Please consider registering
Guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
JOHN, PAUL, GEORGE and RINGO - *re-shuffle that (hackneyed) sequence for a change??
31 July 2020
8.37am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

JOHN, PAUL, GEORGE and RINGO - *re-shuffle that (hackneyed) sequence for a change??*

Has a thread for this ever been started, does anyone know?

 

PS: My thanks to Ron Nasty and Ahhh Girl.  Handy tips.  Does make life easier, in some cases anyway. And ...

PPS: I know none of us will want to be too hard on Joe.  There are only so many hours in a day.  He's already put in a mine of work on this forum for the information of us all, and he's done his 'homework'!  'Vote of thanks 'to JOE ET AL for all of that!

The following people thank edwardtheconfessor for this post:

sigh butterfly

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

31 July 2020
9.15am
Avatar
Ahhh Girl
sailing on a winedark open sea
Moderator

Moderators

Members

Reviewers
Forum Posts: 19404
Member Since:
20 August 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Do you mean a thread where people can tell what order their names should be presented? If not, then, well, I'm probably going to feel silly when you spell it out more clearly for me. ahdn_paul_02 LOL a-hard-days-night-ringo-14

31 July 2020
6.10pm
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ahhh Girl said
Do you mean a thread where people can tell what order their names should be presented? If not, then, well, I'm probably going to feel silly when you spell it out more clearly for me. ahdn_paul_02 LOL a-hard-days-night-ringo-14

  

Yes, I mean: JOHN, PAUL, GEORGE and RINGO became the cliche.  It became almost *unthinkable* to put their names in any other order.  You only needed to start saying 'John, Paul, George..' and it became literally just another way of saying 'The Beatles'.  This was true of no other beat group of the time that I know of  - not even the Rolling Stones, for example.  But why?   And when  you think about it; it was simply because that was what most people always thought to be the **order of importance**.   It was a kind of (understood) 'pecking order' - but not one of The Beatles' own making, actually.

And there are other ways one could have looked at this.  John was not the eldest, for exmple; Ringo was.  And George was the lead, not John (or even Paul).  By 1965, Lennon and Mc. Cartney were not the oniy songwriters either -  and we now know that George was actually writing material almost from the begining as a matter of fact. And he wrote alone.  Some even  believe that he was offering his work from ealry on - but this being sidelined intentionally by Lennon and Mc. Cartney...  And his harmony contibution was often vital on vocals.  How often did you see him and Paul onstage, for example, sharing a microphone whenever John was on lead vocal?  Was Ringo always an 'afterthought' - hidden away at the back of the stage , behind his kt'?  Did he have to be?  In both the movies, for example,  Ringo has rather a pivotal part. And so on. 

If it hasn't been done, and there is felt to be a need for it, then yes I will "spell it all out" and discusss whatever happened to other attmepts to 'reshuffle' the cliched sequence, even if just for some 'variety' somteimes  - why these attempts never 'caught on', and could they/should they have done? Did The Beatles themselves really like the idea of being set up in a kind of  - permament - 'hiercarchy of importance' like this?  And there is evidence, for example, that Epstein didn't really think so, either.  George,  for instance,  was very unhappyy about Ringo's temporary replacement by Jim Nichol.  For sure, no-one would have ever seriously countnenanced even a temporary replacement for John, or Paul, or even for George for that matter. At times when Ringo felt a bit 'pissed off' - after they stopped touring - evidently it was to George that he went for a sympathetic ear.  ... .  ... and more to discuss...  

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

31 July 2020
7.42pm
Avatar
Starr Shine?
Waiting in the sky
Apple rooftop
Members
Forum Posts: 15907
Member Since:
1 November 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Richard, John, James, George

The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:

The Hole Got Fixed, edwardtheconfessor

https://youtu.be/52nwiTs7bk8

Brainwashed by RadiantCowbells.

If you can't log in and can't use the forum go here and someone will help you out.

1 August 2020
5.59am
Avatar
meanmistermustard
Here when I am. Not when I am not.
Moderator
Members

Reviewers


Moderators
Forum Posts: 23245
Member Since:
1 May 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It sounds better and rolls off the tongue easier, which helps when making announcements or just speaking in general. 

I doubt the Beatles ever gave it much or any thought (they always saw the group as one whole regardless of what anyone said) but it is also the order in which they joined; John brought in Paul who brought in George who brought in Ringo.

The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:

Little Piggy Dragonguy

"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)

1 August 2020
7.50am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Starr Shine? said
Richard, John, James, George

  

Yeah!  Clever!  In age order in this case - and with their real first names all.  Like it! 

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

1 August 2020
10.35am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

meanmistermustard said
It sounds better and rolls off the tongue easier, which helps when making announcements or just speaking in general. 

I doubt the Beatles ever gave it much or any thought (they always saw the group as one whole regardless of what anyone said) but it is also the order in which they joined; John brought in Paul who brought in George who brought in Ringo.

  

Well, I agree that The Beatles themselves always saw the group as one whole, but like I said, this *ineluctable* 'pecking order was NOT of their making - yet everybody, but everybody seems to have accepted it.  I'm not so sure they did, though.  Could they really have 'not given it much thought', when - as we know, and even from early days - this became THE way of announcinng them or talking (or writing) about them; everywhere, all over the world and every place they went and in almost every world language.  Why, even the 'oldies' and the 'sqaures' used this when referreing to them.  I cannot really agree that 'they did not give it much thought'. I think there is evidence that they really never actually liked the idea of putting any one member before another.  And, as to 'rolling off the tongue' - well, theirs was what became, for some time, a CLASSIC instrument line-up, and most people for sure would have called this out as 'lead, rhythm and bass and drums' - so, by that token, the 'call out' should have run: GEORGE, JOHN, PAUL and RINGO.  I thnk this was how, in fact, their early DJ convert in the US, Murray the Kaye, would anoucnce them as he put their records on the turntable (in 1964, when they were just 'breaking into' the US market - see below).  But that choice of order never 'caught on' either.  But why not?

And, I will insist; this rolls just as easily off the tongue as does any other.  The first three names were all common enough boys' names.  You could have 'rattled them off' in ANY order, and it will still work, actually.  Try it!  I think Starr Shine? (above) helps to make that point actually.  Read the (original) sleeve notes (by Tony Barrow) on the album 'Please Please Me ' - and you'll see how he quotes a very early announcement of the group by some compere, who began with the - already cliched (as early as 1963) - way of listing their names, and only got as far as 'John, Paul...' - before being 'drowned out' by a barrage of applause (later, of course, it would be hysterical screams!).

Like I said: I know of no other group - of that era or since actually - of whom such a stereotyped 'pecking order' was estabslished like that - and then became, effectively, UNALTERABLE.  Do you?  True: there was a 60s group here in UK called Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Titch .. but that was exceptional (in fact, it was their gimmmick really, in their case - chosen in fact by them; and most of these names were 'catchy' nicknames anyway).

Did anyone ever 'call out', for example: MICK, KEITH, BRIAN, BILL and CHARLIE?  Who the Hell were they?  That list of names would have been pretty much meaningless to most people, and still is (except, perhpas, for  a  few of the most dedicated of this group's fans!).  Who were, in fact, ARE they? THE ROLLING STONES! Second in popularity  at the time, as we know, to only The Beatles themselves!

For a time, in 1967ish, as we know, there was a (short-lived) frenzy of (mostly very young girl) adulation for THE MONKEES.  We could have a big discusion about them all by itself - but we won't!  But did anyone ever 'call out' MICKY, DAVEY, MIKE and PETE .. and, interestingly, that would have been putting the drummer - and most frequent lead singer, in this case - first!  (Again; true - their last album, really, before they were pretty much over - was called 'Pisces, Capricorn, Aqaurius and Jones Ltd.' - which I think was a listing of their respective astrological sun signs?).

Suppose I said to most people: BRIAN, CARL, DENNIS, MIKE  and AL.  Well, agan; who the Hell were they? The BEACH BOYS.  Or: RAY, DAVE, PETE and MICK?  THE KINKS!  DAVE, MIKE, RICK, DENNIS and LENNY?  The Dave Clark Five (even had his name in their title, yet...!!). The SUPREMES were, during the 1960s, widely acknowledged as probably the world's No.1 (top) girl group (in fact, they were once each asked in interview, which of the four Beatles was their favourite) - but if you had said then (and, in this case, only three names to 'juggle' with) DIANA, FLO/FLORENCE and MARY? Who??  (At least; not until Diana Ross herself began to be propelled by Tamla on to a solo career would even her name have 'rolled off' most peoples' tongues!). It's probably fair to say that the names of their most frequent hit WRITERS - Holland,Dozier, Holland - were better known than the individual names of this top girl trio themselves!

Am I making my point here? 

Interestignly; when Dora Bryan made a spoof record, in 1963(?), 'All I Want For Christmas Is A Beatle' the lyricists had it "Ringo, Paul, John, George - they're all the same" .  So; here they put poor old Ringo first... and completely 'reshuffled' the rest of the sequence - but yet it still 'rollled off her tongue' just fine (semi-comic spoof though it was) and note that the lyric has it "they're all the same".  They weren't - but perhaps it does make the point that ALL are of (equal) value.  Agreed?  And, if Ringo really was just as important as the other three, then how come he was replcaed (temporarily) whilst it would have been truly unthinkable for Epstein to have sent out for even temporary replacements - tour of Australia or no - for John, or Paul, or even George.  When any of these were ill or indiposed, then concerts were simply cancelled, and later rescheduled with them back, if possible - otherwise scrubbed altogether (albeit much to the disappointment of many fans - though at least they did get their ticket money refunded).  At least George could see how making Ringo - even temporarily - replaceable like this was not really fair.  John and Paul, apparently, couldn't ... but then George understood better than either of them what it felt like to be cast as forever in 'second rank'.  [Cf. my original post here on this thread]. 

There were some amusing little ditties too - made up by fans themselves at the tme - which gave Ringo prominence: "We three Beatles of Liverpool are: one in a taxi and one in a car, one on a scooter bibbing his hooter - following Ringo Starr (and only Ringo gets a name here, as well as the punchline!) or (to the tune of 'Love Me Do '): "Paul's in Liverpool, John's shifting coal, George is down a hole - and Ringo's... on the dole!" (which not only 'reshuffles' the seqence but, once again, gives Ringo the punchline and the 'hook'!). 

As I have suggested in my opening post on this thread, The Bealtes themsleves - even whilst, in the early days, acknowledging John (UNOFFICIALLY) as so often the 'spokesman'... yet the evidence is that they NEVER liked the idea of putting any one of them 'first' or 'second' or whatever.  There is a legend, which was used in one of the movie biopics (I think it was the (1979) movie 'Birth of the Beatles') that Brian Epstein once pointed out to John (this was just before he broke it to John that he was going to attmept what had never been done before by any British band - break into the American market!) that 'No one of you is important on your own.  Each of you is a vital part of it.' [I paraphrase here a little] 'You, John are the mind.  Paul is the heart and Geroge is the soul'. 'And what about Ringo?' asks John.  'Ringo is the flesh and blood'.  I think this sums it up, actually, extraordinarly well.  Does one not agree?  

As to order of 'joining'?  Well, we have to remember that John was the original founder, yes - but of The Quarrymen - and, at first it was made up of his school pals from Quarry Bank (hence the name) - his best freinds Pete Shotton and Ivan Vaugnan.  This was going back to the late 1950s, when skiffle was the thing that was happeniing here in UK and 'Rock 'N' Roll ' (cf. my post on 'Cry For A Shadow') was truly, as one musicologist has put it 'in transition'.  Until it was realised by John, as well as by his two best mates themselves actually, that these really couldn't 'hack it' as musicians.  Paul came along a litte after this. 

John recruited George, Paul didn't.  In fact, one biography of The Bealtes suggests that Paul was a little puzzled as to why John wanted him.  There was his youth for one thing.  And George was then 'an out and out Ted' (cf. again, my post 'Cry For A Shadow').  And I think I'm right in saying that, by then, John had left Quarry Bank and was now at art shcool, and I believe he had already brought in, or was recruiting, his art shcool friend Stuart Sutcliffe.  And they still had no drummer.  They were in sore need of one, actually.  In fact, they went to Hamburg the first time without one.  The name had to be changed as two of them at least, John and Stuart, were not at Quarry Bank.   Pete Best was a later addition.  They even had a pianist for a time, at one stage.

Stuart tried to 'blag it' as a bass guitarist, but ... well, we all know the (tragic) story of what happened there. Ringo was not recruited by George either.  No. It is not clear where they first met Ringo.  Probably in Hamburg (he was at one time drumming with another visiting British band on the then popular Hamburg circuit; Rory Storm and the Hurricanes.).  Some say he was never as good a drummer as Pete Best.  But, socially, there was a sense in which Best had never quite fully fitted in (notwithstanding, Pete had a few of his own fans in the Beatles, pre-contract, Cavern days).  It was JOHN primarly who wanted Ringo in.  And Ringo was keen.  As we all know, none of them had the guts to tell Pete that he was out (even though - or perhaps because - they were on the very verge of a reccording contract at last).  They got Epstein to do it.  Sneaky!  Underhand! 

The cliche also runs, of course, that 'the rest is history' - but the point here is that the 'inevitable' and 'unalterable' sequence does not even, entirely, refllect some kind of 'straightforward' and 'linear' joining or formation history.  It is more complex than that. 

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

1 August 2020
11.30am
Avatar
Ahhh Girl
sailing on a winedark open sea
Moderator

Moderators

Members

Reviewers
Forum Posts: 19404
Member Since:
20 August 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The librarian in me wants to alphabetized them: George, John, Paul, Ringo.

I was leading a Zoom meeting with 42 people last Friday, and I kept wanting the squares to be in alphabetical order so I could find the person I wanted to talk to. I said that out loud, and got some LOLs.

1 August 2020
11.39am
Avatar
Von Bontee
A Hole In The Road
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4452
Member Since:
14 December 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I mentioned this on the forum once years ago: When I taped a bunch of Beatles/Lennon documentary programming and soundbites off AM radio in December/January of 1980-1, amongst it was a brief clip of the boys all reciting "Ringo, John, Paul and George!" together, in that order, presumably after the interviewer asked them their names. 

The following people thank Von Bontee for this post:

edwardtheconfessor

One day, a tape-op got a tape on backwards, he went to play it, and it was all "Neeeradno-undowarrroom" and it was "Wow! Sounds Indian!"
-- Paul McCartney

                 Winner-Funniest-Post-and-Most-Creative-Contribution-2017-1.pngfunniest-post-badge2018.png

1 August 2020
11.57am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ahhh Girl said
The librarian in me wants to alphabetized them: George, John, Paul, Ringo.

I was leading a Zoom meeting with 42 people last Friday, and I kept wanting the squares to be in alphabetical order so I could find the person I wanted to talk to. I said that out loud, and got some LOLs.

  

Any Beatle Can Do Everybody's  Favourite Group Harmony - Including John's 'Kaleidoscope Lucy'-  Much Nearer Original Prouduction Quality;  Really Sounding Terrific, Understandably Valuable..  When X-rated (Yearly), Zealously!

The following people thank edwardtheconfessor for this post:

The Hole Got Fixed, Starr Shine?, Ahhh Girl

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

1 August 2020
11.59am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Von Bontee said
I mentioned this on the forum once years ago: When I taped a bunch of Beatles/Lennon documentary programming and soundbites off AM radio in December/January of 1980-1, amongst it was a brief clip of the boys all reciting "Ringo, John, Paul and George!" together, in that order, presumably after the interviewer asked them their names. 

  

Cool! Age order in this case.  Coincidentally? 

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

1 August 2020
2.52pm
Avatar
Tony Japanese
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 632
Member Since:
11 September 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

At one point I came to the conclusion that there wasn't a single photograph where the four of them were lined-up up (left to right) in the classic order. It's obviously not true, but it might take you a while to find one.

1 August 2020
3.34pm
Avatar
meanmistermustard
Here when I am. Not when I am not.
Moderator
Members

Reviewers


Moderators
Forum Posts: 23245
Member Since:
1 May 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Tony Japanese said
At one point I came to the conclusion that there wasn't a single photograph where the four of them were lined-up up (left to right) in the classic order. It's obviously not true, but it might take you a while to find one.

  

9th result in a google search for "John Paul George Ringo"

John, Paul, George, and Ringo pick favourite Beatles albumImage Enlarger

"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)

1 August 2020
9.44pm
Avatar
Starr Shine?
Waiting in the sky
Apple rooftop
Members
Forum Posts: 15907
Member Since:
1 November 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Paul looks short in that one 

https://youtu.be/52nwiTs7bk8

Brainwashed by RadiantCowbells.

If you can't log in and can't use the forum go here and someone will help you out.

2 August 2020
12.59am
Avatar
Tony Japanese
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 632
Member Since:
11 September 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

meanmistermustard said

Tony Japanese said

At one point I came to the conclusion that there wasn't a single photograph where the four of them were lined-up up (left to right) in the classic order. It's obviously not true, but it might take you a while to find one.

  

9th result in a google search for "John Paul George Ringo"

John, Paul, George, and Ringo pick favourite Beatles albumImage Enlarger

  

Took you forty-two minutes though, didn't it? a-hard-days-night-john-3

2 August 2020
1.01am
Avatar
Tony Japanese
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 632
Member Since:
11 September 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Starr Shine? said
Paul looks short in that one 

  

The image has actually been reversed. The original shows Ringo on the left and John on the right. Also, I'm fairly sure it's been photo-shopped because George was in Hemel Hempstead that day.

2 August 2020
5.58am
Avatar
kelicopter
Sitting in an English Garden
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 621
Member Since:
6 November 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Here's my thinking @edwardtheconfessor

John and Paul going first in the order makes sense with them being the songwriters, especially in the early years. Ringo not being a songwriter, and also his name having two syllables does just all add up to him going last! So the only other option that may make sense to me would be "Paul John George and Ringo" - and having the two "juh" sounds next to each other doesn't roll off the tongue as easily!

The classic "John, Paul, George and Ringo" does sound best phonetically. And this is the order they joined the band (you mentioned in your post how Paul didn't recruit George and George didn't recruit Ringo, but I don't know if that's relevant. It's just simply the chronological order.)

But I hadn't considered your point on why we even list them individually at all, when we've never done this for The Rolling Stones, The Beach Boys etc. I guess a lot of the early marketing of The Beatles was based on how they looked and dressed the same but all their personalities were different; the cute one, the quiet one, etc. On The Ed Sullivan show, where their names appeared on screen with each of their close ups (correct me if I'm wrong, but was this regularly done when bands performed or just with The Beatles?) Badges and merchandise sold with "I Love John / Paul / George / Ringo" printed on them, so fans are encouraged to pick their favourites. Again I may be wrong, but I just don't think the same emphasis was placed on individual members of RS or BB?

The following people thank kelicopter for this post:

edwardtheconfessor

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."

"When I cannot sing my heart, I can only speak my mind."

2 August 2020
7.02am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Starr Shine? said
Paul looks short in that one 

  

Actually, Ringo was the shortest.  Tended not to be noticebale with him seated behind his kit. 

 

@EVERYONE!!  A big thank you for your responess on this thread so far.  As I've already plenty had my say for now, I encourage you all to keep your thoughts on this one coming.  It's a good debate...

Regards edwardtheconfessor

The following people thank edwardtheconfessor for this post:

kelicopter

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

2 August 2020
9.22am
Avatar
Starr Shine?
Waiting in the sky
Apple rooftop
Members
Forum Posts: 15907
Member Since:
1 November 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Wow, never knew that. Thanks! 

The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:

edwardtheconfessor

https://youtu.be/52nwiTs7bk8

Brainwashed by RadiantCowbells.

If you can't log in and can't use the forum go here and someone will help you out.

10 August 2020
6.11am
Avatar
edwardtheconfessor
Yellow Submarine in a Sea of Holes in Pepperland
The Jacaranda
Members
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
6 July 2020
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hello again, everyone.  If this thread is now lying 'fallow' becuase pretty much everyone - who wishes to - has had their say, for the moment.; then fair enough.  No wish to simply 'bump' it, or rehash my arguments for the sake of it.

For my part, I was (intentionally at first) 'stepping back' a bit, in order to let everyone chip in their 'two penneth' (if that's not a mixed figure of speech?).  Then, unfortunatley, I got 'locked out' (to use rather topical phraseology here if I may)... as, for over a week now, I could login but not post anything at all (on ANY thread), for some reason (sigh!).  I don't know if anyone else had a simialr hassle?

Anyway:- evidently, that is fixed now, as we see here... so, as a courtesy to kelicopter (and others) who have kindly shared their thoughts about this here, I really owe it to acknowledge and resopnd.  As I've only just got back on here, as an actual participant, again. I mean .. give me just a little time if you will folks. 

Regards  edwardtheconfessor.

RWS_Tarot_00_Fool.jpg     "And, in the end; the love you take - is equal to the love YOU MAKE!" "Nowhere Man, THE WORLD is AT YOUR COMMAND!"

Forum Timezone: America/Chicago
Most Users Ever Online: 700
Currently Online: Ron Nasty, Starr Shine?, alittlebitolder
Guest(s) 1
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
Starr Shine?: 15907
Ron Nasty: 10839
50yearslate: 8592
Necko: 7904
AppleScruffJunior: 7213
parlance: 7111
mr. Sun king coming together: 6403
Mr. Kite: 6147
trcanberra: 6064
sir walter raleigh: 5113
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 2573
Moderators: 6
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 44
Topics: 4890
Posts: 350014
Newest Members:
gabhold, Phebelya123, Phebelya1, Phebelya, JamesRoush
Moderators: Joe: 5099, Zig: 9812, meanmistermustard: 23245, Ahhh Girl: 19404, Beatlebug: 17264, The Hole Got Fixed: 7923
Administrators: Joe: 5099