Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 04:06:23 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Is There A Good Reason To Still Be Calling BTC Money/Currency?  (Read 5807 times)
netrin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


FirstBits: 168Bc


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 03:30:32 AM
 #61

My opinion is based on what mostly resembles bitcoins in use and utility, I find this to be diamonds.  If we had a willy wonka teleportation machine and could move diamonds instantaneously and securely across space they would function exactly as bitcoins do.

I am not immediately inclined to equate bitcoins to diamonds, but bitcoins unlike securities, banknotes and most other goods, can be directly traded in a digital market. The digital market is the medium, just as vegetables are directly traded in the physical environment of a farmers market. In that sense, I don't see any different between exchanging cash for carrots or exchanging USD for bitcoins, making bitcoins seem like a commodity.

But since bitcoins don't have any other use than as a store of value, means of trade, they are certainly not a commodity.

Greenlandic tupilak. Hand carved, traditional cursed bone figures. Sorry, polar bear, walrus and human remains not available for export.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481040383
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040383

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040383
Reply with quote  #2

1481040383
Report to moderator
1481040383
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040383

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040383
Reply with quote  #2

1481040383
Report to moderator
1481040383
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481040383

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481040383
Reply with quote  #2

1481040383
Report to moderator
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 03:36:32 AM
 #62

Quote
I will look into tax issues of various jurisdictions but did you know that gambling winnings are not taxed in the UK?  You can't assume that all countries have laws similar to the US.

I'm sorry, but that is simply not the case: General betting duty

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000255&propertyType=document

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/05/betfair-gambling-tax-offshore

I do not live in the U.S. but Sweden, however I know more about U.K. law than any other jurisdiction. Of course there are variations, but the laws of the FIRE sector have since the deregulations in the 80ies become more aligned, and today the developed world, in particular the U.S., the E.U., Japan have very similar provisions FIRE sector provisions in order to operate on a level ground, which they continously extend to emerging markets who are disadvantaged due to less capital and less input regarding the regulatory framework.

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
CryptoCommodity
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 04:29:28 AM
 #63

Quote
I will look into tax issues of various jurisdictions but did you know that gambling winnings are not taxed in the UK?  You can't assume that all countries have laws similar to the US.

I'm sorry, but that is simply not the case: General betting duty

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000255&propertyType=document

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/05/betfair-gambling-tax-offshore

I do not live in the U.S. but Sweden, however I know more about U.K. law than any other jurisdiction. Of course there are variations, but the laws of the FIRE sector have since the deregulations in the 80ies become more aligned, and today the developed world, in particular the U.S., the E.U., Japan have very similar provisions FIRE sector provisions in order to operate on a level ground, which they continously extend to emerging markets who are disadvantaged due to less capital and less input regarding the regulatory framework.

Betting duty applies only to bookmakers that are based in the UK.  As I stated UK citizens do not pay taxes on gambling winnings.
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 05:08:48 AM
 #64

That is because the bookmaker pays the duty, i.e. it is already deducted from the gains. It does not matter to HMRS if they collect taxes from bookmakers or gamblers as long as they collect taxes at some point. In 1997 I opened an account with an English bookmakingfirm online via telephone. When I placed a bet I could chose to pay 10 % tax (I think that was the rate, maybe 15%) on the bet or the earnings. If I chose to pay on the earnings I did not pay tax if I lost. This concept was entirely novel to me, and I looked into the matter and it was due to UK tax laws (albeit I was not a U.K. resident).

Regarding the information from the securities lawyer; I only glanced at the Global bitcoin stock exchange and did not notice that it was a securities exchange, per se. So the lawyer did not state that Bitcoins are "securities". He thought the concept was very new and did not have a clear answer; he thought it functioned a bit like a derivative, although it was too far a stretch to actually call it a derivative. I would not consider Bitcoin to be a derivative, as it has no underlying asset, unless you consider the hardware or opensource code to be the assets. I still think there is a case for Bitcoins to be classified as "securities" as it is a code which may be used by a person to initiate an electronic fund transfer. Am I positive that this is the case - no.

EDIT: The part about hardware or opensource code being the underlying asset is intended as a pun; of course USD is what would back Bitcoin if it were a derivative, but due to the volatility of Bitcoin it defies both common sense, and more importantly, derivative laws (I do not know derivative laws in any detail) which obviously have stipulations against "assets" appreciating/depreciating 20-60 % per day (not only Mtgox, but other exchanges too) and 100% + per week. Although in the case of Bitcoin, it would be some kind of inverse calculation of asset appreciation/depreciation as Bitcoin itself fluctuates and not USD.

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 06:34:38 AM
 #65

Regarding the information from the securities lawyer; I only glanced at the Global bitcoin stock exchange and did not notice that it was a securities exchange, per se. So the lawyer did not state that Bitcoins are "securities".

So, once again, you are talking out of your ass.

You haven't said a single thing that's even remotely factual or productive in this entire thread.  You are a complete, utter retard.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 06:50:46 AM
 #66

Regarding the information from the securities lawyer; I only glanced at the Global bitcoin stock exchange and did not notice that it was a securities exchange, per se. So the lawyer did not state that Bitcoins are "securities".

So, once again, you are talking out of your ass.

You haven't said a single thing that's even remotely factual or productive in this entire thread.  You are a complete, utter retard.

I disagree, this thread started off by discussing whether or not it was convenient to name Bitcoin as a currency or not. Some posters have engaged in a dialogue as to what the actual legal status of Bitcoin is. As it is unchartered terrirtories, and no authoritative answer exists or at least not easily accessible, such a dialogue will always proceed with a try and fail method. I am guessing you have never read any of Plato's dialogues?

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 08:55:09 AM
 #67

I'm certainly aware of Platonic dialog.  But you aren't asking questions.  You're just making a bunch of assertive claims based on obvious bullshit and then retracting them a few posts later.  It's pointless to engage you, because your starting point seems to be "Bitcoin is somehow illegitimate" and then you work backwards from there, re-hashing a bunch of settled issues in the process.

I've looked back through your post history, and it seems to be 100% nonsense -- a bunch of copy/pastes from the IRS website.  Are you seriously under the impression that any of the criminally corrupt governments on Earth are going to bless Bitcoin as opposed to just accepting the fact that it exists and that they can't do anything about it?

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 24, 2011, 10:18:44 AM
 #68

I'm certainly aware of Platonic dialog.  But you aren't asking questions.  You're just making a bunch of assertive claims based on obvious bullshit and then retracting them a few posts later.  It's pointless to engage you, because your starting point seems to be "Bitcoin is somehow illegitimate" and then you work backwards from there, re-hashing a bunch of settled issues in the process.

I've looked back through your post history, and it seems to be 100% nonsense -- a bunch of copy/pastes from the IRS website.  Are you seriously under the impression that any of the criminally corrupt governments on Earth are going to bless Bitcoin as opposed to just accepting the fact that it exists and that they can't do anything about it?

The process is not a strict platonic dialogue, however, I have attempted to obtain an answer. Yes, I have been wrong on several occasions, and the reason I retract previous arguements is because it has become obvious that they are not valid. My first post was: "The authorities in respective countires are the ones who will define whether BTC are regarded as a "currency" or a "commodity", it does not matter what other people associate BTC with." However, the legality question has provoked substantial interest from me.

I can state plainly that I am 100% certain that the unregulated trade with Bitcoins is definately not in accordance with the law. No trade is free from regulation (unless expressly stated otherwise according to law) so this maxim applies to Bitcoins. If it is possible to bring clarity to what law(s) that Britcoin is obliged to follow, it would be very interesting to obtain this information. I am not saying that just because it is not legal people will stop trading or that the authorities will undoubtedly be able to stop Bitcoins. I am an inquisitive person by nature who prefers to have knowledge aforehand than after the fait accompli. Also, if more people within the Bitcoin community became aware of the legal issues, a larger possibility exists that actions can be taken to prevent an outright ban. I currently hold a notion that legal awareness is not very high, whereas "programming skills" are high.

Due to human nature and the Goldman Sachs, Geithners, IRS's, Bilderbergers etc. who are at this moment gathering information (I sent a PM to Gavin saying that whatever he says at the CIA will make no difference, the powers that be are simply on a fact finding mission from multiple sources before they unilaterally decide on which action(s) to take) I am not the least hopeful that Bitcoin will survive, and that the primary threat stems from the legality point.

So I sincerely hope that you can see my point of view, and at least have an understanding of that I am not simply "trolling". The past days I was posting on other legal issues, force majuer etc. and the first post used an example from force majuer within construction work. Needless to say, I was semi-accused of trolling, but later I navigated to the London Stock Exchange and posted their "force majeur" definition - which was entirely different to MagiculTux definition, and was very mcuh aligned to the example taken from the field of construction work.

EDIT: I am not the least hopeful that Bitcoin will survive = thrive/develop from a state of usage by innovators/speculators to a wider commercially sound market

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 25, 2011, 04:55:13 PM
 #69

Although I am not claiming that the information contained here within would be applied to Bitcoin, it contains definitions and scopes which could, in at least some aspects, be applied to Bitcoins. The information also shows that Bitcoins is not operating in as much “uncharted waters” as at least I was under the impression. Of course Mtgox is not operating from the U.S. or the E.U. but other exchanges do. Other laws may apply in Japan, as the laws in the U.S. and E.U. differentiate very substantially regarding their applicability to Bitcoins.

Bitcoins are:

A; A code generated created through computational power.

B; A code traded against real dollars; it could thus be described as a form of electronic currency.

C; A code traded for services/goods; it thus performs functions of an electronic currency.

When lawmakers and/or the judicial branch enact laws/pass judgments they consider, amongst other things, the functions of the subject. It is thus likely that Bitcoins will be viewed as something capable of possessing value in an electronic form and something capable of being exchanged for services and goods.

In U.S. law the UNIFORM MONEY SERVICES ACT pertains to money transmissions, and although it puts in place statutory regulations against money laundering during the course of transmissions, money exchanges and check cashing, it contains some definitions that might be applied towards Bitcoins.

Electronic money is usually redeemable in cash, as with Dwolla for example. However this act includes a form of electronic money that is not redeemable in cash:

”Internet scrip

Stored value cards, token or notational systems as well as account-based systems may all involve exchange of value that is not redeemable in money. The term “scrip” has been used to refer to value that may be exchanged over the Internet but which may not be redeemable for money. Scrip is more analogous to coupons or bonus points that can be exchanged by a consumer for goods or services but have no cash redemption value. Scrip can be used by merchants to sell access to value-added web pages on a per-access basis or a subscription basis. They can also use scrip to provide promotional incentives to users. Scrip can represent any form of currency, points in a frequent user program, access rights, etc.”

 “Monetary value

The definition of “money” has been expanded to reflect the fact that certain payment service providers employ a form of value that is not directly redeemable in money, but nevertheless (1) serves as a medium of exchange and (2) places the customer at risk of the provider’s insolvency while the medium is outstanding. The same safety and soundness issues pertinent to redeemable forms of value apply to these irredeemable forms of value. Consequently, a new definition of “monetary value” has been included in this Act.”

Money transmission is defined as following:

“Money transmission subsumes several activities or functions: the transmission of funds as well as the sale or issuance of payment instruments and the sale or issuance of stored value. Stored value, as defined in this Act, is treated similarly to payment instruments, although some kinds of stored value are irredeemable in money. The grouping of funds transmission and the sale or issuance of payment instruments and stored value is consistent with existing state practice.”

Even the concept of mining could, hypothetically speaking, be addressed within the scope of the act:

“Stored value

Stored-value products are a recent innovation in payment systems technology. Stored-value products possess certain basic characteristics. According to the Federal Reserve, stored-value products share three attributes: “(1) [a] card or other device electronically stores or provides access to a specified amount of funds selected by the holder of the device and available for making payments to others; (2) the device is the only means of routine access to the funds; and (3) the issuer does not record the funds associated with the device as an account in the name of (or credited to) the holder.”

However, to comply with UNIFORM MONEY SERVICES ACT one must be licensed to transmit and issue “money”; Dwolla holds a license in Iowa, for example.

In the E.U. the definition of electronic money does not contain provisions where the electronic money is not redeemable by the issuer. The relevant E.U. Directive (Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on the taking up, pursuit and prudential supervision of the business of electronic money institutions amending) states:

“The definition of electronic money should cover electronic money whether it is held on a payment device in the electronic money holder’s possession or stored remotely at a server and managed by the electronic money holder through a specific account for electronic money. That definition should be wide enough to avoid hampering technological innovation and to cover not only all the electronic money products available today in the market but also those products which could be developed in the future.”

“Issuance and redeemability
1. Member States shall ensure that electronic money issuers issue electronic money at par value on the receipt of funds.
2. Member States shall ensure that, upon request by the electronic money holder, electronic money issuers redeem, at any moment and at par value, the monetary value of the electronic money held.”

Thus, despite attempting not to hamper technological innovation, by setting the requirement of redemption of electronic money, at least Bitcoins is not considered electronic money in the E.U.

Regardless of whether or not above laws are applicable to Bitcoins or not, I am absolutely positive that Bitcoins will be deemed as an electronic currency, and if Bitcoins are successful and become more widely accepted and utilized as a payment in trade, the authorities in respective countries will either apply existing laws, or enact new laws.

UNIFORM MONEY SERVICES ACT
http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/archives/ulc/moneyserv/umsa2004final.htm

Directive 2009/110/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on the taking up, pursuit and prudential supervision of the business of electronic money institutions amending
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32009L0110:EN:NOT

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
BBanzai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 25, 2011, 06:29:38 PM
 #70

Fucking lawyers...I fail to see the value in arguing over semantics and form when the essence of what gets accomplished with our taxes is a police state, rampant consumerism, an education system that teaches kids to be good slaves, and endless warfare and destruction of - oh, wait, now I remember.  The Death Cult is here, they're Fear, get used to it.
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


View Profile
June 25, 2011, 07:48:27 PM
 #71

“Monetary value

The definition of “money” has been expanded to reflect the fact that certain payment service providers employ a form of value that is not directly redeemable in money, but nevertheless (1) serves as a medium of exchange and (2) places the customer at risk of the provider’s insolvency while the medium is outstanding. The same safety and soundness issues pertinent to redeemable forms of value apply to these irredeemable forms of value. Consequently, a new definition of “monetary value” has been included in this Act.”

1) This doesn't describe Bitcoin. 

2) I stand by my assertion that you are a moron.

Quote
I can state plainly that I am 100% certain that the unregulated trade with Bitcoins is definately not in accordance with the law. No trade is free from regulation (unless expressly stated otherwise according to law) so this maxim applies to Bitcoins.

Go ahead and retract this too since you can't cite it.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 25, 2011, 08:22:03 PM
 #72

Quote
Quote from: dennis_sweden on Today at 04:55:13 pm
“Monetary value

The definition of “money” has been expanded to reflect the fact that certain payment service providers employ a form of value that is not directly redeemable in money, but nevertheless (1) serves as a medium of exchange and (2) places the customer at risk of the provider’s insolvency while the medium is outstanding. The same safety and soundness issues pertinent to redeemable forms of value apply to these irredeemable forms of value. Consequently, a new definition of “monetary value” has been included in this Act.”

1) This doesn't describe Bitcoin.

2) I stand by my assertion that you are a moron.

Quote
I can state plainly that I am 100% certain that the unregulated trade with Bitcoins is definately not in accordance with the law. No trade is free from regulation (unless expressly stated otherwise according to law) so this maxim applies to Bitcoins.

Go ahead and retract this too since you can't cite it.

When I'm absolutely positive/100% certain of something it would take compelling evidence to change my mind. Compelling evidence in this case would be an actual legislature enacting laws, or a court of law adjudicating, contrary to my current position. And I do not see that happening. So far you have not stated your position - how would you classify Bitcoins?

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 25, 2011, 08:49:28 PM
 #73

Quote
Quote
I can state plainly that I am 100% certain that the unregulated trade with Bitcoins is definately not in accordance with the law. No trade is free from regulation (unless expressly stated otherwise according to law) so this maxim applies to Bitcoins.

Go ahead and retract this too since you can't cite it.

The Constitution of the United States of America states:

"Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"

Following information is from Cornell University Law School:

"The U.S. Constitution, through the Commerce Clause, gives Congress exclusive power over trade activities between the states and with foreign countries.  Trade within a state is regulated exclusively by the states themselves.  As with any commercial activity, intrastate and interstate trade is often times indistinguishable."

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/trade_regulation

But maybe there are sovereign nations where this maxim is not applicable. (rhetorical question)

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
BBanzai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 25, 2011, 10:28:31 PM
 #74

There are sovereign nations.  One of them begins in your front yard and ends at your back-fence.
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288


View Profile
June 26, 2011, 04:05:17 PM
 #75

more stuff

It's not at all in my interest to explain to you why what you posted has nothing to do with your original, asinine assertion, and in fact doesn't even say what you think it says.  So feel free to go on believing that you are correct, since that seems to be your goal anyways.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 26, 2011, 05:26:23 PM
 #76

Quote
dennis_sweden on June 25, 2011, 08:49:28 pm
more stuff

It's not at all in my interest to explain to you why what you posted has nothing to do with your original, asinine assertion, and in fact doesn't even say what you think it says.  So feel free to go on believing that you are correct, since that seems to be your goal anyways.

Firstly, when you use quotes, make sure that the quote has actually been used; I never use "more stuff" in writing. Secondly, it ought be abundantly clear that I have altered my views on Bitcoins legal status several times, but only once have I used the term "absolutely positive"; the earlier post when I erronously regarded Bitcoins to be "securites" I explicitly stated that I was not positive.

Quote
A; A code generated created through computational power.

B; A code traded against real dollars; it could thus be described as a form of electronic currency.

C; A code traded for services/goods; it thus performs functions of an electronic currency.

i.e. Is there any value in the code; What is the code used for etc; this led me to believe that Bitcoins is a form of electronic currency. At this point I started searching laws on electronic currency. It is not apparent to me how you have appeared to come to the conclusion that the definitions "Internet scrip", "monetary value" and "money transmission" do not describe or are not relevant to the functions and mechanisms of Bitcoins; which is what the definitions do/are. Dwolla, Inc holds license nr: 2009-0049 as a Money Transmitter in the state of Iowa.

Due to the fact that the UNIFORM MONEY SERVICES ACT contains provisions that describe or are relevant to the functions and mechanisms of Bitcoins, and that it is not only my belief that Bitcoins perform functions of an electronic currency, it has allowed me to form an assertive opinion that when a law case is brought against Bitcoins, or when lawmakers decide to make specific regulations pertaining to Bitcoins, Bitcoins will be judged/infered to be an electronic currency.



How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
BBanzai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
June 26, 2011, 05:59:02 PM
 #77

Bitcoins are doing their damndest to become an international currency.  The alternative to Bitcoins in that context is to allow the fascist architects to announce one of their own design.  Would you prefer to pay rent to thugs and murderers or would you prefer to be free?
dennis_sweden
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 26, 2011, 06:13:11 PM
 #78

Quote
Bitcoins are doing their damndest to become an international currency.  The alternative to Bitcoins in that context is to allow the fascist architects to announce one of their own design.  Would you prefer to pay rent to thugs and murderers or would you prefer to be free?

Difficult choice; however as the thugs and murderers control the political and judicial systems in society, preference does not equal accomplishment. Effort can lead to accomplishment, although history tells us that effort is often hindered from leading to tangible and sustainable accomplishment, although history is oftentimes obfuscated.

How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving. A little girl asked her father, 'do all fairy tales begin with "Once upon a time"? The father replied, 'No, some begin with - If I am elected.' How come political leaders don't have all the answers until they write their memoirs?
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!