Virtual Magic Kingdom Community Fansite
VMK Forums | Disney | Virtual Magic Kingdom (Official Site)
VMK Forums Home VMK Forums VMK Forums Gallery Arcade User Control Panel Register! Members Lose Your Marbles? Click Here! Search VMK Forums

Go Back   VMK Forums - Virtual Magic Kingdom Online Community, Forums & Fansite > VMK Game Forums > VMK Remembered > VMK Remembered Archive

VMK Remembered Archive Archive for VMK Remembered forum.

Old I still don't understand...

Login or Register now to see less ads.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-05-2009, 08:58 PM
ThrillJacob ThrillJacob is offline
Registered+
Awards Showcase
VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 1


Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: VMK Central
Posts: 76
VIP
My Mood: SaveVMK
ThrillJacob is as Frosty as a Snowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
Why would Paramount void the contract if Disney continued with Sulake? That doesn't make any sense. And January 2008 is not when Disney started acting "strange" about VMK; they discontinued quests in WDW before that. You mentioned earlier that VMK would need an overhaul to switch contractors. Whether that is true or not, Disney would have done it if they thought VMK was a money-making opportunity. Do you really think Disney would have dropped the idea of hiring a new subcontractor because of the necessity of an overhaul?

This theory takes 2 facts about Sulake and makes them seem connected using a probable story. It's believable if you readily accept that Paramount would drop Sulake's contract if Disney continued with Sulake. But that doesn't make any sense. Why can't two companies associate themselves with Sulake at the same time?
They are rival movie companies and don't want to be associated with Sulake at the same time. Why? Both Habbo and VMK have links to Sulake's site, and that can lead them to another game which advertises the rival. Maybe Paramount started talks with Sulake towards the end of 2008? The overhaul is not really an overhaul at all, more like dumping VMK and making a new game from scratch. Paramount most likely wouldn't allow Sulake to turn over the VMK database to allow users to be ported over to the new game.

Like I said, they're rivals. It's business. That would be like Bob Iger being CEO of Disney and Universal Studios at the same time.
  #32  
Old 08-06-2009, 04:08 AM
StitchMad's Avatar
StitchMad StitchMad is offline
Red Flips Rule!
Awards Showcase
Patriot 2011 Award EKB Day Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award Halloween'10 Award 2010 Holiday Award Carol Parody Winner's Award Epitaph Winner's Award 
Total Awards: 39


Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Red Flips Land
Posts: 4,436
VIP
My Mood: RedFlips
StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!StitchMad has Levitated to new heights!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
I agree here. Now I just want to put a little spin on it.

Unlike in their other pay-to-play online games, VMK was not bringing in money directly to the WDIG. However, it was making money for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, which helped develop the game. So, after communicating with WDPR about what they thought VMK's influence was on revenue, WDIG decided that VMK did not have the potential to be a financially successful pay-to-play game and so it was closed. Does this sound probable?
That sounds about right to me, and probably an adding factor. Other divisions other than the WDIG were benefitting more than them. It's probably a law or Disney rule or Bob Iger's wishlist that WDIG can't accept more than 10p per year from the public.

There was probably some rubbish with Sulake at the same time which was just the icing on the cake. Get rid of the game - it's a headache.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
They are rival movie companies and don't want to be associated with Sulake at the same time. Why? Both Habbo and VMK have links to Sulake's site, and that can lead them to another game which advertises the rival. Maybe Paramount started talks with Sulake towards the end of 2008? The overhaul is not really an overhaul at all, more like dumping VMK and making a new game from scratch. Paramount most likely wouldn't allow Sulake to turn over the VMK database to allow users to be ported over to the new game.

Like I said, they're rivals. It's business. That would be like Bob Iger being CEO of Disney and Universal Studios at the same time.
Don't forget there was VMK advertisements on Habbo USA for well over a year.
__________________
  #33  
Old 08-06-2009, 10:02 AM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
They are rival movie companies and don't want to be associated with Sulake at the same time. Why? Both Habbo and VMK have links to Sulake's site, and that can lead them to another game which advertises the rival. Maybe Paramount started talks with Sulake towards the end of 2008? The overhaul is not really an overhaul at all, more like dumping VMK and making a new game from scratch. Paramount most likely wouldn't allow Sulake to turn over the VMK database to allow users to be ported over to the new game.

Like I said, they're rivals. It's business. That would be like Bob Iger being CEO of Disney and Universal Studios at the same time.
Links will always lead to more links; it's inevitable and therefore not a probable concern for companies. Paramount couldn't tell Sulake what to do with VMK, especially since Sulake started working for Disney before Sulake signed with Paramount. Bob Iger is a person; Sulake is a company. A company can certainly do subcontracting work with one company while signing an agreement with another company. Just because two companies are rivals doesn't mean they can't profit from the same other company. I do see where problems could arise, but remember, the 2 associations did coexist from January 2008 to May 2008. Why the sudden problem after about 5 months of Disney and Paramount being "connected" by Sulake?

Quote:
Originally Posted by StitchMad View Post
That sounds about right to me, and probably an adding factor. Other divisions other than the WDIG were benefitting more than them. It's probably a law or Disney rule or Bob Iger's wishlist that WDIG can't accept more than 10p per year from the public.

There was probably some rubbish with Sulake at the same time which was just the icing on the cake. Get rid of the game - it's a headache.
Yes lol, it is difficult to sort this closure out, especially when Disney gave us a bogus explanation and tried to push us into their other online games, as
if we were too blind to notice what particular Disney game we were playing. Whether Sulake is involved we can't say for sure, but for now I just don't see it.
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
  #34  
Old 08-07-2009, 04:06 AM
ThrillJacob ThrillJacob is offline
Registered+
Awards Showcase
VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 1


Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: VMK Central
Posts: 76
VIP
My Mood: SaveVMK
ThrillJacob is as Frosty as a Snowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
Links will always lead to more links; it's inevitable and therefore not a probable concern for companies. Paramount couldn't tell Sulake what to do with VMK, especially since Sulake started working for Disney before Sulake signed with Paramount. Bob Iger is a person; Sulake is a company. A company can certainly do subcontracting work with one company while signing an agreement with another company. Just because two companies are rivals doesn't mean they can't profit from the same other company. I do see where problems could arise, but remember, the 2 associations did coexist from January 2008 to May 2008. Why the sudden problem after about 5 months of Disney and Paramount being "connected" by Sulake?
My thinking is this: Sulake went to a bidding war and Paramount won. The terms of the contract were that Paramount is promoted in Habbo for so many years, and will be exclusively promoted after the contract with Disney ran out.
  #35  
Old 08-07-2009, 07:15 AM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
My thinking is this: Sulake went to a bidding war and Paramount won. The terms of the contract were that Paramount is promoted in Habbo for so many years, and will be exclusively promoted after the contract with Disney ran out.
Why would a bidding war be necessary? Paramount made a licensing agreement with Habbo that allowed Habbo to create virtual items that were based on Paramount films. This agreement was made in January 2008. At that time, Sulake, the creator of Habbo, had already been doing subcontracting work for Disney for over 2 years. From this point until the closure on May 21, 2008, Habbo held the rights to create virtual items based on Paramount films while Sulake, the creator of Habbo, continued working for VMK. 5 months. Nothing happened. Then, on May 21, VMK closed and Sulake consequently stopped working for Disney. After the closing, Habbo still held the same licensing agreement with Paramount.

The point I'm trying to make is that the 2 associations are unrelated. The facts support it. If a bidding war had taken place, VMK would have closed in January 2008 immediately following the Paramount-Sulake agreement. But no, it did not.

The reason for the closing is simple. Disney didn't think VMK would benefit them financially as a pay-to-play game, so they shut it down.
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
  #36  
Old 08-07-2009, 03:03 PM
EtnaGreen's Avatar
EtnaGreen EtnaGreen is offline
Deal with it!
Awards Showcase
EKB Day Award St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Halloween'10 Award Talk Like A Pirate Day 2010 Graphics Trio Award 
Total Awards: 23

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Land of the Awesome!
Posts: 4,404
Born In Park
My Mood: Evil
EtnaGreen is covered with ConfettiEtnaGreen is covered with ConfettiEtnaGreen is covered with Confetti
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
Why would a bidding war be necessary? Paramount made a licensing agreement with Habbo that allowed Habbo to create virtual items that were based on Paramount films. This agreement was made in January 2008. At that time, Sulake, the creator of Habbo, had already been doing subcontracting work for Disney for over 2 years. From this point until the closure on May 21, 2008, Habbo held the rights to create virtual items based on Paramount films while Sulake, the creator of Habbo, continued working for VMK. 5 months. Nothing happened. Then, on May 21, VMK closed and Sulake consequently stopped working for Disney. After the closing, Habbo still held the same licensing agreement with Paramount.

The point I'm trying to make is that the 2 associations are unrelated. The facts support it. If a bidding war had taken place, VMK would have closed in January 2008 immediately following the Paramount-Sulake agreement. But no, it did not.

The reason for the closing is simple. Disney didn't think VMK would benefit them financially as a pay-to-play game, so they shut it down.
If vmk wasn't benefiting them financially from the beginning, why would they wait three years to shut it down? I know Disney can be very blind sometimes, but not that blind.
__________________
  #37  
Old 08-07-2009, 07:40 PM
Noelle's Avatar
Noelle Noelle is offline
Still miss VMK
Awards Showcase
Patriot 2011 Award 2010 Holiday Award Caption Contest Winner's Award Patriot 2010 Award Guess the Picture Winner's Award VMK Memories Award 2010 Crossword Puzzle Participant's Award Your Favorite Attraction Award 
Total Awards: 22


Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Main Street
Posts: 1,054
My Mood: Happy
Noelle is floating through Inner Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by EtnaGreen View Post
If vmk wasn't benefiting them financially from the beginning, why would they wait three years to shut it down? I know Disney can be very blind sometimes, but not that blind.
Also, we know that there were a lot of new items yet to introduced into the game which is another reason I don't buy their anniversary explanation.
  #38  
Old 08-07-2009, 08:58 PM
Bobray's Avatar
Bobray Bobray is offline
Go Donald Duck!!!!!!!!!!!
Awards Showcase
Happy St. Patrick's Day 2010 Guess the Picture Winner's Award Which Disney Character Participant's Award Golden Years Award VMKF's Klingon Appreciation Day Patriot 2009 Award Guess the Picture Winner's Award VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 11


Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A Very Merry Unbirthday
Posts: 391
My Mood: Exasperated
Bobray is spinning in a Cursed Storm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EtnaGreen View Post
If vmk wasn't benefiting them financially from the beginning, why would they wait three years to shut it down? I know Disney can be very blind sometimes, but not that blind.
Didn't you notice all of the advertisement? The sci-fi drive in's screen, in-park quests. VMK advertised for Disney while we played. But as the economy has been worsening, Disney probably thought free virtual games were the first to go, or that the advertising wasn't worth it. Cuts have to be made in a company. Even workers at the parks got cuts.
__________________
Sig made by Friez!
"Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy!"
  #39  
Old 08-07-2009, 09:21 PM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by EtnaGreen View Post
If vmk wasn't benefiting them financially from the beginning, why would they wait three years to shut it down? I know Disney can be very blind sometimes, but not that blind.
VMK was a financial success, that is why Disney kept it open beyond its original promotional timeframe. VMK got people to go to the parks. Disney made agreements with Kellogg's, Apple, and eBay during VMK's existence to make even more money. However, when VMK started to tank (at least, by their estimation), Disney had to decide between making VMK a pay-to-play or shutting it down. Ultimately, they decided that VMK was not making them money and that it did not have the potential to succeed, so they closed it down.

This was the mistake. VMK had potential. But Disney decided to look to their other online games for revenue.
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
  #40  
Old 08-08-2009, 05:17 AM
ThrillJacob ThrillJacob is offline
Registered+
Awards Showcase
VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 1


Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: VMK Central
Posts: 76
VIP
My Mood: SaveVMK
ThrillJacob is as Frosty as a Snowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
Why would a bidding war be necessary? Paramount made a licensing agreement with Habbo that allowed Habbo to create virtual items that were based on Paramount films. This agreement was made in January 2008. At that time, Sulake, the creator of Habbo, had already been doing subcontracting work for Disney for over 2 years. From this point until the closure on May 21, 2008, Habbo held the rights to create virtual items based on Paramount films while Sulake, the creator of Habbo, continued working for VMK. 5 months. Nothing happened. Then, on May 21, VMK closed and Sulake consequently stopped working for Disney. After the closing, Habbo still held the same licensing agreement with Paramount.

The point I'm trying to make is that the 2 associations are unrelated. The facts support it. If a bidding war had taken place, VMK would have closed in January 2008 immediately following the Paramount-Sulake agreement. But no, it did not.

The reason for the closing is simple. Disney didn't think VMK would benefit them financially as a pay-to-play game, so they shut it down.
My guess is there was a bidding war because, like I said, they didn't want to be networked to their rival movie company. The agreement with Disney would have cost money to void out, which is why they co-existed for 5 months.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobray View Post
Didn't you notice all of the advertisement? The sci-fi drive in's screen, in-park quests. VMK advertised for Disney while we played. But as the economy has been worsening, Disney probably thought free virtual games were the first to go, or that the advertising wasn't worth it. Cuts have to be made in a company. Even workers at the parks got cuts.
The advertising was more than worth it, but when they closed VMK Central, they kind of ruined it. I have seen Annual Passholders buy one day passes to avoid the questing limit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelle View Post
Also, we know that there were a lot of new items yet to introduced into the game which is another reason I don't buy their anniversary explanation.
Do you recall a Yavn Speaks where he mentioned big plans for the third birthday back in May-June 2007? They were big alright...
  #41  
Old 08-08-2009, 05:52 AM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
My guess is there was a bidding war because, like I said, they didn't want to be networked to their rival movie company. The agreement with Disney would have cost money to void out, which is why they co-existed for 5 months.
In your theory, Paramount wins Sulake in a bidding war. The result of the bidding war is what voids the Disney-Sukake agreement and secures the Paramount-Sukake agreement. Plus, a bidding war would not take 5 months, that's ridiculous. Negotiations would be made in one single meeting.

And even if money had to be paid to void the Disney-Sulake agreement, why would Disney wait 5 months to pay it? According to your theory, doesn't Disney want to be disconnected from Paramount?
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
  #42  
Old 08-08-2009, 05:55 AM
ThrillJacob ThrillJacob is offline
Registered+
Awards Showcase
VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 1


Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: VMK Central
Posts: 76
VIP
My Mood: SaveVMK
ThrillJacob is as Frosty as a Snowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
In your theory, Paramount wins Sulake in a bidding war. The result of the bidding war is what voids the Disney-Sukake agreement and secures the Paramount-Sukake agreement. Plus, a bidding war would not take 5 months, that's ridiculous. Negotiations would be made in one single meeting.

And even if money had to be paid to void the Disney-Sulake agreement, why would Disney wait 5 months to pay it? According to your theory, doesn't Disney want to disconnected from Paramount?
The result of the bidding war is that the Disney-Sulake agreement will run out it's time while it cannot be extended. The 5 month time they co-existed was only because Sulake/Paramount did not want to pay the cost to void out the Disney agreement. Disney likely stayed with the agreement because they had to give notice to their customers of the closure and couldn't go "We're closing tonight, sorry." Right then and there.
  #43  
Old 08-08-2009, 07:00 AM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
The result of the bidding war is that the Disney-Sulake agreement will run out it's time while it cannot be extended. The 5 month time they co-existed was only because Sulake/Paramount did not want to pay the cost to void out the Disney agreement. Disney likely stayed with the agreement because they had to give notice to their customers of the closure and couldn't go "We're closing tonight, sorry." Right then and there.
Why would Paramount let Sulake "run out its time" with Disney if they just won the bidding war? Because Paramount didn't want to pay the money to void the Disney-Sulake agreement? I thought Paramount didn't want to be connected to Disney. Why would Paramount not want to pay the money?

Disney would have to close the game immediately under your theory because Sulake would have controlled the game engine and with Sulake being separated from Disney, the game could not operate. There is no way Paramount would allow Sulake to "run out it's time" with Disney if they won the bidding war.
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
  #44  
Old 08-08-2009, 07:05 AM
ThrillJacob ThrillJacob is offline
Registered+
Awards Showcase
VMK Memories Award 
Total Awards: 1


Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: VMK Central
Posts: 76
VIP
My Mood: SaveVMK
ThrillJacob is as Frosty as a Snowman
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoccerRyan View Post
Why would Paramount let Sulake "run out its time" with Disney if they just won the bidding war? Because Paramount didn't want to pay the money to void the Disney-Sulake agreement? I thought Paramount didn't want to be connected to Disney. Why would Paramount not want to pay the money?

Disney would have to close the game immediately under your theory because Sulake would have controlled the game engine and with Sulake being separated from Disney, the game could not operate. There is no way Paramount would allow Sulake to "run out it's time" with Disney if they won the bidding war.
If Sulake pulled out without some kind of warning, they'd be in legal trouble. Maybe the contract had some sort of clause where it couldn't be voided unless certain events happened in Sulake or Disney decides to pull out of the contract. Like I said, Disney wanted to have a warning and finish out the game with a last few promotions.
  #45  
Old 08-08-2009, 07:34 AM
SoccerRyan's Avatar
SoccerRyan SoccerRyan is offline
Masked Cowboy
Awards Showcase
St. Patrick's Day 2011 Award Happy Valentine's Day Award Make A Wish Award 2010 Holiday Award Trivia Winner Halloween'10 Award Epitaph Winner's Award Caption Contest Participant's Award 
Total Awards: 49


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Frontierland Hub
Posts: 2,188
VIP
My Mood: Happy
SoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing InfernoSoccerRyan ’s feet are on fire with Dancing Inferno
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThrillJacob View Post
If Sulake pulled out without some kind of warning, they'd be in legal trouble.
The warning is set before the bidding war: whoever offers less money loses their partnership with Sulake. Disney and Paramount would understand that going into the bidding war.

Quote:
Maybe the contract had some sort of clause where it couldn't be voided unless certain events happened in Sulake or Disney decides to pull out of the contract.
This seems vague to me. Some sort of clause? Certain events? Please clarify what you are talking about and explain why such a clause would exist.

Quote:
Like I said, Disney wanted to have a warning and finish out the game with a last few promotions.
Then why did Disney wait until April 7th to make that warning if, according to you, they knew since January that the game was going to close?
__________________

Play trivia at #vmktrivia to win a purple scrolly!
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.