If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy. (was: Positioning the Windows Explorer windows)
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 12:34:34 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote: Don't I know it! I have a (possibly similar) elderly friend who doesn't grasp the concept of folders within folders. Have you tried asking him to visualize a filing cabinet containing folders, and several folders in each of them? Perhaps even better than visualizing it is demonstrating it in an actual filing cabinet, if you have one handy. |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 12:08:33 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote: You have pretty much mirrored my frustration with the lack of any documentation being included with computers. It's no wonder people have so little clue as to how to use a computer. Although I somewhat share your frustration, at least in part, let me make several comments disagreeing with you: 1. It costs considerably more to print documentation that it does to create a Windows DVD. So the lack of documentation keeps the cost down. 2. The lack of documentation *may* (see below) be an issue for some people, but not for most of us with Windows experience. So as far as I'm concerned, keeping the cost down by not having documentation is good, not bad. 3. Most people never look at whatever documentation they get with their computers, cars, TV sets, or anything else. They put it away somewhere, and usually can't remember where. Or maybe they throw it away. They don't even look at it when it's a one or two page flyer that came with the computer. As a single example, look at how many people who get a one or two page flyer with their computer telling them about the recovery partition that comes with it instead of a DVD, and tells them they should copy it to a DVD and how to do it, and not only don't do it, but never realize that they could or should. And because most people never look at their documentation, that's another reason why keeping the cost down by not having documentation is good, not bad. 4. In my experience, back in the days when documentation used to be much more common with computers and software packages, it was typically somewhere between mediocre and very poor. If you wanted good documentation, you bought a third-party book. 5. Those third-party books are still available. And since they are almost always better than what used to come with the computer or software, and probably cost less than the addition to the price that would exist if they were included with it, that's what people should get. 6. Very few people buy those third-party books. They don't because they don't want to take the time and trouble to read them any more than they used to when they were included with the software packages. Or in some cases because they can't afford them. I was lucky, I didn't start out with Windows. My first windowing computer was an Atari 1040ST. That manual DID tell you how to drag and drop, and everything else. So when I was exposed to Windows, those things I already knew how to do. I didn't start out with Windows either. I started out with mainframe computers (in 1962). When I started with PCs (in 1987), it was with on an IBM clone running DOS (3.0). I started with Windows a few years later (Windows 2.0, running under DOS), but didn't use it much. It was just a way to learn something new (and something that I correctly anticipated would take over) and get familiar with it. I've run almost every version of Windows from 3.0 to 10 since then. I learned it from my early experience with 2.0, from reading books about it, from my son, who started with PCs before I did, from other friends with more Windows experience that I had, from attending meetings of the local PC Users Group, from my own trial, error, and research, and from newsgroups. Also having skipped almost no versions of Windows except for Me, going from one version to the next was seldom a big jump for me. It's a much bigger jump for those who stick for too long with an old obsolescent version before moving to a new one, since they have to take in a lot more changes at once. Many, if not most, people who don't like Windows 10 fall into that category, and that's largely the reason most people don't like it. A friend of mine recently made a very cogent comment... "Ignorance is a choice." After he said that, I lost all sympathy for people having computer issues. They can go out and find the answers, or live with the problem. Ignorance is only partly a choice. Many people don't know they can go out and find the answers, or don't even know that they can do that. And many people don't have the time to do it; it's usually a lot quicker to ask a question and be told the answer than it is to search for it, whether in books, on the web, or anywhere else. I have lots of sympathy for people with computer problems. That's why I help many friend and relatives with their computer problems, and it's also the reason I'm here in this newsgroup and others, and also in the Microsoft Windows forums--to help when I can. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:08:59 -0500, "Bob_S" wrote:
"Mayayana" wrote in message news "Bob_S" wrote | Right-click on Explorer icon, select Properties and enter what you want in | the Target window. | What he wants is 2 Explorer windows, for two different folders, opening next to each other, one on the left and one on the right. If you can choose position in shortcut properties it's news to me. That’s what I get for working on two systems and reading a newsgroup at the same time.... As long as you're not also chewing gum... G |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:54:54 -0500, "Bob_S" wrote:
"Ken Springer" wrote in message news On 3/1/18 8:08 PM, Bob_S wrote: "Mayayana" wrote in message news "Bob_S" wrote | Right-click on Explorer icon, select Properties and enter what you want in | the Target window. | What he wants is 2 Explorer windows, for two different folders, opening next to each other, one on the left and one on the right. If you can choose position in shortcut properties it's news to me. That’s what I get for working on two systems and reading a newsgroup at the same time.... ROFL Ken, See if "Total Commander" doesn't get you closer to what you want to do. The SourceForge site is down right now but here's the authors page https://www.ghisler.com/ Total Commander is a good choice. I used it for a while and liked it a lot. But even better, as far as I'm concerned, is Directory Opus (https://www.gpsoft.com.au/), which is what I now use. Unfortunately it's not free, but it's worth the cost ($89 AUD) to me. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
In message , Wolf K
writes: On 2018-03-02 07:34, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [...] What _is_ it that makes the hierarchical file/folder system, which is so obvious to us, so difficult to grasp as a concept to some? I'd really like to know. My friend, for example, just about knows how to make a new folder - but I suspect would never think of doing so, or at best would only ever do so in one or two specific places. Good question. It may be that some people never used real manila folders stored in file cabinets. Or they just can't classify I don't think it was/is a good metaphor anyway. I _have_ used manila folders, but I don't think I've ever put them inside each other! They were a good metaphor when the hierarchy was only one level deep, i. e. not really a hierarchy. But ... hierarchically to begin with. You wouldn't believe the number of .... I think that's the real problem. At least, have never been trained to think hierarchically. I guess there are _some_ who genuinely can't, and a lot more who have never really been trained to. (And no, I'm not claiming this is something simple to do. As I have found.) [] I think it's a glitch in the brain. Eg, I used to have my grade 9 students organise their 3-ring binders by subject. About 10% couldn't do it even when looking at a page of Geography notes in the Math section. So I helped them move their notes into the right sections, step by step, and two days later it was all a mess again. Despite it being them who invented the metaphor, Microsoft are a bit to blame he their folders, and the ones they encourage users to use, are very sloppy (and even inconsistent). Then there are people who are neatness-blind, or tone-deaf. Etc. I'm very untidy in my house, but (IMO) tidy inside my computer. Neurologists will solve some of these puzzles eventually. (-: -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf If your mind goes blank, remember to turn down the sound. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
Don't I know it! I have a (possibly similar) elderly friend who doesn't grasp the concept of folders within folders. A tree structure might be just as effective a teaching tool. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure Finding your files is like "going down a mine". It also makes it possible to give a justification for behaviors when "moving" a file versus "copying" a file. If you have two inverted trees in your diagram, it's pretty hard to get the file from one tree to another without copying it. Whereas you can imagine moving a file up and down within a single inverted tree. The purpose of the desktop metaphor was to answer the question "what is this big space on the CRT screen for". And to answer that, the first GUI people said it "was the top surface of your desk". Which it really isn't. But you have to make this stuff up, as part of the "story". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_metaphor "The desktop metaphor was first introduced by Alan Kay at Xerox PARC in 1970" I think at least some desktops offered more convincing representations. (There have been attempts to animate everything, but such attempts are doomed to fail from a productivity perspective.) I'm sure if someone was teaching you how to use an IBM mainframe, the lesson wouldn't have worked this way. You would be going "what is this 191 and 192 stuff and why do I want to SWAP A B ?". Thankfully the explanations now should be a bit milder and easier to take. IPL CMS, Paul |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
In message , Paul
writes: J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: Don't I know it! I have a (possibly similar) elderly friend who doesn't grasp the concept of folders within folders. A tree structure might be just as effective a teaching tool. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_structure I'm sure I must have used the tree metaphor; as far as it goes, it's a good one: branches can have other branches but also leaves, and leaves can even grow out of the trunk. I think it's just a mental block. Finding your files is like "going down a mine". It also makes it possible to give a justification for behaviors when "moving" a file versus "copying" a file. If you have two inverted trees in your diagram, it's pretty hard to get the file from one tree to another without copying it. Whereas you can imagine moving a file up and down within a single inverted tree. But that only works if you intuitively grasp the concept in the first place. Extra metaphors are just, after a point, extra sources of confusion. The purpose of the desktop metaphor was to answer the question "what is this big space on the CRT screen for". And to answer that, the first GUI people said it "was the top surface of your desk". Which it really isn't. But you have to make this stuff up, as part of the "story". I never thought it was a good metaphor, and don't really think of my "desktop" as a real desk top. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desktop_metaphor "The desktop metaphor was first introduced by Alan Kay at Xerox PARC in 1970" An awful lot of windows concepts seem to be the subject of claims from Xerox PARC in the '70s (-:. I think at least some desktops offered more convincing representations. (There have been attempts to animate everything, but such attempts are doomed to fail from a productivity perspective.) I remember one - I think it was Packard Bell - who presented a view of a hallway, with rooms opening off it. I'm sure if someone was teaching you how to use an IBM mainframe, the lesson wouldn't have worked this way. You would be going "what is this 191 and 192 stuff and why do I want to SWAP A B ?". Thankfully the explanations now should be a bit milder and easier to take. I never programmed that particular processor, but if the reason is what I think it is, I don't think I'd have wondered why I might want to use a swap instruction. Of course I don't know about the "191 and 192 stuff". IPL CMS, interrupt, program, load? Paul -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Once a mind is opened it is very hard to shut. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Paul IPL CMS, interrupt, program, load? Initial Program Load perhaps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conver...Monitor_System The first computer I worked on, was a mainframe that took punched cards. And those had a tiny bit of JCL at the start, and you'd slap some number of 7-8-9 (orange) and 6-7-8-9 (pink) cards to your deck (those are a kind of record marker). I think when i was done with punched cards, I'd collected around two boxes (4000 cards). Hey, look! They have a picture of the pink card!!! Yikes. It's missing the 6-7-8-9 holes in a single column though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:H...rd_Punch-2.jpg And no, the inhabitants of the room didn't look like this. The keypunch room looked like a hippie convention. These people are entirely too clean cut. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...nes_in_use.jpg https://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/e...4506VV4002.jpg Back then, they had a program to allow high-school students access to the university mainframe. There were 25 key-punches, but at busy times, there wasn't a seat left in the house. Surprisingly, not a lot of students took up the offer. A good thing I guess. You couldn't bring food in there, so staying there meant a bit of "suffering" :-) Paul |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
On 2018-03-02 00:57, Paul wrote:
B00ze wrote: Hmmm, doesn't work well on my system. I end-up with two internet browser windows (positioned as requested,) and one explorer window (folder2). I removed the screen-width code and I still end-up with two browser windows and one explorer window. I tried adding pauses here and there but it did not help. Might be because I run Classic Shell and Clover, but not really interested in unInstalling them to test ;-) Regards, You can use virtual machines to test code like that. Installing them from an installer DVD is a nuisance. Yeah, I mean to get to that at some point. I used to have 2 copies of Xp running dual boot so I could test things, but nowadays I run 7/10 and 7 32 bits (might replace that with a Linux variant one day, but the partition is pretty small). I would need a bigger SSD to run more. But Microsoft has some pre-baked ones (which run for at least the 30 day grace period), which you could use. The selection isn't as wide as it used to be. I have a WinXP one and a Vista one, from back when those were offered. https://developer.microsoft.com/en-u...vms/#downloads When the grace period expires, you can unpack the original download as many times as you want. Thanks, Bookmarked (typical Microsoft, the VM downloads are in the Microsoft-Edge folder). You may need to change the workgroup on those from MSHOME to WORKGROUP. That's something I have to remember to do when using one. And I leave the network cable unplugged, until Windows Update is disabled on the Windows 7 one. I use the VirtualBox versions. Yeah, that's what I plan to use. We use VMWare @ work but it's unfortunately (no longer) free for home use... The Windows 10 Insider version, the OS itself will expire after a while. So the Insider version isn't a good deal as such. Probably a good deal if you cannot get the Insider to run any other way (and you needed an Insider version for some test case). Says they expire after 90 days. But running things in Insider isn't really what I need - I don't have time to test everything I use each time Microsoft releases a new sub-version. Best Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo How come I can never find Troi when I'm angry at her? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
On 2018-03-02 09:29, Mayayana wrote:
"B00ze" wrote | Hmmm, doesn't work well on my system. I end-up with two internet browser | windows (positioned as requested,) and one explorer window (folder2). I wrote it on XP and haven't had a chance to test it on 7. It may not work on all systems. That's why I suggested to Ken that he test it first. Shell is quirky, as you know. Yeah, I really think it's Clover. It patches Explorer (installs a BHO) and intercepts new windows and turns them into TABs. But.... the result you get seems odd. What's the location shown in the title bar of the IE on the left? Could it be that Fol1 is not a valid path? Or that it's restricted? Nope, I used C:\ and D:\ for the test. It's the NAVIGATE, it doesn't work right, they never go to where we ask. Also, you shouldn't be seeing the first IE. It's never made visible. (Though that quirk could be a Windows security change, I'd be surprised.) That's the strange thing, I am not seeing that first window. I end-up with 2 correctly positioned IE windows, and then Clover intercepts the folder2 navigate command and opens-up a new TAB in my existing Explorer window. No idea where the first navigate goes lol. Each folder starts as an IE instance and becomes an Explorer instance as a result of navigating to a folder rather than a webpage. (The document object then becomes a ShellFolderView object.) So.... if you get one folder then it seems to be working. If the other folder is not loading then I'd suspect the folder, or the code. No I think the code's fine. It's fun that we can move the window around and tell it to browse a folder ALL before making it visible, I was afraid I'd see everything paint when I read the first few lines (before seeing the visible = True). That Clover program interferes with Classic Shell too, but I kinda like having tabs. An explorer replacement is on the TODO list, then I can get rid of the Clover hack. Best Regards, -- ! _\|/_ Sylvain / ! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society oO-( )-Oo CHILDISH GAME: One at which you cannot beat your spouse. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Positioning the Windows Explorer windows
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | I don't think BG has claimed either kingship or genius-ship - not in the | last decade or two, anyway. | I guess we're way OT here, but it's an interesting issue. If you do a search for something like... gates foundation education problems ...you'll find all sorts of links. Here's an especially pithy one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...es-foundation/ Long story short, with no experience at all, Bill Gates just assumed he was such a brilliant business leader that he would also be brilliant at fixing education. It's classic geek short-sightedness, thinking that logical calculation is the same thing as intelligence. He dumped piles of money into education with the idea that teachers can't be allowed to be responsible for their job and that children must be assessed by standardized tests. What does that mean? It means that for Mr. Windows, the human element is the problem in education. It needs to be mechanized, adapted to the abilities of spreadsheets and algorythms. And it needs to teach testable learning. The chilling aspect of this is that Gates had such extreme influence, with things like promoting Common Core, simply by virtue of his wealth. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
Sorry for the late replies to everyone. I use Albasani.net, and they've
been down for like 3 days. Had withdrawal symptoms! LOL On 3/2/18 5:34 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Ken Springer writes: [] At this stage, Total Commander will "totally confuse" this guy. :-) The concept of the filesystem hierarchy still hasn't sunk in. The "light bulb" hasn't come on. Explaining things like this can be hard when the user is fixated on doing a, b, c, d and has no interest in learning something else. The Don't I know it! I have a (possibly similar) elderly friend who doesn't grasp the concept of folders within folders. He's more than once asked me to go through downloading from his camera card - and he writes down each stage/step. He just doesn't grasp the _concept_. Exactly, grasping the concept is hard, and, IMO, none of the MS file managers windows adequately as they don't display the very top level correctly. That's why I created my own charts to show the very basic hierarchy of the filesystem. I've done one for both Windows and Mac, and would like to do one for Linux someday. You can see the charts he https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1lrrman43...kEaOcINFa?dl=0 For any reader that looks at the charts, feel free to download for your own personal use. The goal was to make it as simple and self explanatory as possible, and still be able to print on letter sized paper. I'd appreciate comments and improvement suggestions if anyone has any. I got my brother-in-law to try Directory Opus, and we turned on the feature that (He's not dim; I'm quite proud that he's managed to convert most of his LP collection onto CDs, using mp3directcut to cut sides into tracks, and so on. He's a retired printer - from hot metal days, but I think would have used linotype machines, not just hand-layout.) The guy I'm working with is similar, and I think he may have been beat down growing up with people telling him he is dumb. As a result, he's possibly over compensated in areas of life. I haven't heard from him in a couple of days, so I'm thinking he's finally got a grasp on just the things he wants to do. hierarchy is so much easier to explain when your file manager has "lines" like XP and older system have. I may end up installing only (My friend has Vista, which I think still has the lines.) In XP the lines are optional, in Vista they don't exist. But Classic Explorer, part of Classic Shell, can show the lines, and I have mine set that way. the Classic Explorer part of Classic Shell, so he has the lines for his eyes to follow. I've created a simple chart that visually shows the hierarchy, but laid out as if it was an organizational chart, but I don't know if he's really looked at it. That is indeed the problem. You can't give them too much at once, or they suffer from information overload. What I tell everyone one, is when what I say starts going over their head, it's time to quit. I'm fairly sure that, at some point, he's going to decide he wants his music categorized, into R&B, country, soft rock, etc., and that should be the perfect time to explain the hierarchy. Could be; good luck. What _is_ it that makes the hierarchical file/folder system, which is so obvious to us, so difficult to grasp as a concept to some? I'd really like to know. My friend, for example, just about knows how to make a new folder - but I suspect would never think of doing so, or at best would only ever do so in one or two specific places. Humans, I think, are basically visual at the core. But if the visual feed your brain gets doesn't make sense, even that is useless. The charts display the same thing as the MS file managers, but just laid out in a way many of us are used to seeing, a simple organizational chart. Even here, some explanation may be necessary. For some, the use of color may help. So, if you ad a 3rd party program like Folder Colorizer, where, say, all folders containing bills are green, that may make it easier. I haven't tested this as yet. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
On 3/2/18 7:50 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-03-02 07:34, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [...] What _is_ it that makes the hierarchical file/folder system, which is so obvious to us, so difficult to grasp as a concept to some? I'd really like to know. My friend, for example, just about knows how to make a new folder - but I suspect would never think of doing so, or at best would only ever do so in one or two specific places. Good question. It may be that some people never used real manila folders stored in file cabinets. Or they just can't classify hierarchically to begin with. You wouldn't believe the number of incorrectly classified lists I've seen, even in papers published in professional journals. For that matter, many scientific problems hide classification/category errors in their assumptions. Eg, nature vs nurture. "If you don't ask the right question...." I think it's a glitch in the brain. Eg, I used to have my grade 9 students organise their 3-ring binders by subject. About 10% couldn't do it even when looking at a page of Geography notes in the Math section. So I helped them move their notes into the right sections, step by step, and two days later it was all a mess again. Is it a glitch, or just the fact that we are all not alike, and our brains work differently? Then there are people who are neatness-blind, or tone-deaf. Etc. Neurologists will solve some of these puzzles eventually. You can put me in the neatness-blind category! LOL All my life, if I left things in a mess, I knew that X was "over there". When I try to organize, in a short time I don't know where anything is. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
On 3/2/18 12:17 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Wolf K writes: On 2018-03-02 07:34, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [...] What _is_ it that makes the hierarchical file/folder system, which is so obvious to us, so difficult to grasp as a concept to some? I'd really like to know. My friend, for example, just about knows how to make a new folder - but I suspect would never think of doing so, or at best would only ever do so in one or two specific places. Good question. It may be that some people never used real manila folders stored in file cabinets. Or they just can't classify I don't think it was/is a good metaphor anyway. I _have_ used manila folders, but I don't think I've ever put them inside each other! They were a good metaphor when the hierarchy was only one level deep, i. e. not really a hierarchy. But ... One metaphor I used to use is the case of a Christmas present. You open the box, and there's another box inside plus a couple of items. Open that box, and still another box and some items. On and on. hierarchically to begin with. You wouldn't believe the number of ... I think that's the real problem. At least, have never been trained to think hierarchically. I guess there are _some_ who genuinely can't, and a lot more who have never really been trained to. (And no, I'm not claiming this is something simple to do. As I have found.) [] I think it's a glitch in the brain. Eg, I used to have my grade 9 students organise their 3-ring binders by subject. About 10% couldn't do it even when looking at a page of Geography notes in the Math section. So I helped them move their notes into the right sections, step by step, and two days later it was all a mess again. Despite it being them who invented the metaphor, Microsoft are a bit to blame he their folders, and the ones they encourage users to use, are very sloppy (and even inconsistent). Then there are people who are neatness-blind, or tone-deaf. Etc. I'm very untidy in my house, but (IMO) tidy inside my computer. Neurologists will solve some of these puzzles eventually. (-: -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Explaining the file system hierarchy.
On 3/2/18 8:42 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 12:34:34 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: Don't I know it! I have a (possibly similar) elderly friend who doesn't grasp the concept of folders within folders. Have you tried asking him to visualize a filing cabinet containing folders, and several folders in each of them? Perhaps even better than visualizing it is demonstrating it in an actual filing cabinet, if you have one handy. I used to use the "folder in a folder" metaphor too, but this will break down when the student suddenly realizes you can't physically fit any more folders inside the one folder. Maybe better is this: You need a bunch of folders with the tabs staggered across the top. One level is a folder with the tab on the left end. The next level down is a physical folder with the tab one step to the right. Next level down are folders with the tabs one more step to the right. :-) -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|