+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by CadetSgt511 View Post
    Ok! I've been reading this thread and I believe it is neccesary for me to jump in First of all I have done SLC and yes the "power" stance or the hands on the hips is a traditional thing that you are "taught" every year. However it is by no means limited to SLC graduates nor is it appropriate for a cadet to tell another cadet that he or she cannot do it because they have not completed a course. I understand that it occurs jokingly but we must realize that it is just that; a joke, nothing more. It is ridiculous for anybody to tell someone in a serious manner that they cannot place their hands in a certain manner. AIC, SIC, or SLC graduates alike.
    i disagree with you but only for the factor that its unprofessional, and when ur out in public, it doesnt matte reven if you've done the course, cadets just dont do it

    and we were never taught it, or atleast i wasnt, it was one of those things mutually assumed
    Last edited by SummerDarlin; 13th May 2009 at 11:01.
    rclcme- WO2. Soul - aircsm
    - 521 Aurora RC(Air)CS - Level 2 Sr. Instructor - DepCom -
    - Basic 2k5 - ITLC 2k6 - SLC 2k7 - AH Staff 2k8 - AH Staff 2k9 -
    WSNBM/ONBP <3 B7 BOXCAR 4LIFE

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Buckle View Post
    I have a bad habit of putting my hand's on my hips now when I am in uniform just because I have no where else to put them. I wouldn't dare put my hands in my pockets while I am in uniform just because I don't think it looks very good. I see hips as the best plan, although, until this summer coming I probably shouldn't be doing it.
    lol, i wouldnt be doing that till the final week, while ur at SLC this summer :P
    rclcme- WO2. Soul - aircsm
    - 521 Aurora RC(Air)CS - Level 2 Sr. Instructor - DepCom -
    - Basic 2k5 - ITLC 2k6 - SLC 2k7 - AH Staff 2k8 - AH Staff 2k9 -
    WSNBM/ONBP <3 B7 BOXCAR 4LIFE

  3. #23
    thepriceisright is on a distinguished road thepriceisright's Avatar
    Join Date
    2007
    Location
    Langham, SK, Canada
    Posts
    846
    Gender
    Blog Entries
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by CadetSgt511 View Post
    Ok! I've been reading this thread and I believe it is neccesary for me to jump in First of all I have done SLC and yes the "power" stance or the hands on the hips is a traditional thing that you are "taught" every year. However it is by no means limited to SLC graduates nor is it appropriate for a cadet to tell another cadet that he or she cannot do it because they have not completed a course. I understand that it occurs jokingly but we must realize that it is just that; a joke, nothing more. It is ridiculous for anybody to tell someone in a serious manner that they cannot place their hands in a certain manner. AIC, SIC, or SLC graduates alike.
    I'm glad you're always around to lay the law Warrant Gillespie, haha and it always makes perfect sense
    OCdt Petten
    702 Lynx RCAirCS


  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by CadetSgt511 View Post
    I understand that it occurs jokingly but we must realize that it is just that; a joke, nothing more. It is ridiculous for anybody to tell someone in a serious manner that they cannot place their hands in a certain manner. AIC, SIC, or SLC graduates alike.
    Just as telling someone to do something and having them do it because of a little piece of fabric on your uniform is ridiculous?

    These 'ridiculous' traditions are a matter of everyone accepting them and agreeing to abide by them. Nothing compels a cadet to follow orders given by another cadet except for mutual agreement that the rank matters. If a cadet does not follow and order nothing can be done to them to force them to obey, or no punitive action can be taken beyond removing them from the system, no charges, no jail time.

    These traditions are exactly the same, nothing compels anyone to do it except a mutual agreement. Crossing the arms and the power stance may be unprofessional in the eyes of the public, which is why they weren't intended to be used in that context, for example I crossed my arms when I was on survival exercises and it was bitterly cold at 5am when I was up planning the net activities because I was an SIC graduate. SLC cadets use their stance because crossed arms are a form of body language that means unapproachable which is not what a leader wants. I don't know the other stances but I'm sure there is a reason for those as well.
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Saroop View Post
    These 'ridiculous' traditions are a matter of everyone accepting them and agreeing to abide by them. Nothing compels a cadet to follow orders given by another cadet except for mutual agreement that the rank matters. If a cadet does not follow and order nothing can be done to them to force them to obey, or no punitive action can be taken beyond removing them from the system, no charges, no jail time.
    The very significant difference is that a cadet who is insubordinate to a higher-ranking cadet is likely to be subject to the officially sanctioned disciplinary procedures in place in the cadet programme, while one who simply puts his hands in a certain way that is supposedly reserved for graduates of a particular course probably will not. (And if he does, then something's definitely wrong in that unit.)

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by N. McKay View Post
    The very significant difference is that a cadet who is insubordinate to a higher-ranking cadet is likely to be subject to the officially sanctioned disciplinary procedures in place in the cadet programme, while one who simply puts his hands in a certain way that is supposedly reserved for graduates of a particular course probably will not. (And if he does, then something's definitely wrong in that unit.)
    While the cadet will be disciplined accordingly, the actions taken reflect the nature of the offence. Insubordination is a more serious offence than crossing your arms.

    If a WOII tells a FSgt to uncross their arms and they do not, is that not also insubordination? The order was lawful, maybe unnecessary but entirely lawful. Same deal when over and over junior cadets are told to do thier boots and they come back next week exactly the same except for having more dust on them than the week before, that is insubordination but what is done about that?

    There is nothing the cadet program can do to a cadet, who refuses to obey and order, that would impart anything on the cadet. You can remove them from the program as a last resort and that is all. Make them do extra drill? Drill is not a punishment. Make them do pushups? PT is not a punishment. IR on their cadet file? What consequences if any ever really come from that? Charge them? No authority to do so. Throw them in a holding cell for the night to think about it? See last statement. Anything you can impose on them, they can refuse as well, so there is nothing anyone can actually do to a cadet that refuses orders. This also reflects the nature of the cadet program in that the program trains youth.

    Therefore the only reason any cadet follows any order is entirely because they choose to, not because they are compelled to.
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Saroop View Post
    While the cadet will be disciplined accordingly, the actions taken reflect the nature of the offence. Insubordination is a more serious offence than crossing your arms.

    If a WOII tells a FSgt to uncross their arms and they do not, is that not also insubordination? The order was lawful, maybe unnecessary but entirely lawful. Same deal when over and over junior cadets are told to do thier boots and they come back next week exactly the same except for having more dust on them than the week before, that is insubordination but what is done about that?

    There is nothing the cadet program can do to a cadet, who refuses to obey and order, that would impart anything on the cadet. You can remove them from the program as a last resort and that is all. Make them do extra drill? Drill is not a punishment. Make them do pushups? PT is not a punishment. IR on their cadet file? What consequences if any ever really come from that? Charge them? No authority to do so. Throw them in a holding cell for the night to think about it? See last statement. Anything you can impose on them, they can refuse as well, so there is nothing anyone can actually do to a cadet that refuses orders. This also reflects the nature of the cadet program in that the program trains youth.

    Therefore the only reason any cadet follows any order is entirely because they choose to, not because they are compelled to.
    tis why i love the definition, Leadership is the Art of influencing human behaviour to accomplish a mission in the manner desired so by the leader.

    Its an Art all the way, because u cant force anyone to do anything in cadets.
    rclcme- WO2. Soul - aircsm
    - 521 Aurora RC(Air)CS - Level 2 Sr. Instructor - DepCom -
    - Basic 2k5 - ITLC 2k6 - SLC 2k7 - AH Staff 2k8 - AH Staff 2k9 -
    WSNBM/ONBP <3 B7 BOXCAR 4LIFE

  8. #28
    And management is the science of doing that. I've never had a cadet refuse a direct order given that must be actioned immediately (there was always that 1 cadet who wouldn't do his uniform), but I'm sure it has and will happen where cadets will.
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by SummerDarlin View Post
    tis why i love the definition, Leadership is the Art of influencing human behaviour to accomplish a mission in the manner desired so by the leader.

    Its an Art all the way, because u cant force anyone to do anything in cadets.
    No one can ever force someone to do anything. That implies there are no choices involved. There is always a choice, and with that, there are consequences to the choices we make. Sure, you can choose to not follow an order given to you by a superior rank, but then you also choose to accept the consequences of that choice. That's the crux of responsibility. You always have a choice. Without it, leadership, responsibility and just about every other skill we try to pass on to cadets are meaningless.

    JB
    Run until you can't. Then run some more

  10. #30
    To quote the prophet Stan Lee: "With great power comes great responsibility". So far the discussion has been the responsibility of the follwer to follow orders. The leader is also responsible not to be such an idiot as to order someone not to hold their hands or arms in a certain way because they haven't attended some course. That would clearly be an abuse of power.
    gliderwingsJ-P Johnson cd1
    Barrie Ontario
    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by J-P Johnson View Post
    To quote the prophet Stan Lee: "With great power comes great responsibility". So far the discussion has been the responsibility of the follwer to follow orders. The leader is also responsible not to be such an idiot as to order someone not to hold their hands or arms in a certain way because they haven't attended some course. That would clearly be an abuse of power.
    I understand the responsibility of the leader to not be an idiot, but for the sake of argument, lets assume that most leaders arn't perfect and that they believe tradition overcomes practicality (which has happened many many times). The order was legal so if the follower does not follow it that's still insubordination.

    And while you can never force anyone to do anything, you can compel someone to do it, or forcibly restraint them outside of cadets, whereas in cadets there is nothing to compel anyone to do anything other than their personal choice. For example, you tell a cadet not to leave this area after you find them with drugs, the cadet runs away, can you physically restraint them without risking a lawsuit? (This is an actual question)
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  12. #32
    Tight_eyez is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    2006
    Location
    Tong Yun Gai, Vancouver (You know that Supermarket on Keefer St.? Yeah, way East of that)
    Posts
    1,733
    Gender
    I believe you can perform a "citizens arrest" (as the cadet was in violation of law, that is possession of a controlled substance) and from what I remember from my law class that just involves using "enough" restraint to keep them there and no more until the LEO arrives to perform an actual detaining and arrest of the suspect.

    "Enough" is actually a broad term and you do actually risk the possibility of a lawsuit if the suspect was injured in any way. eg. Can you hold them down vs putting them in an arm lock or choke hold.

    If you tell them not to leave the area so you can talk to them about holding their arms a certain way, they can do whatever they want in that case and if you restrain him you're asking for trouble on your part as it is holding someone under duress.

    NOTE: I am not a lawyer by any means, I have only taken one introductory law class, this is not meant to replace professional legal advice in any way.
    古惑仔
    Leadership is a flavour of evil no one would lead you to do something you wanted to do anyways.
    Cogito ergo nom

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Saroop View Post
    I understand the responsibility of the leader to not be an idiot, but for the sake of argument, lets assume that most leaders arn't perfect and that they believe tradition overcomes practicality (which has happened many many times). The order was legal so if the follower does not follow it that's still insubordination.
    You presuppose that such an order would be lawful in the first place. Transpose this to the CF and SL for the CF version. I can read the charge sheet now: Private Bloggins did wilfully place his hands on his hips without having attended the specified course and did refuse to remove them in contravention of a lawful order to the detriment of good order and discipline.

    I mean really. That's not an issue of the leader not being perfect. It's an issue of the leader not really being a leader.

    If the person is formed up on parade, you can control their stance. If they are in a situation where drill is required (attention areas, reporting to officers, etc) then you can control their stance. There are also specific orders determining conduct (such as no hands in pockets). To micromanage people in the ways like the example we're discussing is detrimental to good order and discipline in and of itself.

    Course traditions are used to bind the people who attended the course together as a team. They have no currency outside those courses. Especially, as in the case of SL for example, many of these traditions are keep secret from outsiders.

    Now, what is the responsibility of the follower. Certainly, the smart thing to do is to remove the hands from the hips to avoid conflict but they also have the right to take it up the chain of command (and I would). Not that I'm encouraging people to question every order given - that would cause the whole structure to collapse - but any order that sounds a bit dodgy should be able to be queried.

    And while you can never force anyone to do anything, you can compel someone to do it, or forcibly restraint them outside of cadets, whereas in cadets there is nothing to compel anyone to do anything other than their personal choice. For example, you tell a cadet not to leave this area after you find them with drugs, the cadet runs away, can you physically restraint them without risking a lawsuit? (This is an actual question)
    The question would probably be better asked in the "Ask a Lawyer" thread but my take on it is no, you couldn't legally restrain them unless someone was in imminent danger. Your job is to go through the steps outlined in the CATO which includes reporting them to the relevant authorities.
    gliderwingsJ-P Johnson cd1
    Barrie Ontario
    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by J-P Johnson View Post
    You presuppose that such an order would be lawful in the first place. Transpose this to the CF and SL for the CF version. I can read the charge sheet now: Private Bloggins did wilfully place his hands on his hips without having attended the specified course and did refuse to remove them in contravention of a lawful order to the detriment of good order and discipline.
    It's not thhhhaaat far fetched

    a. S. 83 of the NDA: OCdt _________ Disobeyed a lawful command from a superior officer. In that he, on 21 April 09, at Kingston, ON, parked his car at KMCSC, contrary to the order of R_________ Cdr ______, on 27 Jan 09.

    b. S. 129 of the NDA:An act to the prejudice of good order and discipline. In that he, on or about 7 April 09, at RMC Kingston, ON, told H________ Lt(N) _________ that his vehicle was being used by another cadet with a legitimate parking pass, which he knew to be untrue.

    That was today's daily lists of charges being processed. The individuals were fined $400 and $300 dollars. I Think that crossing one's arms when receiving a direct order to not do so could at least get you CB'ed for a night, or extra duties or something along those lines.

    I do believe that the said order is completely legal. The course material taught states that all personnel shall follow an order given by someone who is in a higher position than they are (rank or appointment) unless that order would be considered grossly illegal by a reasonable person. The examples we were given were, kill that baby is illegal but sometimes civilian casualties will happen as a result of following a lawful order (open fire on that group of soldiers shooting at us and a stray bullet hits a civilian, road blocks where the car does not stop and ends up being fired upon, those situations). Since it's up to the member to determine the legality of the order, I would have to say that order is completely legal. There are no moral questions there either, no one is being hurt no rights are being violated. Is it ethical though? Thats for the leader to determine, but the legality is bulletproof.

    "An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime"
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Saroop View Post
    It's not thhhhaaat far fetched

    a. S. 83 of the NDA: OCdt _________ Disobeyed a lawful command from a superior officer. In that he, on 21 April 09, at Kingston, ON, parked his car at KMCSC, contrary to the order of R_________ Cdr ______, on 27 Jan 09.

    b. S. 129 of the NDA:An act to the prejudice of good order and discipline. In that he, on or about 7 April 09, at RMC Kingston, ON, told H________ Lt(N) _________ that his vehicle was being used by another cadet with a legitimate parking pass, which he knew to be untrue.

    That was today's daily lists of charges being processed. The individuals were fined $400 and $300 dollars. I Think that crossing one's arms when receiving a direct order to not do so could at least get you CB'ed for a night, or extra duties or something along those lines.

    I do believe that the said order is completely legal. The course material taught states that all personnel shall follow an order given by someone who is in a higher position than they are (rank or appointment) unless that order would be considered grossly illegal by a reasonable person. The examples we were given were, kill that baby is illegal but sometimes civilian casualties will happen as a result of following a lawful order (open fire on that group of soldiers shooting at us and a stray bullet hits a civilian, road blocks where the car does not stop and ends up being fired upon, those situations). Since it's up to the member to determine the legality of the order, I would have to say that order is completely legal. There are no moral questions there either, no one is being hurt no rights are being violated. Is it ethical though? Thats for the leader to determine, but the legality is bulletproof.

    "An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime"
    Based on what information you included, these are not the same kind of situations at all. Even in civvie circles there are designated parking areas that you ignore at your peril.

    Who is the cdr in question and in what context was the order given?

    Maybe the sports centre didn't want its parking lot full of RMC cadet's vehicles so the order was promulgated. This is a perfectly acceptable order to be given and those who deliberately break the rule should pay the price.

    Even if the order was given for another reason, setting out of bounds areas is perfectly within the control of a commander. Heck, bars in Barrie routinely find themselves out of bounds to Base personnel and those are civvie establishments!

    In the second case, the person lied which is clearly conduct prejudicial.

    But I have to ask you a question: Do you expect that a leader should be able to give an order no matter how absurd or clearly outside their authority?

    Say you are a Sgt and you walk up to a corporal and tell them that from now on they have to do the "I'm a little teapot" dance every time they have to report to you. Should the corporal obey or can they refuse on the basis that it is an abuse of authority?
    gliderwingsJ-P Johnson cd1
    Barrie Ontario
    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by J-P Johnson View Post
    Based on what information you included, these are not the same kind of situations at all. Even in civvie circles there are designated parking areas that you ignore at your peril.

    Who is the cdr in question and in what context was the order given?

    Maybe the sports centre didn't want its parking lot full of RMC cadet's vehicles so the order was promulgated. This is a perfectly acceptable order to be given and those who deliberately break the rule should pay the price.

    Even if the order was given for another reason, setting out of bounds areas is perfectly within the control of a commander. Heck, bars in Barrie routinely find themselves out of bounds to Base personnel and those are civvie establishments!

    In the second case, the person lied which is clearly conduct prejudicial.

    But I have to ask you a question: Do you expect that a leader should be able to give an order no matter how absurd or clearly outside their authority?

    Say you are a Sgt and you walk up to a corporal and tell them that from now on they have to do the "I'm a little teapot" dance every time they have to report to you. Should the corporal obey or can they refuse on the basis that it is an abuse of authority?
    Yes, well the case in the first is that an order was given, the individual didn't think it was an important order and got the equivalent of a 400 (+25) dollar parking ticket. An order is given for a cadet to uncross their arms for any reason, the cadet thinks its a stupid order doesn't do it, where is the difference? A legal order, is a legal order.

    Should the leader be able to do so? No. Can the leader do so legally and should the order thereafter be followed? Yes. The absurdity of an order is clearly not applicable, using an example from cadets is if an officer tells a sgt to stop making the cadets mark time as a punishment. To everyone else it is clearly unacceptable but to that Sgt the order is absurd, what should that Sgt do? In the CF same situation, you are ordered to defend this position and to not retreat, suicide mission? Yes, but you MUST stay at your post or will face a court martial most likely.

    The commissioning scrolls/scripts say:

    "WE reposing especial Trust and Confidence in your Loyalty, Courage and Integrity" meaning the Queen trusts the officer's decision making. It further goes on to say "and We do hereby Command them ("inferior" officers and NCMs) to Obey you as their Superior Officer, and you to observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any other your Superior Officer according to Law, in pursuance of the Trust hereby Reposed in you."

    It seems pretty clear that any lawful order no matter how dumb must be followed. If you start drawing lines about which legal orders must be followed and which ones much not then you also break down the good order and discipline or a unit, except much faster and much more decisively than any other method.

    Sir to finish off, When you were CO of your squadron, if you gave an order you felt was reasonable (beyond just being legal) and a cadet disobeyed it, you'd be upset would you not? Would it really matter if the sergeant above (marking time) believed it was a reasonable order or not? The sergeant should immediately stop doing that action and then if they needed an explanation afterward the maybe it would be appropriate depending on the situation right?
    OCdt (I) Saroop, Dean
    1 Sqn RMC

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Saroop View Post
    Yes, well the case in the first is that an order was given, the individual didn't think it was an important order and got the equivalent of a 400 (+25) dollar parking ticket. An order is given for a cadet to uncross their arms for any reason, the cadet thinks its a stupid order doesn't do it, where is the difference? A legal order, is a legal order.

    Should the leader be able to do so? No. Can the leader do so legally and should the order thereafter be followed? Yes. The absurdity of an order is clearly not applicable, using an example from cadets is if an officer tells a sgt to stop making the cadets mark time as a punishment. To everyone else it is clearly unacceptable but to that Sgt the order is absurd, what should that Sgt do? In the CF same situation, you are ordered to defend this position and to not retreat, suicide mission? Yes, but you MUST stay at your post or will face a court martial most likely.
    The parking example was a legal order and a member ought to have reasonably known it was a legal order.


    The commissioning scrolls/scripts say:

    "WE reposing especial Trust and Confidence in your Loyalty, Courage and Integrity" meaning the Queen trusts the officer's decision making. It further goes on to say "and We do hereby Command them ("inferior" officers and NCMs) to Obey you as their Superior Officer, and you to observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any other your Superior Officer according to Law, in pursuance of the Trust hereby Reposed in you."

    It seems pretty clear that any lawful order no matter how dumb must be followed. If you start drawing lines about which legal orders must be followed and which ones much not then you also break down the good order and discipline or a unit, except much faster and much more decisively than any other method.

    Sir to finish off, When you were CO of your squadron, if you gave an order you felt was reasonable (beyond just being legal) and a cadet disobeyed it, you'd be upset would you not? Would it really matter if the sergeant above (marking time) believed it was a reasonable order or not? The sergeant should immediately stop doing that action and then if they needed an explanation afterward the maybe it would be appropriate depending on the situation right?
    Okay, here is an actual example of an order I have witnessed being given. Tell me if the person had the right to refuse:

    Attending a mess dinner a major turns to a lieutenant and asks him why he didn't have any port in his glass for the toast to the Queen. In the major's opinion water is not appropriate for the toast. The Lt explained that he didn't drink port. The major then ordered the Lt to fill his glass with port and drink a "proper toast".

    Could the Lt refuse to comply?

    Technically, since the person wasn't a tee-totaller or had religious reasons or allergies or anything, there is no reason why the person couldn't drink the port other than their own preference so, I guess, it's not an "illegal" order. But did the major have the authority to give that order? Does the Lt have to comply immediately and complain later?
    gliderwingsJ-P Johnson cd1
    Barrie Ontario
    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

  18. #38
    So back to the topic: Pilots; "Hands in my pockets, hands in my pockets hands---" only during gliding ops in a CF Blue flight suit (which IS the standard for cadet pilots).

    ~T.P~
    gliderwings F/Sgt. Ardila powerwings
    Lancaster Flight Commander
    Canadian Junior Soaring Team Pilot
    Basic 2K4, ITAC 2K5, IACE 2K6, Oshkosh 2K7, Glider (CRGS) 2K8, Power (DFC) 2K9

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by j-18 View Post
    So back to the topic: Pilots; "Hands in my pockets, hands in my pockets hands---" only during gliding ops in a CF Blue flight suit (which IS the standard for cadet pilots).

    ~T.P~
    Not condoning it or anything but there's a reason why our pockets were once nicknamed "air force gloves".
    gliderwingsJ-P Johnson cd1
    Barrie Ontario
    The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

  20. #40
    There should be a new tradition.

    All National level courses have their arm/hand/head/butt/finger dances all they want.

    All cadets who perform said actions in uniform on my parade square shall be beaten half to death with a tuna fish.

    The parade square is not the place for silly traditions and course rituals. It is a place for drill. And I guarantee you won't find a "power stance" in the drill manual.

    Traditionally, crossing of the arms was a sign of mutiny. Thats not something you want on the deck. Your CO might not be too impressed. lol
    Doug "The Dougler" Campbell scsm
    Lieutenant Commander (NL)
    Divisional Staff Officer - Jefferies Squadron (West)
    Man this place needs Slinkies.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts