It is currently Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:42 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 3:25 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 12911
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Meadowchik wrote:
But then, YMMMV, I value emotional labor.

"YMMMV" = "Your Mileage Mileage May Vary?" :-)

_________________
"[Elder] Pearson says he uses a 'black box' for those issues that bother him. . . He forgot to mention that his black box has gotten so big he had to put an addition onto his house."

--kairos, 08-08-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 4:13 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:00 pm
Posts: 1030
Dr. Shades wrote:
Meadowchik wrote:
But then, YMMMV, I value emotional labor.

"YMMMV" = "Your Mileage Mileage May Vary?" :-)


It was a Freudian slip I think...for another M word cuz anyone who underestimates the significance of Mr Rogers is a Meanie. Hmmpff.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 5:19 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7009
Location: Cassius University
Kishkumen wrote:
I take issue with the Good Doctor in his perception that Mr. Rogers seems Mormony. In all my years as a Mormon I never encountered a role model who was as truly kind as Fred Rogers. Mormon kindness is too often shallow niceness. Ultimately Mormonism has too much of a gospel of success and appearance of perfection.


I think we are actually on the same page, Reverend. As I noted in my opening post: "the show seemed like a highly idealized version of the ways that Mormons are supposed to behave." I agree with you that Rogers's niceness is both sincere and earnest in a way that one doesn't encounter as often as one would like to in Mormondom. And I get, further, why the apologists and others would have an issue with him: let's face it, he is fairly easy to ridicule (and *has* been ridiculed, sometimes to devastating effect--cf., e.g., Eddie Murphy's SNL bit called "Mister Robinson's Neighborhood"). He is so nice, decent, and kind that it can come across as downright strange.

But something else that the Mopologetic disdain for Mr. Rogers reveals is how uncomfortable they are with certain facets of their own faith--and how fundamentally terrified they are of ridicule. Mr. Rogers is so earnest and decent that it is practically surreal. The Mopologists, on the other hand, won't even openly bear their testimonies: in fact, they scornfully repudiated such behavior in the pages of the FROB--they did this in response to criticism that their apologetics were "nothing more" than testimony-bearing.

And there are yet more parallels here that are worth exploring. Consider Dean Robbers's observations about the Neighborhood of Make-Believe, with its emblematic trolley tooting cheerfully through the tunnel. Isn't this sort of like the Mopologists "passing through" some sort of veil, to a world where Nephi was a real person, and horses existed in pre-Columbian Latin America? (It's telling that the fantasy realm in the show is called "Neighborhood of Make-Believe"; it's not "Neighborhood of Fantasy" or "Neighborhood of Whimsy" or "Neighborhood of Imaginary Stuff"--it's "Neighborhood of Make-Believe.")

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2018 11:58 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:00 pm
Posts: 1030
Doctor Scratch wrote:
(It's telling that the fantasy realm in the show is called "Neighborhood of Make-Believe"; it's not "Neighborhood of Fantasy" or "Neighborhood of Whimsy" or "Neighborhood of Imaginary Stuff"--it's "Neighborhood of Make-Believe.")


Good point. That would be far too much candor for Mormon Truthiness Time, when if you preach of love you will also talk of spectacular fictions, as if love is too radical in the secular world.

But it is normal here on earth. People love, and that's a hard pill for a religion trying to sell belonging.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:25 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 18977
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
I thought you all might get a few chuckles from DCP’s response. I showed it to a relative who thought it was bizarrely obsessive, but I found plenty of humor therein:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2018/07/why-im-unworthy-of-mr-rogers-neighborhood.html#disqus_thread

Quote:
I despise Mr. Rogers’s goodness, his niceness, and his kindness. I disrespect him because he was Christlike — for the simple and sufficient reason that, when it comes right down to it, I don’t actually like Jesus, either. Moreover, Fred Rogers was and is a painful reminder to me of my moral failures and an exemplar of decent behavior, which I loathe.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:16 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3328
Quote:
I despise Mr. Rogers’s goodness, his niceness, and his kindness. I disrespect him because he was Christlike — for the simple and sufficient reason that, when it comes right down to it, I don’t actually like Jesus, either. Moreover, Fred Rogers was and is a painful reminder to me of my moral failures and an exemplar of decent behavior, which I loathe.

This is the same reason Peterson hates Gerald Bradford so much.

_________________
"Someone like MG doesn't have the capacity to understand why a position is justified. The only thing worse than having MG against you, would be having MG on your side, defending you, with his mental capabilities on full display."

Gadianton, Dean of Cassius University


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:43 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7009
Location: Cassius University
Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Reverend. I think your relative may be correct. The very fact that Prof. Peterson posted that blog entry is pretty much a total affirmation of the point I was making in my opening post. Mr. Rogers himself would never fire off a long, angry rant like that. And I worry that Dr. Peterson's reading comprehension is starting to suffer:

DCP wrote:
I despise Mr. Rogers’s goodness, his niceness, and his kindness. I disrespect him because he was Christlike — for the simple and sufficient reason that, when it comes right down to it, I don’t actually like Jesus, either.


Was there someone who actually said that? *I* certainly didn't say that DCP doesn't "actually like" Jesus; this is what I said:

Dr. Scratch wrote:
It really is remarkable how coldly DCP dismisses Rogers, and it occurs to me that the Mopologists' lack of understanding in this case runs parallel to another case where they don't understand somebody: i.e., Jesus.


I think that Dr. Peterson probably *does* like Jesus an awful lot--especially the Jesus who took a whip to the money changers at the temple, and also the Jesus who enables resurrection. That said, I stand by my original remark, which is that the Mopologists don't really seem to understand Jesus. Again: DCP's most recent blog entry is a perfect illustration of this. This just isn't how Jesus--or Mr. Rogers--would have reacted.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 8:19 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 18977
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
Far be it from Professor P to respond to what we actually wrote! That would not be Mopologetic of him at all. The Mopologist’s Handbook Rule #1 is to misrepresent the words of your opponents. It is one of the main reasons why they got kicked out of the Maxwell Institute. It was never enough for them to disagree with others; they had to make their opponents out to be the worst people in the world.

And, yes, in responding as he did, he pretty much validated everything we wrote.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:05 pm 
Apostle
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:10 am
Posts: 789
I'd much rather ride a trolley than a tapir into the land of make believe.

Telestial-caliber image linked here

How can the harmless "Where is Thumbkin" and holding up the corresponding fingers be a "Telestial-caliber image"?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fred-rogers-rumors/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:29 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 19250
Location: Koloburbia
There are basically two kinds of Mormon in regards to Mr. Rogers. The first is the kind souls who want to do good and help others when they see a need. The second group is more ideological and harsh in their approach to the gospel and humanity in general.

Harsh Gospelites insist on principles like justice trumping mercy, and say things like "if there was true justice there would be no need for mercy". They are the ones from the old MAD forum who thought it odd for posters to talk about love. There is scant room for love in the confines of the harsh gospel doctrine. Love is too freely given and simply does not fit in well with the scheme of accruing earthly credits for upgrades in heavenly comfort. MAD posters sneered at those wishing to sing Kumbaya and that would naturally spill over into a Mr. Rogers character who exuded goodness and who traded in more formal business attire for sweaters and sneakers. That relaxed attitude flew in their desire to emulate the 1965 dress codes of the IBM Corporation.

Those who place their emphasis on the Love, Mercy and Forgiveness gospel are more likely to appreciate Mr. Rogers and the values he inculcated in children.

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:41 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3328
moksha wrote:
There are basically two kinds of Mormon in regards to Mr. Rogers. The first is the kind souls who want to do good and help others when they see a need. The second group is more ideological and harsh in their approach to the gospel and humanity in general.


Good point. I would think that Internet Mormons would be in the former and Chapel Mormons in the latter.

_________________
"Someone like MG doesn't have the capacity to understand why a position is justified. The only thing worse than having MG against you, would be having MG on your side, defending you, with his mental capabilities on full display."

Gadianton, Dean of Cassius University


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:43 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16716
Location: Northern Utah
Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
Good point. I would think that Internet Mormons would be in the former and Chapel Mormons in the latter.


I'm still gobsmacked that anyone would put out in public that they "can't stand" Mister Rogers. Who does that?

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:52 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3328
Runtu wrote:
Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
Good point. I would think that Internet Mormons would be in the former and Chapel Mormons in the latter.

I'm still gobsmacked that anyone would put out in public that they "can't stand" Mister Rogers. Who does that?

I'm just guessing, but it would probably have to be the same kind of person who would cheer and applaud the onscreen murder of Angela Lansbery or the same kind of person who would personally take pride and much glee in publicly announcing they outed someone to the Church authorities for being gay (Michael Quinn).

ETA I just read Shulems post below about DCP having a "major dislike" of Barney too? I'm astounded at how much hate and anger DCP must have stored.

_________________
"Someone like MG doesn't have the capacity to understand why a position is justified. The only thing worse than having MG against you, would be having MG on your side, defending you, with his mental capabilities on full display."

Gadianton, Dean of Cassius University


Last edited by Everybody Wang Chung on Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:57 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:52 am 
Son of Perdition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 7294
Runtu wrote:
I'm still gobsmacked that anyone would put out in public that they "can't stand" Mister Rogers. Who does that?


Only one other person in the whole world was dumb enough to say something like that. Some dude by the name of Poohnatic on a Disney discussion board:

Poohnatic wrote:
I think we all have shows we can't stand but the kids adore. I have a major dislike for the purple dinosaur, but my kids love him. I can't stand Mr. Rogers, but they like him (I think he's condescending), so I let them watch and I leave the room.


There you have it. Mr. Peterson is not alone. There is another person out there that's just as dumb as he is.

_________________
SECOND TOKEN OF THE MELCHIZEDEK PRIESTHOOD (Telestial Forum thread)

Be sure to check back for changes, updates, and additions


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:03 pm 
Founder & Visionary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 12911
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Runtu wrote:
I'm still gobsmacked that anyone would put out in public that they "can't stand" Mister Rogers. Who does that?

Someone who was referring to "Mister Rogers" the T.V. show, not "Mister Rogers" the human being.

Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
ETA I just read Shulems post below about DCP having a "major dislike" of Barney too? I'm astounded at how much hate and anger DCP must have stored.

Shulem was referring to a poster screen named "Poohnatic," not DCP.

_________________
"[Elder] Pearson says he uses a 'black box' for those issues that bother him. . . He forgot to mention that his black box has gotten so big he had to put an addition onto his house."

--kairos, 08-08-2018


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:07 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7009
Location: Cassius University
One thing we need to remember is that, fundamentally, Mr. Rogers was a teacher. And, as I'm sure many here recall, Mopologists have a fraught relationship with the concept of teaching:

Daniel Peterson wrote:
It sometimes occurs to me that, after all, most students in school aren't very good. They don't read carefully or accurately, and they do badly on tests. Then it occurs to me that they probably don't become any better at reading just because they age into their thirties, forties, and beyond. I don't know your personal history or situation, but that's certainly one possible explanation for the gross misreading of what I wrote that you offer above.


It's never a "beauti-ful day for a student" in the Mopologists' neighborhood.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:16 am 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 18977
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
There is truth to what DCP says, but most of what students are asked to read is nothing like the equivocating, sophistic nonsense he writes. DCP’s rants in which he complains he has been misread often amount to “don’t trust your good sense, trust me!”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:23 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 10768
Location: Multiverse
Doctor Scratch wrote:
And there are yet more parallels here that are worth exploring. Consider Dean Robbers's observations about the Neighborhood of Make-Believe, with its emblematic trolley tooting cheerfully through the tunnel. Isn't this sort of like the Mopologists "passing through" some sort of veil, to a world where Nephi was a real person, and horses existed in pre-Columbian Latin America? (It's telling that the fantasy realm in the show is called "Neighborhood of Make-Believe"; it's not "Neighborhood of Fantasy" or "Neighborhood of Whimsy" or "Neighborhood of Imaginary Stuff"--it's "Neighborhood of Make-Believe.")

I love this. :biggrin:

_________________
You have made this ludicrous assertion about Israelite religion in the New World. Produce one shred of non-faith based evidence to prove it. --Philip Jenkins


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:13 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:15 pm
Posts: 4314
I finally saw the documentary, and there is one point that I don't think has been brought up.

The movie talks about a Mr. Rogers "backlash" years ago among some people in the conservative movement based on the perception that Mr. Rogers' insistence that "everyone is special" is somehow counterproductive to human development.

For example...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5JkzyGXJ2w

I don't know how widespread this sentiment was, but my wife and I agreed (after seeing the movie) that it is based on a misunderstanding of what Mr. Rogers was actually conveying. He wasn't saying "you're special so you don't have to do anything or accomplish anything in your life..." He was saying "Even if you aren't an Olympic Gold Medalist, Oxford Scholar or a billionaire, you have value and worth." This is very similar to what the LDS Church teaches in that everyone is a "child of God" and has value. So whatever "backlash" there was is obviously misguided and probably more of an attempt to gin up some ratings than a sincere objection to what he was actually saying.

But I think there's a lot of projection and overreaching regarding what Peterson actually wrote. As others have pointed out, he just wasn't in the age group (2-5 year olds) for the show. The show nationally aired in 1968, when Peterson would have been 13. He wasn't supposed to like it.

I have the same low opinion of the show "Barney", which was beloved by a generation of kids but aired when I was in my teens (and I would loudly complain when my younger siblings co-opted the TV to watch it). Hopefully that doesn't make me a bad person.

_________________
Cinepro's Got a Blog


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm
Posts: 16716
Location: Northern Utah
cinepro wrote:
I finally saw the documentary, and there is one point that I don't think has been brought up.

The movie talks about a Mr. Rogers "backlash" years ago among some people in the conservative movement based on the perception that Mr. Rogers' insistence that "everyone is special" is somehow counterproductive to human development.

For example...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5JkzyGXJ2w

I don't know how widespread this sentiment was, but my wife and I agreed (after seeing the movie) that it is based on a misunderstanding of what Mr. Rogers was actually conveying. He wasn't saying "you're special so you don't have to do anything or accomplish anything in your life..." He was saying "Even if you aren't an Olympic Gold Medalist, Oxford Scholar or a billionaire, you have value and worth." This is very similar to what the LDS Church teaches in that everyone is a "child of God" and has value. So whatever "backlash" there was is obviously misguided and probably more of an attempt to gin up some ratings than a sincere objection to what he was actually saying.

But I think there's a lot of projection and overreaching regarding what Peterson actually wrote. As others have pointed out, he just wasn't in the age group (2-5 year olds) for the show. The show nationally aired in 1968, when Peterson would have been 13. He wasn't supposed to like it.

I have the same low opinion of the show "Barney", which was beloved by a generation of kids but aired when I was in my teens (and I would loudly complain when my younger siblings co-opted the TV to watch it). Hopefully that doesn't make me a bad person.


Yep. There was a "self-esteem" backlash among some conservatives several years ago (I know a woman who wrote a book about the myth of self-esteem), and I agree it was based on a misunderstanding of the message from people like Fred Rogers. But yes, Dan's offhand statement has been blown out of proportion, but it's still just weird that he would say it publicly. I don't know.

My kids watched Barney when they were little, and I can see how someone not in the target demographic wouldn't like it. Teenaged cinepro is definitely not who they were going after.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Mopologists Don't "Get" Mr. Rogers
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:25 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm
Posts: 18977
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
cinepro wrote:
I don't know how widespread this sentiment was, but my wife and I agreed (after seeing the movie) that it is based on a misunderstanding of what Mr. Rogers was actually conveying. He wasn't saying "you're special so you don't have to do anything or accomplish anything in your life..." He was saying "Even if you aren't an Olympic Gold Medalist, Oxford Scholar or a billionaire, you have value and worth." This is very similar to what the LDS Church teaches in that everyone is a "child of God" and has value. So whatever "backlash" there was is obviously misguided and probably more of an attempt to gin up some ratings than a sincere objection to what he was actually saying.

But I think there's a lot of projection and overreaching regarding what Peterson actually wrote. As others have pointed out, he just wasn't in the age group (2-5 year olds) for the show. The show nationally aired in 1968, when Peterson would have been 13. He wasn't supposed to like it.

I have the same low opinion of the show "Barney", which was beloved by a generation of kids but aired when I was in my teens (and I would loudly complain when my younger siblings co-opted the TV to watch it). Hopefully that doesn't make me a bad person.


I don't know. Do you think that Barney is as culturally significant as Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood (relatively speaking)? Why is your dislike of Barney pertinent? I don't really care for Friends. So what?

Let's review the passage:

DCP wrote:
I was, I have to admit, never a Mr. Rogers fan. I doubt that I ever watched an entire episode. I really couldn’t stand the show. So I was a bit surprised at the news that we were going to see Won’t You Be My Neighbor? tonight. It was interesting, though. And there was one section, in the last quarter of the film, involving a young boy in a wheelchair, that was genuinely moving.


First:

Quote:
I was, I have to admit, never a Mr. Rogers fan.


OK. Disinterest or dislike of Mr. Rogers.

Quote:
I doubt that I ever watched an entire episode.


So, lots of exposure to Mr. Rogers, plenty to conclude that:

Quote:
I really couldn’t stand the show.


So, in the less than an entire episode he watched, he conceived a very deep dislike for Mr. Rogers.

Weird.

Unless you understand him to be signaling to other conservatives who do not like Fred Rogers, his show, its values, and the fact that he successfully defended public television, something conservatives want to get rid of.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], lostindc, Tuna_Surprise and 45 guests


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

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group