View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 20th, 2014, 12:22 am



Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 Zombies vs. Terminator 
Author Message

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 555
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
How's this for a scenario?

*Anomaly Detected*
*Nature of Anomaly?*
*Encounter with stealthed homo sapiens. Vital signs detect as negative, detected due to mobility. Unit postulates new stealth system in use by homo sapiens*
*Hypothesis accepted as provisional; attempt to capture stealth unit for analysis*
*Confirmed*

*Hypothesis lacks confirming data; specimens were not in possession of stealth apparatus of any sort. Furthermore, despite fatal wounds being present on all specimens and corresponding lack of vital signs, three specimens were still capable of independent motion. Furthermore, fatal wounds were not inflicted by capturing Terminator unit. New Hypothesis: New combat drug in use by homo sapiens*

*Analysis of ambulatory specimens fails to reveal any chemical agent responsible for post-mortum mobility. Beginning analysis for biological agents*

*Virus detected in specimens. Exposure to living homo sapiens resulted in rapid necrosis, death and subsequent reanimation. Reanimated homo sapiens proceeded to attack uninfected homo sapiens*
*Prepare weaponized form of virus for deployment*


June 16th, 2009, 2:41 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 2548
Location: Middle of Nowhere, Japan
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Actually, if you see a purple unicorn on your lawn, assuming you've been dosed with LSD or something is probably very fair. You're point still stands. I just have to point out that when you encounter something entirely outside the framework of your experiences up to that point, assuming that it's not exactly what it appears is, if not logical, then at least the most reasonable course of action.

If you continue to see purple unicorns and you have confirmation that you are neither hopped up on drugs nor schizophrenic, then the idea that unicorns actually exist and are in fact purple would become the more reasonable, logical thing to believe.

_________________
Alex Meridea


June 16th, 2009, 2:48 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1090
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
I just saw T4: Salvation today, and oh boy...

...

The movie is retarded. Skynet is retarded. It became self-aware with the awareness of your average idiotic movie villain:

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot has easily accessible control chip you can yank out, and the destruction of said chip does not impair the robot in any way.

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot will not kill Kyle Reese when contact is made.

-HURR DURR, inflitration robot will not kill John Conner when contact is made.

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot shuts down anti-air defenses, but Skynet decides to keep them off-line even after prime-target is in base.

-HURR DURR, reveals the new T-800 Arnold model early, thus losing any chance of using it to kill Conner further on (since in T3 we are told this is how he dies, unless things can change and all that).

-HURR DURR, easily accessible ports on motor-terminators that allow for fast conversion into usable motorcycles.

-HURR DURR, no internal defenses like wall mounted mini-guns inside Skynet's facility because no one is ever going to infiltrate, right? Not even when Skynet makes that happen, right?

...

Having said that, I really wonder if zombies might not give Skynet a run for it's money. If it kept acting retarded, it wouldn't surprise me...


June 16th, 2009, 3:41 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
bibliophile20 wrote:
How's this for a scenario?

*Anomaly Detected*
*Nature of Anomaly?*
*Encounter with stealthed homo sapiens. Vital signs detect as negative, detected due to mobility. Unit postulates new stealth system in use by homo sapiens*
*Hypothesis accepted as provisional; attempt to capture stealth unit for analysis*
*Confirmed*

*Hypothesis lacks confirming data; specimens were not in possession of stealth apparatus of any sort. Furthermore, despite fatal wounds being present on all specimens and corresponding lack of vital signs, three specimens were still capable of independent motion. Furthermore, fatal wounds were not inflicted by capturing Terminator unit. New Hypothesis: New combat drug in use by homo sapiens*

*Analysis of ambulatory specimens fails to reveal any chemical agent responsible for post-mortum mobility. Beginning analysis for biological agents*

*Virus detected in specimens. Exposure to living homo sapiens resulted in rapid necrosis, death and subsequent reanimation. Reanimated homo sapiens proceeded to attack uninfected homo sapiens*
*Prepare weaponized form of virus for deployment*

That is probably the most likely outcome, Skynet going Snidely Whiplash about a new weapon, but not actually finding a method of killing the zombies themselves.
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
The point I'm making isn't that zombies need all that much to be out smarted, but the simple fact that anything concerning the threat potential of zombies would be considered irrelavent by a computer who is self-aware, granted, but still bound by the rules of logic.


And the first rule of logic is that theories are changed to fit facts, not the other way around.

Or to put it in plain English, upon seeing a purple unicorn on the lawn, a logical entity will not immediately go 'Unicorns do not exist, much less purple unicorns, therefore I cannot be seeing a purple unicorn.' It will go 'I'll be damned, a purple unicorn. I wonder how that happened? Maybe I'd better go find out.'

Your entire argument is based on a Hollywood misunderstanding of what "logic" is. Logic is not being so tied to a set of preconceived assumptions that you're incapable of adjusting to anomalous events... in fact, that's anti-logic.

In order for Skynet to be incapable of re-considering its basic postulates upon encountering new and highly anomalous data, it would have to lack all self-awareness. Since we know as a fact that the goddamn thing is at least as self-aware as a human being, well, there you go.

Besides, it doesn't have to figure out the scientific basis of zombiedom in order to figure out how to most efficiently kill the damned things. Lord knows nobody else in zombie movies ever had to.
Actually, my basis of logic is the same as Holmes, if you eliminate the impossible, what remains, not matter how improbable, must be the truth...the problem is that the dead rising from the grave is impossible based on everything we think we know, and since Skynet started out as a construct of man, it knows only what we knew to program into it and what it itself learned when and after it became self-aware. It is illogical to assume that becoming self-aware will result in a sudden ability to make any kind of leaps in intuition that do not possess a strong baisis in fact, at least for a machine, that is a major barrier between organic and inorganic thought. And while you might be a genius-level intelegence, it does not mean that you are very intuitive, but I diagress. Your assumption is that Skynet will systematically test methods of killing the zombie, but wouldn't be just as logical to assume that Skynet would start designing new and more powerful weapons, based on what they thought they knew about humans in an attempt to kill them with established methods...or capture them like bibliophile sugguested? Head shots are a rather specific and rather accidentally descovered weakness, we in that know about zombies say it like it is the simpliest thing in the world, like it is a easy and magical solution to the threat, but to a very precise machine used to killing its enemies quite easily and without resorting to blunt truama to the skull, it is quite the leap.
Dervon wrote:
I just saw T4: Salvation today, and oh boy...

...

The movie is retarded. Skynet is retarded. It became self-aware with the awareness of your average idiotic movie villain:

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot has easily accessible control chip you can yank out, and the destruction of said chip does not impair the robot in any way.

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot will not kill Kyle Reese when contact is made.

-HURR DURR, inflitration robot will not kill John Conner when contact is made.

-HURR DURR, infiltration robot shuts down anti-air defenses, but Skynet decides to keep them off-line even after prime-target is in base.

-HURR DURR, reveals the new T-800 Arnold model early, thus losing any chance of using it to kill Conner further on (since in T3 we are told this is how he dies, unless things can change and all that).

-HURR DURR, easily accessible ports on motor-terminators that allow for fast conversion into usable motorcycles.

-HURR DURR, no internal defenses like wall mounted mini-guns inside Skynet's facility because no one is ever going to infiltrate, right? Not even when Skynet makes that happen, right?

...

Having said that, I really wonder if zombies might not give Skynet a run for it's money. If it kept acting retarded, it wouldn't surprise me...
How so? Through simple numbers of zombies milling about? Or, in the few know cases, the human/Terminator hybreds, do we know what would happen there with a bite?


June 16th, 2009, 5:04 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1090
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Dunno, Skynet going HURR DURR and ignoring the zombies and then they shamble into something important, like a cooling fan or something. Wouldn't surprise me. :D


June 16th, 2009, 5:27 pm
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 722
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
Actually, my basis of logic is the same as Holmes, if you eliminate the impossible, what remains, not matter how improbable, must be the truth...the problem is that the dead rising from the grave is impossible based on everything we think we know [...]


Actually, your logic here is the exact opposite as Holmes.

From everything we think we know, the dead rising from the grave is impossible, yes. What you are overlooking is if we actually saw a dead man rise from the grave, at that moment everything we know would change. Because then there would be a new data point, notably the directly observed fact that that dead guy over there just got up and walked.

And in the eventuality of that, Holmes would be the first guy to go '... wow, a zombie.'

The point is that deliberately ignoring direct evidence because it doesn't fit preconceived notions is not logic. It is in fact logic's exact opposite, superstition and ignorance.


June 16th, 2009, 6:18 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
Actually, my basis of logic is the same as Holmes, if you eliminate the impossible, what remains, not matter how improbable, must be the truth...the problem is that the dead rising from the grave is impossible based on everything we think we know [...]


Actually, your logic here is the exact opposite as Holmes.

From everything we think we know, the dead rising from the grave is impossible, yes. What you are overlooking is if we actually saw a dead man rise from the grave, at that moment everything we know would change. Because then there would be a new data point, notably the directly observed fact that that dead guy over there just got up and walked.

And in the eventuality of that, Holmes would be the first guy to go '... wow, a zombie.'

The point is that deliberately ignoring direct evidence because it doesn't fit preconceived notions is not logic. It is in fact logic's exact opposite, superstition and ignorance.

A computer would reject a superstitius notion like zombie-isum(?), and go for the more logical concept that the weaponry has been rendered useless by whatever condition these humans are aflicted with, hence the need for more effective weapons, not responces based on illogical human superstitions of the dead raising.


June 17th, 2009, 1:21 am
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 722
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
A computer would reject a superstitius notion like zombie-isum(?)


Superstition (noun)

1 a: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation b: an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition
2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary (emphasis mine)

-- Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

In a world where zombies actually exist, believing in zombies is not superstition. In fact, refusing to believe in zombies even after actually meeting one would be the superstition.

You are simply refusing to acknowledge this. If zombies are actually up and walking around, then its anti-scientific to refuse to believe in zombies, not scientific.


June 17th, 2009, 3:13 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 364
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
Would the Borg count as zombies?



To answer you question, the Borg are a hybrid of both Terminators and Zombies.
Points
    They stab you with their wrist tubes and a short time later you rise as one of them. Zombie
    They wish to assimilate/kill all of humanity. Both Zombie and Terminator
    Intelligent and unemotional Terminator


I may add more points later, but you can see where this is going. I rather suspect that the Borg were deliberately created to embody the emotional impact of both the Terminator and Zombie tropes.

_________________
I don't believe in overkill, but I do believe in economy of force. Which is why I don't use tactical nuclear devices to get rid of gnats that are annoying me. Well, not often anyway.

Naruto shrugged. "It doesn't have to make sense, we're ninja. We walk on water because it's easier than learning to swim." Vulpine by Saphroneth

Stories do not exist to warn you of monsters. You knew that monsters existed before you could speak, before you could walk. Stories exist to tell you monsters can be defeated.
~Unknown


June 17th, 2009, 10:52 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
A computer would reject a superstitius notion like zombie-isum(?)


Superstition (noun)

1 a: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation b: an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition
2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary (emphasis mine)

-- Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

In a world where zombies actually exist, believing in zombies is not superstition. In fact, refusing to believe in zombies even after actually meeting one would be the superstition.

You are simply refusing to acknowledge this. If zombies are actually up and walking around, then its anti-scientific to refuse to believe in zombies, not scientific.
Yes, but does that apply to a machine that has none of our psychological needs to believe in something? You cannot anthropamorphize Skynet, while it is a very advanced A.I., that doesn't mean that it is a perfect copry of the human mind...actually, that's exactly what it means, artificial intelegence appose to actual intelegence to quote Robert Picardo. The fualt in your logic my friend is that you are making the computer far more human than it has ever been depicted, actually considering it started out life as a military program, humanity was seen as a liability, hence Judgement Day.
Jasruv wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
Would the Borg count as zombies?



To answer you question, the Borg are a hybrid of both Terminators and Zombies.
Points
    They stab you with their wrist tubes and a short time later you rise as one of them. Zombie
    They wish to assimilate/kill all of humanity. Both Zombie and Terminator
    Intelligent and unemotional Terminator


I may add more points later, but you can see where this is going. I rather suspect that the Borg were deliberately created to embody the emotional impact of both the Terminator and Zombie tropes.
Actually, they sorta were, they were created to show the dangers of need for technology gone too far, the de-"humanizing" of it.


June 17th, 2009, 5:02 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 3875
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
So, Ironwolf, how does Skynet not being an actual human intelligence make it lose to zombies? Because so far, all you've said is that it isn't human.


June 17th, 2009, 5:07 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 361
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Personally, I cannot see Skynet being worse than humans, on average, at fighting zombies. Human bodies are wandering around, attacking things which attract their attention. Unless some truly astounding programming glitch causes Skynet to ignore that fact, it will categorize them as 'threat', and deal with figuring out what they are, and why they are wandering around while defending itself. Further examination of the situation would likely cause them to be classified 'minor threat, possible opportunity'.

_________________
Warning: the above may contain strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and logic (which may be unsuitable for stupid people).
-adapted from xkcd

I'm a solipsistic conspiracy theorist. I'm sure I must be up to something, and I will not stop until I find out what.
-xkcd


June 17th, 2009, 5:52 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 3875
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
And (if we're going by Max Brooks zombies, which I am. Really, the contest should be more specific) there is no way the Terminators (as far as I know. Do they have human brains?) could get infected. The only way they could be a threat is if the stumbled around messing up vital operating machinery for the Terminators.


June 17th, 2009, 5:57 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1090
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
*nips back in*

Dunno if this has a bearing on anything, but Skynet isn't technically a machine. T3 establishes it is actually software, a program. Data A.I., if you will.

*nips out*


June 17th, 2009, 7:10 pm
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 722
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
Yes, but does that apply to a machine that has none of our psychological needs to believe in something?


Yes. Yes, it entirely does.


June 17th, 2009, 7:44 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
Yes, but does that apply to a machine that has none of our psychological needs to believe in something?


Yes. Yes, it entirely does.

So the military now includes superstition software? Even though it is not pertinent to killing or fighting?


June 17th, 2009, 9:58 pm
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 722
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
So the military now includes superstition software?


That isn't even remotely what I said. Seriously, why are you dragging this out?

A brief recap: "superstition" would be not believing in zombies after actually meeting a zombie. Skynet would need your "superstition software" in order to be able to continue denying the existence of zombies after it physically tripped over a real live zombie.

Skynet, lacking the capacity for superstition, would thus have much less problem adapting to 'Holy shit, zombies are real! I just met some!' event than many human beings would.


June 17th, 2009, 10:02 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
So the military now includes superstition software?


That isn't even remotely what I said. Seriously, why are you dragging this out?

A brief recap: "superstition" would be not believing in zombies after actually meeting a zombie. Skynet would need your "superstition software" in order to be able to continue denying the existence of zombies after it physically tripped over a real live zombie.

Skynet, lacking the capacity for superstition, would thus have much less problem adapting to 'Holy shit, zombies are real! I just met some!' event than many human beings would.
*sigh* I'm not the one with the illogical arguement here, your assertion is that the computer will instantly recognize a zombie for what it is, which of course is possible, it just needs the right references to provide it with the needed data...but the rub is that there is no logical reason for Skynet to even consider something based off of an illogical human superstition, thus the computer would then COMPLETELY reject the concept of the zombie and just take care of the situation just like it has every other human it has found and killed before, through sheer volume of fire

To recap: A zombie is a superstition, superstition are illogical, a computer (unless otherwise designed) will not deal with an illogical superstition because as you yourself have stated there no evidence or proof or quantifiable facts to analize, thusly there is no logical way for the "OMG, Zombie" resonse to be enacted.


June 17th, 2009, 10:18 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 3003
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
O.k. Lets put it like this Ironwolf. Skynet doesn't know about Zombies. However what it does know is there are dessicated and rotting humans shambling about and impeding it's Terminators. If it recognises them as Human even with the rotting it is going to Terminate them. If it views them as a hinderance it is going to move them out of the way. The Zombies have no way to resist in either situation. Anyway, it has been clearly stated to be a learning computer. Just because it doesn't know about them as anything other than Human stories doesn't mean it's going to ignore them.

_________________
Spoiler: show
Image


Last edited by Darkandus on June 17th, 2009, 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.



June 17th, 2009, 10:24 pm
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 555
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Okay, people, this thread is starting to degenerate into "nuh uh" "uh huh" debates. You're all using different postulates at the basis of your arguments, and I doubt anyone's going to convince anyone else of anything at this point. So, cool off, take a breather, consider your arguments and come back fresh later. And remember the MST3K Mantra, "It's just a story, it's just a story." :)


June 17th, 2009, 10:27 pm
Profile

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 722
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
*sigh* I'm not the one with the illogical arguement here, your assertion is that the computer will instantly recognize a zombie for what it is, which of course is possible, it just needs the right references to provide it with the needed data...


Such as the reference that a human corpse visibly in the stages of decomposition, with no detectable vital signs or body heat, is still moving around under its own power? But does not betray any signs of intelligent behavior, merely mindless predation? Skynet can figure all of this out simply by looking at it for a while, and aiming a few basic sensors at it.

At this point, it has correctly identified what the zombie is, and can begin work on figuring out how to most efficiently kill it. Even if it never actually calls the damn thing a "zombie", because it hasn't watched any zombie movies, and instead refers to the phenomenon as "anomalous ambulatory human death syndrome" or somesuch, does it matter? The mental label it uses is irrelevant, what is important is whether or not Skynet is capable of accepting the evidence of its own sensors and going from there to formulate some kind of intelligent plan.

Which, as has already been repeatedly noted, its entirely capable of doing, as its canon that it is a "learning computer".


June 17th, 2009, 11:25 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 364
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Here is a what if? inspired by everybody discussing this.

Z Day happens and some political appointee freaks out and activates the prototype military robot program, code named, oh lets say, Terminator. Skynet is the master AI that is supposed to act as the infrastucture for the human generals but takes over when the Generals and Political Oversight waste too much time in arguements.

Skynet while analyzing the Zombies determines that 'living' humans are just the first stage of the 'Zombie' life-cycle and triggers Judgement Day in an attempt to use nuclear weapons to vaporize a large percentage of the zombies.

Make the Zombies mystical and capable of putting themselves back together no matter how much damage they take and you could have a near eternal Terminator vs Zombies war.

What do you guys think?

_________________
I don't believe in overkill, but I do believe in economy of force. Which is why I don't use tactical nuclear devices to get rid of gnats that are annoying me. Well, not often anyway.

Naruto shrugged. "It doesn't have to make sense, we're ninja. We walk on water because it's easier than learning to swim." Vulpine by Saphroneth

Stories do not exist to warn you of monsters. You knew that monsters existed before you could speak, before you could walk. Stories exist to tell you monsters can be defeated.
~Unknown


June 18th, 2009, 2:55 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1090
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Ironwolf wrote:
Chuckg wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
Yes, but does that apply to a machine that has none of our psychological needs to believe in something?


Yes. Yes, it entirely does.

So the military now includes superstition software? Even though it is not pertinent to killing or fighting?


Uhm, the military never intended for Skynet to become self-aware. Or for it to trigger Judgment Day. Or for it to create an army of killer robots and try to wipe out the last pitiful remains of humanity.

See where I'm going with this? It is quite possible that Skynet could have developed in new ways that mirrored human behavior/mentality. Let's face it, Skynet makes the kind of mistakes you'd expect a human to make, not a super-evolved AI program. It certainly seems to have developed stupidity, so why not superstition?


June 18th, 2009, 9:58 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: January 20th, 2011, 5:14 pm
Posts: 1100
Unread post Re: Zombies vs. Terminator
Dervon wrote:
Ironwolf wrote:
Chuckg wrote:

Yes. Yes, it entirely does.

So the military now includes superstition software? Even though it is not pertinent to killing or fighting?


Uhm, the military never intended for Skynet to become self-aware. Or for it to trigger Judgment Day. Or for it to create an army of killer robots and try to wipe out the last pitiful remains of humanity.

See where I'm going with this? It is quite possible that Skynet could have developed in new ways that mirrored human behavior/mentality. Let's face it, Skynet makes the kind of mistakes you'd expect a human to make, not a super-evolved AI program. It certainly seems to have developed stupidity, so why not superstition?
But that doesn't change the purpose of Skynet when it was concieved, nor what kind of programming that its designers included so it could complete its mission, it just means that someone over-achieved a little bit and it bit humanity on the ass this time.


June 18th, 2009, 3:05 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.