Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Not quite philosophy discussions, debates, various thought experiments and other topics of interest.

Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 9:25 am 

Forgive me for skipping over to this part:

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 07:35 am wrote:Sometimes less is more.


because I see a symptom here.

Yes, sometimes less is more. And other times less is just less. If you always go with less, you are missing important information. Is this your definition of a rigorous approach?

NCE gave you examples of how and when your method fails, and how you can improve it so that it - at least - fails less. Instead, you come back with arguments that "sometimes less is more", and contrive whatever specific examples that justify your less robust method. Is this rigorous science to you? If you're always sticking with the simpler approach, you're probably missing half the picture. Wait, half the picture? Does that sound familiar?

The team tried to replicate the findings of 100 studies that had been published in three prestigious journals. The researchers found they could do so in only half the cases.


Remember that study that tried to replicate 100 psychology papers?

Look Ursa. Everybody comes to this site with an agenda. For some of us, this agenda includes learning and having fun. It has become clear to me that your agenda misses at least one of those two. With you, when there is a problem with science, it's always the fault of the scientists in physical science, and when there's something good about science, the social scientists are the poster children for it. When someone posted a paper on the unreliability of published research in PSYCHOLOGY, you had 4 or five scientists here from basic science fields (biology, chemistry, physics, neuroscience) say : Yes, we acknowledge there are problems, so let's discuss ways to address reliability of published research such that maybe we can improve the public's trust of science and scientists. Then you, a social scientist, come in and all you do is attack scientists on everything from how we wear our tie to how we walk and talk, while simultaneously sparing the social scientist on every point. Is that not even a little ironic to you? Or maybe you just wanted to go out of your way to hide the fact that this was specifically a social science fail? I don't recall seeing you once fault the social scientists for anything, or admit that something could be made better about your techniques and approaches to improve rigor, quality, and reliability. Not once.

I'm sorry, but I must withdraw from this thread as well. It is obvious that you have nothing to teach us other than ego and bias, the very things you (correctly) pointed out that we, the new generation of academic scientists, need to avoid in order to not come across as insufferable know-it-alls who alienate everyone outside their field (thanks for the demo I suppose?).

I will be skipping over your posts for now. I would rather spend that time conversing with someone who will give me (and us) at least a little credit for my (and our) intelligence. You may enjoy your tête-à-tête's with mtb now.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 9:48 am 

BioWizard » October 9th, 2015, 7:25 am wrote:Forgive me for skipping over to this part:

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 07:35 am wrote:Sometimes less is more.


because I see a symptom here.

Yes, sometimes less is more. And other times less is just less. If you always go with less, you are missing important information. Is this your definition of a rigorous approach?

NCE gave you examples of how and when your method fails, ...


False. He spoke to the general case, not to the specific methodological case.

I don't make any claims about your intelligence, but I have seen aspersions cast at mine. I do make claims about your skills.

I suggest that if I started making uninformed claims about your field over and over, you would quickly end conversation. But if I asked you questions, you would give me answers.

I suggest that asking people about stuff they know in more detail than you do would be a basic showing of respect.

I give what I get on that front.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 10:06 am 

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 08:48 am wrote:I suggest that asking people about stuff they know in more detail than you do would be a basic showing of respect.

I give what I get on that front.


Is that so now? Because you did not grant me (whether directly or indirectly) that respect when I said in another thread that some nuances about doing science (which may result in non-reproducibility) aren't readily evident to non-scientists. In fact, you launched an attack on me, and accused me of disdain for non-scientists. Was I not worthy of the benefit of the doubt, if not the respect you speak of?

Shameless displays of double standards (that don't give people credit for their intelligence) and obsession with being always right are not exactly what come to my mind when I think of due respect. Please stop.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 11:42 am 

BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:25 am wrote:Forgive me for skipping over to this part:

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 07:35 am wrote:Sometimes less is more.


because I see a symptom here.

Yes, sometimes less is more. And other times less is just less. If you always go with less, you are missing important information. Is this your definition of a rigorous approach?

NCE gave you examples of how and when your method fails, and how you can improve it so that it - at least - fails less. Instead, you come back with arguments that "sometimes less is more", and contrive whatever specific examples that justify your less robust method. Is this rigorous science to you? If you're always sticking with the simpler approach, you're probably missing half the picture. Wait, half the picture? Does that sound familiar?

The team tried to replicate the findings of 100 studies that had been published in three prestigious journals. The researchers found they could do so in only half the cases.


Remember that study that tried to replicate 100 psychology papers?

Look Ursa. Everybody comes to this site with an agenda. For some of us, this agenda includes learning and having fun. It has become clear to me that your agenda misses at least one of those two. With you, when there is a problem with science, it's always the fault of the scientists in physical science, and when there's something good about science, the social scientists are the poster children for it. When someone posted a paper on the unreliability of published research in PSYCHOLOGY, you had 4 or five scientists here from basic science fields (biology, chemistry, physics, neuroscience) say : Yes, we acknowledge there are problems, so let's discuss ways to address reliability of published research such that maybe we can improve the public's trust of science and scientists. Then you, a social scientist, come in and all you do is attack scientists on everything from how we wear our tie to how we walk and talk, while simultaneously sparing the social scientist on every point. Is that not even a little ironic to you? Or maybe you just wanted to go out of your way to hide the fact that this was specifically a social science fail? I don't recall seeing you once fault the social scientists for anything, or admit that something could be made better about your techniques and approaches to improve rigor, quality, and reliability. Not once.

I'm sorry, but I must withdraw from this thread as well. It is obvious that you have nothing to teach us other than ego and bias, the very things you (correctly) pointed out that we, the new generation of academic scientists, need to avoid in order to not come across as insufferable know-it-alls who alienate everyone outside their field (thanks for the demo I suppose?).

I will be skipping over your posts for now. I would rather spend that time conversing with someone who will give me (and us) at least a little credit for my (and our) intelligence. You may enjoy your tête-à-tête's with mtb now.



Stop dragging me into your pissing contests please. I have done my best to keep out of the way but you've done this previously, going so far as to accuse me of saying things or positions that were ursa's. From what I've seen the only one who had his intelligence explicitly questioned was Ursa. In the face of personal insults (including as a teacher), he's not given back what he's taking. But yes I agree lets all start practicing some respect.
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 12:10 pm 

What did I drag you into and what positions did I ascribe to you that were Ursa's? The last time I remember something like this happening was when you ascribed a position of Ursa's to me (and then argued against it until you realized it was Ursa's). As far as the tête-à-tête comment, I simply meant that you seemed to be the only other person (next to NCE and myself) engaging Ursa.

I thought I was being fairly precise here. Although, did you really think that these threads were nothing but a pissing competition? I don't want to attribute anything to Ursa, but is this why none of these threads were able to go anywhere, except people digging their heals in further and further?

I do think practicing respect all around is a good idea. So long as it is done in a consistent and generalized manner. No double standards.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 12:27 pm 

BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:10 am wrote:What did I drag you into and what positions did I ascribe to you that were Ursa's? The last time I remember something like this happening was when you ascribed a position of Ursa's to me (and then argued against it until you realized it was Ursa's). As far as the tête-à-tête comment, I simply meant that you seemed to be the only other person (next to NCE and myself) engaging Ursa.

I thought I was being fairly precise here. Although, did you really think that these threads were nothing but a pissing competition? I don't want to attribute anything to Ursa, but is this why none of these threads were able to go anywhere, except people digging their heals in further and further?

I do think practicing respect all around is a good idea. But it has to be done in a consistent and generalized manner. No more double standards.


Yes my impression of these threads is they are pissing contests, academic turf marking.

Your characterization of other threads is wrong - piss away.
Last edited by mtbturtle on October 16th, 2015, 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: sp turf
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 12:30 pm 

mtbturtle » 09 Oct 2015 11:27 am wrote:Yes my impression of these threads is they are pissing contests, academic truff marking.


Well, see, had you been a biochemist, a physicist/mathematician, or a social scientist, you would've known that your impression was entirely false. Alas, you don't possess our academic knowledge and wisdom, and therefor you lack the expertise to evaluate the threads rigorously ;)))
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Natural ChemE on October 9th, 2015, 12:47 pm 

BioWizard » October 9th, 2015, 11:30 am wrote:
mtbturtle » 09 Oct 2015 11:27 am wrote:Yes my impression of these threads is they are pissing contests, academic truff marking.


Well, see, had you been a biochemist, a physicist/mathematician, or a social scientist, you would've known that your impression was entirely false. Alas, you don't possess our academic knowledge and wisdom, and therefor you lack the expertise to evaluate the threads rigorously ;)))

The worst part about this discussion is that now we know that, as outsiders, we're unequiped to make disparaging assessments of Scientology.

Only Xenu can pass judgement.
    Image
Natural ChemE
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: 28 Dec 2009


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 12:54 pm 

On the bright side NCE, we too are now immune to criticism from people outside our respective fields. Anyone outside our circle of domain-experts is apparently ill-equipped to criticize any part of what we do. This shall come in handy in future (and possibly some past) threads (albeit not in real life - unfortunately).
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:21 pm 

mtbturtle » 09 Oct 2015 12:16 pm wrote:It is not about being an outsider, it is about having relevant training, information. You as an outsider could have attempted to gain this knowledge, but you aren't going to pick it up from some journal articles. Having done so, you could have developed some rigorous criteria by which to evaluate social science and natural science and then gone about applying it methodically, but you haven't so why should I respect your opinions on this issue. Oh wait I remember cause it's math that's what allows you to disparage Social Science.


Yes, so basically... the next time you want to meaningully criticize science, be sure to go get a relevant degree and practice the trade for some time before you do it. And if you intend to do so about something related to my line of work, your degree, training, experience, and publications better be in biochemistry or molecular biology. Right?

I can learn to dig that, at least around here.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:28 pm 

We're being told that we're ill-equipped to criticize any part of social science's methodologies because we're not trained as social scientists. There is no straw-person here.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:36 pm 

Good for you. But that's all irrelevant.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:40 pm 

mtbturtle » 09 Oct 2015 12:31 pm wrote:
BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:28 pm wrote:We're being told that we're ill-equipped to criticize any part of social science's methodologies because we're not trained as social scientists. There is no straw-person here.


You have not been told that.

When it comes to Biochemistry I'm going to listen to you over Ursa, shouldn't I? - when it comes to critiques of Bio methodology I'm going to assume yours would be more informed than Ursa's. Are you telling me there's no difference? That being a scientist, having some math, and reading some journals makes Ursa equal to you?


I thought you said you read my story? About how CS/math scientists helped me improve my methodology quite a bit? I also have many stories about how I improved the methodologies of scientists in other fields (all resulted in publications), but I spared those. So no not everyone needs to listen to domain-experts on everything in their methodologies. Especially not on the parts of the methodologies that ARE NOT DOMAIM-SPECIFIC. Geez.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 1:43 pm 

BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:40 pm wrote:
mtbturtle » 09 Oct 2015 12:31 pm wrote:
BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:28 pm wrote:We're being told that we're ill-equipped to criticize any part of social science's methodologies because we're not trained as social scientists. There is no straw-person here.


You have not been told that.

When it comes to Biochemistry I'm going to listen to you over Ursa, shouldn't I? - when it comes to critiques of Bio methodology I'm going to assume yours would be more informed than Ursa's. Are you telling me there's no difference? That being a scientist, having some math, and reading some journals makes Ursa equal to you?


I thought you said you read my story? About CS/math scientists helped me improve my methodology quite a bit? So not not everyone needs to listen to domain-experts on everything in their methodologies. Especially not on the parts of the methodologies that ARE NOT DOMAIM-SPECIFIC. Geez.


yes and what does that have to do with the comments that were made in terms of domain-specific methodologies?... i asked previously but got no pertinent reply. Feel free to ignore it again, i put my boots on.
Last edited by mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 1:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typos
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:50 pm 

mtb, and that's why I said in the other thread (and will repeat here):

If we can't agree on what constitutes domain-specific knowledge and what doesn't, then this thread will remain sterile. Or more precisely, whether someone without domain-specific knowledge can evaluate/contribute constructively to the non-domain specific components of the methodology of someone with domain-specific knowledge (of course the guidance of the domain-specific expert remains critical, which was the point of my little story - by the way).
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 1:54 pm 

BioWizard » October 9th, 2015, 11:36 am wrote:But that's all irrelevant.



You will note that it does use non-linear analysis. Which came up in the thread.

It also shows something that statistical approaches did not catch. Sometimes a non-quantitative method is superior to any quantitative method for a given set of data.

The details of the stratified cluster sample (methods) help a great deal in interpreting the statistical results, as well as the qualitative results.

So maybe not as irrelevant as some might think at a glance.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 1:56 pm 

User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 2:03 pm 



Yes when you stop pissing it actually takes time and effort to make an argument, one free of logical fallacies and in which the premises actually support the conclusion which is clearly stated rather than begging the question.

My point is I expect you to know more about biochemistry methods and methodology, best practices, than those outside your field. seems reasonable to me.
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 2:08 pm 

mtbturtle wrote:My point is I expect you to know more about biochemistry methods and methodology, best practices, than those outside your field. seems reasonable to me.


I already answered that question, with an example.


mtbturtle wrote:Yes when you stop pissing it actually takes time and effort to make an argument, one free of logical fallacies and in which the premises actually support the conclusion which is clearly stated rather than begging the question.


OK, now I'm done with you too.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 2:57 pm 

BioWizard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 1:08 pm wrote:
mtbturtle wrote:My point is I expect you to know more about biochemistry methods and methodology, best practices, than those outside your field. seems reasonable to me.


I already answered that question, with an example.


mtbturtle wrote:Yes when you stop pissing it actually takes time and effort to make an argument, one free of logical fallacies and in which the premises actually support the conclusion which is clearly stated rather than begging the question.


OK, now I'm done with you too.


We'll see.

My point has been as an outsider to all fields who's opinion carries more weight when it comes to the methods of that field? I don't think you or NCE are qualified to have an opinion when it comes to Social Science methods or accessing their rigor. I don't think you are familiar with them for starters. Neither am I. Ursa would be barely qualified because he occupies one discipline within Social Science. My point would not be that ONLY INSIDERS can have an opinion; rather, I would say outsiders have to do alot of work in order to become adequately informed. I don't think either of you have done that. So your opinion regarding anything about the quality of Social Science carries no weight.
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 3:20 pm 

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 10:33 am wrote:BTW, I thought you weren't to my posts any more? What comes to mind when people say one thing and do another? I've seen you lock threads because they get off topic, but I have also see you continue to be off topic in a thread for quite a while. Is that a double standard?

This is a game that is easy to play... if you don't mind ignoring lots of details that could matter. Kind of like doing social science or physics or poetry is easy, if you don't mind ignoring lots of details that could matter.

Since you said you won't be replying to my posts, I suggest that if you wish to take me to task for something, or demand I hew to a specific standard of posting that you care to define, you can do so via PM and not derail threads.


For your rigorous record, I did not say that I won't be replying to your posts. My exact words were: "l will skip over your posts for now". Quite different.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 3:26 pm 

BioWizard » October 9th, 2015, 1:20 pm wrote:
For your rigorous record, I did not say that I won't be replying to your posts. My exact words were: "l will skip over your posts for now". Quite different.


Thank you for that clarification.

So any reply will be to something you skipped over... for some unspecified time.

If you decide to do otherwise, give me a heads up so I won't assume "skipping" where you pranced, or gallivanted, or plodded. That will help minimize unintended misinterpretation.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 3:27 pm 

mtbturtle » October 9th, 2015, 1:25 pm wrote:
So you can have rigor without Science? imagine that and you can have rigor without math ?


By my definition, of course.

Key term... "logical calculus." It covers a LOT of ground.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 3:28 pm 



mtb,

The intention of my remarks was that I don't care to "seriously" engage in that discussion any more. As for the the pissing part, I don't mind. It's actually fun and I'm having a boring Friday afternoon writing a review. So those bantering posts I'm willing to entertain. Though maybe we should just move it to the lounge, to avoid solidifying a bad example. Or something.
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 3:29 pm 



Down at an angle would be more effective.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby BioWizard on October 9th, 2015, 3:33 pm 

Ursa Minimus » 09 Oct 2015 02:29 pm wrote:


Down at an angle would be more effective.


I saw the content of your message before it got edited and PMed mtb about it. It's time that we bring back some class and acknowledge our added responsibilities as admins (at least mtb and I).
User avatar
BioWizard
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: United States
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Ursa Minimus on October 9th, 2015, 3:36 pm 

BioWizard » October 9th, 2015, 1:33 pm wrote:I saw the content of your message before it got edited and PMed mtb about it. It's time that we bring back some class and acknowledge our added responsibilities as admins (at least mtb and I).


Delete them both, and this, and tracks will have been covered.

No objection offered.
Ursa Minimus
 


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby vivian maxine on October 9th, 2015, 4:24 pm 

mtbturtle » October 9th, 2015, 2:25 pm wrote:
Ursa Minimus » Fri Oct 09, 2015 2:22 pm wrote:
mtbturtle » October 9th, 2015, 12:57 pm wrote:Ursa would be barely qualified because he occupies one discipline within Social Science.


So you can have rigor without Science? imagine that and you can have rigor without math ?


As in rigor mortis?
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby Natural ChemE on October 9th, 2015, 5:10 pm 

This thread's been really helpful. It's been consistent with prior discussions on similar topics, e.g. Questioning P values in which Bio had noted issues with overly simplistic statistics while Ursa had then noted that there were correct ways to go about such methods as in this PDF.

In general I see Bio asking questions about just about everything, from the energy content of the universe in one thread to database optimization in another to numerical simulation tips in another. And that's relatable for me as I've posted threads about stuff like how to program and what a number is.

But it's weird because it's the folks who know the most that ask the most. Cause-and-effect, I guess? This is, perhaps it's just that folks who are critical and questioning throughout their lives end up being the ones who get stuff?

Honestly Ursa, your approach to statistics is pretty elementary and flawed. And you have to understand, when I say that your methods are stupid, I really didn't think you'd defend them. That's not how folks I know work. Folks I know what to trace down every weakness that they have, then improve. But when I showed you a cutting-edge, easy-to-use tool that's a vast improvement over what you're already doing.. I mean, seriously man, did you even look?

Ah wells. I guess we all like our lives, so it's all well and good. I just wanted to understand why some folks do stuff that seems so confusing to me. Honestly I'm happy to feel like I get how different folks operate better than I did before this thread and the larger discussion of which it's a part.
Natural ChemE
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: 28 Dec 2009


Re: Using linear estimates for non-linear processes.

Postby mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 5:24 pm 

more ad hominems and circular reasoning - you show flaws not declare them.

You know I split off one thread and Ursa started this other to get away from the insults and lack of reason, but alas all the threads have devolved into pissing contests. I find the opinions insuffiiciently informed and unreasoned.
Last edited by mtbturtle on October 9th, 2015, 5:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: insufficiently
User avatar
mtbturtle
Banned User
 
Posts: 9742
Joined: 16 Dec 2005



Return to Odds & Ends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests