


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Posts: 1363
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: H*wL*tt P*ck*rd muffins
The Pumaman wrote:
I liked this resolution upon first glance, but then I realized how skewed AFF this is if you pick the right case. There's lots of discussion to be had, and I don't think the year will be boring by the end of the year at all, should this resolution be picked - but it's too one-sided of a resolution for my liking. Although I have my issues with it, I do, however, find that I wouldn't mind too much if this option were picked.

I don't think that it would be skewed in either direction. US governmental interaction with agricultural production is rather fascinating and would benefit us as debaters to learn more about it since not much everyday policy attention is given to it. As such, the lack of knowledge leads to very few developed opinions on the topic which means that going into the round it's anyone's game.

The court system would also be fabulous. So much room for discussion here, but I'll probably go with Agriculture because of the education in an unknown area factor.

C. would make a good extemp question, not a resolution.

_________________
-Joshua
08-09 | Half-Timer | Verdict | R8
09-10 | Timer | Verdict | R8
10-11 | Folkert/Folkert | Verdict | R8
11-12 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
12-13 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
13-14 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
14-15 | Folkert/Porter | Arx Axiom | R8
15-16 | Doto/Folkert | Verdict | R8


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 3:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 4:02 am
Posts: 158
Home Schooled: Yes
I'm rooting for B for both of them.

Probably the main reason I prefer B for TP is because both of my parents are lawyers, so I've lived my whole life learning about federal courts and such. And tbh, it's seriously fascinating. Cases could focus on judicial activism (hello, LD resolution), judge appointment, the appeal system, organization of district courts, specific judges/places, or (depending on the interpretation of the resolution) specific past cases. Maybe the coolest part of that resolution is that most cases would be fresh; there are a ton of ideas for reform that are all pretty cool.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:58 am
Posts: 244
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: do I want you to know...?
Okay, I've rethought this a little bit. I can't decide between A and C.

A) Agriculture is a lot broader than I thought. "the science, art, or practice of cultivating the soil, producing crops, and raising livestock and in varying degrees the preparation and marketing of the resulting products." That's just Webster, I'm sure there are better definitions; but that puts it into perspective. This includes much more than the farm bill. Here's a list of topics covered on the U.S. Department of Agriculture website: "Animal Health, Biotechnology, Conservation, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Employee Services, Energy, Environment and Natural Resources, Ethics, Farm Bill, Food and Nutrition, Food Safety, Forestry, Homeland Security, Laws and Regulations, Marketing and Trade, Organic Agriculture, Outreach, Plant Health, Research and Science, Rural and Community Development, Rural Opportunities, Travel and Recreation, USDA for Kids"

B) Cool topic, but too narrow. I feel like by the time nationals rolls around there would be half a dozen decent cases. This is basically Criminal Justice, minus two thirds of the topic area. Criminal Justice basically included three things: police, courts, and prisons. This only includes the courts. Don't get me wrong, I think this would be a fun topic, but in general the narrow topics are less fun (e.g. Middle East > Russia; CJS > Election Law). Also, I'd guess that about one in five of next year's TPers debated CJS 3 years ago, and many of those that didn't were around that year, and probably learned something about the topic.

C) This is the most politically relevant of the three, and I think it's definitely the widest. We haven't had a medical resolution since '05 (no problems there) and we've never had a resolution that related to social security/welfare programs, and since it is a pretty relevant political issue I think it'd be good to have a topic where we could all learn more about it.

_________________
Jonathan Meckel || Nebraska || NCFCA Boycotter. #BracketGate #BracketLivesMatter
Free at last, they took your life, they could not take your pride


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 4:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Posts: 1363
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: H*wL*tt P*ck*rd muffins
mountain dude wrote:
Cool topic, but too narrow.

I thought the same thing about Election year but was proved wrong. I believe that once the court system is broken down you'll find that there is a lot more content than what initially meets the eye.

_________________
-Joshua
08-09 | Half-Timer | Verdict | R8
09-10 | Timer | Verdict | R8
10-11 | Folkert/Folkert | Verdict | R8
11-12 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
12-13 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
13-14 | Folkert/Light | Verdict | R8
14-15 | Folkert/Porter | Arx Axiom | R8
15-16 | Doto/Folkert | Verdict | R8


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 4:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:19 pm
Posts: 123
Home Schooled: Yes
I think that narrowing the topic doesn't reduce the number of cases but rather increases the depth of research. For example, in a broad topic such as the middle east, the standard for significance becomes higher. Basically all of the cases this year are relatively large changes toward a country or several countries. Such as lifting all sanctions on Iran, Ending all aid to Egypt or Pakistan, Or free trade with the whole Middle East. Because the resolution is so broad, the standard for significance goes up. Limiting the number of small cases there are. But if you have a more narrow subject, such as towards one country in particular then you get more specific cases not less cases. You just have to research more in depth


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 79
Home Schooled: Yes
I think the judge bias and broadness of resolution C is way to daunting and I would really be disappointed if that resolution was chosen. Don't get me wrong it is an important topic to address but I feel like it is to one sided and broad for actual debate. Resolution B sounds very interesting and I don't feel like it would be any less interesting or more complex than resolution C. I think resolution B could also be just as educational for those who didn't debate the criminal justice year as resolution C and it seems that there would be plenty of good academic sources on the topic. I personally would not be to concerned with the narrowness factor because even if it was narrow we would simply be able to learn more about certain issues and deepen our arguments and research in certain areas. Anyway that's my two cents worth :) ! Still up in the air about my vote,

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:58 am
Posts: 244
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: do I want you to know...?
As far as how educational the topic is, I thought this year was the most educational of any resolution, and it's almost definitely the broadest resolution we've had. I think we would all learn more with SS/Medicare/aid than we would with the courts resolution, both because there's more to learn and because some people were around in CJS year. Debating about the Middle East demanded quite a bit of knowledge about different countries and policies, at least for me.

Edit (forgot to say this and posted too soon): Ultimately if education is the goal then it'd probably be better to have a good understanding of welfare programs than a deep understanding of the federal court system. Almost all of us will, at some point, encounter welfare programs in our lives to some degree. I hope that none of us have to appear before a court, and it's pretty likely that we won't.

The bias is a factor I'm thinking about. I said this before I think, but there's usually a bias towards the negative in domestic resolutions (2/3 of my wins last year were on neg; the negative also won all 5 of the finals rounds in R5 last year, including the MN open). Maybe this is an opportunity to have a more balanced resolution.

I'm still undecided between A and C...all I'm saying is don't exalt B and don't eliminate C.

_________________
Jonathan Meckel || Nebraska || NCFCA Boycotter. #BracketGate #BracketLivesMatter
Free at last, they took your life, they could not take your pride


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 3:01 am
Posts: 649
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Flying a UFO to an undisclosed location ;)
mountain dude wrote:
Almost all of us will, at some point, encounter welfare programs in our lives to some degree.

To me, this is exactly why we don't need to know a whole lot about the topic. We are going to learn about it eventually, and honestly until we actually encounter the system in our daily lives I feel rather un-credible debating issues that the judge has a better understanding of than I do (though I get that I'm supposed to overcome that through research and whatnot, not everyone can or will).
mountain dude wrote:
Also, I'd guess that about one in five of next year's TPers debated CJS 3 years ago, and many of those that didn't were around that year, and probably learned something about the topic.
^so much this. Too narrow for one (even though I agree with what Hammy and Andy had to say), and honestly it isn't a major departure from what we've had for the last few domestic resolutions.
I'm quite likely to go with Agricultural policy.
As far as LD, C >/= B > A in my opinion.

_________________
John Mark Porter, Alumni
Arx Axiom/Carpe Dictum/Verdict/UADC/HSDC/HSDRC

2011-12 l Porter/Thomason, Light/Porter
2012-13 l Bailey/Porter
2013-14 l Bailey/Porter
2014-15 l Folkert/Porter

2015-16 I Childs/Porter


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 6:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 79
Home Schooled: Yes
mountain dude wrote:
Ultimately if education is the goal then it'd probably be better to have a good understanding of welfare programs than a deep understanding of the federal court system. Almost all of us will, at some point, encounter welfare programs in our lives to some degree. I hope that none of us have to appear before a court, and it's pretty likely that we won't.

I completely understand that this is an important thing to learn about and I certainly believe that changes to Social Security ect. probably need to take place but considering the likely bias we would be risking by selecting this resolution I'm inclined to attempt learning about Social Security elsewhere and vote for a resolution that's possible more debatable and less one sided. After reading the NCFCA's comments about the resolutions and considering the value of doing a possible fresher and newer topic than B I'll probably vote for resolution A.

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 2:46 am
Posts: 48
Home Schooled: Yes
As far as the TP resolutions go, I am definitely leaning toward A. C would have too much judge bias in my view, and I have no desire to debate entitlement programs all year. B would be substantially better, but it is narrower than I would like. True, cases would be more specific, but they would all be very similar. Getting a decent number of cases may not be a problem with B, but I think getting a sufficient variety of significant cases would be, at least in contrast to agriculture. An additional point to consider is the nature of impacts; in A the main impacts would be economics-based, whereas with B impacts would focus on justice. Not only do I think economics would be more enjoyable, but also that it would be more relevant to the judges. The Federal Court System certainly is important, but its effects on our daily lives are far less noticeable than that of agricultural policy and its economic effects. So, in my view, A > B >> C. Just my two cents. :)

_________________
Connor T. Daniels, Region VIII, UADC
2014-2015|Cash/Daniels
2015-2016|Cash/Daniels
2016-2017|Daniels/Green
COG Author

"Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them. They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be removed by a policy of appeasement." ~ Winston Churchill


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 25, 2015 5:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:07 am
Posts: 1374
Home Schooled: Yes
I don't see B as narrow at all. B would include a good half of the cases run during CJS year, maybe more, PLUS all kinds of civil court reforms, PLUS reforms to higher levels of court and even the supreme court (including a lot of stuff run Election Law year). I would argue that B is probably a lot more broad than Election Law or Criminal Justice System.

_________________
Check out my new website!

"Never quote yourself on internet forums" - Gabriel Blacklock, 2014


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2015 1:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:19 am
Posts: 54
Home Schooled: Yes
mendicant2 wrote:
B: Oh the judge bias. It seems like all the neg would have to do is connect Roe v Wade to Judicial Activism and the debate is over. Seriously. I'd love to have this debate in a different league, but I don't think it would work in the NCFCA due to the insane bias against Judicial Activism.


Just a note with the people who say B won't have much problems with judge bias, Guys, medicant is right. Stuff like Roe vs. Wade is what Judicial Activism is. Option B would clearly be biased neg. There's pretty big judge bias with all the options, even B. So IMO judge bias shouldn't really be an issue in deciding which LD option to go with.

_________________
The Bible has a say on every topic, even debate!
Job 13:18 "Behold, I have prepared my case; I know that I shall be in the right."
Proverbs 18:17 "The first to plead his case seems just, until another comes and [cross-]examines him."


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited