User Tag List

View Poll Results: What type are you?

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • Fe

    8 44.44%
  • Fi

    9 50.00%
  • Don't know yet

    1 5.56%
First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 76

  1. #11
    Squirrel! Hermit of the Forest's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 so/sx
    Posts
    3,653

    Default

    Well, you convinced me.
    Chase the adventure. Cherish the joy.


    Cu·ri·ous
    adjective
    1. Eager to know or learn something.
    2. Strange; unusual.



    INTP 9w1 2w1 5w6 so/sx
    Likes Chaotic Symphony liked this post

  2. #12
    ∂ιѕgяα¢є∂ ¢σѕмσηαυт Luminous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    952 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII Fi
    Posts
    5,206

    Default

    In regards to F and harmony/ relationships, the wiki here says

    A Feeling type (F) is one whose primary rational outlook is looking at the world in terms of "people" or humanity, and the elements that makes them “subjects”, which is basically what could be called “anthropic” (or “humane”), and ultimately deals with the “soul”, with its emotions and values. It's not the same thing we normally call "feelings", but, according to Jung, involves "sorting them out". This will usually lead to a focus on goals such as individual or group harmony. (They will often mirror the other person’s inner state and adjust their behavior accordingly).
    They approach life in terms of being human first, and seeing others as humans to interact with, and objects are to be looked at and used from the perspective of how we relate to them. This leads them to “think” in terms of “good” or “bad” (or "like/dislike", which will assume what is “correct/incorrect”).
    And

    Extraverted Feeling (Fe): assessment of “like/dislike” or “good” is stimulated by an environmental standard of the needs of people
    (turn outward to evaluate proper relationship involving/between people)
    —individual’s assessment of good/bad (soul-affect of the situation) are determined by the environment

    Introverted Feeling (Fi): assessment of “like/dislike” or “good” [for "people"] is stimulated by an individual standard
    (turn inward to internal “blueprint” of proper relationship involving people)
    —individual’s assessment of good/bad (soul-affect of the situation) are determined by individual reflection.

    Perhaps the simplest descriptions that can be made:
    ...
    Fe revealed good[ness]
    Fi self-determined good[ness]...

    Sociabilty (associated with Fe products; connecting with people via the environment)
    The conscience (and affinities; associated with Fi products; our own human values used to relate to others).
    I am strongly F. I relate to some of how Fe is described, but my primary concern is my own internal values and integrity, which are inherently personal to me. It just happens that sure of my values include being caring and empathetic toward others, especially special others.

    ✦ᏖᏒᎥᎮ ค ℓιɬɬℓɛ Ꮭıɠɧɬ ʄคŋɬคʂɬıƈ✦ -: ✦ :- ƒ O ᖇ G E ᗪ I ᑎ ƒ I ᖇ E ❋-: ✦ :-★ᴅᴏɴ'ᴛ ꜰᴇᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇᴇʟꜱ★
    * ・゚ ・゚ * ⊱9w1✶S✶5w4✶X✶2w1⊰ * ・゚ ・゚ *
    ✦Շђєяє คяє ๓σяє тнιηﻭѕ ιη нєανєη αη∂ єαятн Շђαη คяє ∂яєαмт σƒ ιη уσυя ρнιℓσѕσρну.✦
    Likes Chaotic Symphony, Zhaylin liked this post

  3. #13
    Time-OverLord Norexan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7 sp
    Socionics
    LIE Te
    Posts
    1,759

    Default

    Fi vs Fe


    Romantic vs Altruistic

    Fi - I love her.
    Fe - But you are selfish.
    Fi - *Try to explain how his feelings toward someone have to do with selfishness*.

    Mature vs Childish
    Fi - See that's the love. A poem for her. I'll do this for her.
    Fe - Love is slapping her on her ass.
    Fi - OMG you are such a child ha-ha

    Grumpy vs Chill
    Fe- You must support people who you love not ban them something if they love to do it!
    Fi - And if the person wants to jump in the well so you will push her! Go KILL YOURSELF is your advice.
    Fe- I didn't say that
    Fi - But you are.

    Fi - understanding how your emotions work and project them to other people - be yourself and fuck off everybody
    Fe - understanding how others emotions inflict on you and the ones you care - be loved by others and successful.
    True Neutral 1 8 3 7 5 Teexcellent>Niexcellent>Figood>Tigood>>>>Siaverage>Fe unused
    "There is no intellectualism in faith. Both atheist and theist choose their belief system based on ego and self-preservation." by 2017
    ===Logical Crusader===

    Dail [or Daer] ú-[o] chyn [or fyn/thyn] [?] Ú-danno i failad a thi; an úben tannatha le failad.
    Likes awbro liked this post

  4. #14
    Somber and irritated cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chaotic Symphony View Post
    I'm constantly trying to decipher my actual true type, and the argument of Fe vs. Fi always comes up.

    I know in the past about 90% of the user base considered me an Fe dominant of sorts, some still do. I find it almost humoring that the new user base seems to predominantly find me Fi-dominant. I had a friend here before during an argument though say my argument was "so Fi he could sneeze" so some users still saw it. XD)
    You know, I'm trying to figure out how this phenomena came about. I think some of it can be traced way back to the early years on this forum, when there were many Fe/Fi discussions and Fe users often felt misunderstood or just with weird intentions planted on them. Or, reading descriptions of Fe as well as what Fi users perceived of Fe-users (in particular NFJ's, who I think are a pretty different breed in some ways from SFJ's), Fe users began bristling whenever it was implied they didn't have values of their own and for whatever reason just sucked up only things around them. So I think that's where some of the transition on the forum began. I am kind of speculating too, but I have also noticed that in recent years ANY statement or behavior of actually having personal beliefs and standing up for them, even if it ruffles feathers, or having more solid 'selfish' boundaries, seems to be automatically lumped into the Fi category / is typed as Fi. I don't personally believe this is the case. I, for one, have become more 'hardened' with age and boundaries have become more evident in me as I have aged --- so I have gone through all of my more recent years on this forum commonly typed as an Fi person. Early on, everyone was 100% down with my being INFJ.

    Also, Fe users are always going to relate on some level to Fi descriptions -- because who on this planet doesn't believe they have their own belief systems and values? We all do. Conversely, Fi users can and will care about accommodating others, whether to a minimal degree or a larger degree.

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    I can only really comment thoroughly on Fe, since I think most of my friends are actually Fe folks. (I can't think of any Fi dom/aux good friend that I have? I for sure have a few TJ friends but they are of a different breed from FP). Also I am back to identifying as FJ -- due to dichotomy alone - though I think it could be said I have a fair amount of Fe (even if I can be counterphobic about it in a group/expectation setting - which tbh doesn't jive against nfj - many can be).

    I would say a fair number of FJ's (I'm not going to say ALL - how would I know) wouldn't relate to things they read FP's cite about them - thus the next step is 'not relating' to what's lumped as Fe at all. (there are NFJ's on this forum who have said as much)

    My FJ friends would find it bizarre in the least to be perceived as not seeking out and greatly desiring deep friendships with people they can truly connect with, or not having strong personal beliefs that might run contrary to 'the norm'/group or that they believe were crafted on their own.

    My feeling like I think others have brought up before is that FJ / 'Fe' is 1)ultimately more about pragmatics in terms of getting sh*t done that needs to get done in the most people-attuned way as possible - taking into account every individuals' idiosyncrasies to try to maximize their talents and preferences --- knowing fair well that it's impossible to appease everyone 100% of the time with 100% of their preferences being met -- and 2)also reading group dynamics / relationships between one or more people, and being highly attuned to those dynamics at work, thus Fe user will be more attuned to knowing Peter and Paul will really clash and shouldn't be ideally placed to work on a task together, thus stick Peter with Jane and Paul can do this other thing because he likes doing that better anyway.

    Regarding not speaking up in a setting where said FJ user is surrounded by people who are totally against whatever they may personally represent -- well speaking for myself, it's weighing pragmatics again -- let's say hypothetically I'm out to dinner with ten people and 8 of them I don't know and I personally think all 8 of these people suck and they're just saying the most outrageous things I don't agree with at all. Is there an ultimate 'point' in my saying I think opposite? What will be gained by my doing so? Am I in such a dire need of proclaiming my own views to them/the world that I must proclaim them even if that's all that is 'accomplished'? Me proclaiming them and then who cares anyway? otoh maybe I think it's wholly justified that I state what I think or correct some misinformation, even if ultimately I view it as pointless, because of x or y reason instead. I mean, I don't know. I just know that there are a crap load of situations where I feel no compulsion to say what I actually think or feel, because I think it'll be a fruitless effort that won't make any impact whatsoever. I think this is part of where FP/Fi 'reads' of FJ can be off -- in terms of actual motivation / intention ----> meaning, I think that what is viewed externally as 'just going along with the group' internally is quite another story with the FJ. Not saying that this isn't understood, but I think it's not often fleshed out very well.

    Additionally, yes, at work I probably interact in different ways with different people; it's about knowing everyone is different and everyone speaks a 'different language', and not feeling HOW I speak or WHAT I speak about is inherently defining WHO I AM - because WHO I AM is outside of that, or rather, that's part of it, but I don't feel it 'defines' me in any critical way -- thus I'm not going to feel a need to speak in the same language with every single person if I know some people won't care or even listen, or other such things. I don't have a solo way of being, iow. In this sense I think FJ's can appear more flimsy and malleable -- and FP's can seem more sure and solid in their identity.

    It has also been spoken before re FJ of different 'tiers' of relations --- thus the vast majority of folks are in fact not good friends of the FJ, nor does the FJ even necessarily act like they are. It's just that the FJ may still be diplomatic (for the sake of work and knowing they aren't going to get along or agree with everyone, but still need/want to treat everyone with respect), or wants to try to find some common ground with people, if they have to work with them anyway in some capacity. In terms of my FJ friends, I'd say for them it's that they don't actually need or even want to be friends with everyone -- but they still might interact or try to build some level of goodwill simply because.... pragmatically and from a human standpoint why not? Again I think it's tied to the accepted notion of knowing everyone is different and knowing even if they'll only be good friends or feel really close to say 1% of the population (or whatever), they still need to interact with the other 99% so those are 'relationships' too, even if just as a coworker -- so why not try to make them the best it's possible to make or to keep things so that work can actually get done. Stuff like that.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints

  5. #15
    Senior Member awbro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    344

    Default

    I have nothing else to contribute to the discussion at the moment other than I'm debating between Fe and Fi for myself, and the more I read about it the more confused I get, even though it seems like a relatively simple concept to understand.
    Likes Zhaylin liked this post

  6. #16
    Somber and irritated cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by awbro View Post
    I have nothing else to contribute to the discussion at the moment other than I'm debating between Fe and Fi for myself, and the more I read about it the more confused I get, even though it seems like a relatively simple concept to understand.
    fwiw I think almost everyone will relate to some elements of both, and I think that's normal/human. Remember these are just theoretical black and white lumpings and it's more about overall whether someone leans more one way than another.

    Also I'm kinda like @Hexcoder where I think cognitive functions are a lot of crap -- in the sense that while they are interesting and perhaps useful concepts, there's ZERO way to 'prove' one is one and not the other. That's why in my post I was emphasizing FJ's and FP's vs talking about functions. Fe/Fi discussion will also probably be less 'meaningful' to T's. There's nothing objective about how one goes about identifying with one or the other. Just something to keep in mind.

    (At least with dichotomy there is objectivity -- now it will be a neverending argument as far as some people thinking dichotomy is just ridiculous and it's all about the functions, and then vice versa - that argument isn't going to end -- but you can't argue against the fact that J is defined as having pretty black and white traits, as is P, as is F and T and all of the others)
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints
    Likes Chaotic Symphony, awbro, Zhaylin liked this post

  7. #17
    Iron Maiden fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    13,148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cascadeco View Post
    You know, I'm trying to figure out how this phenomena came about. I think some of it can be traced way back to the early years on this forum, when there were many Fe/Fi discussions and Fe users often felt misunderstood or just with weird intentions planted on them. Or, reading descriptions of Fe as well as what Fi users perceived of Fe-users (in particular NFJ's, who I think are a pretty different breed in some ways from SFJ's), Fe users began bristling whenever it was implied they didn't have values of their own and for whatever reason just sucked up only things around them. So I think that's where some of the transition on the forum began. I am kind of speculating too, but I have also noticed that in recent years ANY statement or behavior of actually having personal beliefs and standing up for them, even if it ruffles feathers, or having more solid 'selfish' boundaries, seems to be automatically lumped into the Fi category / is typed as Fi. I don't personally believe this is the case. I, for one, have become more 'hardened' with age and boundaries have become more evident in me as I have aged --- so I have gone through all of my more recent years on this forum commonly typed as an Fi person. Early on, everyone was 100% down with my being INFJ.

    Also, Fe users are always going to relate on some level to Fi descriptions -- because who on this planet doesn't believe they have their own belief systems and values? We all do. Conversely, Fi users can and will care about accommodating others, whether to a minimal degree or a larger degree.

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    I can only really comment thoroughly on Fe, since I think most of my friends are actually Fe folks. (I can't think of any Fi dom/aux good friend that I have? I for sure have a few TJ friends but they are of a different breed from FP). Also I am back to identifying as FJ -- due to dichotomy alone - though I think it could be said I have a fair amount of Fe (even if I can be counterphobic about it in a group/expectation setting - which tbh doesn't jive against nfj - many can be).

    I would say a fair number of FJ's (I'm not going to say ALL - how would I know) wouldn't relate to things they read FP's cite about them - thus the next step is 'not relating' to what's lumped as Fe at all. (there are NFJ's on this forum who have said as much)

    My FJ friends would find it bizarre in the least to be perceived as not seeking out and greatly desiring deep friendships with people they can truly connect with, or not having strong personal beliefs that might run contrary to 'the norm'/group or that they believe were crafted on their own.

    My feeling like I think others have brought up before is that FJ / 'Fe' is 1)ultimately more about pragmatics in terms of getting sh*t done that needs to get done in the most people-attuned way as possible - taking into account every individuals' idiosyncrasies to try to maximize their talents and preferences --- knowing fair well that it's impossible to appease everyone 100% of the time with 100% of their preferences being met -- and 2)also reading group dynamics / relationships between one or more people, and being highly attuned to those dynamics at work, thus Fe user will be more attuned to knowing Peter and Paul will really clash and shouldn't be ideally placed to work on a task together, thus stick Peter with Jane and Paul can do this other thing because he likes doing that better anyway.

    Regarding not speaking up in a setting where said FJ user is surrounded by people who are totally against whatever they may personally represent -- well speaking for myself, it's weighing pragmatics again -- let's say hypothetically I'm out to dinner with ten people and 8 of them I don't know and I personally think all 8 of these people suck and they're just saying the most outrageous things I don't agree with at all. Is there an ultimate 'point' in my saying I think opposite? What will be gained by my doing so? Am I in such a dire need of proclaiming my own views to them/the world that I must proclaim them even if that's all that is 'accomplished'? Me proclaiming them and then who cares anyway? otoh maybe I think it's wholly justified that I state what I think or correct some misinformation, even if ultimately I view it as pointless, because of x or y reason instead. I mean, I don't know. I just know that there are a crap load of situations where I feel no compulsion to say what I actually think or feel, because I think it'll be a fruitless effort that won't make any impact whatsoever. I think this is part of where FP/Fi 'reads' of FJ can be off -- in terms of actual motivation / intention ----> meaning, I think that what is viewed externally as 'just going along with the group' internally is quite another story with the FJ. Not saying that this isn't understood, but I think it's not often fleshed out very well.

    Additionally, yes, at work I probably interact in different ways with different people; it's about knowing everyone is different and everyone speaks a 'different language', and not feeling HOW I speak or WHAT I speak about is inherently defining WHO I AM - because WHO I AM is outside of that, or rather, that's part of it, but I don't feel it 'defines' me in any critical way -- thus I'm not going to feel a need to speak in the same language with every single person if I know some people won't care or even listen, or other such things. I don't have a solo way of being, iow. In this sense I think FJ's can appear more flimsy and malleable -- and FP's can seem more sure and solid in their identity.

    It has also been spoken before re FJ of different 'tiers' of relations --- thus the vast majority of folks are in fact not good friends of the FJ, nor does the FJ even necessarily act like they are. It's just that the FJ may still be diplomatic (for the sake of work and knowing they aren't going to get along or agree with everyone, but still need/want to treat everyone with respect), or wants to try to find some common ground with people, if they have to work with them anyway in some capacity. In terms of my FJ friends, I'd say for them it's that they don't actually need or even want to be friends with everyone -- but they still might interact or try to build some level of goodwill simply because.... pragmatically and from a human standpoint why not? Again I think it's tied to the accepted notion of knowing everyone is different and knowing even if they'll only be good friends or feel really close to say 1% of the population (or whatever), they still need to interact with the other 99% so those are 'relationships' too, even if just as a coworker -- so why not try to make them the best it's possible to make or to keep things so that work can actually get done. Stuff like that.
    I very much identify with this. In my case at least, I find that I do look to sources outside myself to confirm that people are receiving the same message that I think I'm broadcasting. When they mirror back something totally different, it can be confusing. I also find that I am more dependent on talking through problems aloud to some sort of audience because it helps me clarify what I put the most weight on, what bubbles up within me to discuss, most salient points etc, which I can't seem to do in the same way on my own. I've noticed many of my Fi friends seem more adept at doing that by themselves and probably have a more nuanced understanding of the shades of their own feeling. I have in the past kind of seen some of my own feelings as transient, not a real part of me, or even inconviences to work around, more than a defining aspect of who I am, as my Fi friends do. As I've gotten older, it was a useful revelation to me to understand that our feelings are there for a practical purpose, to alert us to something that needs our attention and that they should move us to some kind of action. I'm sure that Fi users see feelings in a different way, but understanding that there was some useful outcome in allowing myself to pay attention to how I felt more (it inconveniences others less and is better for my own well being) was the main thing that motivated me to revisit my relationship with them.

    I do think that Fe is sometimes viewed by some Fi users (not all) as being very rulesy, and requiring everyone to conform to a happy set of guidelines unquestioningly. I would argue that Fe tends to be pragmatic and look for the outcome that is workable to the most people and try to span the gaps between the disparity of the individuals. It's action oriented and so I know in my first few years on the forum, I was confused as to why people would want to bring up stuff that would stir things up, but that they had no actual intended change in mind to try to bring about.

    I actually have noticed that depending on who a group is comprised of, I may arrive at varying solutions/decisions because my natural bent is to want to find common ground. That is good in some settings, but isn't always great on say a committee establishing guidelines for a larger group of people or for long into the future, because I can be influenced by who in is a particular gathering of people. I think one of the other downsides of Fe for me, particularly in earlier years is that I tended to want to emphasize the aspects of me that people responded positively to, or appreciated more, which meant that they sometimes were not aware of other parts of me that were equally representative of who I was. That's not to say that I was being dishonest at all. Just that it sometimes resulted in an incomplete picture of what I was actually like. Because I tended to observe before jumping in a lot and refrained from expressing my most controversial views or vehement opposition until I really trusted someone, I think a lot of people who knew me as an acquaintance could either have a blank enough canvas to fill in the blanks for whatever they wanted to see me as, others had more scope to manipulate how I was seen, or I was perceived as blander and sweeter than I actually am.

    I definitely do that thing cascadeco was referring to about weighing the practical benefits vs drawbacks of opposing those around me. It's not a matter of having no values or being afraid of conflict. It's just deciding which ones require expression and where I think that the potential positive longterm outweighs the possible negatives short term. In an organization I have to work for where I know that I will not have enough solidarity to effect change, or my views are too disparate from the management's/coworkers' to work peacefully and authentically together, I am more likely to leave, than try to revolutionize things. Sometimes that's good and sometimes it is not.

    In relating to people, I suspect that Fe users are more likely to start from points of commonality to establish rapport or goodwill and then point out where they diverge, instead of jumping right into disagreement.

    Having said all that though, I tend to be acquainted more with NFJ and NTP versions of Fe, and NFP or TJ versions of Fi. Where Fe or Fi comes in the stacking and what role it plays, in addition to the person's own history, upbringing, stress levels etc, change very much how it manifests itself.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Enneagram
    6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ILI Si
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Well, I don't tend to go much with the 'collective' vs 'individual' interpretation of Fe vs Fi, just because it seems to me more of a personality difference than a 'how you think' difference.

    I like something like the socionics take on this issue -- the idea there is Fe is the ethics of emotion (which is not the same as emotion itself -- it is the reasoning component; if we roughly see emotions as motivations and moods, the ethics of emotion is cognizant of what affects these... it is extraverted roughly in the sense that emotions are that component of our subjective response which basically just flare up -- they're not the parts we most directly cognitively can define of our values... when I think of the fact that sometimes, my response emotionally to something didn't seem appropriate, and there is some way I could influence it to change, obviously that isn't just emotion itself, it's a decision-making process about them.)

    I see the Ti/Fe line as about this idea that no amount of logic influences one to act in and of itself independent of emotional factors.

    Obviously there are different takes, and some of them fit into a more Te/Fi philosophy.
    Likes Zhaylin liked this post

  9. #19
    幽霊||๏ ɪɴᴀᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,756

    Default

    @cascadeco Well said for most, but my question comes in where you say dichotomies are more objective. Howso?

  10. #20
    Somber and irritated cascadeco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hexcoder View Post
    @cascadeco Well said for most, but my question comes in where you say dichotomies are more objective. Howso?
    Objective in the sense that what each dichotomy represents in the mbti test is very black and white. J is defined as x, y, and z aspects, P is a different set of aspects, it is fairly unambiguous by the definitions themselves what each dichotomy IS.

    Like I said, opinions will vary as to whether these attributes are 'accurate' or truly speak for J or P or whatnot, but if referring to how the majority of the world knows about mbti/type, it's by these very straightforward dichotomies and what traits are associated with each.

    You highly prefer having direction/an established endpoint and don't have any issues completing something you start? OK, by definition that's J. etc.
    "...On and on and on and on he strode, far out over the sands, singing wildly to the sea, crying to greet the advent of the life that had cried to him." - James Joyce

    My Photography and Watercolor Fine Art Prints!!! Cascade Colors Fine Art Prints

Similar Threads

  1. Why does everyone hate ESFJs? (Warning.... yet another Fe vs. Fi discussion)
    By Julius_Van_Der_Beak in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-09-2013, 11:27 AM
  2. Fe vs. Fi, Disloyalty, Allegiance, Or the Lack Thereof…
    By Esoteric Wench in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 01-13-2011, 07:55 PM
  3. Fe Vs Fi (from one of your previous posts)
    By liYA in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-13-2010, 10:45 PM
  4. Showdown: Fe vs Fi...
    By Kalach in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-16-2009, 09:45 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO