The bit about “Nasim” seems just a little over the top:
The International Nazarene Beit Din is comprised of the Council of Emissaries and the Great Nazarene Sanhedrin.
Nasi (President) - Dr. James Trimm
Av Beit-Din - Rabbi Rob Miller
Council of Emissaries
(Twelve Seats)
*Rabbi Rob Miller
*Dr. James Trimm
Wayne Ingalls
(* Three "Pillars")
(9 empty seats)
Great Nazarene Sanhedrin
(Seventy plus one seats)
Dr. James Trimm - Nasi
Rabbi Rob Miller - Av Beit DIn
Wayne Ingalls
(68 empty seats)
The Nasim (Presidents) of the Nazarene Sanhedrin
1. Ya'akov (James) (c.30 C.E.- 63 C.E.)
2. Shim'on (Simeon) (63 C.E. - 98 C.E.)
3. Justus (98 C.E. -?)
4. Zakkai (Zaccheus) (?-?)
5. Toviyah (Tobias) (?-?)
6. Benyamin (Benjamin) (?-?)
7. Yochanan (John) (?-?)
8. Mattityahu (Matthew) (?-?)
9. Philip (?-?)
10. Seneca (?-?)
11. Justus (?-?)
12. Levi (?-?)
13. Efrayim (Ephres) (?-?)
14. Yosef (Joseph) (?-?)
15. Y'hudah (Judas) (?-132 C.E.)
*
16. Dr. James Scott Trimm (1996-Present)
The Av Beit-Dins of the Nazarene Sanhedrin:
1. Kefa (Peter) (c.30-68 C.E.)
2. Yochanan (John) (68-c. 100 C.E.)
3. ????? (100 C.E.-132 C.E.)
*
4. Rabbi Rob Miller (2007-Present)
(In 132 C.E. as a result of the Bar Kochba revolt, the Nazarene Sanhedrin seems to have been dissolved as Nazarene Judaism lost its organizational structure until it was reorganized in 1996 C.E. in accordance with Deut. 16:18)
I am clearly the editor and there is no deception there. I have already said, if you do not want to read the Journal, than do not read it.
Nice bait and switch there James. I never said you denied being the editor. What I said is that you said your journal is peer reviewed and clearly it is NOT. I also referenced your begging for money, which you attempted to deny by saying the website wasn't yours.
I have intentionally sought out some of the most serious scholars who were once part of TWI's research team, and sent them PDF copies of my book The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament, as well as the Issue of G'MIRA seeking their feedback (and perhaps even future participation in the Journal).
Is that supposed to lend you credibility? Well, maybe it will for those who were in TWI back in the early days, maybe it won't. I strongly suspect a large number of us here have little respect for TWI's so-called research team.
So far none of these persons have criticized the content (or even me personally) Certainly none of them has emailed back anything remotely suggesting that I have no idea what I am talking about.
Have any of them even responded to you at all???? If so, why not invite them to post here and tell us what they think of your work?
NASI is simply "President" the point is that I am the president of the International Nazarene Beit Din which governs the Worldwide Nazarene Assembly of Elohim since we reorganized the Beit Din in 1996 as a successor to the one of which Ya'akov HaTzadim (James the Just) was the first president.
This is a matter of our beliefs, and outside the academic realm.
...CALLING ALL MEMBERS AND EX-MEMBERS OF THE WAY INTERNATIONAL!
I am looking for members and ex-members of The Way International. As you may know, the late Dr. Wierwille, founder of The Way International, taught that the NT was originally written in Aramaic, that the Pedangta Aramaic NT is an important witness to the NT text, and that research tools on this subject are badly needed. As the following quotes demonstrate:
"...Aramaic was the original language in which the New Testament was written..."-- Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille; Twenty-fifth Anniversay Souvenir Booklet, p. 17.
"For centuries, the Greek versions of the New Testament have recieved their due attention while the Aramaic versions, for the most part, have been neglected. Discoveries in textual criticism in the last 150 years, however, have shown the Pedangta [Aramaic] text,... and other versions play as vital a role as the Greek in ascertaining the original New Testament text... In recent times some scholars have demonstrated that a Palestinian Aramaic original lies behind the Greek versions of New Testament documents.... research tools of the Pedangta [Aramaic] Version are essential to this task."-- Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille; The Concordance to the Pedangta Version of the Aramaic New Testament; p. ix
If you are interested in this type of research we would like to hear from you.
HEBREW/ARAMAIC NEW TESTAMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE
"Researching & publishing Hebrew and Aramaic N.T. manuscripts"
... Hebrew/Aramaic New Testament Research Institute
I get it. James, I have often wondered why you would bother with an ex-way international website. You are looking for ex-researchers to come work on things like Gmira? That would make sense to me at this point.
Well in the wake of my suit, yes that is something I might accomplish here. And even if I do not inspire these people to co-ordinate with me, if I inspire them to renew their work on Aramaic NT Origins then I have succeeded.
BTW if ex-TWI Research Team members started working on the ACADEMIC problem of Aramaic NT Origins OUTSIDE of TWI especially if they were acting as a "Team" formally or informally... don't you think that would be a stick in the eye of TWI?
I would like to see more work in this area even if I am not involved.
Well in the wake of my suit, yes that is something I might accomplish here. And even if I do not inspire these people to co-ordinate with me, if I inspire them to renew their work on Aramaic NT Origins then I have succeeded.
BTW if ex-TWI Research Team members started working on the ACADEMIC problem of Aramaic NT Origins OUTSIDE of TWI especially if they were acting as a "Team" formally or informally... don't you think that would be a stick in the eye of TWI?
That it might be, James. But at what cost? If sticking TWI in the eye means participating in the dishonesty and manipulation you have perpetrated here and elsewhere on the internet . . . . well I'd call that jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
NASI is simply "President" the point is that I am the president of the International Nazarene Beit Din which governs the Worldwide Nazarene Assembly of Elohim since we reorganized the Beit Din in 1996 as a successor to the one of which Ya'akov HaTzadim (James the Just) was the first president.
This is a matter of our beliefs, and outside the academic realm.
Well, at least he finally admits he is operating outside the academic realm, despite his frequent claims otherwise. He likewise admits HE (and his two buddies) decided they were the successors. Gee. . . . if I decide to appoint myself as the successor of the Apostles, does it make it so?
Also, I think the date is interesting. 1996 was when he and his buddies "reorganized" the Beit Din. That just so happens to be the same year the previous Beit Din he built got sick of him and disfellowshipped him.
Also, I think the date is interesting. 1996 was when he and his buddies "reorganized" the Beit Din. That just so happens to be the same year the previous Beit Din he built got sick of him and disfellowshipped him.
See James, I can do research too. :D
Again not true. Although the event you describe never happened, I assume you refer to the claims of a failed splinter group and refers to events that took place in 2007. They split off and claimed to have disfellowshipped me after their having been removed from office a few days earlier.
I'm simply astonished that you give names and dates (as you say) from 30CE to 132CE numbered 1 to 15 then leap jauntily from that to yourself as 16th president in 1996.
So this council lasts for a mere 100 years, for whatever reason does not continue, and then 1864 years later, 18.5 times the duration of the original council, it manages to reconvene itself and you magically appoint yourself as the next president?
I note you picked up on that, but didn't asnwer this:
James, if these are your family circumstances, I am sorry that you are in difficulties. The way to escape financial difficulties could indeed be to set up your own cult and get people to support you. Many have found this extremely lucrative.
Another method is to stop messing about glorifying yourself and your cronies, and get out there and do an honest day’s work. Feel some sweat on your brow as you put your back into some legitimate labor.
I'm simply astonished that you give names and dates (as you say) from 30CE to 132CE numbered 1 to 15 then leap jauntily from that to yourself as 16th president in 1996.
So this council lasts for a mere 100 years, for whatever reason does not continue, and then 1864 years later, 18.5 times the duration of the original council, it manages to reconvene itself and you magically appoint yourself as the next president?
I note you picked up on that, but didn't asnwer this:
Oh, don't be too shocked, Twinky. Afterall, it isn't any different from what VPW claimed when he said he was going to teach us The Word like it hadn't been taught since the first century. I'm sure somewhere out there are a bunch of very gullible and somewhat misdirected teenagers who will swallow James' b.s. too. Although, VPW did have an advantage in that the internet didn't yet exist when he started his little cult. James is going to have a difficult time overcoming that part. Especially given the ever growing wealth of information out there exposing his con.
Again not true. Although the event you describe never happened, I assume you refer to the claims of a failed splinter group and refers to events that took place in 2007. They split off and claimed to have disfellowshipped me after their having been removed from office a few days earlier.
My bad. That's right you started your first cult in 1996, got kicked out and then started this one in 2007. Hard to keep up with all the cons you've pulled James.
I'm simply astonished that you give names and dates (as you say) from 30CE to 132CE numbered 1 to 15 then leap jauntily from that to yourself as 16th president in 1996.
So this council lasts for a mere 100 years, for whatever reason does not continue, and then 1864 years later, 18.5 times the duration of the original council, it manages to reconvene itself and you magically appoint yourself as the next president?
I note you picked up on that, but didn't asnwer this:
I don't want to get into my doctrine here but it is covered in detail in my free PDF book The Apostasy and Restoration at
Oh, don't be too shocked, Twinky. Afterall, it isn't any different from what VPW claimed when he said he was going to teach us The Word like it hadn't been taught since the first century. I'm sure somewhere out there are a bunch of very gullible and somewhat misdirected teenagers who will swallow James' b.s. too. Although, VPW did have an advantage in that the internet didn't yet exist when he started his little cult. James is going to have a difficult time overcoming that part. Especially given the ever growing wealth of information out there exposing his con.
My bad. That's right you started your first cult in 1996, got kicked out and then started this one in 2007. Hard to keep up with all the cons you've pulled James.
No this is the same "cult" I started in 1996 :-)....
But seriously I have tried to keep two things separate:
1. My academic research on Hebrew and Aramaic NT Origins
2. My religious doctrine of Nazarene Judaism
Why is it that when I try to discuss the first, people try to discredit me because of the second.... isn't that being a religious bigot ?
No this is the same "cult" I started in 1996 :-)....
But seriously I have tried to keep two things separate:
1. My academic research on Hebrew and Aramaic NT Origins
2. My religious doctrine of Nazarene Judaism
Why is it that when I try to discuss the first, people try to discredit me because of the second.... isn't that being a religious bigot ?
I dunno. I would say you are dealing with a skeptical crowd, myself included, here at GSC. You have to shoot straight from the hip and have an indisputable track record. If reasonable doubt can be raised from a few searches credibility is pretty much lost. It can be regained but it puts the burden of proof on you to answer a lot of people shooting a lot of questions.
And I didn't ask about your doctrine, I asked WHY YOU DIDN'T GET A JOB! At least put some effort into trying to get a job!!
Or do you class yourself as self-employed? Self-employed cult leader?
Most already know that I stay home to take care of my disabled wife who cannot left at home alone for long.
I dunno. I would say you are dealing with a skeptical crowd, myself included, here at GSC. You have to shoot straight from the hip and have an indisputable track record. If reasonable doubt can be raised from a few searches credibility is pretty much lost. It can be regained but it puts the burden of proof on you to answer a lot of people shooting a lot of questions.
There you go.... when people read stuff on the internet, why do I end up with any burden of proof to prove myself innocent? What is that all about... and must I spend much of my time for the rest of my life defending myself to every new person I run into?
No this is the same "cult" I started in 1996 :-)....
But seriously I have tried to keep two things separate:
1. My academic research on Hebrew and Aramaic NT Origins
2. My religious doctrine of Nazarene Judaism
Why is it that when I try to discuss the first, people try to discredit me because of the second.... isn't that being a religious bigot ?
Perhaps, James, it is because you lie and manipulate? It isn't your doctrine that is in question, it is your integrity. If you lack integrity in promoting your work, odds are you lacked integrity when you were doing your work. Thus, odds are very, very good that your work is flawed.
Simimlarly, if you lack integrity your doctrine is also flawed. And because they are both dealing with religion they are to some extent intertwined.
There you go.... when people read stuff on the internet, why do I end up with any burden of proof to prove myself innocent? What is that all about... and must I spend much of my time for the rest of my life defending myself to every new person I run into?
I guess that is a double edged sword. On one hand there is worthless information all over the internet. On the other there are true accounts. What things you decide to answer are really of a personal nature. Again, that is a double edged sword. As an example, the way international has told it's followers that the information regarding them on the internet are all lies that the devil orchestrated against them. (I'm paraphrasing - but I heard the orders to stay off the internet firsthand) So not answering and seeking to discredit detractors is a technique used by some. So I have no clear answer. Only providing opposing viewpoints.
Most already know that I stay home to take care of my disabled wife who cannot left at home alone for long.
Who's this "most"? Cos it's new to people at the Cafe. If you have to stay home to take care of your family, do you not get some state aid to help you financially?
There you go.... when people read stuff on the internet, why do I end up with any burden of proof to prove myself innocent? What is that all about... and must I spend much of my time for the rest of my life defending myself to every new person I run into?
Maybe because you spend your time making extraordinarily long posts, presenting yourself as an expert, refusing to answer reasonable requests, obfuscating. Stop whining and just get on with proper responses. How you spend the rest of your life is up to you.
There's a burden of proof on any "expert" to show him/herself so, when they push their agenda as much as you're doing.
What it's about, as you well know, is that all of us here have been scammed with this story once already. How does this proverb read in Aramaic, Hebrew or whatever else is your specialist subject?
Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird .
Perhaps, James, it is because you lie and manipulate? It isn't your doctrine that is in question, it is your integrity. If you lack integrity in promoting your work, odds are you lacked integrity when you were doing your work. Thus, odds are very, very good that your work is flawed.
Simimlarly, if you lack integrity your doctrine is also flawed. And because they are both dealing with religion they are to some extent intertwined.
So then failing to have a good argument against my research claims, you question my integrity?
This is a common logic error called "Argumentum ad Hominem"
In this error a proposition is rejected not because of its validity or soundness, but because of the reputation of the one making the proposition.
So even if your attacks on my reputation were right (and they are not) your logic is in error because this has no bearing in the validity or soundness of my propositions.
So then failing to have a good argument against my research claims, you question my integrity?
This is a common logic error called "Argumentum ad Hominem"
In this error a proposition is rejected not because of its validity or soundness, but because of the reputation of the one making the proposition.
So even if your attacks on my reputation were right (and they are not) your logic is in error because this has no bearing in the validity or soundness of my propositions.
Yeah, yeah yeah, and just because VPW raped people it didn't guarantee his work was flawed. We've heard these arguments before too James. You are going to have to come up with something more original.
I lost interest in your research claim when it became apparent you were selling it. When it became apparent you weren't interested in having a discussion with anyone, because you already knew it all.
I called you out on your legalism in the doctrinal forum and in response you decided you weren't going to discuss doctrine there anymore. I called you out by contradicting your claim that Jewish people were required to go to the Synagogue every sabbath.
Since we've already descended into meta-discussion:
Use of Ad hominem is definitely a cheap way to go.
Problem is, though, that sometimes a persons integrity and credibility are directly tied to the message in question, in which case, such concerns would be valid.
edit:
Maybe if we had taken some time to question VPW's integrity and credibility, all those years ago, we wouldn't be here having this discussion.
There you go.... when people read stuff on the internet, why do I end up with any burden of proof to prove myself innocent? What is that all about... and must I spend much of my time for the rest of my life defending myself to every new person I run into?
That statement really nails it all down in one sentence. You really don't know. You really don't get it do you? And everywhere you go on the internet you run into this.... You really don't get it do you? And it's as plain on the noses on our faces to us, and has been to others for over a decade. But you don't get it.
That's cool, don't listen,... I'm sure it'll never happen again - ever. The weird thing here James, is - no one here at GSC is out to hang you out to dry as you seem to suppose, we're just pointing to the obvious
Maybe it's because it's obvious to everyone but you. maybe, after more than a decade, it's not a coincidence. And these "new people" they all keep coming to the same conclusions,.... how amazing!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
10
7
16
Popular Days
Jun 13
46
May 30
4
Jun 18
3
Jun 19
3
Top Posters In This Topic
Abigail 12 posts
Twinky 10 posts
OldSkool 7 posts
James Trimm 16 posts
Popular Days
Jun 13 2010
46 posts
May 30 2010
4 posts
Jun 18 2010
3 posts
Jun 19 2010
3 posts
Twinky
The bit about “Nasim” seems just a little over the top:
(my emphasis)
http://nazarenespace.ning.com/group/virtualchamberofhewnstone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
NASI is simply "President" the point is that I am the president of the International Nazarene Beit Din which governs the Worldwide Nazarene Assembly of Elohim since we reorganized the Beit Din in 1996 as a successor to the one of which Ya'akov HaTzadim (James the Just) was the first president.
This is a matter of our beliefs, and outside the academic realm.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Well in the wake of my suit, yes that is something I might accomplish here. And even if I do not inspire these people to co-ordinate with me, if I inspire them to renew their work on Aramaic NT Origins then I have succeeded.
BTW if ex-TWI Research Team members started working on the ACADEMIC problem of Aramaic NT Origins OUTSIDE of TWI especially if they were acting as a "Team" formally or informally... don't you think that would be a stick in the eye of TWI?
I would like to see more work in this area even if I am not involved.
Edited by James TrimmLink to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
That it might be, James. But at what cost? If sticking TWI in the eye means participating in the dishonesty and manipulation you have perpetrated here and elsewhere on the internet . . . . well I'd call that jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
Well, at least he finally admits he is operating outside the academic realm, despite his frequent claims otherwise. He likewise admits HE (and his two buddies) decided they were the successors. Gee. . . . if I decide to appoint myself as the successor of the Apostles, does it make it so?
Also, I think the date is interesting. 1996 was when he and his buddies "reorganized" the Beit Din. That just so happens to be the same year the previous Beit Din he built got sick of him and disfellowshipped him.
See James, I can do research too. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Hmmmmmmm
Now I'm starting to feel like somebody poked a stick in MY eye.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Again not true. Although the event you describe never happened, I assume you refer to the claims of a failed splinter group and refers to events that took place in 2007. They split off and claimed to have disfellowshipped me after their having been removed from office a few days earlier.
Edited by James TrimmLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
James, I can see you say Nasi means President.
I'm simply astonished that you give names and dates (as you say) from 30CE to 132CE numbered 1 to 15 then leap jauntily from that to yourself as 16th president in 1996.
So this council lasts for a mere 100 years, for whatever reason does not continue, and then 1864 years later, 18.5 times the duration of the original council, it manages to reconvene itself and you magically appoint yourself as the next president?
I note you picked up on that, but didn't asnwer this:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Oh, don't be too shocked, Twinky. Afterall, it isn't any different from what VPW claimed when he said he was going to teach us The Word like it hadn't been taught since the first century. I'm sure somewhere out there are a bunch of very gullible and somewhat misdirected teenagers who will swallow James' b.s. too. Although, VPW did have an advantage in that the internet didn't yet exist when he started his little cult. James is going to have a difficult time overcoming that part. Especially given the ever growing wealth of information out there exposing his con.
My bad. That's right you started your first cult in 1996, got kicked out and then started this one in 2007. Hard to keep up with all the cons you've pulled James.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
I don't want to get into my doctrine here but it is covered in detail in my free PDF book The Apostasy and Restoration at
http://www.lulu.com/nazarene
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Haven't the time or inclination to chase you around all over the internet, James.
Nothing to stop you posting a BRIEF synopsis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
No this is the same "cult" I started in 1996 :-)....
But seriously I have tried to keep two things separate:
1. My academic research on Hebrew and Aramaic NT Origins
2. My religious doctrine of Nazarene Judaism
Why is it that when I try to discuss the first, people try to discredit me because of the second.... isn't that being a religious bigot ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
And I didn't ask about your doctrine, I asked WHY YOU DIDN'T GET A JOB! At least put some effort into trying to get a job!!
Or do you class yourself as self-employed? Self-employed cult leader?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I dunno. I would say you are dealing with a skeptical crowd, myself included, here at GSC. You have to shoot straight from the hip and have an indisputable track record. If reasonable doubt can be raised from a few searches credibility is pretty much lost. It can be regained but it puts the burden of proof on you to answer a lot of people shooting a lot of questions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Most already know that I stay home to take care of my disabled wife who cannot left at home alone for long.
There you go.... when people read stuff on the internet, why do I end up with any burden of proof to prove myself innocent? What is that all about... and must I spend much of my time for the rest of my life defending myself to every new person I run into?
Edited by James TrimmLink to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Perhaps, James, it is because you lie and manipulate? It isn't your doctrine that is in question, it is your integrity. If you lack integrity in promoting your work, odds are you lacked integrity when you were doing your work. Thus, odds are very, very good that your work is flawed.
Simimlarly, if you lack integrity your doctrine is also flawed. And because they are both dealing with religion they are to some extent intertwined.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I guess that is a double edged sword. On one hand there is worthless information all over the internet. On the other there are true accounts. What things you decide to answer are really of a personal nature. Again, that is a double edged sword. As an example, the way international has told it's followers that the information regarding them on the internet are all lies that the devil orchestrated against them. (I'm paraphrasing - but I heard the orders to stay off the internet firsthand) So not answering and seeking to discredit detractors is a technique used by some. So I have no clear answer. Only providing opposing viewpoints.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Who's this "most"? Cos it's new to people at the Cafe. If you have to stay home to take care of your family, do you not get some state aid to help you financially?
Maybe because you spend your time making extraordinarily long posts, presenting yourself as an expert, refusing to answer reasonable requests, obfuscating. Stop whining and just get on with proper responses. How you spend the rest of your life is up to you.
Obfuscation
There's a burden of proof on any "expert" to show him/herself so, when they push their agenda as much as you're doing.
What it's about, as you well know, is that all of us here have been scammed with this story once already. How does this proverb read in Aramaic, Hebrew or whatever else is your specialist subject?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
So then failing to have a good argument against my research claims, you question my integrity?
This is a common logic error called "Argumentum ad Hominem"
In this error a proposition is rejected not because of its validity or soundness, but because of the reputation of the one making the proposition.
So even if your attacks on my reputation were right (and they are not) your logic is in error because this has no bearing in the validity or soundness of my propositions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Yeah, yeah yeah, and just because VPW raped people it didn't guarantee his work was flawed. We've heard these arguments before too James. You are going to have to come up with something more original.
I lost interest in your research claim when it became apparent you were selling it. When it became apparent you weren't interested in having a discussion with anyone, because you already knew it all.
I called you out on your legalism in the doctrinal forum and in response you decided you weren't going to discuss doctrine there anymore. I called you out by contradicting your claim that Jewish people were required to go to the Synagogue every sabbath.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Since we've already descended into meta-discussion:
Use of Ad hominem is definitely a cheap way to go.
Problem is, though, that sometimes a persons integrity and credibility are directly tied to the message in question, in which case, such concerns would be valid.
edit:
Maybe if we had taken some time to question VPW's integrity and credibility, all those years ago, we wouldn't be here having this discussion.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
That statement really nails it all down in one sentence. You really don't know. You really don't get it do you? And everywhere you go on the internet you run into this.... You really don't get it do you? And it's as plain on the noses on our faces to us, and has been to others for over a decade. But you don't get it.
That's cool, don't listen,... I'm sure it'll never happen again - ever. The weird thing here James, is - no one here at GSC is out to hang you out to dry as you seem to suppose, we're just pointing to the obvious
Maybe it's because it's obvious to everyone but you. maybe, after more than a decade, it's not a coincidence. And these "new people" they all keep coming to the same conclusions,.... how amazing!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Sad, what happens to the con man when he buys his own con. You think that is how Martindale sees it too?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.