Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    I cant believe i missed this thread lol
    Posted by MVPkilla4life


    Missed this thread?

    You would have had to have been in a coma for five years to have missed this thread; it's been regurgitated so many times.

    Wink
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    Rusty, I for one applaud you for taking the time to rebuff what is certainly a bunch of "Trollish propaganda on the part of Bubbainhawain or whatever his name is. That was a long list of garbage he just spewed out and I don't understand one thing it validated from his point of view. A bunch of jargon. Any person who attempts to paint the actions of Arlen Spector in a positive light obviously has an agenda.

    From one Pats fan to another I will say thanks for taking the time to accurately defend the team, even if it is just frivolous attacks from trolls with an agenda.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    BubbainHawaii is no troll.  He's been posting here longer than most of us.  He often takes contrarian views and criticizes the team but he is no troll. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    By whom?    By trolls?  Name one Pats fan besides Tubby here who has "called me out" for lying.  What is the topic and the lie?  You're really, really a dumb person. How's the paper pushing coming today? Enjoying it, are we?
    Posted by russgriswold


    LOL. That was funny. This is what I mean. Please show me in writing that I called you a liar. I'm betting you can't find it. Because you just made up shyt.

    Anyways, here's my response for your work of fiction:

    Russ :We have no idea if teams filmed the Pats coaches or sidelines and you'd have to have ridden a short bus at some point to claim no team didn't.
    Me:  I already indicated that others taped too – so, your declaration of a “truth” is a moot point.


    Russ:Even by mistake, a team's sideline will be in the frame of a camera shot. 

    Me: Irrelevant, we’re not talking about a “mistake”. It’s not like Joe Blow “accidently” turned on a camcorder and was merely walking around and just so happened to be filming at the time.

     
    Russ:What you are not getting, because you and Bubba are far too ignorant or just plain dumb, is the fact you are allowed to film.

    Me: Irrelevant, we all know it is legal to film from designated areas. You conveniently forgot to mention that RUSS, lol.

    Russ:Tubby is so dumb he equates the equivalent of speeding in a car to "cheating". Lol

    Me: As previously stated, Dictionary.com defines cheat as breaking a rule.  So, what you’re really saying is that Dictionary.com is “wrong”.  I was merely using the site as a source of objective information.

     

    Russ:The act of filming anything on the field, from a specific location granted by the NFL, is LEGAL.

    Me: Yep, already agreed upon. However, the Patriots filmed from areas that were NOT Designated.

    RUSS:The act is legal.  Please get this through your thick heads.

    Me: Yep, for the 3rd time, it is legal to film from designated areas. And for the 3rd time, the Patriots knowingly broke the rule by filming in a non-designated area. In addition, in an earlier response - you admitted they "partially" broke the rule. Are you asking for a take-back now?Smile

    Russ:Either explain how the location provided NE with an in-game advantage or get bent.

    Me: Show me an objective outside source that includes that as part of the definition of cheat. I used Dictionary.com for my definition.  Even when you cited definition #4 (fraud or deceit) as support for your opinion,  I would say you are wrong.  BB knew what was going on. He never admitted to wrong doing (because I’m sure he got legal advice to do so), but most sane Pats fans would agree that he knew what was going on – and was deceitful about it.


    Russ: So, if the concept of catching a coach on the camcorder, even by mistake, was so egregious, why didn't the NFL have a quality control process of sorts in place?

    Me: It doesn’t matter. Once a snitch like Mangini makes a formal complaint to the NFL, the NFL has no choice but to respond to the complaint.  The question of whether it is a good or bad rule is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Nice diversionary tactic though.

    Russ:These are questions you and your fellow trolls cannot answer.

    Me:  Hmmm, looks like I’ve answered your questions so far.  My answers make a lot more sense than yours so far. You have provided absolutely ZERO facts or evidence to substantiate your BS.



    Russ:Everything falls in  favor of BB and the Pats here.  Everything. It was obvious Walsh had nothing, the walkthrough rumor was almost impossible to have been legit due to 9/11 security being at its height that year AND the FACT NE had their walkthrough FIRST.

    Me: Where’s the evidence for your statement, Russ. What would Goodell/NFL have to gain by saying something happened – when nothing happened; as you claim? Did you talk to the Chief of Security at the stadium? Do you have a transcript of any interviews?  I’m guessing no. So, again, your work of fiction shows your level of paranoia. Good try, but you still have no objective website to substantiate your claim.

    Russ:And when confronted and forced to tell the truth with a written statement, everything checked out in terms of what BB told Goodell.

    Me: I have no clue what yer talking about Russ.  BB indicated that he was unaware whether teams were being filmed in illegal areas. Please show me the transcript of what that written statement was.

    Russ:As you can see, or maybe you can’t due to an incredibly low IQ, Roger Goodell stated there was no advantage. He says it right there within the timeline link that Tubby just posted.

    Me: As previously stated, many people interpret cheat as defined in dictionary.com – the breaking of a rule. Since the Patriots broke a rule, many people feel the Patriots cheated.

    Russ:I find it highly comical that Tubby wants me to provide quotes, and when I do, he denies it.

    Me: I asked you to provide facts or evidence from objective source other than from RussMakesUpShyt.com.  So, again…you couldn’t find any evidence, could you, Russ?


    Russ:Hey Tubby, do you think you and your boyfriend here, still believe Chris Mortensen when he said NE is being investigated for "sabotaging communications" during games?

    Me: Can’t speak to it because I didn’t hear or read about it. Regardless, on your free time, feel free to let us know what the outcome was.  Please provide the source, so we know you’re not makin’ up shyt yet again.


    Russ:Do you think it's good journalism to print specualtion and heresay by a jealous rival or rivals, and then pass it off as a fact?

    Me: Irrelevant. We all concur that the media likes to sensationalize current events.

    Russ: you know who controls the headsets?  The NFL does, not the home team.

    Me: Irrelevant.  Glad to know you own NFL trivial pursuit.

    Russ:I still have yet to understand what posting a timeline even means here considering it actually shows how GOODELL's DRACONIAN RULING AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF HIS OWN RULES PUT HIM IN A BAD POSITION. I know the timeline BETTER than either one of you idiots, as do other Pats fans.  We all watched the witch hunt unfold. remember?
    This came in February, SIX MONTHS after he punished NE and only NE.  So, after doing his homework, even Goodell knew he messed up with his Draconian ruling.

    Me: It was merely to point out why the media coverage lasted so long. As clearly stated, events happened over time. Therefore, media coverage occurred over time. That’s why the coverage lasted so long, Russ.  I think that is more plausible than some man behind the curtain (mebbe the Wizard of Oz? LOL) orchestrating and coordinating a “witchhunt” against the Patriots.  Have you found the man on the Rusty Knoll yet?   Damn, my response made me laugh so hard I peed myself.


    Russ:  Goodell destroyed the tapes BB sent him because it had other teams on there filming NE from field level. If one of those tapes were duped or stolen, people would see other teams needed to be punished for "cheating". The original Week 1 tape that was confiscated was stolen, so Goodell can't even hold onto his own property, apparently.
    Funny how he destroyed the evidence, showed Walsh's after sifting through it personally, yet you and your band of dumb-dumbs can't see it.  You just can't, because you don't want to.  You prefer to let the ESPN Josef Goebbels propaganda be your own personal truth because you are a Jets fan.

    Me: Oh my goodness.  Total speculation on your part. Yes, you have us all convinced that those are actual facts!!! Oh. BTW, what is your source on this again? Please include the link.

     

    RUSS:The Jets also "cheated". 
    Me: LOL.  I agree. So since the JETS ALSO cheated, then that must inherently mean the Patriots  cheated.

    Glad you agreed that the Patriots cheated….LOL.


    Russ:Just who was beaten to a pulp here?  Everyone can see it's you, Tubby and other uneducated trolls who have been completely bitchslapped off this thread and the witch hunt known as Spygate.
    ESPN still can't get it right.
    They have been telling us for months Brady and NE are at odds over his contract, yet you want to source ESPN?????
    Me: Here’s the problem, Russ. Not once in your response did you provide a credible source. Not one. So, I’m  pretty sure that I won.

     

     

    The following is your modus operandi:

    When someone disagrees with you or calls you out on a point, you immediately insult them, their mother, and/or call them a troll.

    When other’s actually substantiate what they say from objective sources, you divert attention to include irrelevant topics and insult the writer even more. Why? So, hopefully no one notices that you could NOT substantiate your own viewpoint. 

     

    The reason why you do this is because you’re very insecure about yourself. It’s a very common tactic for those individuals who cannot admit that they are wrong. We all understand that about you. Unfortunately, none of us are able to do an intervention. The only thing we can do is suggest you have some Kool-Aid to calm you down.

     

    I’m also pretty sure I heard you sobbing and crying yourself to sleep at night – repeating over and over again: “Bill, you didn’t cheat. Bill, you didn’t cheat. I love you. You’re the best and would NEVER do that!”

    It’s kind of disturbing that a man like you have such thoughts, but we understand.

     

    There, there, little boy. It’s okay for you to cry. Have a sip of Kool-Aid.

     

    Bottom Line Russ, WHERE ARE THE LINKS FOR SUPPORTING YOUR STATEMENTS FROM AN OBJECTIVE SOURCE?

     

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : Missed this thread? You would have had to have been in a coma for five years to have missed this thread; it's been regurgitated so many times.
    Posted by p-mike



    I was bored.  Football is still so far away, I thought I would incite Russ a little to provide entertainment for the masses Cool
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : Umm, is there really a question just who belongs in an institution after this display?  Seek help. Like, today. Oh my good god.
    Posted by russgriswold


    Again, good diversion Russ. No matter how many times you write and say things like above - it just doesn't help your cause or mean they're true. Say after me: "Bill didn't cheat...Bill didn't cheat"

    Don't forget to click the heels of your cleats 3 times.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : Far from a "diversion". Anyone who reads your little playland dissertation can see you are clearly a very disturbed little individual. I am sure there are some good facitilies where you live. All the best.
    Posted by russgriswold


    LOL. At least we can agree that you couldn't substantiate your statements Russ.
    I know I had fun, hope you did too.
    Peace, Brah.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : LOL. At least we can agree that you couldn't substantiate your statements Russ. I know I had fun, hope you did too. Peace, Brah.
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    It's over, It's really over.. The only thing missing is Brotha Iz singing "Over the Rainbow" in the background.

    Laughing
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : It's over, It's really over.. The only thing missing is Brotha Iz singing "Over the Rainbow" in the background.
    Posted by ewhite1065


    I love that song Cool
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ewhite1065. Show ewhite1065's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : I love that song
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    Me too.. I listen to an all night radio station where the guy plays it every Saturday morning at 4:30 AM my time.. I always thought it was like Richie Havens or one of the Woodstock dudes doing it until he said it was Brutha IZ. Pretty Cool Youtube Vid too.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from whodeawhodat. Show whodeawhodat's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : I asked you to provide facts or evidence from objective source other than from RussMakesUpShyt.com. That is a great name for his website.  One of the best lines I have read on this forum.
    Also, This should be Rustytrombone's signature line except he should substitute "I", "My" and "Me" for "you".
    The following is your modus operandi: When someone disagrees with you or calls you out on a point, you immediately insult them, their mother, and/or call them a troll. When other’s actually substantiate what they say from objective sources, you divert attention to include irrelevant topics and insult the writer even more. Why? So, hopefully no one notices that you could NOT substantiate your own viewpoint.     The reason why you do this is because you’re very insecure about yourself. It’s a very common tactic for those individuals who cannot admit that they are wrong. We all understand that about you. Unfortunately, none of us are able to do an intervention. The only thing we can do is suggest you have some Kool-Aid to calm you down.   I’m also pretty sure I heard you sobbing and crying yourself to sleep at night – repeating over and over again: “Bill, you didn’t cheat. Bill, you didn’t cheat. I love you. You’re the best and would NEVER do that!” It’s kind of disturbing that a man like you have such thoughts, but we understand.   There, there, little boy. It’s okay for you to cry. Have a sip of Kool-Aid.   Posted by BubbaInHawaii

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tcal2. Show Tcal2's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    What do you get when you have two posters, who refuse to let the other guy get the last word in, battling?


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from whodeawhodat. Show whodeawhodat's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    the odd thing is that the neverending story is only 453 pages long!  I wonder how many pages this thread will reach.  I know that rustytrombone can keep regurgitating the same trash for at least 453 pages but I would have to think that Hawain dood will get tired of proving him wrong.  I mean, how many times has rustytrombone already ignored the rational conversation of this arguement and the actual issues that are being opined and gone off on some tangent to claim victory and that he has slapped all those opposed...

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    I was in Wiakiki for my honeymoon last year and that guys picture was all over the place lol
    Posted by MVPkilla4life

    He's right up there with Don Ho.....but the latter was well before your time

    Cool
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    Not to mention he got his "facts" from ESPN which is not a place you go to for facts. ESPN of course is going to have a bunch of BS on their website about spygate because they were the morons spreading lies and dragging the Pats through the mud through out the whole thing and then when it came out that their was no super bowl tape they didnt apologize they just simply stopped talking about it. So excuse me if i dont trust anything anyone from ESPN has to say about anything ever.
    Posted by MVPkilla4life


    MVP, got no axe to grind with you.  The only point in the time line is to demonstrate that different events happened over time. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. The content wasn't the point. I used the timeline to clearly show that the coverage lasted a long time because events occurred over time.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    Yea but Bubba used ESPN for his source so you cant really trust any of the points he made using that source since that source is clearly corrupt.
    Posted by MVPkilla4life


    Don't forget. I used dictionary.com too - we all know they're suspect too....lol.

    Cool

    That's still two more sources than RUSS!!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : Me too.. I listen to an all night radio station where the guy plays it every Saturday morning at 4:30 AM my time.. I always thought it was like Richie Havens or one of the Woodstock dudes doing it until he said it was Brutha IZ. Pretty Cool Youtube Vid too.
    Posted by ewhite1065


    who woulda thought that a voice like that could come from a big man like Brutha IZ
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos :
    Posted by whodeawhodat


    Yeah, the website name was okay, but I thought the funniest line was:

    "Me: It was merely to point out why the media coverage lasted so long. As clearly stated, events happened over time. Therefore, media coverage occurred over time. That’s why the coverage lasted so long, Russ.  I think that is more plausible than some man behind the curtain (mebbe the Wizard of Oz? LOL) orchestrating and coordinating a “witchhunt” against the Patriots.  Have you found the man on the Rusty Knoll yet?   Damn, my response made me laugh so hard I peed myself."

    I thought it was poetic, considering we were talking about witchunts and conspiracies.

    Laughing
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    BubbainHawaii is no troll.  He's been posting here longer than most of us.  He often takes contrarian views and criticizes the team but he is no troll. 
    Posted by themightypatriotz


    I am glad you think so and it is great that he has posted here so long. However when i read a 20 paragraph "Timeline" derived from the source of all sources "ESPN" about how the Patriots and Belichick are just plain cheaters then I will go ahead and call the person who posted it a troll or whatever else. Like I said before it is a bunch of garbage has no merit.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos





    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : I am glad you think so and it is great that he has posted here so long. However when i read a 20 paragraph "Timeline" derived from the source of all sources "ESPN" about how the Patriots and Belichick are just plain cheaters then I will go ahead and call the person who posted it a troll or whatever else. Like I said before it is a bunch of garbage has no merit.
    Posted by TrueChamp


    True, if that was the only thing you read, I can understand why you think that. However, if you read all of the posts in this thread (and u would be kinda insane to do so) you would realize that it was NOT the content but the occurence  of events to explain why the media coverage lasted so long. Again, since the events occured over time - the media coverage occurs over time.

    If all of the events in said article occurred exactly on 9/9/2007 AND media coverage continued every day for 6 months - then the argument for saying a witchunt or conspiracy becomes stronger.

    Here's another link if that makes u happy:
    http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/spygate/index.html

    Again when sensational events occur over time, media coverage of sensational events occur over time.

    My guess is that someone will now claim that the NY Times is equivalent or worse vs. ESPN or that someone will say - well, they're owned by NY, so, of course they're against us.

    Hope that clarifies the use of a timeline.


     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    This is a dead horse, but you shouldn't need six pages of repetitive blather to arrive at the conclusion that the only reason "the media" does anything is for money. Sure, it might be a witchhunt -- but it's only a witchhunt as long as the ads are selling.

    Carry on . . .










     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : True, if that was the only thing you read, I can understand why you think that. However, if you read all of the posts in this thread (and u would be kinda insane to do so) you would realize that it was NOT the content but the occurence  of events to explain why the media coverage lasted so long. Again, since the events occured over time - the media coverage occurs over time. If all of the events in said article occurred exactly on 9/9/2007 AND media coverage continued every day for 6 months - then the argument for saying a witchunt or conspiracy becomes stronger. Here's another link if that makes u happy: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/spygate/index.html Again when sensational events occur over time, media coverage of sensational events occur over time. My guess is that someone will now claim that the NY Times is equivalent or worse vs. ESPN or that someone will say - well, they're owned by NY, so, of course they're against us. Hope that clarifies the use of a timeline.
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    I admit that is pretty much the extent of what i read, it was tough to follow as you eluded to. If I have inaccurately accused you of being the dreaded "Troll" then I apologize, perhaps I took what you said out of context, but only if you are really a fan and do indeed believe the Pats cheated. If you do I disagree but to each his own.

    I still applaud Russ as he devotes a significant amount of time to defending the Pats in all angles. Some may say perhaps too much time but I don't doubt his intentions. He is surely a hardcore Patties fan.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos : I admit that is pretty much the extent of what i read, it was tough to follow as you eluded to. If I have inaccurately accused you of being the dreaded "Troll" then I apologize, perhaps I took what you said out of context, but only if you are really a fan and do indeed believe the Pats cheated. If you do I disagree but to each his own. I still applaud Russ as he devotes a significant amount of time to defending the Pats in all angles. Some may say perhaps too much time but I don't doubt his intentions. He is surely a hardcore Patties fan.
    Posted by TrueChamp


    FWIW, I think Russ knows his stuff. I've stated that in several posts.

    I am a Pats fan, and do think the Pats cheated. I think they also got a raw deal with the penalty - but NOT because it was a witchhunt or conspiracy, but because Goodell/NFL had to make an example of the Patriots.  And, after that, Spygate took a life of its own in the media because it is - and always will be - a sensational topic for the media to write about.

    If the same thing happened to the Colts, Steelers, Cowboys, Raiders, or other "hated" teams. I can only speak for myself that if it happened to the Colts, I'd probably use it as easy fodder if I wanted to mess around with Underdoggggg (how many g's u up to dog?).
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos

    In Response to Re: Russ vs. JimmyJack and UnderRoos:
    This is a dead horse, but you shouldn't need six pages of repetitive blather to arrive at the conclusion that the only reason "the media" does anything is for money. Sure, it might be a witchhunt -- but it's only a witchhunt as long as the ads are selling. Carry on . . .
    Posted by p-mike



    lol...i was trying.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share