|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
Sweet 16,
As Tears Go By,
Maggie May
My Little Angel
Claire
I could go on as there are plenty more songs, but I think you get the idea. Your stance on this I think is way off the mark. I respect your right to hold strong views, but I totally disagree in THIS context
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
I really don't care what you think. I find the subject matter reprehensible, and your defense of it disgusting.
And yet you waste time and space reacting to comments. If you don't care what others think then why not just walk away. You cast rather nasty inferences and a wide net. Surely you must expect others to call you out on it? I was not defending anything, merely saying your reaction is a gross over-reaction as I am sure the writers intent was not what you are insinuating. Are you so arrogant that you cannot even contemplate for a moment, that your "opinion" may actually be wrong regarding this song? Defending the innocence of children is never a “waste” of my time. Apparently, I am in the minority. That's OK. And it's not my nature to 'walk away'. You speak of this “writer” in the third person, yet the song is posted under your forum name. Did you write this piece of art or not? If so, why try to distance yourself from it? Didn't you write: “The intent was to suggest that the person telling the tale is more troubled by the events than he realizes or admits ("I don't know why, I always sigh, each time I think of her name -- nothing was ever the same.")”? I have been called arrogant, but usually not to my face. I rather doubt that you would choose to do so; but then, I'm not a 15 year old child, either. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
errmm...I didn't write the song 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
I have been called arrogant, but usually not to my face. I rather doubt that you would choose to do so; but then, I'm not a 15 year old child, either. I would certainly repeat every comment I have made face to face. No problem. Bear in mind I am only criticising your comments and reaction on this one, NOT you personally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
errmm...I didn't write the song I am quite aware of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
errmm...I didn't write the song errmm............I wasn't speaking to you. But thanks for playing. But you used my post in your quote, thereby inferring I had written it. So that was a mistake? In which case your apology is accepted......oh wait you didn't apologise  My bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
errmm...I didn't write the song errmm............I wasn't speaking to you. But thanks for playing. But you used my post in your quote, thereby inferring I had written it. So that was a mistake? In which case your apology is accepted......oh wait you didn't apologise My bad. You are quite right. I apologize for confusing you with the other person. I do not, however, apologize for my opinion. I need another drink.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
Okay cool, no probs...Easy enough to do on an emotive subject as this is.
And I expected no apology for your views. They are valid for you and I respect that 100%
Peace to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352 |
The author is clearly not advocating or glamourizing the abuse of a minor, right? I didn't read the lyric as either "advocating" or "glamourizing" the abuse of a minor. One of us has a serious reading comprehension problem. Well, that's quite possible. I think we can agree the lyric talks about pedophilia without clearly condemning it. But I don't agree that it "advocates" (recommends or supports) pedophilia. As for "glamorize" (make glamorous or desirable), how does the narrator feel about being in the relationship? The only time the narrator speaks about their own feelings are: I don’t know why
I always sigh
each time I think of her name
nothing was ever the sameOne could take the word "sigh" to mean "Gosh, I really loved that 32 year old rapist!"Or it could mean "Boy, I should be over these feelings of attachment by now - darned Stockholm Syndrome!" It doesn't seem to be a word that overly "glamorizes" the relationship. It seems to be just another ordinary choice in a song filled with trite and lazy "rhymes" (boy/boy and good/good).
-- David Cuny My virtual singer development blogVocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?BiaB 2025 | Windows 11 | Reaper | Way too many VSTis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“It doesn't seem to be a word that overly "glamorizes" the relationship. It seems to be just another ordinary choice in a song filled with trite and lazy "rhymes" (boy/boy and good/good).”
David -
You really are an expert on critiquing the songs of others. You say that this one is “filled with trite and lazy "rhymes".
On what basis do you claim any expertise in songwriting? On what basis do you presume to critique anyone's songwriting?
I have yet to hear any of your wonderful, well-crafted songs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352 |
You really are an expert on critiquing the songs of others. Am I? I never made that claim. You say that this one is “filled with trite and lazy "rhymes". Yes. Sorry,Gilley. I quoted "rhymes" because he rhymed "boy" with "boy" and "good" with "good." As for "trite", I'll defer to Pat Pattison on that one. On what basis do you claim any expertise in songwriting? I never claimed any expertise in songwriting. On what basis do you presume to critique anyone's songwriting? My comments were explaining why I didn't think this song promote or glamorize pedophilia. Specifically, I was speaking to the choice of the word "sigh", which is the only place where the narrator of the song voices any emotional response. I have yet to hear any of your wonderful, well-crafted songs. I'm not sure how that invalidates my ability to parse a song. Why the ad hominem attack?
-- David Cuny My virtual singer development blogVocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?BiaB 2025 | Windows 11 | Reaper | Way too many VSTis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“I'm not sure how that invalidates my ability to parse a song.”
What gives you the 'ability' to “parse” a song at all? That's precisely the point. You critique people's songs, never having written one yourself (or at least posted one), and everyone is supposed to take your criticism seriously. On what grounds?
Why the ad hominem attack?
A better question would be -
“Why would someone who has never written a song in his life comment on anyone's writing?”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,888
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,888 |
Oh Gilley,
what have you done to the forum?
Why didn't you let that boy grow two years older
and you would have created a wonderful song.
A forum mishap.
Guenter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352 |
What gives you the 'ability' to “parse” a song at all? Ah, you got me there. This "language" thing, using "communication" to encode the transmitting of information from the sender to the receiver is just beyond me. The last couple of posts prove that decisively. From now on, I'll leave critiquing to songwriters, endowed as they are with mystical powers to understand meter, rhyme and complex stuff beyond the ken of ordinary listeners. How any of this has any bearing on Gilley's song is beyond me...
-- David Cuny My virtual singer development blogVocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?BiaB 2025 | Windows 11 | Reaper | Way too many VSTis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11
Newbie
|
|
OP
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11 |
I could probably change 15 to 16 (and perhaps get rid of the curseword in the final verse). But, looking at the comments here, would that make a difference? I was thinking about how I decided to write this song, and the choices musically and otherwise, and I suspect that in the back of my mind was that 1971 film, Summer of '42. A boy, who is also 15, has his first sexual experience with an older women. She's closer to the boy's age, being in her 20s, but she is still an adult female who sexually initiates a 15-year-old. I might also have been affected, without thinking about it, by Michel Legrand's hauntingly beautiful score and the song at the heart of it, "The Summer Knows." I suspect I was going for the same sad, wistful feeling in the intro.
What I find interesting, though, is that Summer of '42 seems to get away with it. I wondered if the film had provoked any moral indignation at the time, so I went back and read some reviews that came out when the film was first released (NY Times, Roger Ebert, etc.) To my surprise, I couldn't find any that mentioned "pedophilia" or objected to the film's theme, or the actions of the Jennifer O'Neill character, on that basis. Are we living in different time with different sensibilities? Or was the movie just so sweet and drenched in nostalgia that few could condemn the plotline? Frankly, I don't think the movie would have worked if the boy had been 17. I think there is something about being about 15, in that stage between childhood and adulthood, that is necessary for this kind of story. But what do I know. Still, I wonder how people would have responded to Summer of '42 if it had been released in 2013, instead of 1971.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987 |
There was a more recent case in Washington State where a female teacher "initiated" a young boy and, if I recall, is still in prison. Her name is Mary Kay Leturnou and the boy was only 13.
Last edited by Don Gaynor; 07/15/13 02:12 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,352 |
Changing the age won't "fix" the problem, because the core issue is that the relationship is morally wrong. The legal distinction between children and adults is predicated on the idea that children lack the intellectual and moral capacity to understand the consequences of their actions. The adult in a relationship has the upper hand in every regard over the teenager, and that's why we give children and teenagers legal protection. There was once a sort of double-standard in play, where sex with an adult male was considered predatory rape, while sex with a adult female was a sort of "coming of age" incident. There was also the idea that it was less harmful, in that boys wouldn't become pregnant. The political and legal landscape has changed a lot since then. And in the past few years there's been a lot of high profile cases were older women have been charged with rape of teenagers. Here's a recent case of an adult teacher having sex with her student. The only reason she's not in jail is because she married the student (with the mother's blessing)! 
-- David Cuny My virtual singer development blogVocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?BiaB 2025 | Windows 11 | Reaper | Way too many VSTis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,682
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,682 |
I don't recall the female in this song being in a 'position of authority', which would change things.
Both 90db and Don (and DCUNY) have mentioned this. 11 - 13 yrs old is is different than 15 -16, under many circumstances. Especially when a teacher or mentor is involved.
Like Gilley, I think the age choice is significant in the reactions.
If he's 16 it is no legal issue in most states (provided no authority figure is involved). Being shy of that the 'pedophile' question comes up. That's why I posted the link of the Pedophile definition .. generally accepted to be a few years younger than 15.
I'm not condoning any of it, just questioning the reactions, and trying to clarify the accusations. I honestly don't think the original post was meant to promote pedophilia. But then again I don't know the original poster at all.
FWIW in the Letorneau case, the boy was 12 ..
Last edited by rharv; 07/15/13 07:23 PM.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,109 |
My take on this is that the wrong issue is being discussed. <my two cents> It isn't a question of whether the song has offended some people, because it clearly has. But there are two distinct groups and their opinions about what is OK are different. Therefore we can never get consensus based on a discussion of whether or not the subject is OK. Its really a question of censorship on the forum, and which group gets to decide what's not allowed. We've had this discussion several times , and it always ends up that we decide censorship is not what we want In the past we've had blow-ups when people posted songs with faith-based content. It is another situation in which two groups having opposing and irreconcileable opinions fight for control of the forum. When one group tells the other group they can't post faith-based songs because they don't like them, we quickly protest that they don't have the right to censor our posts based on their beliefs. And in a group with multiple points of view, there needs to be liberty to accommodate all of them, except where it violates other forum rules. In this case, forum rule #2 says:
2. There will be no profanity or foul language. Any disruptive language will be removed and you may receive sanctions.
therefore it is reasonable to request a change in the posted lyrics containing the offending language. But there's no rule about the songs content any more than there is a rule about posting faith based stuff. In both cases, allowing posts from the opposing group doesn't mean you agree with that sentiment. It just means that the forum doesn't have thought-police on duty. Personally, I didn't like the song either. But I don't want to set a precedent that starts an ideology war of both groups trying to set limits on the other. The most peaceable response when you don't like a post or a song, is to skip over it. That applies to all of us. (note to self: "yes, you too") If censorship DOES come into play, it should come from PGMusic, not from forum members. We're just guests in their house abiding by THEIR rules. </my two cents>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 794 |
+1
Great post Pat.
Dennis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introducing XPro Styles PAK 11 – Now Available for Windows Band-in-a-Box 2026 and Higher!
XPro Styles PAK 11 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box® version 2026 (and higher) is here with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 31 RealTracks/RealDrums!
Guess who’s back again? That’s right! It’s our XPro Styles PAK’s triumphant return with the 11th edition in this series! 100 new styles are coming your way spread across the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres. And this edition's wildcard genre explores the immense and far-reaching catalogue of electronic music! The included 31 RealTracks and RealDrums can be used with any Band-in-a-Box® 2026 (and higher) package.
Special offers available until August 31st, 2026!
All the XPro Styles PAKs 1-11 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 11 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2026 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Introducing Xtra Styles PAK 22 – Now Available for Windows Band-in-a-Box 2026 and Higher!
Xtra Styles PAK 22 for Windows & Mac Band-in-a-Box version 2026 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
It’s time to celebrate! Xtra Styles PAK 22 for Band-in-a-Box® is here, and we've got 200 brand-new styles coming your way!
No Xtra Styles PAK is complete without the classic rock & pop, jazz, and country volumes you know and love, and we’ve got plenty to share, with 150 styles spread across too many genres to list! Of course, it also wouldn’t be complete with our special wildcard volume to add a little spice and pizzazz to the mix. This year, because we loved it so much the first time, we’ve decided to make the second iteration of our SynthMaster volume, full of new sounds, interesting genres, and 50 engaging styles, all making use of the diverse SynthMaster plugin! Here you can find genres such as airy yacht rock, sultry electrotango, and even some synth soca funk. Don’t wait, pickup up Xtra Styles PAK 22 today!
In this PAK you can find: dulcet folk ballads, funky gospel country, Brazilian jazz fusion, upbeat 1980s pop, classic Americana, a plethora of breezy bossa novas, indie singer-songwriter, scintillating synthwave, exuberant electronica, and many, many more!
Special offers available until August 31st, 2026!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1-22 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 22 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 22.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 22 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 22 requires the 2026 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Introducing XPro Styles PAK 11 – Now Available for Mac Band-in-a-Box 2026 and Higher!
XPro Styles PAK 11 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box® version 2026 (and higher) is here with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 31 RealTracks/RealDrums!
Guess who’s back again? That’s right! It’s our XPro Styles PAK’s triumphant return with the 11th edition in this series! 100 new styles are coming your way spread across the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres. And this edition's wildcard genre explores the immense and far-reaching catalogue of electronic music! The included 31 RealTracks and RealDrums can be used with any Band-in-a-Box® 2026 (and higher) package.
Special offers available until August 31st, 2026!
All the XPro Styles PAKs 1-11 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of XPro Styles PAKs.
Video: XPro Styles PAK 11 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2026 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
Introducing Xtra Styles PAK 22 – Now Available for Mac Band-in-a-Box 2026 and Higher!
Xtra Styles PAK 22 for Mac & Windows Band-in-a-Box version 2026 (and higher) is here with 200 brand new RealStyles!
It’s time to celebrate! Xtra Styles PAK 22 for Band-in-a-Box® is here, and we've got 200 brand-new styles coming your way!
No Xtra Styles PAK is complete without the classic rock & pop, jazz, and country volumes you know and love, and we’ve got plenty to share, with 150 styles spread across too many genres to list! Of course, it also wouldn’t be complete with our special wildcard volume to add a little spice and pizzazz to the mix. This year, because we loved it so much the first time, we’ve decided to make the second iteration of our SynthMaster volume, full of new sounds, interesting genres, and 50 engaging styles, all making use of the diverse SynthMaster plugin! Here you can find genres such as airy yacht rock, sultry electrotango, and even some synth soca funk. Don’t wait, pickup up Xtra Styles PAK 22 today!
In this PAK you can find: dulcet folk ballads, funky gospel country, Brazilian jazz fusion, upbeat 1980s pop, classic Americana, a plethora of breezy bossa novas, indie singer-songwriter, scintillating synthwave, exuberant electronica, and many, many more!
Special offers available until August 31st, 2026!
All the Xtra Styles PAKs 1-22 are on special for only $29 each (reg $49), or get all 22 PAKs for $199 (reg $399)! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 22.
Video: Xtra Styles PAK 22 Overview & Styles Demos: Watch now!
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 22 requires the 2026 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Peter Gannon Talks Band-in-a-Box with zplane
zplane recently interviewed Peter Gannon, the founder and creator of Band-in-a-Box, about the software's early days, what sets it apart from AI, how zplane's audio algorithms are used in Band-in-a-Box, and more!
Special thanks to the team at zplane for their continued support.
Check out the full interview here: https://products.zplane.de/blog/peter-gannon-interview-pg-music
Last Chance! The Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® Special Ends Today (May 31, 2026) at 11:59pm PDT!
Time really is running out! Save up to 50% on Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® upgrades and receive a FREE Bonus PAK—only when you order by 11:59 PM PDT today!
We've added many major new features and new content in a redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
Version 2026 introduces a modernized GUI redesign across the program, with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, and a new Dark Mode option. There’s also a new side toolbar for quicker access to commonly used windows, and the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, making it easier to customize your workspace.
Another exciting new addition is the amazing new AI-Notes feature, which can transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI. View the results in notation or play them back as MIDI, and choose whether to transcribe an entire track or transcribe specific parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
Upgrade your Band-in-a-Box for Mac® to save up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade packages!
Plus, when you order your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac upgrade during our special, you'll receive a Free Bonus PAK of exciting new add-ons.
If you need any help deciding which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We are here to help!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Special Offers Extended Until May 31st!
Good news- we've extended our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® special offers until May 31, 2026!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 is packed with major new features, enhancements, and an incredible lineup of new content! The program now sports a sleek, modern GUI redesign across the entire interface, including updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, a new dark mode option, and more. The brand-new side toolbar provides quicker access to key windows, while the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, creating a flexible, clutter-free workspace. We have an amazing new “AI-Notes” feature. This transcribes polyphonic audio into MIDI so you can view it in notation or play it back as MIDI. You can transcribe an entire track (all pitched instruments and drums) or focus on individual parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
There are over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
When you order purchase Band-in-a-Box® 2026 before 11:59 PM PDT on May 31st, you'll also receive a Free Bonus PAK packed with exciting new add-ons.
Check out the Band-in-a-Box® for Mac packages page to find the best package for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,670
Posts808,265
Members40,183
| |
Most Online64,515
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean