Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > > >

Vehicular Cycling (VC) No other subject has polarized the A&S members like VC has. Here's a place to share, debate, and educate.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-16-07, 02:45 PM   #251
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,366
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya
you forgot #4, legal for bikes to leave the space
I'm just quoting Zeytoun but I believe #4 (as stated by you) would be captured by #2.
joejack951 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 02:48 PM   #252
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,960
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 844 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951
Really? I thought I was in a very small minority in preferring narrow outside lanes in these conditions. Or were you agreeing with something else I said?
I was agreeing with you... I really feel that removing the abiguity of WOL where shareing lanes is a requirement, is more of a "issue" then actually taking a lane especially in the case of narrow lanes in a multiple lane situation, and where it is clearly spelled out that cyclists should take the lane.

I think a large issue with motorists is simple ambiguity... the motorists don't know the rules, don't care and don't understand when one cyclist does one thing and another does something else.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 02:51 PM   #253
zeytoun
Non-Custom Member
 
zeytoun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Bikes: 1975-1980 SR road bike
Posts: 1,613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Joejack,

I was posting the CVC definition of intersection as excluding driveways/entrances to malls, etc.

When I made my original post, I was thinking of intersections as the CVC defines them, however, I can't remember if I've used that definition of intersection consistently before that, so I deleted it.

So if we define intersection as the CVC does, then all three follow. If we define it to include driveways, entrances, only 2 and 3 follow.
zeytoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 02:55 PM   #254
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,366
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec
I was agreeing with you... I really feel that removing the abiguity of WOL where shareing lanes is a requirement, is more of a "issue" then actually taking a lane especially in the case of narrow lanes in a multiple lane situation, and where it is clearly spelled out that cyclists should take the lane.

I think a large issue with motorists is simple ambiguity... the motorists don't know the rules, don't care and don't understand when one cyclist does one thing and another does something else.
Ok, I think I understand you, although I wouldn't mind if you re-read your own first sentence and tried to make it a little clearer. If I remove the word "removing" from that sentence it makes sense but I don't want to be putting words in your mouth, or taking them out in this case.
joejack951 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 02:56 PM   #255
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
Posts: 24,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951
Because the pink flamingo isn't going to jump out into the road in front of me. Is that a good enough reason?
Which means you noticed the pink flamingo in the first place and made that decision. You gotta notice to decide if something is relevant.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 02:58 PM   #256
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
Again, if you don't pay attention to everything - especially things out of the ordinary, in your environment, how do you determine what is relevant and not relevant? Crystal Ball? Talk to God? Talk to Satan? The voices? How can you decide if it is relevant if you don't notice it?
Again, I'm not a cognitive scientist, but, as I understand it, relevancy, with respect to whether one consciously notices something or not, is determined subconsciously. But there is a feedback loop.

For example, are you fond of a certain type of car? Says it's Mustangs. On your rides, I bet you probably cannot provide an accurate count of the number of, say, Camrys you encountered, but you probably could give an accurate count of the number of Mustangs you encountered. What that means is that your subconscious is programmed, if you will, to notice Mustangs and bring them to the attention of your conscious mind, while it doesn't bother your conscious with the Camrys, so you have no idea if you saw any or not. But that doesn't mean you weren't vaguely aware of the Camrys subconsciously.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:00 PM   #257
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,366
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeytoun
Joejack,

I was posting the CVC definition of intersection as excluding driveways/entrances to malls, etc.

When I made my original post, I was thinking of intersections as the CVC defines them, however, I can't remember if I've used that definition of intersection consistently before that, so I deleted it.

So if we define intersection as the CVC does, then all three follow. If we define it to include driveways, entrances, only 2 and 3 follow.
Ok, I've got it now.

For everyone, including me, who has not read the CVC definition of an intersection, here it is:

Intersection
365. An "intersection" is the area embraced within the prolongations of the lateral curb lines, or, if none, then the lateral boundary lines of the roadways, of two highways which join one another at approximately right angles or the area within which vehicles traveling upon different highways joining at any other angle may come in conflict.
joejack951 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:04 PM   #258
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951
You are using too literal of an interpretation of what HH means when he says he "ignores bike lane stripes while riding." You are also going a bit overboard assuming that just because he didn't notice the dashed length of some stripes that he is incapable of noticing the dashed length of others. Have some faith in what's being written, especially when it's so trivial. It would do a lot for your character (since what you write here is all that I know about you other than a few visits to your website).
Thanks JJ, I was tempted to respond to the sophist again, but now I'm not.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:05 PM   #259
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,366
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Fagerlin
I disagree. He has clarified and re-clarified and re-re-clarified, ad nauseum that he does not pay attention to bike lane stripes because they are irrelevant details in his environment, that he "totally and completely" ignores them, etc.

If I'm using too literal an interpretation Mr. Head has had ample opportunities to state so. He hasn't.
Are you sure you aren't taking the phrase "totally and completely" out of context? In terms of where he rides on the road, I'm sure he "totally and completely" ignores bike lane stripes. In terms of what his eyes see when he's looking at something which happens to be a bike lane stripe, I'm sure he sees the bike lane stripe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Fagerlin
It's incredibly difficult to have faith in what's being written when so much of it is contradictory.
It can be difficult to have a discussion with someone when they have a habit of quoting words out of context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete Fagerlin
You assume that I care what you think about my "character".
Point noted.
joejack951 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:09 PM   #260
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,366
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipcom
Which means you noticed the pink flamingo in the first place and made that decision. You gotta notice to decide if something is relevant.
I didn't notice that pink flamingo just like I didn't notice the fountain in the middle of the flower bed because it's not going anywhere and thus is irrelevant to my safety while cycling in the road. Now, if kids were playing baseball near the road, I'd probably take notice just in case a ball was struck towards me. I might even look right at the flamingo they are using as third base and still not notice it because it's that irrelevant.
joejack951 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:09 PM   #261
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Yes, I didn't know of such lines lines anywhere because I didn't notice them, even on my own commute.
Maybe its just like your VC induced tunnel hearing and tunnel vision when it comes to hearing or seeing any driver miscues as you ride in your VC zone. You apparantly don't hear or see anything that would upset your equilibrium.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:09 PM   #262
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
Again, I'm not a cognitive scientist, but, as I understand it, relevancy, with respect to whether one consciously notices something or not, is determined subconsciously. But there is a feedback loop.

For example, are you fond of a certain type of car? Says it's Mustangs. On your rides, I bet you probably cannot provide an accurate count of the number of, say, Camrys you encountered, but you probably could give an accurate count of the number of Mustangs you encountered. What that means is that your subconscious is programmed, if you will, to notice Mustangs and bring them to the attention of your conscious mind, while it doesn't bother your conscious with the Camrys, so you have no idea if you saw any or not. But that doesn't mean you weren't vaguely aware of the Camrys subconsciously.
Oy vey!

btw your analogy isn't very good, noticing or not noticing a particular make or model of car isn't required to negotiate traffic, but noticing traffic control devices is. Unless of course you are committing 'civil disobedience' w/r/t the bike lane stripe, in which case I would presume that you are hyperconscious of it, rather than oblivious of it.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:13 PM   #263
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951
Are you sure you aren't taking the phrase "totally and completely" out of context? In terms of where he rides on the road, I'm sure he "totally and completely" ignores bike lane stripes. In terms of what his eyes see when he's looking at something which happens to be a bike lane stripe, I'm sure he sees the bike lane stripe.
Again, it sounds to me more like he is hyperconscious of them, rather than oblivious to them. 'Totally and copletely' ignoring them has more to do with ignoring what they mean from a traffic control perspective.

btw, if Serge really rides the way he claims to ride, he is just pissing motorists off and making it worse for all the rest of the cyclists on the road.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:13 PM   #264
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya
Oy vey!

btw your analogy isn't very good, noticing or not noticing a particular make or model of car isn't required to negotiate traffic, but noticing traffic control devices is. Unless of course you are committing 'civil disobedience' w/r/t the bike lane stripe, in which case I would presume that you are hyperconscious of it, rather than oblivious of it.
I don't think of it as civil disobedience. I believe I understand the intent of the law, and ride accordingly which means deciding where to ride without giving consideration to the presence of the bike lane stripe.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:14 PM   #265
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
John Forester and Helmet Head,

You were looking for scientific studies that supported bike lanes. I provided one from Portland, which I don't think either of you had seen before. That wasn't good enough, so I pointed out several others, plus several studies that are currently underway. But those aren't good enough either. Well, I'll let you guys stew on it for a while. But it is not what HH said above, "...Nada. Zippo. Nothing excepth the typical sematic sophistry..."

John, if you have taken those studies apart in the past, please do post some of that to support it. We have not been researching if as long as you have, and if it is what you say it is, you may change a few minds.

John
I have long had a copy of my paper The Bikeway Controversy, published in Transportation Quarterly, on my website. Look under Articles, then Facilities, the first listed.

johnforester.com/Articles/Facilities

I have prepared another article containing my two reviews of Pucher's paper Making Bicycling and Walking Safer: Lessons from Europe. However, my web host has been having trouble since last week. Sometimes my website is readable, sometimes not. Same with my incoming email correspondence. At this time I cannot add to my website (and all of my host's phone lines are engaged, meaning lots of trouble). When I can add to my website, the two reviews will be in one article, listed second on the Facilities list.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:14 PM   #266
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I don't think of it as civil disobedience. I believe I understand the intent of the law, and ride accordingly which means deciding where to ride without giving consideration to the presence of the bike lane stripe.
Right, exactly the same as a Critical Mass of one.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:17 PM   #267
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya
Again, it sounds to me more like he is hyperconscious of them, rather than oblivious to them. 'Totally and copletely' ignoring them has more to do with ignoring what they mean from a traffic control perspective.

btw, if Serge really rides the way he claims to ride, he is just pissing motorists off and making it worse for all the rest of the cyclists on the road.
I don't know what you're imagining or assuming, but I ride the way I claim I ride, and rarely do motorists give me reason to believe they're pissed off by it. In fact, I rarely do anything that would piss anyone off. What do you think I do that would piss someone off? Look back before merging left and see if anyone will yield for me? Some just blow by me, others choose to let me in. Do you think they feel forced to let me in, and are pissed off by it?
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:22 PM   #268
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I don't know what you're imagining or assuming, but I ride the way I claim I ride, and rarely do motorists give me reason to believe they're pissed off by it. In fact, I rarely do anything that would piss anyone off. What do you think I do that would piss someone off? Look back before merging left and see if anyone will yield for me? Some just blow by me, others choose to let me in. Do you think they feel forced to let me in, and are pissed off by it?
You've already admitted to not hearing the honks, either. Get a clue, Lou.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:25 PM   #269
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya
Again, it sounds to me more like he is hyperconscious of them, rather than oblivious to them. 'Totally and copletely' ignoring them has more to do with ignoring what they mean from a traffic control perspective.

btw, if Serge really rides the way he claims to ride, he is just pissing motorists off and making it worse for all the rest of the cyclists on the road.
Well, yes, that is only one of the problems produced by bike-lane stripes. When riding properly means riding on the left side of the stripe, yes, motorists get upset because they believe that cyclists should be only on the right side of the stripe. That's one of the many reasons why bike-lane stripes are harmful to cyclists.

The discussion about the type of stripe when approaching intersections has not taken into account the various changes in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. I think that it has had all three versions: terminated before the intersection, dashed approaching the intersection, and solid approaching the intersection. The solid is, if I recall correctly, the current version, or has been proposed as the next version. As a result, some stripes are done one way, some another way, and different states have different degrees of compliance with MUTCD, or have their own version. What has not been mentioned is the distance required for cyclists to make their proper moves in traffic, which is generally much longer than the distance required for a motorist to prepare for a right turn. That consideration has never been part of the bike-lane stripe supposed thought.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:25 PM   #270
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Pete Fagerlin most certainly IS taking my comments out of context. My comments about how bike lane stripes are "totally and completely irrelevant to me" were made in the context of deciding where to ride while I'm riding. The fact that I may notice them anyway, while waiting at a red light perhaps, and notice that the dashed part seems short, just like I may notice an irrelevant pink flamingo anyway, is noting them in a totally different context from the context of "deciding where to ride while I'm riding".

And being "totally and completely irrelevant to me" in terms of deciding where to ride is only referring to the "guidance" aspect bike lane stripes are supposed to have. It doesn't mean I would ignore the paint on a moist morning. Again, different contexts.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:26 PM   #271
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya
You've already admitted to not hearing the honks, either. Get a clue, Lou.
You must be confusing me with someone else. I've never said I don't hear honks.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:32 PM   #272
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,960
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 844 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
You must be confusing me with someone else. I've never said I don't hear honks.
No, but you have admitted ignoring them.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:34 PM   #273
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester
Well, yes, that is only one of the problems produced by bike-lane stripes. When riding properly means riding on the left side of the stripe, yes, motorists get upset because they believe that cyclists should be only on the right side of the stripe. That's one of the many reasons why bike-lane stripes are harmful to cyclists.
I've never noticed motorists getting upset when I'm on the left side of the stripe. But I try to make my reasons to be "out there" pretty clear whenever I am out there.

Quote:
The discussion about the type of stripe when approaching intersections has not taken into account the various changes in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. I think that it has had all three versions: terminated before the intersection, dashed approaching the intersection, and solid approaching the intersection. The solid is, if I recall correctly, the current version, or has been proposed as the next version. As a result, some stripes are done one way, some another way, and different states have different degrees of compliance with MUTCD, or have their own version.
Per the CA MUTCD, the bike lane is supposed to be terminated 100 feet prior to any intersection, at 200 feet under some circumstances. Using dashed striping for that portion of it is an option that seems to be almost always taken.

Quote:
What has not been mentioned is the distance required for cyclists to make their proper moves in traffic, which is generally much longer than the distance required for a motorist to prepare for a right turn. That consideration has never been part of the bike-lane stripe supposed thought.
You're right, I've never seen that mentioned, and it's an excellent point.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:37 PM   #274
Helmet Head
Banned.
Thread Starter
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec
No, but you have admitted ignoring them.
By "ignoring" honks I think I usually if not always mean (I can't recall every context where I said this right now) not getting upset by it; not letting it bug me. I do try to always acknowledge a honk by looking, smiling, conveying "huh?", nodding, waving, signalling, etc., whatever is appropriate.
Helmet Head is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-07, 03:50 PM   #275
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helmet Head
You must be confusing me with someone else. I've never said I don't hear honks.
Please don't make someone go find where you did.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:22 PM.