Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. One of my bedrock beliefs is that capitalists *really* hate capitalism.

One of my bedrock beliefs is that capitalists *really* hate capitalism.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
50 Posts 13 Posters 3 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

    Conservatives are trying to create a world populated by husbands you can't divorce, pregnancies you can't prevent or terminate, and politicians you can't vote out of office. Add to that Trump's assault on the National Labor Relations Board, his reversal of the FTC's ban on noncompetes, and his protection of "TRAP" agreements that force employees to pay thousands of dollars if they quit their jobs, and you get "jobs you can't quit":

    Link Preview Image
    Pluralistic: Trump steals $400b from American workers (09 Sep 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

    favicon

    (pluralistic.net)

    13/

    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
    pluralistic@mamot.fr
    wrote last edited by
    #14

    Conservative strongmen like Trump and Musk exalt the value of self-determination - for themselves, at everyone else's expense. Trump's ability to stiff the contractors that built his hotels and Musk's ability to rain flaming rocket debris down on the people who live near his company town require that everyone else be stripped of protections. They get to determine their own course in life by taking away your ability to determine your own.

    14/

    pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

      Conservative strongmen like Trump and Musk exalt the value of self-determination - for themselves, at everyone else's expense. Trump's ability to stiff the contractors that built his hotels and Musk's ability to rain flaming rocket debris down on the people who live near his company town require that everyone else be stripped of protections. They get to determine their own course in life by taking away your ability to determine your own.

      14/

      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
      pluralistic@mamot.fr
      wrote last edited by
      #15

      Their right to swing their fists ends two inches past your nose:

      Link Preview Image
      Pluralistic: Quinn Slobodian and Ben Tarnoff’s “Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed” (21 Apr 2026) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

      favicon

      (pluralistic.net)

      Cheaters and bullies hate the rule of law, hence Trump's endless repetition of Nixon's: "When the president does it, that means it is not illegal." But not everyone can be president, and the world is full of would-be Trumps in positions of power who would like to be able to commit crimes without fear of legal repercussions. For these people, we have something called "binding arbitration."

      15

      pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
      1
      0
      • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

        But if you own the building and your coffee shop tenant goes under, well, you've still got the building, and hey, now it's on the same hot block as the amazing new cafe that's driving its competitors out of business:

        Link Preview Image
        Pluralistic: Yanis Varoufakis’s “Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism?” (28 Sep 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

        favicon

        (pluralistic.net)

        Douglas Rushkoff calls this "going meta": don't drive a taxi, rent a medallion to a taxi driver. Don't rent a medallion, start a ride-hailing app company. Don't start a ride-hailing company, *invest* in the company.

        8/

        jmcrookston@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jmcrookston@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jmcrookston@mastodon.social
        wrote last edited by
        #16

        @pluralistic

        Don't open a store, sell a franchise, and externalize all your capital costs

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

          Their right to swing their fists ends two inches past your nose:

          Link Preview Image
          Pluralistic: Quinn Slobodian and Ben Tarnoff’s “Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed” (21 Apr 2026) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

          favicon

          (pluralistic.net)

          Cheaters and bullies hate the rule of law, hence Trump's endless repetition of Nixon's: "When the president does it, that means it is not illegal." But not everyone can be president, and the world is full of would-be Trumps in positions of power who would like to be able to commit crimes without fear of legal repercussions. For these people, we have something called "binding arbitration."

          15

          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
          pluralistic@mamot.fr
          wrote last edited by
          #17

          "Binding arbitration" is a widely used contractual term that forces you to surrender your right to sue a company that wrongs you. Instead of suing, binding arbitration forces you to take your case to an "arbitrator"; that is, a lawyer who is paid by the company that cheated you or maimed you or killed your loved one. The arbitrator decides whether their client is guilty, and, if so, how much that client owes you.

          16/

          pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

            "Binding arbitration" is a widely used contractual term that forces you to surrender your right to sue a company that wrongs you. Instead of suing, binding arbitration forces you to take your case to an "arbitrator"; that is, a lawyer who is paid by the company that cheated you or maimed you or killed your loved one. The arbitrator decides whether their client is guilty, and, if so, how much that client owes you.

            16/

            pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
            pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
            pluralistic@mamot.fr
            wrote last edited by
            #18

            The entire process is confidential and it is non-precedential, meaning that if a company rips off millions of people in the same way, each of them has to arbitrate their claims separately, and people who are successful can't share their tactical notes with the people who are next in line to plead for justice.

            17/

            pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

              The entire process is confidential and it is non-precedential, meaning that if a company rips off millions of people in the same way, each of them has to arbitrate their claims separately, and people who are successful can't share their tactical notes with the people who are next in line to plead for justice.

              17/

              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
              pluralistic@mamot.fr
              wrote last edited by
              #19

              That makes binding arbitration another key weapon in the conservative movement's war on choice: not just jobs you can't quit and politicians you can't vote out of office, but also companies you can't sue. Binding arbitration is a creation of the Federalist Society and their champion Antonin Scalia, who authored a series of Supreme Court dissents and (ultimately) decisions that opened the door for binding arbitration everywhere:

              Link Preview Image
              Pluralistic: Shake Shack wants you to shit yourself to death (27 Oct 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

              favicon

              (pluralistic.net)

              18/

              pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                That makes binding arbitration another key weapon in the conservative movement's war on choice: not just jobs you can't quit and politicians you can't vote out of office, but also companies you can't sue. Binding arbitration is a creation of the Federalist Society and their champion Antonin Scalia, who authored a series of Supreme Court dissents and (ultimately) decisions that opened the door for binding arbitration everywhere:

                Link Preview Image
                Pluralistic: Shake Shack wants you to shit yourself to death (27 Oct 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                favicon

                (pluralistic.net)

                18/

                pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                pluralistic@mamot.fr
                wrote last edited by
                #20

                Given the Fedsoc's role in shoving binding arbitration down every worker and shopper's throat, it's decidedly odd that they invited Ashley Keller to be their keynote debater in 2021, where he argued that "concentrated corporate power is a greater threat than government power":

                - YouTube

                Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

                favicon

                (www.youtube.com)

                Keller is a powerhouse lawyer, and an avowed conservative, who has pioneered many tactics for overcoming binding arbitration clauses.

                19/

                pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                  Given the Fedsoc's role in shoving binding arbitration down every worker and shopper's throat, it's decidedly odd that they invited Ashley Keller to be their keynote debater in 2021, where he argued that "concentrated corporate power is a greater threat than government power":

                  - YouTube

                  Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

                  favicon

                  (www.youtube.com)

                  Keller is a powerhouse lawyer, and an avowed conservative, who has pioneered many tactics for overcoming binding arbitration clauses.

                  19/

                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                  pluralistic@mamot.fr
                  wrote last edited by
                  #21

                  He helped create "mass arbitration," bringing thousands of arbitration cases on behalf of Uber drivers who'd had their wages stolen by the company. Since Uber has to pay the arbitrators in each of those cases, they faced a much larger bill than they would face in any possible class action suit:

                  reuters.com

                  favicon

                  (www.reuters.com)

                  20/

                  pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                    He helped create "mass arbitration," bringing thousands of arbitration cases on behalf of Uber drivers who'd had their wages stolen by the company. Since Uber has to pay the arbitrators in each of those cases, they faced a much larger bill than they would face in any possible class action suit:

                    reuters.com

                    favicon

                    (www.reuters.com)

                    20/

                    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                    pluralistic@mamot.fr
                    wrote last edited by
                    #22

                    Mass arbitration cases spread to all kinds of large firms that used petty grifts to steal from thousands or even millions of people, like Intuit, who deceive - and rip off - millions of Americans every year with their fake Turbotax "free file" system:

                    Link Preview Image
                    Pluralistic: 24 Feb 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                    favicon

                    (pluralistic.net)

                    21/

                    pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                      Mass arbitration cases spread to all kinds of large firms that used petty grifts to steal from thousands or even millions of people, like Intuit, who deceive - and rip off - millions of Americans every year with their fake Turbotax "free file" system:

                      Link Preview Image
                      Pluralistic: 24 Feb 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                      favicon

                      (pluralistic.net)

                      21/

                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                      pluralistic@mamot.fr
                      wrote last edited by
                      #23

                      Mass arbitration worked so well that Amazon actually revised its terms of service to *remove* binding arbitration from their terms of service, because they realized that they'd be better off facing class action suits:

                      Link Preview Image
                      Pluralistic: 02 Jun 2021 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                      favicon

                      (pluralistic.net)

                      Of course, the point of binding arbitration was never to create a streamlined system of justice - it was to bring about a world of *no* justice, where you have no right to sue.

                      22/

                      pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                        Mass arbitration worked so well that Amazon actually revised its terms of service to *remove* binding arbitration from their terms of service, because they realized that they'd be better off facing class action suits:

                        Link Preview Image
                        Pluralistic: 02 Jun 2021 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                        favicon

                        (pluralistic.net)

                        Of course, the point of binding arbitration was never to create a streamlined system of justice - it was to bring about a world of *no* justice, where you have no right to sue.

                        22/

                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pluralistic@mamot.fr
                        wrote last edited by
                        #24

                        It's part of the decades-old "tort reform" movement that the business lobby has used to take away your right to sue altogether. Any time you hear about a seemingly crazy lawsuit (like the urban legends about the McDonald's "hot coffee" case), you're being propagandized for a world without legal consequences for companies that defraud you, steal from you, injure you, or kill you:

                        Link Preview Image
                        Pluralistic: 12 Jun 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                        favicon

                        (pluralistic.net)

                        23/

                        pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                          It's part of the decades-old "tort reform" movement that the business lobby has used to take away your right to sue altogether. Any time you hear about a seemingly crazy lawsuit (like the urban legends about the McDonald's "hot coffee" case), you're being propagandized for a world without legal consequences for companies that defraud you, steal from you, injure you, or kill you:

                          Link Preview Image
                          Pluralistic: 12 Jun 2022 – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                          favicon

                          (pluralistic.net)

                          23/

                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                          pluralistic@mamot.fr
                          wrote last edited by
                          #25

                          That's why companies (like Bluesky) are now trying terms of service that also ban you from mass arbitration, while retaining the right to consolidate claims into a mass arbitration case if that's advantageous to *them*:

                          Link Preview Image
                          Pluralistic: Bluesky creates the world’s weirdest, hardest-to-understand binding arbitration clause (15 Aug 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                          favicon

                          (pluralistic.net)

                          24/

                          pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                            That's why companies (like Bluesky) are now trying terms of service that also ban you from mass arbitration, while retaining the right to consolidate claims into a mass arbitration case if that's advantageous to *them*:

                            Link Preview Image
                            Pluralistic: Bluesky creates the world’s weirdest, hardest-to-understand binding arbitration clause (15 Aug 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                            favicon

                            (pluralistic.net)

                            24/

                            pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                            pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                            pluralistic@mamot.fr
                            wrote last edited by
                            #26

                            But Keller keeps finding creative ways around binding arbitration. He's currently bringing thousands of arbitration claims against Google, on behalf of advertisers whom Google stole from (Google is a thrice-convicted monopolist, and they lost a case last year over their monopolization of ad-tech, where they were found to have defrauded advertisers).

                            25/

                            pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                              But Keller keeps finding creative ways around binding arbitration. He's currently bringing thousands of arbitration claims against Google, on behalf of advertisers whom Google stole from (Google is a thrice-convicted monopolist, and they lost a case last year over their monopolization of ad-tech, where they were found to have defrauded advertisers).

                              25/

                              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                              pluralistic@mamot.fr
                              wrote last edited by
                              #27

                              He also just argued before the Supreme Court in a case against Monsanto over the company's attempt to escape liability for causing cancer in farmworkers with their Roundup pesticide:

                              Link Preview Image
                              Supreme Court heard case on how to label risks of popular weed killer

                              How the Supreme Court rules could have implications for tens of thousands of lawsuits against Roundup maker Monsanto, which is now owned by Bayer.

                              favicon

                              NPR (www.npr.org)

                              Keller appears in the latest episode of the Organized Money podcast, for a fascinating interview about his work and outlook, and how he reconciles his work fighting corporate power with his identity as a movement conservative:

                              Link Preview Image
                              The Conservative Who Torments Big Business

                              We are faced with corporate power so vast it spawned a conservative antitrust movement.

                              favicon

                              (www.organizedmoney.fm)

                              26/

                              pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                He also just argued before the Supreme Court in a case against Monsanto over the company's attempt to escape liability for causing cancer in farmworkers with their Roundup pesticide:

                                Link Preview Image
                                Supreme Court heard case on how to label risks of popular weed killer

                                How the Supreme Court rules could have implications for tens of thousands of lawsuits against Roundup maker Monsanto, which is now owned by Bayer.

                                favicon

                                NPR (www.npr.org)

                                Keller appears in the latest episode of the Organized Money podcast, for a fascinating interview about his work and outlook, and how he reconciles his work fighting corporate power with his identity as a movement conservative:

                                Link Preview Image
                                The Conservative Who Torments Big Business

                                We are faced with corporate power so vast it spawned a conservative antitrust movement.

                                favicon

                                (www.organizedmoney.fm)

                                26/

                                pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                wrote last edited by
                                #28

                                Keller's first big, important point is that (basically), capitalists hate capitalism (see above). He cites Milton Friedman, who "always said that the tort system is the best way to ensure that companies behave and follow the rules." For Keller (and Friedman) the alternative to private litigation against bad businesses is "government regulation and the alphabet soup of Washington, DC agencies [that] try and police these companies."

                                27/

                                pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                  Keller's first big, important point is that (basically), capitalists hate capitalism (see above). He cites Milton Friedman, who "always said that the tort system is the best way to ensure that companies behave and follow the rules." For Keller (and Friedman) the alternative to private litigation against bad businesses is "government regulation and the alphabet soup of Washington, DC agencies [that] try and police these companies."

                                  27/

                                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                  pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #29

                                  But, of course, the businesses that want binding arbitration and tort reform (so they can't be sued) *also* want to "dismantle the administrative state" (so they can't be regulated). They're the impunity movement, the "when the president does it, that means it is not illegal" movement, the "heads I win, tails you lose" movement. They're the caveat emptor movement, the "that makes me smart" movement:

                                  Link Preview Image
                                  Pluralistic: “That Makes Me Smart” (04 Dec 2024) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                                  favicon

                                  (pluralistic.net)

                                  28/

                                  pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                    But, of course, the businesses that want binding arbitration and tort reform (so they can't be sued) *also* want to "dismantle the administrative state" (so they can't be regulated). They're the impunity movement, the "when the president does it, that means it is not illegal" movement, the "heads I win, tails you lose" movement. They're the caveat emptor movement, the "that makes me smart" movement:

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    Pluralistic: “That Makes Me Smart” (04 Dec 2024) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

                                    favicon

                                    (pluralistic.net)

                                    28/

                                    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #30

                                    They don't want efficient markets, with the ever-present threat of a better competitor putting them out of business. They want feudalism. They want to go meta. They want to have the kind of self-determination you can only achieve by taking away everyone else's self-determination.

                                    I was very struck by Keller's claim to be engaged in an exercise that Milton Friedman identified as the best one for making markets work.

                                    29/

                                    pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                      They don't want efficient markets, with the ever-present threat of a better competitor putting them out of business. They want feudalism. They want to go meta. They want to have the kind of self-determination you can only achieve by taking away everyone else's self-determination.

                                      I was very struck by Keller's claim to be engaged in an exercise that Milton Friedman identified as the best one for making markets work.

                                      29/

                                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                      pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #31

                                      One of Keller's most forceful points is that class action suits are especially important for reining in petty, recurrent grifts, the junk fees that are the hallmark of enshittification.

                                      He quotes his old boss, the archconservative judge Richard Posner, who said "Only a lunatic or a fanatic sues for $20." But if you multiply a $20 junk fee by ten million purchases, a company can use that fact to make *hundreds of millions* of dollars.

                                      30/

                                      pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                        One of Keller's most forceful points is that class action suits are especially important for reining in petty, recurrent grifts, the junk fees that are the hallmark of enshittification.

                                        He quotes his old boss, the archconservative judge Richard Posner, who said "Only a lunatic or a fanatic sues for $20." But if you multiply a $20 junk fee by ten million purchases, a company can use that fact to make *hundreds of millions* of dollars.

                                        30/

                                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #32

                                        That's real money, which is why every company has figured out a way to whack you for $20,.

                                        There's two ways to end this: one is litigation, the other is regulation, and the capitalism-hating-capitalists who run the world want to kill both. That's why the business lobby smears lawyers like Keller as being "vultures." But as Matt Stoller says, "vultures look aggressive and whatnot, but when you actually get rid of vultures out of an ecosystem, all sorts of things go haywire."

                                        32/

                                        pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                          That's real money, which is why every company has figured out a way to whack you for $20,.

                                          There's two ways to end this: one is litigation, the other is regulation, and the capitalism-hating-capitalists who run the world want to kill both. That's why the business lobby smears lawyers like Keller as being "vultures." But as Matt Stoller says, "vultures look aggressive and whatnot, but when you actually get rid of vultures out of an ecosystem, all sorts of things go haywire."

                                          32/

                                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                          pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #33

                                          I love this. Vultures live off the disgusting, rotting crap that piles up around us, breeding disease and emitting an unbearable stench. If plaintiff-side, no-win/no-fee lawyers are vultures, then junk fees, wage theft, and the million frauds they fight are the disgusting, rotting crap that vultures feed off of - and the harder we make it for our noble vulture lawyers, the more disgusting, rotting crap we have to live with, hence the unbearable stench that is all around us.

                                          32/

                                          pluralistic@mamot.frP rgulick@social.coopR 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups