gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
652655 Posts in 26079 Topics by 3717 Members - Latest Member: My1stCRUSHWasCamDiaz December 05, 2019, 10:48:42 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Lorren Daro Thread  (Read 118595 times)
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 10888


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #625 on: January 30, 2015, 01:50:13 AM »

Quote
I have a hunch it's the other way around

You'd be surprised.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"I’d rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Pudding™ ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #626 on: January 30, 2015, 01:55:26 AM »

And Micha...  I nearly fell off my chair when I read your post!  That's not like you at all, he got you riled up didn't he?

Yeah, too much for my own good. Thank you for thinking better of me than by the worst of that post. I'm glad that afterwards some others, including some of the mods, showed support of me in some of my points, because once I calmed down I was feeling kind of bad for going a bit too far in that one post.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 02:02:12 AM by Micha » Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #627 on: January 30, 2015, 01:57:02 AM »

Quote
I have a hunch it's the other way around

You'd be surprised.

Can you make innuendoes to what you mean?
Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
Wild-Honey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 359


View Profile
« Reply #628 on: January 30, 2015, 02:00:54 AM »

Quote
I have a hunch it's the other way around

You'd be surprised.

Probably not actually Smiley  What I meant is that it would be more likely Mike's people would be happier about the hounding of Lorren than Brian's.   Or maybe neither parties really care at all. I dunno, I guess all the nitpicking got to me Wink  
Logged
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 10888


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #629 on: January 30, 2015, 02:10:13 AM »

I don't think anybody's really happy about how everything went down, is what I meant. Regardless of how one feels about the discussion, the fact it degenerated the way it did to a bunch of in-fighting, rather than 'this is what I believe, and why', well...that was the problem, and I think it spoke poorly of both sides.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 02:12:22 AM by ♩♬ Billy C ♯♫♩ » Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"I’d rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Pudding™ ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
Wild-Honey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 359


View Profile
« Reply #630 on: January 30, 2015, 02:19:29 AM »

No, it wasn't quite civilised...

Micha - don't worry about it. It wasn't that bad, it was just uncharacteristic of you so surprised me  Shocked   hehe.
Logged
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2631


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #631 on: January 30, 2015, 02:38:48 AM »


Well said, Jesse.

I admit, I have *major* issues with several things posted by Daro (most of them were in the archived thread) that were at best demonstrably false (and go beyond simple memory lapses), and at worst, libelous. I left this thread open because  I did want Daro to have his say, and to state his side of things, regardless of accuracy or, indeed, motive/agenda. What bothers me more than anything else was that anything that was critical of him was immediately responded to with an attack by members here I really expected more from. Mujan did raise some valid concerns (ones I can back up 100% in most cases) but it was like there was a wall put up...I guess what I'm trying to say is it bothers me that there is such a level of inflexibility here where one only believes something that ties into what they already believe, and all else is 'lies and bullshit'.   To put it bluntly...there is a prevailing 'all insiders here are full of sh*t, except the ones who say what I want to hear..then those are infallible'.  I mean, hell, I could (hypothetically speaking) state that his IP address just so happened to match a member known for being full of sh*t and just so happened to be banned the day before, put up a damn screen shot,  and then immediately be accused of doctoring in Photoshop, because it wouldn't be what one wanted to hear. Hypothetically, of course.

To me, Daro himself was irrelevant (in regards to this rant); it was the way things were handled amongst each other. I stayed out of this for a reason...I stated my case, was suitably ignored, and then I moved on. No biggie. What IS a biggie is the petty sniping at each other.

Well said, Micha (in your first post...as for the 2nd, just some information, but blunted in this case also means 'toned down') and MrRobinsonsFather, I agree as well.

Perhaps the one thing we can all agree on is that Lorren Daro is a polarising figure here.

My principal beef from the start has been that there are ways of challenging somebody about the morality of their actions and veracity of their statements that are conducive to open discourse and will ultimately encourage the truth, not shut it down.  

I feel confident that, due to the efforts of the more openly hostile, we have ended up with less answers to chew over. Less answers for AGD to do with what he does best - No victory for truth at all but a display of just how (in Jason Penick's words) 'anti-intellectual' some here can be.

I'm trying to get my head around the opposing view here. Who do I feel most negativity towards in BB history - Landy I would say. So if he were alive and posting here, and there were those that were benefitting from a q&a with him, would I join the thread? Probably not, purely out of respect for those benefitting from the discourse. If I felt the need to pose him a question about the morality of or motivation behind his actions with Brian I would do so courteously, so as to encourage as open an answer as possible from the guy. I would not continuously jump in with antagonistic, sarcastic and abusive posts - again, primarily out of respect from those benefitting form the discourse, but also because even Landy's perspective has historical value.

Or another hypothetical scenario for the board to ponder: Would it be ok for me to join a Mike Love Honoured Guest thread to ask him why he felt the need to continuously discourage Brian's less positive songs? Even as recently as TWGMTR, if we are to believe Rolling Stone Magazine?

If he had the decency to answer as honestly as possible, would it then be ok for me say he was full of sh*t, or that he was a hypocrite because he has made a load of money out of Brian's more introspective songs etc. etc. etc?

And then move on to his insensitivity around Wilson drug use?

Finally do I feel I could have behaved better in all of this? Yes, I concede I could have been less aggressive in my attempts to help the thread function the way I thought it should. Respect to those on both sides who were less confrontational in their approaches. But my primary frustration was not that people weren't believing everything Daro had to say - I have no problem with that. My frustration was with the way the skepticism and morality issues were communicated.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 02:48:29 AM by buddhahat » Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #632 on: January 30, 2015, 02:46:51 AM »

I don't think anybody's really happy about how everything went down, is what I meant. Regardless of how one feels about the discussion, the fact it degenerated the way it did to a bunch of in-fighting, rather than 'this is what I believe, and why', well...that was the problem, and I think it spoke poorly of both sides.

Unfortunately, it delineated the existing battle lines that much more sharply.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 10888


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #633 on: January 30, 2015, 02:50:11 AM »

I agree with that, and that was precisely why I stayed out after my initial couple of posts. And you touched in something I tried to convey earlier...regardless of the accuracy or agenda behind the posts, it was good to get his side, much like if it were Landy or anybody else. Take things with a grain of salt, but still let it play out. A friend of mine has a saying... 'if someone digs a hole deep enough, they will eventually be stuck in it. No need to help them shovel'.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"I’d rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Pudding™ ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 10888


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #634 on: January 30, 2015, 02:53:06 AM »

I don't think anybody's really happy about how everything went down, is what I meant. Regardless of how one feels about the discussion, the fact it degenerated the way it did to a bunch of in-fighting, rather than 'this is what I believe, and why', well...that was the problem, and I think it spoke poorly of both sides.

Unfortunately, it delineated the existing battle lines that much more sharply.

Very true, and that seems to be a common thing in Beach Boys fandom. One positive way to look at it...at least we're all passionate! I just wish all of us could be more compassionate sometimes. 

Saying all that, as much as I despised Landy, I kind of wish he had given his take  on things before he passed.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 02:55:07 AM by ♩♬ Billy C ♯♫♩ » Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"I’d rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Pudding™ ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2631


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #635 on: January 30, 2015, 03:41:52 AM »

But back to the main point: I really feel Andrew Doe made a great point (I think it was he who said this) when he said that people feel insulated from reality when they use usernames on a board like this. They feel they can behave in a way that they wouldn't face to face because they're hiding behind a pseudonym. That's why I decided to use my real name here. I don't want to ever say anything off the record, that I wouldn't own and stand by. And if I make mistakes and say the wrong thing, say something inappropriate, I want to face actual consequences to my person, so I can learn from it.

This is a lot of truth in this. However, it's worth considering that there is a gain to AGD and other historians posting under their real names. AGD already had a reputation and a certain amount of kudos from his book, prior to becoming a member here. When he presents his assessments of the history he is not just some nameless board member but an established BB author/historian and therefore his opinions are often taken more seriously, for better or worse.

Some authors here also have a commercial gain to posting under their real names i.e self promotion or promotion of an upcoming book. If AGD writes a new tome, or revises the existing one, I'm sure he won't be backward in coming forward about it, and who would blame him?

So it is not always purely a question of honour and I find it slightly disingenuous of AGD to use that point as an attack, as he did earlier.

However, in the case of us mere mortals, there's a case to be made for using one's real name. I agree, if I weren't posting anonymously I probably wouldn't get as carried away and that's worth considering.

The reason I choose to remain anonymous is primarily because you never know who's on the end of the other computer. I have received threatening PMs (from no active members here) urging me to 'kill myself' in the past and I don't want the same weirdos showing up at my front door. I also have a professional reputation to maintain and if prospective clients google my name I'd rather they encounter my work and not a load of hits flagging up the scale of my nerdery. If that's cowardice, so be it.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 03:46:17 AM by buddhahat » Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
LeeDempsey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 749


Avatar: Brian Wilson circa 1957


View Profile
« Reply #636 on: January 30, 2015, 04:43:56 AM »

I looked up "blunt" in an online dictionary, and the first thing that came up was "a joint made from a cigar" - never heard of that, perfect choice of word, Lee! Cheesy

The double-entendre was intentional!  Wink
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 04:47:38 AM by LeeDempsey » Logged
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #637 on: January 30, 2015, 04:52:07 AM »


Perhaps the one thing we can all agree on is that Lorren Daro is a polarising figure here.

My principal beef from the start has been that there are ways of challenging somebody about the morality of their actions and veracity of their statements that are conducive to open discourse and will ultimately encourage the truth, not shut it down.  

I feel confident that, due to the efforts of the more openly hostile, we have ended up with less answers to chew over. Less answers for AGD to do with what he does best - No victory for truth at all but a display of just how (in Jason Penick's words) 'anti-intellectual' some here can be.

I'm trying to get my head around the opposing view here. Who do I feel most negativity towards in BB history - Landy I would say. So if he were alive and posting here, and there were those that were benefitting from a q&a with him, would I join the thread? Probably not, purely out of respect for those benefitting from the discourse. If I felt the need to pose him a question about the morality of or motivation behind his actions with Brian I would do so courteously, so as to encourage as open an answer as possible from the guy. I would not continuously jump in with antagonistic, sarcastic and abusive posts - again, primarily out of respect from those benefitting form the discourse, but also because even Landy's perspective has historical value.

Or another hypothetical scenario for the board to ponder: Would it be ok for me to join a Mike Love Honoured Guest thread to ask him why he felt the need to continuously discourage Brian's less positive songs? Even as recently as TWGMTR, if we are to believe Rolling Stone Magazine?

If he had the decency to answer as honestly as possible, would it then be ok for me say he was full of sh*t, or that he was a hypocrite because he has made a load of money out of Brian's more introspective songs etc. etc. etc?

And then move on to his insensitivity around Wilson drug use?

Finally do I feel I could have behaved better in all of this? Yes, I concede I could have been less aggressive in my attempts to help the thread function the way I thought it should. Respect to those on both sides who were less confrontational in their approaches. But my primary frustration was not that people weren't believing everything Daro had to say - I have no problem with that. My frustration was with the way the skepticism and morality issues were communicated.


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.



Logged
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2631


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #638 on: January 30, 2015, 05:43:16 AM »


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.





I can remember an honoured guest posting confusing messages (it transpires for legitimate reasons - no criticism here) and iirc they were given the benefit of the doubt and treated decently, as they should have been, so I don't agree with your above statement.

If Mike Love came in all guns blazing (not inconceivable) I'd grab the popcorn and let him get on with it.

Joking aside, - If he was pissed off at all the negativity thrown his way over the years and came in to set the record straight, squared up to his detractors (called a few of them chickensh*t), but then apologised, took responsibility for some of his actions and graciously answered questions to the best of his ability, I would not be continuously hounding him about his negative opinions of Dennis, or of his unsympathetic view of Wilson drug use, or his failure to appreciate Brian's more experimental music, or continuously trying to trip him up on misremembered details. I would not hound the man because a) I'd respect that he has a right to those opinions as he's speaking from experience and b) I would not want to jeopardise the discourse for those getting value from it. So we are in disagreement there also as you apparently think I'd have a right to do those things?
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 05:54:43 AM by buddhahat » Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
Lee Marshall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1638



View Profile WWW
« Reply #639 on: January 30, 2015, 05:48:17 AM »

I don't disagree with that Nicko.  Facts were blurred to say the least.  It was more the opinions about those in the picture and I wanted Lorren to start to fill in the holes with info.

I can well recall the name of my Grade 8 teacher...and that I liked him a LOT.  He and I were saying goodbye/good luck when Pet Sounds came out.  But detail about what was the biggest selling song or album in February of that year?  I'd have to look it up.  Did I play hockey the previous winter?  Yes.  Did we win the championship?  You bet your keester we did.  Do I remember the names of all the guys on the team?  Besides my own?  Just 1 other guy.  Our team captain...Jeff Gibb.

To expect Daro to recall all of that minutia is expecting [was expecting] WAY too much.  We probably got MOST all of what he was willing to give.  And in the end...it turned out to be not all that much.  

IF and I repeat IF he is held repsonsible for Brian's drug problems...and I didn't think that previously...I am convinced well beyond a shadow of a doubt now that he shouldn't be used as a scapegoat.  Not to ANY degree.  If he managed to make that point with a few folks here...then I guess his visit helped him along the path to achieving whatever it was he hoped to accomplish when he wrote that essay many of us read.

I doubt he'll return to run for mayor here anytime soon. Wink
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 05:50:40 AM by Add Some » Logged

"Add Some...Music...To Your Day.  I do.  It's the only way to fly.  Well...what was I gonna put here?  An apple a day keeps the doctor away?  Hum me a few bars."   Lee Marshall [2014]

Donald  TRUMP!  ...  Is TOAST.  "What a disaster."  "Overrated?"... ... ..."BIG LEAGUE."  "Lots of people are saying it"  "I will tell you that."   Collusion, Money Laundering, Treason.   B'Bye Dirty Donnie!!!  Adios!!!  Bon Voyage!!!  Toodles!!!  Move yourself...SPANKY!!!  Jail awaits.  It's NO "Witch Hunt". There IS Collusion...and worse.  The Russian Mafia!!  Conspiracies!!  Fraud!!  This racist is goin' down...and soon.  Good Riddance.  And take the kids.
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2631


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #640 on: January 30, 2015, 06:05:20 AM »

Lorren Daro quickly apologized for his tone and inaccurate recall.
I agree that my initial posts were too full of anger. I’m sorry I didn’t calm down and moderate the tone. The anger is still there, but enough of you have objected that I now see your point. More with honey than vinegar, right? A lot of this has been pent up in me for years. Thanks for seeing through the dark clouds and urging me to change my approach. Never too late to learn…
AGD: I’m beginning to understand what’s going on here. It seems that I’m as much of a victim of bad rumors as anyone else. I lot of what I’ve said was from Brian’s mouth – the 2X4 deafness, Dennis’s drumming, the journey of the ‘Smile’ records, etc. And, no, AGD I’m not going to cling to these ‘facts’. I’m here to learn, as well as to relate what I think I know. My distant memories are suspect. I see that now. Good thing you’re here to keep me on the path. I didn’t think I would run into all this scientific analysis…

Since there are some who don't believe he had anything worthwhile to share, I've compiled and whittled the parts that I thought were interesting for their own merit.

http://pastebin.com/7cgmXwTK

Next on the list: someone ought to email Lorren all of the questions he missed in this thread. There were plenty of good ones.

Thanks for taking the time to compile it all in one place - I missed this post earlier.
Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #641 on: January 30, 2015, 06:23:41 AM »


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.

I can remember an honoured guest posting confusing messages (it transpires for legitimate reasons - no criticism here) and iirc they were given the benefit of the doubt and treated decently, as they should have been, so I don't agree with your above statement.

If Mike Love came in all guns blazing (not inconceivable) I'd grab the popcorn and let him get on with it.

Joking aside, - If he was pissed off at all the negativity thrown his way over the years and came in to set the record straight, squared up to his detractors, but then apologised, took responsibility for some of his actions and graciously answered questions to the best of his ability, I would not be continuously hounding him about his negative opinions of Dennis, or of his unsympathetic view of Wilson drug use, or his failure to appreciate Brian's more experimental music. I would not hound the man because a) I'd respect that he has a right to those opinions as he's speaking from experience and b) I would not want to jeopardise the discourse for those getting value from it. So we are in disagreement there also as you apparently think I'd have a right to do those things?
Buddahat - let's just suppose that Brian was Joe Schmo, but Joe is the best strawberry farmer on the planet.  His father Mac was a strawberry farmer but Joe could grow better than Mac, and the old guy didn't like it.  And Joe has a young bride named Betty. And Joe has a buddy that has been watching Joe, and is closer to the secret cultivation formula than anyone else, and he is Nick.  

Nick goes out and sells the prize strawberries, all over the place, doing the grunt work in the grocery stores, and farmers' markets, with some other guys, doing the public relations, bringing sample platters of Joe's strawberries with champagne on the side, to hotels, and conventions. Business is good for Joe, and he keeps working on making the cultivation even better.

All the local farmers and beyond, want Joe's secrets so they can get in on the action.  And some farmer distributor named Johnny, a well-connected guy in big-time agribusiness is on the chase to get the secret so they all can get in on the action.  So they want to give him some "truth serum" to get the secret. Johnny thinks the only way he can get the secret is to cut off Betty, Old Mac and Nick, who gets new accounts all the time...

Anyone can get the scenario with this hypothetical.  In order to get to the essence of this hypothetical, it might be helpful important to "neutralize" who the involved people are, and think of them in terms of any family or any business.  Or to even substitute factors in a math equation where you switch the variables.  Remove the emotionality involved and just look at it clinically.  Change the names of the parties.

Cross the high profile names out.  And just, please look at a neutral scenario, with all the big names removed.  I hope you get my position.  

And at the end of the day, every "Brian" account says the LSD "adversely affected" him and the "other guy" says the opposite.  I'm with the story Brian candidly tells on many videos, over many years.  The story is both consistent over time, and corroborated by others.

Even though I have a strong and opposite position, I don't hate this guy.  I don't even know him.  It is the "scenario" that many find unacceptable.  
Logged
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2631


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #642 on: January 30, 2015, 06:38:01 AM »


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.

I can remember an honoured guest posting confusing messages (it transpires for legitimate reasons - no criticism here) and iirc they were given the benefit of the doubt and treated decently, as they should have been, so I don't agree with your above statement.

If Mike Love came in all guns blazing (not inconceivable) I'd grab the popcorn and let him get on with it.

Joking aside, - If he was pissed off at all the negativity thrown his way over the years and came in to set the record straight, squared up to his detractors, but then apologised, took responsibility for some of his actions and graciously answered questions to the best of his ability, I would not be continuously hounding him about his negative opinions of Dennis, or of his unsympathetic view of Wilson drug use, or his failure to appreciate Brian's more experimental music. I would not hound the man because a) I'd respect that he has a right to those opinions as he's speaking from experience and b) I would not want to jeopardise the discourse for those getting value from it. So we are in disagreement there also as you apparently think I'd have a right to do those things?
Buddahat - let's just suppose that Brian was Joe Schmo, but Joe is the best strawberry farmer on the planet.  His father Mac was a strawberry farmer but Joe could grow better than Mac, and the old guy didn't like it.  And Joe has a young bride named Betty. And Joe has a buddy that has been watching Joe, and is closer to the secret cultivation formula than anyone else, and he is Nick.  

Nick goes out and sells the prize strawberries, all over the place, doing the grunt work in the grocery stores, and farmers' markets, with some other guys, doing the public relations, bringing sample platters of Joe's strawberries with champagne on the side, to hotels, and conventions. Business is good for Joe, and he keeps working on making the cultivation even better.

All the local farmers and beyond, want Joe's secrets so they can get in on the action.  And some farmer distributor named Johnny, a well-connected guy in big-time agribusiness is on the chase to get the secret so they all can get in on the action.  So they want to give him some "truth serum" to get the secret. Johnny thinks the only way he can get the secret is to cut off Betty, Old Mac and Nick, who gets new accounts all the time...

Anyone can get the scenario with this hypothetical.  In order to get to the essence of this hypothetical, it might be helpful important to "neutralize" who the involved people are, and think of them in terms of any family or any business.  Or to even substitute factors in a math equation where you switch the variables.  Remove the emotionality involved and just look at it clinically.  Change the names of the parties.

Cross the high profile names out.  And just, please look at a neutral scenario, with all the big names removed.  I hope you get my position.  

And at the end of the day, every "Brian" account says the LSD "adversely affected" him and the "other guy" says the opposite.  I'm with the story Brian candidly tells on many videos, over many years.  The story is both consistent over time, and corroborated by others.

Even though I have a strong and opposite position, I don't hate this guy.  I don't even know him.  It is the "scenario" that many find unacceptable.  

Thanks for the scenario Filldepage but I'm not sure I'm with you.

Are you suggesting Daro is 'Johnny' and that he was using LSD as a tool to gain something from Brian and was similarly trying to besmirch Marilyn, ML and Murry in order to manipulate Brian?

I suspect I've misread your analogy but if you do view Daro as some sort of brainwasher with an ulterior motive then we are on very different pages indeed.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 06:48:08 AM by buddhahat » Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
Lee Marshall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1638



View Profile WWW
« Reply #643 on: January 30, 2015, 06:40:23 AM »

Filled...There is little doubt that the 3 Wilson boys all had problems with drugs at some point along the path.  Why they took 'em?  They had issues.  It was the 60s.  Loads of folks were 'doin' it.  They were 'on the road to find out'.  They needed to quell the despair of being the 'sons of a gun'?

I remember who gave me my first drink of hard liquor.  First time drinker?  First time puker.  Bad trip.  IF I had become an alcoholic would it have been HIS fault?  Surely not.  Sooner or later...likely sooner...I'd have poured a set of drinks somewhere else with someone else.  And it was illegal too.  The drinking age here back then was 21.  I was what? ... 16 or 17?  Minutia.  Can't remember.  I do recall having a whopper of a hangover the next day,  And I've NEVER taken a drink of gin again.  Can't even tolerate the smell of the stuff.

It would have happened with Brian.  The things already indelibly stamped in his head would have had more to do with his reactions and thoughts and problems while tripping [if he had any problems goin' on inside his noggin at that time] than just where he was situated or who he was with.  I'm guessing if Lorren had provided strawberries that they would have enhanced the experience.

The point?  It could have turned out worse.  Maybe it could have turned out better.  The thing is...it still would have turned out with or without Lorren.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 06:43:44 AM by Add Some » Logged

"Add Some...Music...To Your Day.  I do.  It's the only way to fly.  Well...what was I gonna put here?  An apple a day keeps the doctor away?  Hum me a few bars."   Lee Marshall [2014]

Donald  TRUMP!  ...  Is TOAST.  "What a disaster."  "Overrated?"... ... ..."BIG LEAGUE."  "Lots of people are saying it"  "I will tell you that."   Collusion, Money Laundering, Treason.   B'Bye Dirty Donnie!!!  Adios!!!  Bon Voyage!!!  Toodles!!!  Move yourself...SPANKY!!!  Jail awaits.  It's NO "Witch Hunt". There IS Collusion...and worse.  The Russian Mafia!!  Conspiracies!!  Fraud!!  This racist is goin' down...and soon.  Good Riddance.  And take the kids.
Jesse Reiswig
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


View Profile
« Reply #644 on: January 30, 2015, 06:49:11 AM »


Well said, Jesse.

I admit, I have *major* issues with several things posted by Daro (most of them were in the archived thread) that were at best demonstrably false (and go beyond simple memory lapses), and at worst, libelous. I left this thread open because  I did want Daro to have his say, and to state his side of things, regardless of accuracy or, indeed, motive/agenda. What bothers me more than anything else was that anything that was critical of him was immediately responded to with an attack by members here I really expected more from. Mujan did raise some valid concerns (ones I can back up 100% in most cases) but it was like there was a wall put up...I guess what I'm trying to say is it bothers me that there is such a level of inflexibility here where one only believes something that ties into what they already believe, and all else is 'lies and bullshit'.   To put it bluntly...there is a prevailing 'all insiders here are full of sh*t, except the ones who say what I want to hear..then those are infallible'.  I mean, hell, I could (hypothetically speaking) state that his IP address just so happened to match a member known for being full of sh*t and just so happened to be banned the day before, put up a damn screen shot,  and then immediately be accused of doctoring in Photoshop, because it wouldn't be what one wanted to hear. Hypothetically, of course.

To me, Daro himself was irrelevant (in regards to this rant); it was the way things were handled amongst each other. I stayed out of this for a reason...I stated my case, was suitably ignored, and then I moved on. No biggie. What IS a biggie is the petty sniping at each other.

Well said, Micha (in your first post...as for the 2nd, just some information, but blunted in this case also means 'toned down') and MrRobinsonsFather, I agree as well.

Perhaps the one thing we can all agree on is that Lorren Daro is a polarising figure here.

My principal beef from the start has been that there are ways of challenging somebody about the morality of their actions and veracity of their statements that are conducive to open discourse and will ultimately encourage the truth, not shut it down.  

I feel confident that, due to the efforts of the more openly hostile, we have ended up with less answers to chew over. Less answers for AGD to do with what he does best - No victory for truth at all but a display of just how (in Jason Penick's words) 'anti-intellectual' some here can be.

I'm trying to get my head around the opposing view here. Who do I feel most negativity towards in BB history - Landy I would say. So if he were alive and posting here, and there were those that were benefitting from a q&a with him, would I join the thread? Probably not, purely out of respect for those benefitting from the discourse. If I felt the need to pose him a question about the morality of or motivation behind his actions with Brian I would do so courteously, so as to encourage as open an answer as possible from the guy. I would not continuously jump in with antagonistic, sarcastic and abusive posts - again, primarily out of respect from those benefitting form the discourse, but also because even Landy's perspective has historical value.

Or another hypothetical scenario for the board to ponder: Would it be ok for me to join a Mike Love Honoured Guest thread to ask him why he felt the need to continuously discourage Brian's less positive songs? Even as recently as TWGMTR, if we are to believe Rolling Stone Magazine?

If he had the decency to answer as honestly as possible, would it then be ok for me say he was full of sh*t, or that he was a hypocrite because he has made a load of money out of Brian's more introspective songs etc. etc. etc?

And then move on to his insensitivity around Wilson drug use?

Finally do I feel I could have behaved better in all of this? Yes, I concede I could have been less aggressive in my attempts to help the thread function the way I thought it should. Respect to those on both sides who were less confrontational in their approaches. But my primary frustration was not that people weren't believing everything Daro had to say - I have no problem with that. My frustration was with the way the skepticism and morality issues were communicated.



Buddhat, I agree with basically everything you're saying here. Personally, I think you have behaved most admirably by and large--thank you so much for your thoughtfulness and nuance.
Logged
Alan Smith
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2089


I'm still here bitches and I know everything. –A


View Profile
« Reply #645 on: January 30, 2015, 06:52:14 AM »


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.

I can remember an honoured guest posting confusing messages (it transpires for legitimate reasons - no criticism here) and iirc they were given the benefit of the doubt and treated decently, as they should have been, so I don't agree with your above statement.

If Mike Love came in all guns blazing (not inconceivable) I'd grab the popcorn and let him get on with it.

Joking aside, - If he was pissed off at all the negativity thrown his way over the years and came in to set the record straight, squared up to his detractors, but then apologised, took responsibility for some of his actions and graciously answered questions to the best of his ability, I would not be continuously hounding him about his negative opinions of Dennis, or of his unsympathetic view of Wilson drug use, or his failure to appreciate Brian's more experimental music. I would not hound the man because a) I'd respect that he has a right to those opinions as he's speaking from experience and b) I would not want to jeopardise the discourse for those getting value from it. So we are in disagreement there also as you apparently think I'd have a right to do those things?
Buddahat - let's just suppose that Brian was Joe Schmo, but Joe is the best strawberry farmer on the planet.  His father Mac was a strawberry farmer but Joe could grow better than Mac, and the old guy didn't like it.  And Joe has a young bride named Betty. And Joe has a buddy that has been watching Joe, and is closer to the secret cultivation formula than anyone else, and he is Nick.  

Nick goes out and sells the prize strawberries, all over the place, doing the grunt work in the grocery stores, and farmers' markets, with some other guys, doing the public relations, bringing sample platters of Joe's strawberries with champagne on the side, to hotels, and conventions. Business is good for Joe, and he keeps working on making the cultivation even better.

All the local farmers and beyond, want Joe's secrets so they can get in on the action.  And some farmer distributor named Johnny, a well-connected guy in big-time agribusiness is on the chase to get the secret so they all can get in on the action.  So they want to give him some "truth serum" to get the secret. Johnny thinks the only way he can get the secret is to cut off Betty, Old Mac and Nick, who gets new accounts all the time...

Anyone can get the scenario with this hypothetical.  In order to get to the essence of this hypothetical, it might be helpful important to "neutralize" who the involved people are, and think of them in terms of any family or any business.  Or to even substitute factors in a math equation where you switch the variables.  Remove the emotionality involved and just look at it clinically.  Change the names of the parties.

Cross the high profile names out.  And just, please look at a neutral scenario, with all the big names removed.  I hope you get my position.  

And at the end of the day, every "Brian" account says the LSD "adversely affected" him and the "other guy" says the opposite.  I'm with the story Brian candidly tells on many videos, over many years.  The story is both consistent over time, and corroborated by others.

Even though I have a strong and opposite position, I don't hate this guy.  I don't even know him.  It is the "scenario" that many find unacceptable.  

Snore...almost as boring as Nicko's posts
Logged

ESQ - Subscribe Now!!!

A new Beach Boys forum is here! http://beachboys.boards.net/
♩♬🐸 Sorry Entertainer ♯♫♩🐇
The Dr. of Wilsonomics
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 10888


🍦🍦 Hi...how are you? ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #646 on: January 30, 2015, 06:59:32 AM »

Filled...There is little doubt that the 3 Wilson boys all had problems with drugs at some point along the path.  Why they took 'em?  They had issues.  It was the 60s.  Loads of folks were 'doin' it.  They were 'on the road to find out'.  They needed to quell the despair of being the 'sons of a gun'?

I remember who gave me my first drink of hard liquor.  First time drinker?  First time puker.  Bad trip.  IF I had become an alcoholic would it have been HIS fault?  Surely not.  Sooner or later...likely sooner...I'd have poured a set of drinks somewhere else with someone else.  And it was illegal too.  The drinking age here back then was 21.  I was what? ... 16 or 17?  Minutia.  Can't remember.  I do recall having a whopper of a hangover the next day,  And I've NEVER taken a drink of gin again.  Can't even tolerate the smell of the stuff.

It would have happened with Brian.  The things already indelibly stamped in his head would have had more to do with his reactions and thoughts and problems while tripping [if he had any problems goin' on inside his noggin at that time] than just where he was situated or who he was with.  I'm guessing if Lorren had provided strawberries that they would have enhanced the experience.

The point?  It could have turned out worse.  Maybe it could have turned out better.  The thing is...it still would have turned out with or without Lorren.

I'm with you. I've made my feelings on him quite clear but in all fairness you can't blame him for turning Brian on to acid because Brian would have tried it regardless. That said, not seeing any problem with Brian *driving* while tripping is mindblowingly stupid, but that's been covered already.
Logged

RIP Daniel Dale Johnston ( 1961-2019)
_______________________________________________________
Fear 2 Stop: eating all of Elon Musk's nightmares as he sleeps

"I've never heard such ear-pleasing screams before!"
___________________________________________________


"I’d rather die than owe the hospital Till I get old/ I get adrenalin straight to the heart/ like Uma Thurman overdosing kick-start/ Anaphylactic and super hypocondriactic "

^ This fake quote brought to you by "Oyster Pudding™ ....the Pudding with the Pearl inside!"
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #647 on: January 30, 2015, 07:01:36 AM »


I don`t think it`s a great comparison really. Lorren isn`t an honoured member and his only direct involvement with the group seems to have been on a short tour that he can`t really remember or won`t give any information about.

But if Mike Love did come to the board and threw the f*** word about, insulted members, accidentally posted medical info, talked about `my contribution to the world...`and contradicted himself repeatedly (and not just over historical things) then I would expect him to receive an awful lot of criticism and he would deserve it too.

I can`t remember anyone else who has had any connection with the band posting in the manner that Lorren has done and I would expect anyone who did to receive a similar response.

I can remember an honoured guest posting confusing messages (it transpires for legitimate reasons - no criticism here) and iirc they were given the benefit of the doubt and treated decently, as they should have been, so I don't agree with your above statement.

If Mike Love came in all guns blazing (not inconceivable) I'd grab the popcorn and let him get on with it.

Joking aside, - If he was pissed off at all the negativity thrown his way over the years and came in to set the record straight, squared up to his detractors, but then apologised, took responsibility for some of his actions and graciously answered questions to the best of his ability, I would not be continuously hounding him about his negative opinions of Dennis, or of his unsympathetic view of Wilson drug use, or his failure to appreciate Brian's more experimental music. I would not hound the man because a) I'd respect that he has a right to those opinions as he's speaking from experience and b) I would not want to jeopardise the discourse for those getting value from it. So we are in disagreement there also as you apparently think I'd have a right to do those things?
Buddahat - let's just suppose that Brian was Joe Schmo, but Joe is the best strawberry farmer on the planet.  His father Mac was a strawberry farmer but Joe could grow better than Mac, and the old guy didn't like it.  And Joe has a young bride named Betty. And Joe has a buddy that has been watching Joe, and is closer to the secret cultivation formula than anyone else, and he is Nick.  

Nick goes out and sells the prize strawberries, all over the place, doing the grunt work in the grocery stores, and farmers' markets, with some other guys, doing the public relations, bringing sample platters of Joe's strawberries with champagne on the side, to hotels, and conventions. Business is good for Joe, and he keeps working on making the cultivation even better.

All the local farmers and beyond, want Joe's secrets so they can get in on the action.  And some farmer distributor named Johnny, a well-connected guy in big-time agribusiness is on the chase to get the secret so they all can get in on the action.  So they want to give him some "truth serum" to get the secret. Johnny thinks the only way he can get the secret is to cut off Betty, Old Mac and Nick, who gets new accounts all the time...

Anyone can get the scenario with this hypothetical.  In order to get to the essence of this hypothetical, it might be helpful important to "neutralize" who the involved people are, and think of them in terms of any family or any business.  Or to even substitute factors in a math equation where you switch the variables.  Remove the emotionality involved and just look at it clinically.  Change the names of the parties.

Cross the high profile names out.  And just, please look at a neutral scenario, with all the big names removed.  I hope you get my position.  

And at the end of the day, every "Brian" account says the LSD "adversely affected" him and the "other guy" says the opposite.  I'm with the story Brian candidly tells on many videos, over many years.  The story is both consistent over time, and corroborated by others.

Even though I have a strong and opposite position, I don't hate this guy.  I don't even know him.  It is the "scenario" that many find unacceptable.  

Snore...almost as boring as Nicko's posts
We sure do treat each other like sh*t in here.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #648 on: January 30, 2015, 07:05:08 AM »

Snore...almost as boring as Nicko's posts

Oh no, let's not get at each other's throats, please...
Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
Mr. Cohen
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1746


View Profile
« Reply #649 on: January 30, 2015, 07:07:37 AM »

God, I need a delete post button. I don't want to get involved in this.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 07:09:39 AM by Mr. Cohen » Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.36 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!