Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47
  1. #16
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    That's exactly right. Stuff like Irredeemable and Supreme Power aren't Superman stories; they're INFORMED by Superman, they're a response to Superman, they're even dependent on Superman for much of their power and resonance, but they aren't Superman.

    And by the way, I have to wonder how many people praising Alan Moore's Supreme have actually read it, because I get the sense that it is becoming one of those runs that everyone assumes is brilliant. It isn't, and is often let down by the artwork. It's extremely clever and imaginative, absolutely, but it's undoubtedly a piece of pastiche, and it reads as such. Nowhere near as good, I thought, as his earlier work with Superman, or as MOrrison's seminal run on "All Star Superman". It's maybe -- MAYBE -- as good as his Action Comics run, and even that is a stretch I think (it never reached the dizzying heights of issues 9 or 13).
    It could also be argued that, Superman being the model of the superhero, every time someone wants to make a point about superheros, they just create a pastiche of Superman, since they know everyone is aware enough of the Superman dynamics to see the subversion or the departure.

    As for Supreme, well, yes it's pretty much a big pastiche. Which, amusingly enough and if Moore's words on his goal with that comic was trying to be is to be believed, makes it in itself one of his biggest failure. Basically, he said he wanted to "take a 90's superhero, and give him the depth and the symbolic power of a hero from the 30's-50's". Tough luck, the 90's hero he has chosen was Superman with an attitude, and what he did was basically remove the attitude and giving him Superman's old adventures, making him an effective pastiche with nothing that could link him back to his "90's hero" self. A very well done pastiche, with some nice explorations of things like continuities, reboots.....but one nonetheless.
    I think Tom Strong was much better.
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  2. #17
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    As for best Superman stories, continuity or in continuity? In no particular order save 1:

    All Star Superman
    Grant Morrison's Action Comics
    Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?
    For the Man Who Has Everything
    Hitman 34
    Superman: Secret Identity
    Action 775: What's So Funny...
    For Tomorrow
    Final Crisis/Superman Beyond
    Miracle Monday
    Silver Age Superman (finally got my hands on this little ditty, and it was great)
    And i would pretty much agree with this list, except for the Hitman issue (didn't read it....sounded interesting if that the one I think it is), Final Crisis (didn't read it....much to my dismay), and What's so Funny (which I really didn't like). Would probably add "Must there be a Superman" somewhere (probably closer to the bottom), and the early Golden Age stories.
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Auguste Dupin View Post
    It could also be argued that, Superman being the model of the superhero, every time someone wants to make a point about superheros, they just create a pastiche of Superman, since they know everyone is aware enough of the Superman dynamics to see the subversion or the departure.

    As for Supreme, well, yes it's pretty much a big pastiche. Which, amusingly enough and if Moore's words on his goal with that comic was trying to be is to be believed, makes it in itself one of his biggest failure. Basically, he said he wanted to "take a 90's superhero, and give him the depth and the symbolic power of a hero from the 30's-50's". Tough luck, the 90's hero he has chosen was Superman with an attitude, and what he did was basically remove the attitude and giving him Superman's old adventures, making him an effective pastiche with nothing that could link him back to his "90's hero" self. A very well done pastiche, with some nice explorations of things like continuities, reboots.....but one nonetheless.
    I think Tom Strong was much better.
    It doesn't help that his Supreme run was dominated by some really awful 90s artwork for much of the 'present day' sequences.
    Check out my New Blog! Just a random assortment of ideas, thoughts, and reviews!

    http://heshouldreallyknowbetter.blogspot.com/

  4. #19
    Senior Member manduck37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    As for best Superman stories, continuity or in continuity? In no particular order save 1:

    All Star Superman
    Grant Morrison's Action Comics
    Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?
    For the Man Who Has Everything
    Hitman 34
    Superman: Secret Identity
    Action 775: What's So Funny...
    For Tomorrow
    Final Crisis/Superman Beyond
    Miracle Monday
    Silver Age Superman (finally got my hands on this little ditty, and it was great)
    Well, you beat me to it. I was about to post these stories as well. All-Star is my favorite.

    I've read Moore's Supreme, though it's been a while. I agree with you. Though the reason I love it is because it's that pastiche. Once Moore was no longer writing Superman, he was free to give Supes a fun send up with Supreme. It certainly doesn't have the complexity of Morrison or many of the other great writers of Superman. It's a fun send up. I appreciate it more as someone being familiar with Superman and kind of "in on the joke", so to speak. It's a fun read but it won't redefine the character of Superman for you or break new ground.

  5. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Auguste Dupin View Post
    And i would pretty much agree with this list, except for the Hitman issue (didn't read it....sounded interesting if that the one I think it is), Final Crisis (didn't read it....much to my dismay), and What's so Funny (which I really didn't like). Would probably add "Must there be a Superman" somewhere (probably closer to the bottom), and the early Golden Age stories.
    Popular opinion seems to have turned against "What's So Funny", but I think a lot of that stems from love of the Authority or this expectation of a nuanced, complex take on death.

    Instead, it was a perfect demonstration of the ideal that Superman inspires, the moral standards to which he holds the world. Joe Kelly is a master.
    Check out my New Blog! Just a random assortment of ideas, thoughts, and reviews!

    http://heshouldreallyknowbetter.blogspot.com/

  6. #21
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    It doesn't help that his Supreme run was dominated by some really awful 90s artwork for much of the 'present day' sequences.
    Well, I've always been more of a "writer" kind of guy so I can deal with bad art.
    It was still pretty horrible, completely opposed to my artistic sensibilities. The joys of the 90's Image style. The scenes in the past were kinda nice though.
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  7. #22
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    Popular opinion seems to have turned against "What's So Funny", but I think a lot of that stems from love of the Authority or this expectation of a nuanced, complex take on death.

    Instead, it was a perfect demonstration of the ideal that Superman inspires, the moral standards to which he holds the world. Joe Kelly is a master.
    I really felt that it was presenting itself as some "old school vs new school" kind of story, only to present one side as a bunch of serial killers who kill folks for a laugh. Worse still, Superman, to me, came off as a strawman who either didn't bother or was completely unable to explain why he's doing things the way he does (which is a bit problematic when you are trying to convince someone who doesn't share your opinion). But, hey, the Elite was a bunch of crazy brits, so that makes Superman right no matter what, and he even humiliate them in the end.
    ....I dunno, the whole thing felt a bit like Kelly heard people saying the Authority would kick Superman's ass, and he was like "no, he wouldn't! And I'm going to show you why!", than an exploration of Superman ideals.
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  8. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Auguste Dupin View Post
    I really felt that it was presenting itself as some "old school vs new school" kind of story, only to present one side as a bunch of serial killers who kill folks for a laugh.
    It was that to some extent, but it was more about that old school sentiment which Superman represents. This was not "The Wire", this was very much an example of one exaggerating certain elements to more strongly make your point. But the point WASN'T the Elite, the point was Superman. And I thought it did a great job of elucidating his values, and demonstrating why they're as relevant as ever, and humane.

    That said, I'm not convinced that the Elite were 'serial killers'. They were heartless and ruthless, they believed in acceptable losses, but they weren't much worse than the Authority, who would repeatedly brag about sinking a continent or killing God. They felt very much of a piece with Millar's Authority, buggering villains with jack hammers and the like.


    Worse still, Superman, to me, came off as a strawman who either didn't bother or was completely unable to explain why he's doing things the way he does (which is a bit problematic when you are trying to convince someone who doesn't share your opinion). But, hey, the Elite was a bunch of crazy brits, so that makes Superman right no matter what, and he even humiliate them in the end.
    He SHOWED them why what he did was right, because they refused to see it. That the way they did things was dehumanizing, demoralizing, that they were role models and that wanton murder and acceptable losses was not the model for a society to follow.

    ....I dunno, the whole thing felt a bit like Kelly heard people saying the Authority would kick Superman's ass, and he was like "no, he wouldn't! And I'm going to show you why!", than an exploration of Superman ideals.
    I think an 'exploration' probably goes too far, it was more of a reinforcement of Superman's ideals. And certainly there was a bit of the self conscious "Superman is ridiculous!" "No he isn't!" to it, but it's a feeling an idea that is so widespread that it's worth addressing, I think. Virtually every non comics fan I've talked to feels that way about Superman; that his ideals are dated.
    Check out my New Blog! Just a random assortment of ideas, thoughts, and reviews!

    http://heshouldreallyknowbetter.blogspot.com/

  9. #24
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    221B Baker Street
    Posts
    18,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Auguste Dupin View Post
    I really felt that it was presenting itself as some "old school vs new school" kind of story, only to present one side as a bunch of serial killers who kill folks for a laugh. Worse still, Superman, to me, came off as a strawman who either didn't bother or was completely unable to explain why he's doing things the way he does (which is a bit problematic when you are trying to convince someone who doesn't share your opinion). But, hey, the Elite was a bunch of crazy brits, so that makes Superman right no matter what, and he even humiliate them in the end.
    ....I dunno, the whole thing felt a bit like Kelly heard people saying the Authority would kick Superman's ass, and he was like "no, he wouldn't! And I'm going to show you why!", than an exploration of Superman ideals.
    Yeah I kind of gave Kelly the benefit of the doubt and was ambivalent about the whole story. And then I saw the movie (which was supposed to flesh out the comic more) which solidified my distaste. The whole lethal force debate basically gets resolved with "Well the Elite is crazy!"

    It's more of a knee jerk reaction than a true refutation. I think Morrison has actually done a better job with that kind of thing in Ultramarine Corps - showing that the Authority's methods are kind of reckless and irresponsible. Not a big fan of that story either, but...

  10. #25
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    It was that to some extent, but it was more about that old school sentiment which Superman represents. This was not "The Wire", this was very much an example of one exaggerating certain elements to more strongly make your point. But the point WASN'T the Elite, the point was Superman. And I thought it did a great job of elucidating his values, and demonstrating why they're as relevant as ever, and humane.

    That said, I'm not convinced that the Elite were 'serial killers'. They were heartless and ruthless, they believed in acceptable losses, but they weren't much worse than the Authority, who would repeatedly brag about sinking a continent or killing God. They felt very much of a piece with Millar's Authority, buggering villains with jack hammers and the like.




    He SHOWED them why what he did was right, because they refused to see it. That the way they did things was dehumanizing, demoralizing, that they were role models and that wanton murder and acceptable losses was not the model for a society to follow.



    I think an 'exploration' probably goes too far, it was more of a reinforcement of Superman's ideals. And certainly there was a bit of the self conscious "Superman is ridiculous!" "No he isn't!" to it, but it's a feeling an idea that is so widespread that it's worth addressing, I think. Virtually every non comics fan I've talked to feels that way about Superman; that his ideals are dated.
    -Well, the point is Superman and the Elite. It's Superman compared to the Elite, to the Authority. I thought it was a bit cheap to give a strawman portrayal of the Elite just so you can have a nice speech in the end about how Superman's values are the best ever.
    And, from the stories I've read about the Authority (and I'm not like a fan who think the way they did things were right), there was still that shade of white the Elite didn't have. The Elite didn't even bother with the civilians.

    -I remember him showing them how to do it "the right way", but the whole point of the Elite isn't that they couldn't do it, it's that they don't want to do it "the right way", because to them it just means letting the villain get away to kill people another day. Which made, to me , Superman looked at best like he was completely clueless about what the Elite was all about.

    -Maybe, but it didn't feel like showing why Superman is still relevant to non believers, but like a fanboy reaction, like preaching people that are already converted on why Superman is awesome and always right. Which is one of the tendancies that bugged me in the few Superman comics from the 90's I read. Morally speaking, there's no arguing with Superman. The guy has the superpower on always being right.
    My experience with non comics fans tend to make me believe people's problem with Superman has more to do with his powerlevel than his ideals, though. That and thing like the glasses, the fact the only supervillain they know is Lex Luthor (who never seemed to them like a worthy opponent).
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  11. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Auguste Dupin View Post
    -Well, the point is Superman and the Elite.
    The point is Superman. "Action Comics" was the title, which is Superman's story.

    There wasn't meant to be a complex exploration of building of the Elite. It was a one off issue with a specific purpose.


    It's Superman compared to the Elite, to the Authority. I thought it was a bit cheap to give a strawman portrayal of the Elite just so you can have a nice speech in the end about how Superman's values are the best ever.
    You're bringing in your love of the Authority, but this isn't the authority. "The Elite" were entirely new creations, and owed no respect in that regard. They were used to make a very specific point about Superman, which is what the best villains generally do.

    And, from the stories I've read about the Authority (and I'm not like a fan who think the way they did things were right), there was still that shade of white the Elite didn't have. The Elite didn't even bother with the civilians.
    What do you mean 'didn't bother'? Their whole purpose was to protect civilians, they were just more severe about it, and more accepting of losses, than the average DC superhero. All the collatorerol damage and all that, that is absolutely in the purview of Millar's Authority, and wasn't TOO far off from Ellis'.

    The point is that characters like the Authority, and the Punisher, and Rorshach, they appeal to this very sick, adolescent, stunted part of our natures and cultures; it doesn't make you more adult to give into that.

    The Elite had as much of the Punisher or Rorshach in them as they did the Authority. They were a stand in for just that.

    -I remember him showing them how to do it "the right way", but the whole point of the Elite isn't that they couldn't do it, it's that they don't want to do it "the right way", because to them it just means letting the villain get away to kill people another day. Which made, to me , Superman looked at best like he was completely clueless about what the Elite was all about.
    Howso? He acknowledged that it happened, but that it wasn't worth crossing that line for, that it was unenlightened and simplistic in a way that his worldview was not. And he ultimately SHOWED them what that kind of bloody work did to people, psychologically, which is exactly what they didn't get; Manny Black made a big deal about understanding what it meant to be nothings, but he demonstrated that he never understood what it was to be the one stepped on, or that he had forgotten. Superman showed him, and it actually DID work out for at least Coldcast, who reformed.

    -Maybe, but it didn't feel like showing why Superman is still relevant to non believers, but like a fanboy reaction, like preaching people that are already converted on why Superman is awesome and always right.
    All I have is anecdotal evidence, but I sh owed it to a couple of friends of mine who are into the badass 90s killing hero and have called Superman irrelevant and dated, and it worked on them. I don't know if you remember it, but Action 775 was kind of a phenom when it came out, and a lot of otherwise uninterested folks got on board, causing a multi-print sell out, etc.


    Which is one of the tendancies that bugged me in the few Superman comics from the 90's I read. Morally speaking, there's no arguing with Superman. The guy has the superpower on always being right.
    That's not really Superman from the 90s. That's Superman. He's largely at the end of his journey, which is why stories that concern his end tend to be the ones that are remembered, and why stories about his beginning are the most often tried (is there any hero with a greater number of origin retellings?). The angst and lack of confidence that characterizes most modern superhero stories are not any part of him anymore.
    Check out my New Blog! Just a random assortment of ideas, thoughts, and reviews!

    http://heshouldreallyknowbetter.blogspot.com/

  12. #27
    Inf‚me et fier de l'Ítre Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Desaad View Post
    The point is Superman. "Action Comics" was the title, which is Superman's story.

    There wasn't meant to be a complex exploration of building of the Elite. It was a one off issue with a specific purpose.




    You're bringing in your love of the Authority, but this isn't the authority. "The Elite" were entirely new creations, and owed no respect in that regard. They were used to make a very specific point about Superman, which is what the best villains generally do.



    What do you mean 'didn't bother'? Their whole purpose was to protect civilians, they were just more severe about it, and more accepting of losses, than the average DC superhero. All the collatorerol damage and all that, that is absolutely in the purview of Millar's Authority, and wasn't TOO far off from Ellis'.

    The point is that characters like the Authority, and the Punisher, and Rorshach, they appeal to this very sick, adolescent, stunted part of our natures and cultures; it doesn't make you more adult to give into that.

    The Elite had as much of the Punisher or Rorshach in them as they did the Authority. They were a stand in for just that.



    Howso? He acknowledged that it happened, but that it wasn't worth crossing that line for, that it was unenlightened and simplistic in a way that his worldview was not. And he ultimately SHOWED them what that kind of bloody work did to people, psychologically, which is exactly what they didn't get; Manny Black made a big deal about understanding what it meant to be nothings, but he demonstrated that he never understood what it was to be the one stepped on, or that he had forgotten. Superman showed him, and it actually DID work out for at least Coldcast, who reformed.



    All I have is anecdotal evidence, but I sh owed it to a couple of friends of mine who are into the badass 90s killing hero and have called Superman irrelevant and dated, and it worked on them. I don't know if you remember it, but Action 775 was kind of a phenom when it came out, and a lot of otherwise uninterested folks got on board, causing a multi-print sell out, etc.




    That's not really Superman from the 90s. That's Superman. He's largely at the end of his journey, which is why stories that concern his end tend to be the ones that are remembered, and why stories about his beginning are the most often tried (is there any hero with a greater number of origin retellings?). The angst and lack of confidence that characterizes most modern superhero stories are not any part of him anymore.
    -Sure but still. But there's clearly a point Kelly is making about 90's antiheroes with the Elite, and I don't think it's a fair one.

    - Ho, don't get me wrong. I have no love for the Authority (no hate either but still). But the Elite was obviously a stand in for them and others 90's antiheroes (Manchester Black kinda look like Spider Jerusalem, physically speaking), and it's pretty clear Kelly just plain hate them. And i think that's a bit of a shame, because a confrontation between Superman and Authority like characters was a good idea. But here, I just felt it was too one sided to deliver its promess.

    - But that's kinda the trick. I don't think they feel like they were accepting of the losses, but more like they just plain don't care, that they don't even notice they're killing civilians too. If we take the Punisher as an example, even he would feel bad about murdering innocents (at least, in the comics I read). Not the Elite. They don't even rationalize, like "you need to break a few eggs" or something, they're like "meh. Don't care. Have you noticed how Brit I am?"
    (yeah, because we say the Elite, we should say Black. I'm sure some of them don't even speak.)

    -Yeah, but that's in the very end, when he's done talking and just kick their ass the most scary way he can think off (and I still have no idea what he did to some of them). Take the passage with the water allergic aliens. Basically, he gives them a course about how to deal with the situation without killing. Great, but it's obvious at this point the debate isn't about being able to (which is what they say). Before the entire discussion is more like : "you can't kill. -Why?- Because you can't. I'm sorry I'm British. Why? -BECAUSE YOU CAN'T I'M SUPERMAN!!". And when he does get it, he just shows how crazy scary he can be, and humiliate them (which kinda felt like a cop out. They spend the entire issue trying to make us think they're tougher than him and then he's like "okay, done with you now", and efforcely beat them up). Except people were actually rooting for the Elite in the story. When Superman does it, it gets them scared...... Apparently, it's because they're just used to Superman being a nice guy ("You don't do this. You're Superman"). But then that doesn't apply to them.

    -Funny, it really had the opposite effect on me. At first, I was with Superman. By the end of the story, I was kind of rooting for the Elite myself.
    As for the contextual thing, well....French guy of 23 years old, at the time it came out, I didn't even notice (did it even got published in France? I have no idea, I read this later on a "Superman best stories" anthologies. I don't think it's that well known in France, but french never liked Superman even before he became "outdated"). No, i will take your world for it. But sometimes, thing just don't age well. I'm sure it was perfectly sensical back then. But, when I read it years later, it gave me the impression of reading a dated fanfiction where the hero has crossed the line between "perfect hero" (which Superman has always been) and "complete Mary Sue".

    -To an extend yes. But we had the 70's and "Must There be a Superman" or "Last Son of Krypton", where the idea of Superman having negative repercussions was examined, if only briefly. Superman in the 50's, for all his "perfect hero" thing, also had sort of a arrogant edge and he tendency to mess with people. In the early 40's, well.....he was kind of a smartass and had this all "anti establishment" thing more or less going on. But in the 90's....I don't know, he just don't feel like a character to me, not even a "classic old fashionned" one but a flying blandman that was so "uninteresting" that the comic was always focusing on the supporting cast. It's not even about angst, or lack of confidence, but y'know, just in having character traits.
    "I'm going to paraphrase Nietzsche, when you judge a work, the work judges you."

  13. #28
    Paladin Kurosawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    344 Clinton St, Apt 3E
    Posts
    3,511

    Default

    Most of the best in-continuity Superman stories were in the Bronze Age, Maggin's stuff in particular.
    Doomed Planet. Desperate Scientists. Last Hope. Kindly Couple.

  14. #29
    pygophile and podophile Dr. Cheesesteak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    4,106

    Default

    It's cool, OP, i'll actually read the post and answer your question, like only 3 other ppl did.

    Yes, it is very possible to have great Superman stories w/o Superman in it. If you want the imitation stories, Irredeemable and Supreme are most definitely where it's at, as others have said. I too am a big fan of Irredeemable. I think the 1st half of the series was phenomenal. World-building, the various analyses (psycho, physio, socio, etc) of Plutonian, characterizations, and some of the best cliffhangers I've ever read. If you haven't read the whole series yet, there's some "down time" in the later-middle section (I won't spoil) that drags on for a bit too long, imo, but picks up again towards the ending. But the series as a whole was one of the better epic comic stories I've ever read. I know comic fans don't like it b/c they feel Plutonian is "too" psychotic or unreasonable, for some reason (I guess they don't realize that's kind of the point of the story). And it probably doesn't get legendary status b/c it isn't a life-defining, profound work of art written by a British guy. It's just a "what if" story about a godlike man having a mental break down. And a helluva good one.
    Comics were happier before the Internet turned writing superhero stories into fruitless attempts to impress/entertain a small group of ppl who appear to hate comics and their creators.
    Grant Morrison

  15. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Clark View Post
    Could be that Superman is at his best when he doesn't have to have a continuing story. Look at the original Red/Blue imaginary tale- crime eradicated, Krypton restored, married to both Lois and Lana- what would he have done NEXT issue? .
    Yes, alll they had to do was brainwash all the population of earth. (lol). Well, those were other times, or at least the stories were a lot less complex, they were just fun.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Clark View Post
    Or Red Son- ends with Superman vanishing same as "Whatever Happened...". All-Star ends with a dead Superman. Showing Superman being Superman might be at odds with a status quo book where you need all the toys put back where you found them by story's end.
    Alll these stories are Superman against the ultimate enemy, death itself;they are about how don't matters how much powerful you think you are, he is still human (in the psychological sense) and must deal with his own limitations.
    But for me, one of the best is AC 775, with a Elite more close to the Millar's Authority version than the Ellis' version. It's also a product of their time,but I must confess I love a lot the art of this chapter. Bermejo and Mankhe really made magic in this issue. Hey, you must consider also the art in the selection of the best story.
    Part Kryptonian, Part Asgardian, all Genius.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •