Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » Michelle Ng
Michelle Ng [message #112415] Wed, 21 March 2012 13:16 Go to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
Michelle Ng, you seem like you'd be a perfect member of the UOA
College Rankings voting panel.
If you are at all interested, contact the UOA directly.
Thanks
UOA
agerics20 at yahoo dot com
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112420 is a reply to message #112415] Wed, 21 March 2012 18:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
On Mar 21, 4:16 pm, Reggie Fanelli <ageric...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michelle Ng, you seem like you'd be a perfect member of the UOA
> College Rankings voting panel.
> If you are at all interested, contact the UOA directly.
> Thanks
> UOA
> agerics20 at yahoo dot com
~~~~~~~~

---no?
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112428 is a reply to message #112415] Wed, 21 March 2012 19:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Mar 21, 4:16 pm, Reggie Fanelli <ageric...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michelle Ng, you seem like you'd be a perfect member of the UOA
> College Rankings voting panel.
> If you are at all interested, contact the UOA directly.
> Thanks
> UOA
> agerics20 at yahoo dot com

shes a usau company gal, aint she. i doubt she'd fraternize with the
enemy like that. not that the uoa is an enemy to ultimate but you
know how protective they are of their anti ref stance. and it seems
they are quite threatened by anyone that is innovative.......being the
"established institution" they are and all
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112434 is a reply to message #112428] Wed, 21 March 2012 21:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gregs
Messages: 332
Registered: January 2011
Senior Member
Wow, way to alienate another one, boys.

Not everyone wants to become public fodder for your public-relations program. You could have google searched her name and contacted her through her website in less time than it took for you to send that post..

You shouldn't think that six hours is enough time for somebody to reply to one of your posts. Not everybody places the same emphasis on RSD as you do.

And of course, in typical fashion, this is been turned into a us versus them topic instead of what the original goal was.... which I'm not sure what it was.
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112437 is a reply to message #112415] Thu, 22 March 2012 00:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
redDamage
Messages: 1
Registered: March 2012
Junior Member
Now, bear with me. I'm just a Canadian, eh. I'm just a Canadian that has played Ultimate for a few years and have seen the various levels of Ultimate organization. Been to a few clinics here and there. I met Michelle Ng this year and albeit only for maybe a few days, I believe I can make a fairly accurate account of her character and the passion she has toward Ultimate.

Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is comes across as an uneducated adolescent. The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old. For reasons of not embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you, 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more than skin deep. It is very easy to make random posts (on average 7 times per day???? do you have a job?????) and to publicly condescend various people or organizations. Here's a dictionary, just in case. www.dictionary.com

Michelle delivers a passion and drive for Ultimate that is higher in nature that I've seen in most. The amount of organization and success she possesses is inspiring. To slam her name on here is immature and pointless. As far as I can tell, Michelle is respected by most for a very good reason.

Perhaps this posting-negativity could be put towards something else. Or you could just learn how to play better on the field. Thanks! Have a great day!
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112442 is a reply to message #112434] Thu, 22 March 2012 04:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> Wow, way to alienate another one, boys.


---boys?
one boy gleefully and happily and welcomingly invited Michelle Ng to
join the UOA ranking panel.
you're the only other 'boy'........so, what have you done now?
~~~~~~~~~
> Not everyone wants to become public fodder for your
> public-relations program.


---i don't think anyone wants to eat Michelle's public relations.
the UOA is hoping that she'll join our voting panel since she seems to
attend a great deal of college womens events.
~~~~~~~~~~
You could have google searched
> her name and contacted her through her website in less time
> than it took for you to send that post..


---i didn't need to google search here name....because i see her here
on rsd several times a day.
and.....i'm not doing the math or anything.....but....how could
searching her name, finding her website, finding her contact
information on the website, opening a new email letter, typing a
letter, and sending a letter.......HOW COULD that be faster, than
ALREADY being here on rsd, typing her name in the subject, and then
very nicely and courteously asking her to join the voting panel for
the UOA College Rankings?
i think maybe you should try this experiment to really find out which
would take....'less time'...before coming to such a conclussion.
~~~~~~~~~~~
> You shouldn't think that six hours is enough time for
> somebody to reply to one of your posts. Not everybody places
> the same emphasis on RSD as you do.


---who are you 'assuming' was 'thinking that six hours was enough
time' for "somebody" to reply to one of my posts?
when YOU assume...you're making an ass of you.
i don't care if it takes here 100 hours....
or if Michelle never responds.....i sincerely don't think she will.
however, i'm SO COOL and SO INCLUSIVE and SO INTERESTED in her
joining, that i thought a nice public invitation where she apparently
frequents(rsd) might work....
some folks like to use the word "BUMP" to keep a topic near the
top......i prefer other words....like...."yep" and "uh huh" and in
this case...."no" with a questioning ? afterwards.

so....maybe...YOU shouldn't think....about me....or anything ultimate
related....or rsd related....or 'bump' related.....
~~~~~~~~~~
> And of course, in typical fashion, this is been turned into
> a us versus them topic instead of what the original goal
> was.... which I'm not sure what it was.


---thanks to you.
why DO you try to ruin everything that doesn't involve you all the
time?
i have a guess....
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112445 is a reply to message #112437] Thu, 22 March 2012 05:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
 Been to a
> few clinics here and there.  I met Michelle Ng this year and
> albeit only for maybe a few days, I believe I can make a
> fairly accurate account of her character and the passion she
> has toward Ultimate.


---which seems to be a great reason for the UOA to invite her to cast
a UOA Womens College Ranking ballot every other week!!!
~~~~~~~~~
> Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is comes across as an uneducated
> adolescent.  The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is
> that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old.
 For reasons of not
> embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you,
> 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more
> than skin deep.  It is very easy to make random posts (on
> average 7 times per day???? do you have a job?????) and to
> publicly condescend various people or organizations.  Here's
> a dictionary, just in case.  www.dictionary.com


---personally....i have no idea of Michelle Ng's affiliation with the
upa....however, if she IS deeply rooted with the upa, i CAN see a
reason why she'd avoid, or be asked by the upa to avoid dealing
directly with the UOA...even if it were to simply cast a top 20
ranking every other week.
SO....denying that possibility comes across as uneducated and
adolescent on YOUR part 'keith'.....and you don't even have to
'research' that to know it.
and then to ask about someone's job who is 1000s of miles away from
you, just because they post to rsd....comes across as whiney and
pouting and uneducated, Keith....
~~~~~~~~~~
> Michelle delivers a passion and drive for Ultimate that is
> higher in nature that I've seen in most.  The amount of
> organization and success she possesses is inspiring.


---which is why she'd be super duper welcome on the UOA College
Rankings voting panel.
~~~~~~~~~~
 To
> slam her name on here is immature and pointless.


--i don't see where the ulticritic 'slammed' her name.
i see where he says that maybe she wouldn't fraternize with the
UOA....and i see the critic suggesting that it's because she's in
tight alignment with the upa.
i see you, keith, as immature and pointless for your misinterpretation
of this thread.
~~~~~~~~
As far as
> I can tell, Michelle is respected by most for a very good
> reason.


----which is why she'd be awesome on the UOA College Rankings voting
panel!!!!
and i can't see where anyone, except Greg Southerfried, questioning
here level of respect.
~~~~~~~~~
> Perhaps this posting-negativity could be put towards
> something else.  Or you could just learn how to play better
> on the field.  Thanks! Have a great day!


---wow...keith...horrible ending.
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112446 is a reply to message #112434] Thu, 22 March 2012 05:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Mar 22, 12:10 am, Greg Southfield <greg.southfi...@gmail.com>
wrote:.

> Wow, way to alienate another one, boys.

i'm assuming she privately emailed mike and rejected his
offer.......so it would seem she is alienating herself. all i did was
offer up some valid reasoning as to why she would reject such an
offer.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Not everyone wants to become public fodder for your
> public-relations program.

hey jack, whe you bring your ass on rsd you open ypurself to public
fodder. its the american way.
---------------------------------------------------

 You could have google searched
> her name and contacted her through her website in less time
> than it took for you to send that post..

or........he could have reached out to her here on rsd......which he
did. dont try and dictate to people how to do shit
-------------------------------
>
> You shouldn't think that six hours is enough time for
> somebody to reply to one of your posts.

again, my assumption was that she replied privately and mike responded
publicly. and i think all such dialouge is covered in our countries
constitution under the freedom of speech clause
----------------------------------------


Not everybody places
> the same emphasis on RSD as you do.

that aint got shit to do with shineola
---------------------------------
>
> And of course, in typical fashion, this is been turned into
> a us versus them topic

hey, its the usau admin that drew the line in the sand.......so take
it up with them. i just call out who's standing on which side and
why.
---------------------------------------------


instead of what the original goal
> was.... which I'm not sure what it was.


well initially it was to include her in doing somthing cool......but
when she (assumingly) rejected the offer the goal, for me anyways,
was to expose her for being uncool
> --
> Posted fromhttp://www.rsdnospam.com
Michelle Ng [message #112449 is a reply to message #112415] Thu, 22 March 2012 06:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance Marput
Messages: 992
Registered: June 2010
Location: Columbia Missouri
Senior Member
sounds like a gerics intervention at the uoa is in order. Someone sit Michael down...

script:

"Hey man...Michelle Ng is outa your league. But don't beat yourself up over it. And what about that uoa website update?"


Peter Mc
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112450 is a reply to message #112434] Thu, 22 March 2012 06:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mgd.mitch
Messages: 1207
Registered: January 2009
Senior Member
gregs wrote on Thu, 22 March 2012 00:10
Wow, way to alienate another one, boys.
Greg, Mike's request was completely polite, complimentary and reasonable. Pretty much the behavior you've been asking for for a while, yet you reply as you did. You are justifying the old behavior rather than accepting what you wanted. Nice work, troll.
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112451 is a reply to message #112415] Thu, 22 March 2012 06:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
all i want...is someone involved in the womens college div....to join
the UOA Ranking panel.
what are the rest of ya'll writing about?
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112453 is a reply to message #112449] Thu, 22 March 2012 06:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> sounds like a gerics intervention at the uoa is in order.


---intervention of what?
an intervention because we'd love to include someone as awesome as
Michelle Ng in the UOA College Rankings voting panel?
~~~~~~~~~
> Someone sit Michael down...


---i am sitting down.
what are you writing about?
~~~~~~~~~~
> script:
>
> "Hey man...Michelle Ng is outa your league. But don't beat
> yourself up over it.


---well...there are and always have been some super cool muthers on
the NUMP/UOA voting panel.....some CERTAINLY "out of my league"....but
they have been on the voting panel and have cast their ballots and
been quite happy to be involved.....every year i've run the rankings.
so what?
maybe those who are "outta my league"....really aren't...because they
like what we're doing.
hell....NATHAN WICKS has been on the panel.....there's no one who's
more 'outta my league' than that stud.....yet, there he was,
submitting his ranking ballot every other week.


so.....why are you writing and what are you writing about?
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112454 is a reply to message #112437] Thu, 22 March 2012 05:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Mar 22, 7:07 am, Keith <keith.ram...@hotmail.com> wrote:.

> Now, bear with me.  I'm just a Canadian, eh.


then stick to canada related issues
-------------------------------------

 I'm just a
> Canadian that has played Ultimate for a few years and have
> seen the various levels of Ultimate organization.  Been to a
> few clinics here and there.

we get it, your a pup......still wet behind the ears
---------------------------------------------


 I met Michelle Ng this year and
> albeit only for maybe a few days, I believe I can make a
> fairly accurate account of her character and the passion she
> has toward Ultimate.

but which version OF ultimate? do you know how she feels about the
uoa version?
-------------------------------------------
>
> Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is

pfffft, youde better ask someone
--------------------------------------


comes across as an uneducated
> adolescent.

to a certian "type" of person (sz) it sure seems that way
-------------------------------------------

 The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is
> that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old.

again, if you are a usau loyalist thats usually the case
-------------------------------------------------


 For reasons of not
> embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you,
> 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more
> than skin deep.

nah. i tend to shoot from the hip
------------------------------------------



 It is very easy to make random posts (on
> average 7 times per day????

not for anyone from the usau admin it isnt.........of course i theink
they are just afraid to come onto rsd
------------------------------



>do you have a job?????)

talk about someone that hasent done their reaseach?????
-----------------------------------------



and to
> publicly condescend various people or organizations.


what about it? i mean, i call it "crtiquing" but whatever floats your
boat. (as in ulticritic......get it?)
--------------------------------------------


 Here's
> a dictionary, just in case.  www.dictionary.com

what would i need one of those for. i know what words mean......i
just have my own way of spellin them
---------------------------------------
>
> Michelle delivers a passion and drive for Ultimate that is
> higher in nature that I've seen in most.

whats her passion for the uoa version of ultimate.......cuse if its
similar to those other usau admin goofs, there probably aint a whole
lot of passion
-----------------------------------------


 The amount of
> organization and success she possesses is inspiring.

eh, it dont do shit for me. now if she was to be more flexable and
also promote the uoa version of the sport i'd give her a nod
-------------------------------------------------


 To
> slam her name on here is immature and pointless.

when did i slam here? all i did was offer up a valid explination as
to why she might reject working with the uoa.
-------------------------------------


 As far as
> I can tell, Michelle is respected by most for a very good
> reason.

well i aint part of that "most". so does that mean i dont have a say
in the matter?
-----------------------------------------------
>
> Perhaps this posting-negativity could be put towards
> something else.

or pehaps not.......i mean, when you posse it as an option like that
dont i have a right to decide for myself where to put my negitive
energy?
--------------------------------------------------------


 Or you could just learn how to play better
> on the field.

whats that got to do with it
------------------------


 >,Thanks! Have a great day!


i always do, smell ya later
> --
> Posted fromhttp://www.rsdnospam.com
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112455 is a reply to message #112446] Thu, 22 March 2012 08:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> i'm assuming she privately emailed mike and rejected his
> offer.......
~~~~~~~~

--no.
no reply at all.
STILL HOPING!
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112457 is a reply to message #112415] Thu, 22 March 2012 09:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> Michelle Ng, you seem like you'd be a perfect member of the UOA
> College Rankings voting panel.
> If you are at all interested, contact the UOA directly.
> Thanks
> UOA
> agerics20 at yahoo dot com
~~~~~~~~

---over 1000 reads....and still hoping for Michelle to express
interest in joining the UOA ranking voting panel!
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112465 is a reply to message #112415] Thu, 22 March 2012 11:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Aden
Messages: 59
Registered: August 2009
Member
I don't think anyone is objecting to Mike's original post. That was fine. I mean maybe you e-mail, but it was perfectly respectful. The "no?" was a little premature, but still pretty respectful. Its really ulticritics post that is objectionable. Its hard not to associate the two of them, but I think Mike is pretty blameless on this one.

Aden
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112470 is a reply to message #112465] Thu, 22 March 2012 11:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michelle Ng
Messages: 1060
Registered: September 2008
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Senior Member

Yikes, sorry. I've been flying across the country and trying to figure out some rental car issues and a compromised water source for next weekend. Not looking to alienate anyone, and in case it wasn't clear, I no longer work for USA Ultimate.

Mike-- the reason I haven't chosen to vote on the panel this time around is because I haven't been confident that I could put the time into researching teams / results and doing a good job, something I have spent lots of time doing in the past. I think your rankings are an interesting thing to compare alongside what USAU and Skyd are doing. I'm just not one to do something at half effort-- I think it's an insult to the people organizing (i.e. you).

Sorry all. It's nice to know that I'm missed when I'm not posting on RSD every two hours though. Smile

Michelle
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112474 is a reply to message #112470] Thu, 22 March 2012 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> Mike-- the reason I haven't chosen to vote on the panel this
> time around is because I haven't been confident that I could
> put the time into researching teams / results and doing a
> good job, something I have spent lots of time doing in the
> past.  I think your rankings are an interesting thing to
> compare alongside what USAU and Skyd are doing.  I'm just
> not one to do something at half effort-- I think it's an
> insult to the people organizing (i.e. you).
~~~~~~

--thanks for the kind response Michelle Ng.
knowing your involvement with college womens ultimate, i believe that
your half effort would be more than perfect.
if you change your mind, you will always be welcome to join the UOA
voting panel.
please continue to consider.

as for the UOA rankings being "interesting alongside" another
poll....i'd argue, correctly, that the UOA and formerly NUMP
rankings....have always been best and are more than capable of
STANDING ON THEIR OWN.

best of continued luck with all your efforts, Michelle.
Mike Gerics
UOA
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112478 is a reply to message #112437] Thu, 22 March 2012 12:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Joe Seidler
Messages: 482
Registered: September 2008
Location: San Francisco
Senior Member
On Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:07:25 AM UTC-7, Keith wrote:

>
> Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is comes across as an uneducated
> adolescent. The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is
> that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old. For reasons of not
> embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you,
> 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more
> than skin deep. It is very easy to make random posts (on
> average 7 times per day???? do you have a job?????) and to
> publicly condescend various people or organizations. Here's
> a dictionary, just in case. www.dictionary.com
>

Hi Keith,
Your description of "ulticritic" (aka Toad) is quite accurate... as far as it goes. Actually his emotional instability goes beyond your description. And it's useless offering advice or admonishing him. In fact, he thrives on criticism which allows him to come back and attack (and as I'm sure you've noticed, with ridiculously long posts that no one ever reads).
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112483 is a reply to message #112478] Thu, 22 March 2012 12:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
On Mar 22, 3:28 pm, Joe Seidler <j...@seidler.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:07:25 AM UTC-7, Keith wrote:
>
> > Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is comes across as an uneducated
> > adolescent.  The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is
> > that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old.  For reasons of not
> > embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you,
> > 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more
> > than skin deep.  It is very easy to make random posts (on
> > average 7 times per day???? do you have a job?????) and to
> > publicly condescend various people or organizations.  Here's
> > a dictionary, just in case.  www.dictionary.com
>
> Hi Keith,
> Your description of "ulticritic" (aka Toad) is quite accurate... as far as it goes. Actually his emotional instability goes beyond your description. And it's useless offering advice or admonishing him. In fact, he thrives on criticism which allows him to come back and attack (and as I'm sure you've noticed, with ridiculously long posts that no one ever reads).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---emotional instability?
where do you get that from?
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112486 is a reply to message #112478] Thu, 22 March 2012 12:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
> Hi Keith,
> Your description of "ulticritic" (aka Toad) is quite accurate... as far as it goes. Actually his emotional instability goes beyond your description. And it's useless offering advice or admonishing him. In fact, he thrives on criticism which allows him to come back and attack (and as I'm sure you've noticed, with ridiculously long posts that no one ever reads).
~~~~~~~~

---hey keith, if you decide to call Joe S a tool bagged goofy dork
nerd ball....you'll ACTUALLY be 'quite accurate' about THAT.
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112488 is a reply to message #112478] Thu, 22 March 2012 13:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Reggie Fanelli
Messages: 1958
Registered: September 2011
Senior Member
he thrives on criticism which allows him to come back and attack (and
as I'm sure you've noticed, with ridiculously long posts that no one
ever reads).
~~~~~~~~~

---i wonder....just how do you know so much....if you're not reading
his posts?
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112499 is a reply to message #112465] Thu, 22 March 2012 14:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Mar 22, 2:10 pm, Aden <ade...@gmail.com> wrote:.

>Its really ulticritics post that
> is objectionable.

how? seriously, break it down for us and explain this contention.
------------------------------------

 Its hard not to associate the two of
> them,

not for someone with a brain that dosent have a chip on their
shoulder.
Re: Michelle Ng [message #112500 is a reply to message #112478] Thu, 22 March 2012 14:26 Go to previous message
ulticritic
Messages: 8204
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
On Mar 22, 3:28 pm, Joe Seidler <j...@seidler.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:07:25 AM UTC-7, Keith wrote:
>
> > Whoever this 'Ulticritic' is comes across as an uneducated
> > adolescent.  The outright disdain he/she has for USAU is
> > that of a whiny, pouting 5 year old.  For reasons of not
> > embarrassing yourself any further, I would hope that you,
> > 'Ulticritic' would take the time to research topics more
> > than skin deep.  It is very easy to make random posts (on
> > average 7 times per day???? do you have a job?????) and to
> > publicly condescend various people or organizations.  Here's
> > a dictionary, just in case.  www.dictionary.com
>
> Hi Keith,
> Your description of "ulticritic" (aka Toad) is quite accurate

yea, thats the concensus amoungst the pissly lil spirit zealot anti
ref usau loyalists anyways.
-----------------------------------------------------


.... as far as it goes. Actually his emotional instability goes beyond
your description. And it's useless offering advice or admonishing him.

then why are you bothering to even join the conversation........and
didnt you swear off patronizing rsd some time ago?
---------------------------------------


>.In fact, he thrives on criticism which allows him to come back and
attack

especially with pee brain dillholes like the two of you......but you
do make it quite easy, and fun

this post of joes is a perfect example
---------------------------------------------------


(and as I'm sure you've noticed, with ridiculously long posts that no
one ever reads).

uhmmm, wierd how you speak for everyone (wishfull thinking i guess)
but numbers dont lie for one, and if no one read my posts then wouldnt
we NOT be having this conversation right now.
Previous Topic:Looking for Observers for Southwest Regionals (4/28-29)
Next Topic:LID Try-Outs (Long Island/NYC Open Team)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Feb 26 23:20:16 PST 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software