Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog News, Press Releases
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Roger Waters~Animals Reissue...Issue
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Roger Waters~Animals Reissue...Issue
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17915 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 10:19
Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Well, reading Mark Blake's liner notes I definitely get the impression he is RW's spokesperson. 

For me that is the big issue. As I mentioned before the Waters' proposed liner notes are too Waterscentric. Roger wrote them as to blow his own horn, plus he is trying to make it look like Mark Blake wrote them...hogwash!
The notes don't mean anything other than to start another war....The original album credits show Waters as writing all the songs and sharing credit with Gilmour only on Dogs, so again what is Roger's point?? 

IF...the others had as much input on the other songs as Waters did the notes really should be coming from Gilmour and Nick Mason, clarifying that fact, that in 1977 Waters refused to include them in the credits. But to my knowledge that has never been the case, so again I ask why does Roger even need to clarify anything??

It's a round about way for him to bitch and moan about not having access to the PF website and to tell the world that he created, designed, wrote the songs for PF. Like he was doing the others a favor by allowing them some song writing credits here and there....

Clearly the one who continues to pound the sand is Roger Waters. Again, Roger is amiss if he thinks the hard core PF fans do not realize and know that he was the creative force behind Pink Floyd, especially the concepts, the history shows this and its in the albums. What is his major malfunction!!!??? Confused

His demeaner I bet you is a major reason why a PF reunion at this point will never happen, and probably a main reason why Gilmour stated earlier this year that Pink Floyd was done.
Back to Top
Dellinger View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12771 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dellinger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 21:58
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.


Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 


As far as the concept is concerned, indeed, it's all Waters, and that's what the liner notes are focusing a lot about. Yet, it fails to dig a bit deeper into the writing of the music... and as I understand it, Dogs was mostly written by Gilmour... and given the length of that song, and how it is usually the fan favourite of the album, he might, in a way, be right to have an issue given the way those liner notes focus almost exclusivley on Waters.


No, then you have not really read the liner notes carefully.  Waters does mention You've Got to Be Crazy was co-written by him and Gilmour.  And that is the fact. What other role did the others have anyway in the album?  Like I said, if they hate so much to acknowledge his role in this album and The Wall, they don't have to play it, they don't have to reissue the albums.  Ah, but how can that be, these albums are full of fan favourites.  

Nobody is denying that Waters is a gigantic prick.  I am just saying Gilmour isn't exactly St Gilmour either and doesn't come out looking good from this episode.


I did read the liner notes... well, carefully enough at least. But I did say that those liner notes focus almost exclusively in Waters, not totally. And yeah, he did mention Dogs was co-written with Gilmour, but that's just about it, and then it goes on about Waters and Waters and Waters again, as if writing the music for the longest and arguably most beloved song on the album was a minor thing.
Back to Top
Dellinger View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12771 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dellinger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 22:06
Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:

Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Another notable thing is the mentioning of the names: RW's name is the most mentioned (by far), only at the first occurrence by his first name and last name. Then it is "Roger" or "Waters" everywhere. The other band members are only mentioned (once or twice) by first and last name together...



Im not sure that is notable, as that is a fairly standard way of naming people. Both names are used the first time, and then only one (first or last) from then on. The exception here is David Gilmour who is mentioned twice by both names, but to be honest, I would have done the same, as the second mention is so long after the first. The way the names are given is pretty much exactly as I would write them if I were writing a review.

Gilmour and Wright are both given credit where it is due, but Animals is a Waters-led album, so it’s hardly surprising that his name is mentioned more. Wish You Were Here is realistically the last album by Pink Floyd as a band, and the cracks were already showing. Everything after is very much Waters. Animals, The Wall and The Final Cut all have contributions from the other members, but are undeniably vehicles for Waters. I would never go as far as some do, and claim any are effectively Waters solo albums in all but name, but for me Animals is no more or less a Waters solo album than The Final Cut, so make of that what you will.

I don’t see the problem with acknowledging how much of Animals came from Waters. I don’t say that as a fan of Waters, because I’m really not. I don’t mind any of the albums made by Floyd members outside the band (or those of the post-Waters Floyd), but none are as good as when Gilmour and Waters were both in the band. Gilmour is a jolly good guitarist, and that is noted in the comments on Dogs. But ultimately, Animals largely came from Waters, and as impressive as their contributions are to the album, it’s hard to think of what more could have been said about the other Floyd members.



I just said this a few posts ago, but once again, I don't agree when people make Animals to be already such a Waters dominated album. I mean, it's got only 3 songs that matter, and one of them, Dogs, was written with Gilmour... as I understand it, Gilmour wrote the music (for me, in the end, the most important aspect to the enjoyment of a song), and Waters, as usual, the lyrics (which is the reason he almost always gets a writing credit in the songs), and then Dogs takes almost half of the album and is usually considered the favourite song on the album... so, how is it more Waters dominated than the previous ones? Yeah, he's the one that came up with the concept and all, as usual, but the music writing is still fairly divided as in the previous albums.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 22:27
Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.


Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 


As far as the concept is concerned, indeed, it's all Waters, and that's what the liner notes are focusing a lot about. Yet, it fails to dig a bit deeper into the writing of the music... and as I understand it, Dogs was mostly written by Gilmour... and given the length of that song, and how it is usually the fan favourite of the album, he might, in a way, be right to have an issue given the way those liner notes focus almost exclusivley on Waters.


No, then you have not really read the liner notes carefully.  Waters does mention You've Got to Be Crazy was co-written by him and Gilmour.  And that is the fact. What other role did the others have anyway in the album?  Like I said, if they hate so much to acknowledge his role in this album and The Wall, they don't have to play it, they don't have to reissue the albums.  Ah, but how can that be, these albums are full of fan favourites.  

Nobody is denying that Waters is a gigantic prick.  I am just saying Gilmour isn't exactly St Gilmour either and doesn't come out looking good from this episode.


I did read the liner notes... well, carefully enough at least. But I did say that those liner notes focus almost exclusively in Waters, not totally. And yeah, he did mention Dogs was co-written with Gilmour, but that's just about it, and then it goes on about Waters and Waters and Waters again, as if writing the music for the longest and arguably most beloved song on the album was a minor thing.

But what is Waters to do if the idea for the cover art did come from him?  I would also point out that you are trying to overweight Gilmour's role by dismissing the other two tracks.  Essentially, two thirds of the album was written solely by Waters and Dogs was a co-write.  So it is almost exclusively a Waters project.  WYWH was the last all-hands-on-deck effort.  One can blame Waters himself for the fact that the albums after WYWH were Waters-dominated.  I would, for one.  I think what simply happened is he had his own album-length concepts that he essentially wanted to record with the help of Floyd (and it was less to do with a sudden dearth of creativity from the rest).  

But be that as it may, Animals-Wall-TFC are very largely Waters-driven projects.  Again, if it bothers Gilmour so much, he doesn't have to play anything from Animals or Wall.  But he can't re-invent reality so that it placates his ego. This episode comes across a bit like, "OK, since Waters wants to be the egoistic prick that he is, I will show him my ego too".  

And what happened in the process?  He, that is, Gilmour, held up the re-release and denied it to fans all because of his squabble with Waters over liner notes.  I get it loud and clear that you are firmly in the Gilmour camp but you can't argue your way out of the reality that in this instance, Gilmour prioritized his ego tussle with Waters over the fans and that is not a good look. If he didn't like the liner notes, he need not have approved the draft.  He could have simply rejected it and gone ahead or gone to the public and told them Waters stubbornly insists on his own self-glorifying liner notes.  He has not done either.  He has a big part of the blame in this whole episode. 
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 04:09
It is probably not so much a matter of what is true or not but more of how to represent things. I don't think anything said in the liner notes is false, but I don't think either that it is a fair representation of how things came to be.

What are the official writing credits about? For the lyrics it is rather easy, but for the music...? Is it about who writes the main melody and/or the main themes? But what about the creative input of others: one invents a guitar lick here, another a drum riff there and a third wonderful synth patterns... I think that there are many bands in which writing credits are shared once a musician has a clear contribution in the creative process, be it only through the jam sessions or the recording sessions.

It is interesting, in this context, to read Mark Blake's book on Pink Floyd (in which the chapter regarding the Animals period is much more balanced than the liner notes presented here - were they edited by Waters?), and Nick Mason's biography (Inside Out). It is clear that from Animals on, Waters more and more considered PF as the vehicle for his music which created more and more tensions between the band members (and eventually Wright's departure).

Going back to Animals and these liner notes: I don't think that Waters wrote all the sheet music for the guitar, synth and drum parts of the songs he is credited for (like a composer who writes for an orchestra). He probably wrote the major melodies and themes, but for me it is clear that he doesn't want to acknowledge the creative input of his fellow band members during the whole recording process. Formally, it might not be about "writing credits" but humanly it is about giving credit where credit is due. And he doesn't want to give that.




Edited by suitkees - June 08 2021 at 04:12

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 04:30
Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

It is probably not so much a matter of what is true or not but more of how to represent things. I don't think anything said in the liner notes is false, but I don't think either that it is a fair representation of how things came to be.


Then Gilmour could simply say that and put an end to the debate.  He has not said a word yet about Waters' post.  And he can't pretend to be 'above it all' here because Waters has categorically said that the release was delayed because of Gilmour sitting on it.  By remaining silent, Gilmour only appears to affirm whatever Waters has said and if that is the case, then it's not fair to delay the release because you don't like how Waters has presented the picture in the liner notes.  I mean just sort it out one way or the other but sitting on it for two years is ridiculous.
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 04:36
^ Well, I didn't take part in their exchange, so from where I am I cannot see who's to blame for the delay of the release, and I don't take Water's word for it. When you have read the books I mentioned above, you will understand that "sorting out things together" is not their strong-point...

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 04:38
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

It is probably not so much a matter of what is true or not but more of how to represent things. I don't think anything said in the liner notes is false, but I don't think either that it is a fair representation of how things came to be.


Then Gilmour could simply say that and put an end to the debate.  He has not said a word yet about Waters' post.  And he can't pretend to be 'above it all' here because Waters has categorically said that the release was delayed because of Gilmour sitting on it.  By remaining silent, Gilmour only appears to affirm whatever Waters has said and if that is the case, then it's not fair to delay the release because you don't like how Waters has presented the picture in the liner notes.  I mean just sort it out one way or the other but sitting on it for two years is ridiculous.

That’s exactly how I look at it. It’s kind of irrelevant what any of us think, in regard to whether or not it is a fair representation. It’s on Gilmour’s head, and his silence pretty much affirms what Waters has said.

Generally speaking, when it comes to matters of Pink Floyd, I tend to side with Gilmour rather than Waters. Much of Waters arguments stem from the idea that the group should have ended when he left, and that’s not one I agree with. He left the band, and just because he thought doing so meant the end of the band, does not make it so. Hence the lawsuits and eventual settlement.

But in this instance, I tend to side with Waters, as (regardless of whether or not I think this is is a fair representation), to find out after all this time that the reason for the delay of the reissue was down to Gilmour not liking these liner notes? As per the above - ridiculous….
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 04:54
Sorry, but Waters said Gilmour vetoed it, so he wasn't silent.

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
progaardvark View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams

Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 51802 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote progaardvark Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:03
Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Sorry, but Waters said Gilmour vetoed it, so he wasn't silent.

And sometimes silence speaks volumes. 
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:12
If Waters put as much effort into being musically creative as he does into trying to preserve his place in history, we could have had 10 more decent solo albums from him.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:18
Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Sorry, but Waters said Gilmour vetoed it, so he wasn't silent.

You have misread what has been said. I was responding to Gilmour’s silence since Waters posting, as per a previous comment. Gilmour has been silent.

And, yes, silence speaks volumes…..
(And in this instance, not in Gilmour’s favour.)
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:22
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

If Waters put as much effort into being musically creative as he does into trying to preserve his place in history, we could have had 10 more decent solo albums from him.

Hmmm….not sure on that. We may have made more albums, but quantity does not mean quality. I wouldn’t consider everything he has released decent, although I do like Amused to Death and Is This The Life We Really Want. But I think I’m happier with less Waters, than more….. 🤪

Neither Waters, nor Gilmour greatly float my boat, outside the music of Pink Floyd.
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:30
Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:


Neither Waters, nor Gilmour greatly float my boat, outside the music of Pink Floyd.

And that explains your negative answer.

Edited by SteveG - June 08 2021 at 05:30
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 05:39
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:


Neither Waters, nor Gilmour greatly float my boat, outside the music of Pink Floyd.

And that explains your negative answer.

I’m not sure my answer was negative. 🤔
It wasn’t intended to be, anyway. There’s nothing I dislike from either, and some things I like rather a lot.
Reviewer for The Progressive Aspect
Back to Top
jude111 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1754 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jude111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 06:42
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

It is probably not so much a matter of what is true or not but more of how to represent things. I don't think anything said in the liner notes is false, but I don't think either that it is a fair representation of how things came to be.


Then Gilmour could simply say that and put an end to the debate.  He has not said a word yet about Waters' post.  And he can't pretend to be 'above it all' here because Waters has categorically said that the release was delayed because of Gilmour sitting on it.  By remaining silent, Gilmour only appears to affirm whatever Waters has said and if that is the case, then it's not fair to delay the release because you don't like how Waters has presented the picture in the liner notes.  I mean just sort it out one way or the other but sitting on it for two years is ridiculous.

I hope Gilmour remains silent and above it all. The album's getting a release, so there's no need to react to Waters' craven need for a fight. I love that Gilmour's not publicly re-hashing things that took place 50 years ago. According to his Instagram, he's well and content with his large family, which seems to eat up Waters with bitterness. That's really sad.

The simple fact of the matter is, Gilmour *should* have an equal say in the liner notes. If he doesn't like it, they shouldn't be there. All the band members should have an equal say, and all should come to an agreement. That it's taken years for an Animals Deluxe release is Waters' fault, pure and simple.

We *know* Waters is a control freak and a micro-manager. It's absurd that he held up the release for years because he wanted those partisan, one-sided pro-Waters liner notes. Who does that? Seriously, there's something wrong with the guy LOL It's not that hard to have liner notes that celebrates Animals and Pink Floyd, one that all the member can agree on. FFS. No one even cares about liner notes; they're read once, if at all, and quickly forgotten about. They're superfluous fluff.


Edited by jude111 - June 08 2021 at 07:01
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 07:35
Originally posted by nick_h_nz nick_h_nz wrote:

Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Sorry, but Waters said Gilmour vetoed it, so he wasn't silent.

You have misread what has been said. I was responding to Gilmour’s silence since Waters posting, as per a previous comment. Gilmour has been silent.

No, I did not misread, I just don't understand why Gilmour would have to react to a post on the Internet that is not addressed to him.

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 07:42
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

If Waters put as much effort into being musically creative as he does into trying to preserve his place in history, we could have had 10 more decent solo albums from him.

Well, he could indeed use this energy for more useful things, but I don't think his creativity is suffering from it and I hope he will come out with something new and of his own again. His last album was OK - personally I think it sounded a bit too similar to what he has done before, but it is still a good album. He has already his place in history, with PF and as a solo artist. But I agree that we could do without this bickering with former band mates...


Edited by suitkees - June 08 2021 at 07:43

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20642 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 07:48
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

If Waters put as much effort into being musically creative as he does into trying to preserve his place in history, we could have had 10 more decent solo albums from him.

How about just one decent album..?
Wink
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 08 2021 at 07:57
Oh, a wise guy huh? Yuk yuk yuk.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.152 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.