James S Saint

This is the place to shave off that long white beard and stop being philosophical; a forum for members to just talk like normal human beings.

Re: James S Saint

Postby barbarianhorde » Wed Aug 28, 2019 9:13 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
barbarianhorde wrote:James completely opposed socialism because he opposes anything besides the Constitution of the US, which he intended to amend with this laborious procedure of perfectly justified adaptation to new circumstances which is partly outlined above. He didn't intend to begin from scratch.

Are you referring to his proposal to make US laws obligated to their statutory goals? I' not finding anything else concerning James being a fanatic about the USC.

Lol I spent years discussing it with him in dozens of threads. If thats all unsearchable, forget it, its pointless.

James S Saint » Mon May 10, 2010 4:43 pm wrote:The US Constitution needs merely ONE small change from its original form in order to repair all damages that have taken place as well as rise to far, far greater heights.

That one change is merely to require that the reasoning behind each and every law be recorded for public view and open debate.
James S Saint » Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:41 am wrote:All of that is exactly antithetical to the New USA under Global Socialism.
And that is why you couldn't even begin to go in that direction.
The G8 would shut you down in a heart beat.

But yes, that is the way it was supposed to be. People in authority were NOT allowed even as much freedom of speech as private citizens due to having more authority. Just like on this forum, once you become a mod, you have an obligation to be more careful of what you are saying to or about people. But also like almost every forum, mods, people in authority, immediately begin to dictate what others can say while allowing themselves more freedom to say whatever they want.

The intent of the US Constitution was to be the opposite of the historical tendencies toward totalitarian socialism. The USA was strictly anti-socialist. Yet now, due to leaving a very small window open, the USA is merely pretending to not be socialist and preparing for marshal law when they finally can no longer pretend (pretending is expensive).

He really prophetically hit the mark on that one. They aren't hiding it any more. Trump bumped their timeline.

He wasn't prophetic, he was just not sedated. Neither am or was I ever sedated, I feel anyone could have seen this coming.

Trump made sure its not going to happen under your radar. In their insane response to Trumps election the totalitarians have revealed themselves to you and to about a billion other reasonably sentient humans.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: banned

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:08 am

barbarianhorde wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
barbarianhorde wrote:James completely opposed socialism because he opposes anything besides the Constitution of the US, which he intended to amend with this laborious procedure of perfectly justified adaptation to new circumstances which is partly outlined above. He didn't intend to begin from scratch.

Are you referring to his proposal to make US laws obligated to their statutory goals? I' not finding anything else concerning James being a fanatic about the USC.

Lol I spent years discussing it with him in dozens of threads. If thats all unsearchable, forget it, its pointless.

Then could you provide a link to any of it?
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby barbarianhorde » Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:03 pm

Could be it was mostly in PMs actually, but definitely not just.
There be some in the beforethelight.forumotion links.

In short his view was that the Consitutions only flaw is that it doesn't have a proper process for accepting and rejecting amendments. His whole deal here with me and mine at first was to try and create a hermetically rational consensus-building protocol, which he wanted to see realized somehow into a legislature of the future.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE
User avatar
barbarianhorde
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm
Location: banned

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:16 am

Power is "the ability or capacity to do something or act in a particular way".
That's Google.

One can think of Superman who has numerous super powers such as "the ability to fly" or Heracles who was able to hold the world on his shoulders.

WTP, short for Will to Power, is the idea that everything we do we do in order to attain as much power as possible.

This means that we'd rather live a life that is short but powerful rather than a life that is long but powerless.

This is different from what JSS thinks to be the case. Using Nietzsche's naming convention, you can say that his position is WTMIJOT (short for Will to Maximum Integral Joy Over Time.)

JSS would rather live a life that is short and powerless but high in IJOT than a life that is long and powerful but low in IJOT.

The difference is a very subtle one.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby promethean75 » Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:16 am

There is also the WTETMASBIFOM (will to eat this mushroom and Swiss burger in front of me).
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:17 am

Is it a universal will, Mr Frank?
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby promethean75 » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:42 pm

That's not fair, ANDY. I haven't posted a Zappa song in at least a month, so stop sweatin me, haus.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:41 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTP, short for Will to Power, is the idea that everything we do we do in order to attain as much power as possible.

This means that we'd rather live a life that is short but powerful rather than a life that is long but powerless.

This is different from what JSS thinks to be the case.

I never saw the "Will to Power" thing having anything to do with how long someone lived although the greater the power, the better the chance of using it for longevity.

Using Nietzsche's naming convention, you can say that his position is WTMIJOT (short for Will to Maximum Integral Joy Over Time.)

JSS would rather live a life that is short and powerless but high in IJOT than a life that is long and powerful but low in IJOT.

The difference is a very subtle one.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding something but doesn't IJOT require longevity?
In Sight of SAM, I Am: James S Saint » Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:12 pm wrote:Acquisition is not the goal. SAM maintains focus on Maintaining = Anentropy (anti-corruption). It does that through its decision making process which involves IJOT, an ongoing calculation of the eternal maintaining of joy throughout its populous.

And then he also defines "joy":
Challenge to the Agonists: James S Saint » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:11 pm wrote:Joy ≡ inner perception of progress, or conquest - offspring of the Perception of Hope - Positive psychological affectance
AO vs VO: a friendly challenge: James S Saint » Sun Oct 29, 2017 11:42 pm wrote:all of the insane efforts of the history of homosapiens sprang forth as he attempts threats and false hopes in an effort to control all things. All joy is caused by an inner perception of progress toward that harmony and hope (thus the continual effort). Such is the very make of the deepest devoted love, survival

IJOT seems to be an idea that forms what he considered the "supreme goal", MIJOT.
Democratic vs undemocratic: James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:53 pm wrote:Since MIJOT, Maximum Integral of Joy Over Time, is the "supreme goal", all reasoning is based upon that concern.

So MIJOT must then require a maximum power to form eternal survival in a state of highest joy.

I am not seeing the "short and powerless" that you mention. He has very many other references concerning the idea. I hadn't read many of them so I am glad you brought it up.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:51 pm

WTP and WTMIJOT (an ancronym I invented for the sake of convenience) are merely two different ways of valuing i.e. two different ways of ranking lives. They are two different formulas for calculating the value of any given life.

WTMIJOT is well defined and learning how to calculate the value of any given life is straightforward. You need not concern yourself with how JSS defines the word "joy". We all know what happiness is. We know it's a specific type of feeling and that's enough. In order to calculate the value of any individual's life, all you have to do is measure how happy they are at regular intervals. You could represent happiness on a scale from -100 to +100. Negative numbers would represent pain and positive would represent pleasure. At the end of their life, you'd take these numbers and sum them up, and the result would be IJOT -- Integral of Joy Over Time -- which would also be the value of their life.

The question you're asking is: does IJOT require longevity?

Suppose you have a man who died at 40 but who experienced around 100 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 40 x 100 = 4,000. Compare that to a man who lived to be 100 but who experienced around 20 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 100 x 20 = 2,000. According to JSS, the man who died at 40 had a much better life than the man who lived to be 100. This shows that according to WTMIJOT not every life that is long is better than every life that is short. WTMIJOT does not prioritize longevity. An eternal life of hell is not better than a finite life of heaven.

On the other hand, JSS does think that a society consisting of individuals who are very good at maximizing their IJOT is much more durable than any other. But that's a separate issue.
"Let's keep the debate about poor people in the US specifically. It's the land of opportunity. So everyone has an opportunity. That means everyone can get money. So some people who don't have it just aren't using thier opportunities, and then out of those who are using them, then most squander what they gain through poor choices, which keeps them poor. It's no one else's fault. The end."

Mr. Reasonable
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:59 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTP and WTMIJOT (an ancronym I invented for the sake of convenience) are merely two different ways of valuing i.e. two different ways of ranking lives. They are two different formulas for calculating the value of any given life.

I believed but had to verify the thought that Nietsche's WTP was primarily about social and political power rather than personal power - the will of the people to rise up and take over.
Compare Nietzsche’s concept of the 'Will to Power' wrote:Nietzsche has a completely different outlook than everyone else has. He believes that the will to power means “manipulating characters of fragility and frailty, to indulge on one’s supremacy, and to pamper one’s self with praise, are admirable traits of the good” (O’Sullivan and Pecorino).

That form of WTP is what the current democratic or socialist deep state party in the US Congress is attempting to use to overthrow President Trump. It is largely associated with James' PHT and hidden subtle affectance.

President Trump along with a few republicans are more about your WTMIJOT. And Trump is winning for that reason. WTMIJOT is about a functioning momentum and is more structured, goal oriented, and openly solid. WTMIJOT seems more associated with James' signature statement - "Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony". That is very precisely what Trump has been doing against the US Deep State, solidifying a foundation for long term national and even global security.

Recently I have realized some interesting associations between Trump, the globalists, and James. But that is another subject.

Magnus Anderson wrote:WTMIJOT is well defined and learning how to calculate the value of any given life is straightforward. You need not concern yourself with how JSS defines the word "joy". We all know what happiness is. We know it's a specific type of feeling and that's enough. In order to calculate the value of any individual's life, all you have to do is measure how happy they are at regular intervals. You could represent happiness on a scale from -100 to +100. Negative numbers would represent pain and positive would represent pleasure. At the end of their life, you'd take these numbers and sum them up, and the result would be IJOT -- Integral of Joy Over Time -- which would also be the value of their life.

I guess that I can agree but I'm not comfortable with how you use the word "value". It seems to me that value is something that a person assigns to something else in reference to their own goals rather than something they would assign to their own life. But I think that I know what you mean.

Magnus Anderson wrote:The question you're asking is: does IJOT require longevity?

Suppose you have a man who died at 40 but who experienced around 100 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 40 x 100 = 4,000. Compare that to a man who lived to be 100 but who experienced around 20 points of joy each year. The value of his life would be equal to 100 x 20 = 2,000. According to JSS, the man who died at 40 had a much better life than the man who lived to be 100. This shows that according to WTMIJOT not every life that is long is better than every life that is short. WTMIJOT does not prioritize longevity. An eternal life of hell is not better than a finite life of heaven.

I wasn't asking that question. I was stating that MIJOT must require it. In this case the "M" is important. In order to maximize the "integral" (or the sum of those measures you mentioned) the most time must be allowed, the greatest longevity.

If both person A and person B get 20 points every year but B lives longer than A, person B gained a higher MIJOT score (or "value to their life").

And I agree that according to James, if person B was certain to get only negative scores for the rest of his life, his greater score would be acquired by dying sooner. I am going to have to see what he had to say about mercy killing.

And now I have to wonder if Abu Bakr was absolutely certain of a miserable future or merely suicidal.

Magnus Anderson wrote:On the other hand, JSS does think that a society consisting of individuals who are very good at maximizing their IJOT is much more durable than any other. But that's a separate issue.

Yes that does seem to be the case and gets back to Trump's solidifying of the USA through a WTMIJOT or "Clarify .. to Anentropic Harmony" strategy.

More everyday I'm getting that gut feeling that James knew far more about the deep state in America than meets the eye. He stated that Trump was going to win but that they will try to give it to Hillary - exacty what they are still trying to do.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby Ben JS » Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:29 pm

Ok.

I accept that you've taken another form, James.

I love you, friend.

It was a gift and pleasure to have crossed paths [and perhaps walked alongside, for a time] with you, and I have deep gratitude for the compassion you showed myself and many others here.

You have influenced many in a beautiful way, and inspired positive change - living in accord with your principles.

You will always be part of me, and I will not forget you.

And until our paths cross again,

Thanks for all the joy and love, brother.

-

With all my heart,

Ben
Formerly known as: Joe Schmoe

ben wrote:I think it is eloquently fitting that my farewell thread should be so graciously hijacked by such blatant penis waving. It condenses my entire ILP experience into one very manageable metaphor.
User avatar
Ben JS
Human Being
 
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:12 am
Location: Australia

Re: James S Saint

Postby Meno_ » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:07 pm

Quote:

"James defined Affectance as:
) Subtle influence(s) {as used in Infant Psychology},ultra-minuscule, mostly randomized electromagnetic pulses,
) Actualization of potential(s) to affect
) A region of varied and subtle changes
) An amount of subtle affects"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
<
<<
>
<
>




>><
>}>{<<<<<<<<<<}





Precognitive learning can be split into an either/or world , reduced subtly, so as to acquire proper translation.

It can work reversely, retroactively within the bound sets of natural, bonding deconstruction.

So it does makes ' sense' .As this process goes on, the diminutive 'affectance'does appear to actually send subtle communication , appearing as working a reverse, backward temporal flow.
Last edited by Meno_ on Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8295
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: James S Saint

Postby Meno_ » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:23 pm

It works like the emerging Piaget two way mirror:

In that experiment.a child was placed on a glass ledge of a balcony, totally invisible. The child below a certain age did not notice the depth beneath him, until a succedingly later stage of development. At that time, he fearfully retreated .

He actually reversed to focal plane from upside to downside.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8295
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:54 pm

Ben JS wrote:Ok.

I accept that you've taken another form, James.

I love you, friend.

It was a gift and pleasure to have crossed paths [and perhaps walked alongside, for a time] with you, and I have deep gratitude for the compassion you showed myself and many others here.

You have influenced many in a beautiful way, and inspired positive change - living in accord with your principles.

You will always be part of me, and I will not forget you.

And until our paths cross again,

Thanks for all the joy and love, brother.

-

With all my heart,

Ben

I feel like I am becoming James (so I hope wherever he went was a good place) - but I am NOT James.


I thought I would store this post from another thread here just so I don't lose it -
obsrvr524 wrote:
Great Again wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:I think he should have said - »earnestly seek and ye shall find«. Disingenuously evade the evidence and you merely lose sight of the Truth - but still have to face Reality".

Is this the edit you meant?

Yes.

Great Again wrote:I can agree with it, although there is a a little problem with finding.

Finding is similar to the epistemological subjectivity/objectivity problem, a duality. But nevertheless I agree to the said sentence "earnestly seek and ye shall find" and the following sentence.

What you said about truth and reality - "you can hide from one but never escape the other" is even more agreeable, regardless whether I would use the word "facts" instead of the word "reality" as well. Both refer to what we perceive, namely what has become, that is, what is completed through history. So, I would use the word "facts" as well as the word "reality".

It is right what you said about truth and reality: "you can hide from one but never escape the other". If you try to escape from truth, you have to face the reality (facts); if you try to escape from reality (facts), you have to face the truth. You are not as fast as the both are. Lies have short legs; unreality is like a dream in which movement is impossible.

Actually I meant the reality of the future consequences due to the reality of the past events. If I say, "facts", I just throw in more opportunity of get into the semantics of "who's facts". :-?

And even though the following seems off topic here, it is actually related (to why bother pursuing these words and what they mean).

When a society tries to govern by establishing an artificial truth narrative (such as real world Communism and those trying to govern the US right now), they create an artificially induced public bubble of belief and force the issue of having to stop all thinking. Reasoning tends to unveil the reality that it is all artificial - creating doubt in the veracity of the narrative.

I think establishing an artificial reality narrative for a population can be good or bad but is most certainly a very, very dangerous thing (as has been proven over thousands of years of attempts). It stems from the lust to advance by trying to be God - in place of God (in place of Reality). And they actually know that it is extremely dangerous - to everyone else. They fully know that they are going to murder billions of people - they simply don't care. To them being a god over all life is just too blindingly important. And they know that you can't catch them. So they proceed.

Those kind of people seem to think that they actually have no choice. They think that the only way to advance is through the means they currently see - their "path to godhood". And the reason they think that is because of what we are discussing on this very thread -

Getting the real story straight before making presumptions about what is necessarily true - look CLOSER at the details of your own thoughts and language (which largely affects your thoughts). Seek out, not merely A path to victory, but the BEST path at all possible (assuming you are not in a rush).

The problem is that it is an ethical issue. And when people, high or low, simply don't care - they don't bother (relating to James' PHT). I think that on high they are very willing to murder billions of people because they haven't bothered to seek out a more ethical solution to advancing humanity toward a more harmonious existence on Earth (another seriously big issue with James - "Saint").

I can see where he is coming from. I started by merely being curious - then impressed - then amazed - then awestruck - then just speechless (as you said - "impressed with him" was only in the beginning). I have been closely examining his proposals and what I call his "final solution" (his SAM Co-op) for the possibility of any tiny little misguiding hidden devil. I haven't concluded that his final solution is pure and more importantly that it is the BEST solution to human harmony. I think that I have just recently realized who he was talking to all that time (a serious question I have held) - and it was not anything I was guessing. His solution seems to be a calculated far off destiny - and AFTER billions of people have been murdered - exterminated by what he referred to as the source of all of the trouble - the blind lust of the "Godwannabes".

I have nothing better to do besides my wife, work, and wealth pursuits than to see if his unfortunately distant solution, possibly after the death of literally all human life, is really the BEST possible. And that requires a degree of examination for that elusive devil in the details that a "normal" person ( :oops: ) would never bother to find.

In short - details matter in thinking and trying to solve real world problems involving humanity - not merely maths or scientific war weaponry - "Get the words straight" :D
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby Ben JS » Sat Jan 30, 2021 6:07 am

obsrvr524 wrote:I feel like I am becoming James (so I hope wherever he went was a good place) - but I am NOT James.

I see this thread as a memorial to James.

Whilst we all have our personal philosophies, this isn't the thread to be espousing them.

I necromanced a thread to say farewell to a good guy, and others have decided for w/e reason to soapbox in a memorial thread - I don't really feel it. [people could have been spamming this thread anytime, but weren't]

I'd point to my signature.

Have a good one, pal.

[not responding to avoid further derailment]
Formerly known as: Joe Schmoe

ben wrote:I think it is eloquently fitting that my farewell thread should be so graciously hijacked by such blatant penis waving. It condenses my entire ILP experience into one very manageable metaphor.
User avatar
Ben JS
Human Being
 
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:12 am
Location: Australia

Re: James S Saint

Postby obsrvr524 » Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:43 am

Ben JS wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:I feel like I am becoming James (so I hope wherever he went was a good place) - but I am NOT James.

I see this thread as a memorial to James.

Whilst we all have our personal philosophies, this isn't the thread to be espousing them.

I'm guessing you didn't read it.

I posted it here because of the portion that is about James - which I might expand on here later.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: James S Saint

Postby Great Again » Sat Feb 20, 2021 5:58 pm

Some excerpts from the first page of this thread with the honorable name "James S. Saint" as the title:

encode_decode wrote:I have been wondering for a while now where James is. :-k
Mithus wrote:Me too. I miss him here.
Meno_ wrote:
Mithus wrote:Me too. I miss him here.


I also miss Arminius. Or maybe its not an odd coincidence that they are both missing at the same time, they appeared to share views in a very supporting manner.
Mr J wrote:Hope he is doing alright.
....
Mr J wrote:I know that James was an older man [70's?] and we're all wondering if he has died passing on from this world. That's at least what me and Wendy are thinking anyways. If he has passed on from this earthly realm I hope he found peace in what this world could not offer him. We never agreed much on anything philosophically but he was an interesting man that was strong in his convictions where I respected that. RIP James S Saint.

"Death is the last greatest adventure for us all."

We younger generations will carry the torch that you dropped fighting against the New World Order James.
Mithus wrote:I sincerely hope that he merely takes a break from ILP because he has something better to do than posting here.
Mr J wrote:
Mithus wrote:I sincerely hope that he merely takes a break from ILP because he has something better to do than posting here.

That's what I thought also originally but we're talking about a man that before his disappearance was on here more than any other member concerning hours of interaction. I'm thinking it is for the worse.
....
Chakra Superstar wrote:Fixed hasn't been here for hours. I think he's dead. :-?

It's not such a typical page of a typical ILP thread, is it?

It's kinder, friendlier, gentler, more honorable, more reflective, more contemplative, more likeable (and at the end also a bit funnier) than the overwhelming majority of all ILP threads.

Thank you, folks.
Image
User avatar
Great Again
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:32 pm

Previous

Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users