Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

A Mechanic's Life - Tales From Under the Hood

1274275277279280289

Comments

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    Yeah, I know, but even Eric admits that he has to guess once in a while. He doesn't mind people guessing, and guessing wrong. As he puts it "If I were them, I'd probably try doing that, too".

    The point is that he is a professional, with a reputation to nurture and uphold. It's his livelihood, and that of his family. For most car owners, taking a good guess makes sense sometimes. The only consequence to us is to have failed and maybe dribbled away $50--$100 bucks.

    Besides all that, some problems on cars are not that hard to solve. They aren't all devilishly complicated rabbit-holes.

    "Guessing" is not illogical. It is getting to YES by discovering all the NOs :p
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

    Yeah, I know, but even Eric admits that he has to guess once in a while. He doesn't mind people guessing, and guessing wrong. As he puts it "If I were them, I'd probably try doing that, too".

    That's just him recognizing where he has come from on his path to where he is today. Sure it's tempting to pull up short on the testing if the reward is you can save some time, get it right and get another car in the door faster. But you always have to remember the cost for not getting it right which is littlerally just the coin falling the other way.


    The point is that he is a professional, with a reputation to nurture and uphold. It's his livelihood, and that of his family. For most car owners, taking a good guess makes sense sometimes. The only consequence to us is to have failed and maybe dribbled away $50--$100 bucks.

    And there you're defending it again. Even Eric has gotten to the point where someone who insists on guessing and displaying other behaviors becomes too much of a liablity to try to help anymore. So they didn't just lose what they spent on a part or two. They also lose (lost), and quite deservedly him and techs like him.


    Besides all that, some problems on cars are not that hard to solve. They aren't all devilishly complicated rabbit-holes.

    What is mundane to us is quite often profoundly complicated to those who haven't learned the techniques (not tricks) and skills that a technician has to aquire. https://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/16088/buick/lacrosse/buick-lacrosse-electrical-lighting-problems#latest


    "Guessing" is not illogical. It is getting to YES by discovering all the NOs :p

    Until you learn that you only get one chance to fix it right the first time.



  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    I don't have to meet the standards of the professional mechanic, nor does any DIYer. Why should I have to?

    Given enough time and persistence, any intelligent car owner can solve a fair number of his car's problems.

    Besides, at $150 shop rates in some zip codes, what does the "guesser" have to lose?

    Besides, I hate to tell you how many repair shops are doing exactly what I do--making educated guesses. But you already know that. You see it posted every day here on Edmunds.

    I must disagree about Eric--he reached a point on one video where he took a guess, but one based on prior knowledge of similar cars with similar symptoms, and because there was no real testing to go any further. The problem was simply too erratic.
  • roadburnerroadburner Posts: 12,246

    I don't have to meet the standards of the professional mechanic, nor does any DIYer. Why should I have to?

    Given enough time and persistence, any intelligent car owner can solve a fair number of his car's problems.

    Besides, at $150 shop rates in some zip codes, what does the "guesser" have to lose?

    Besides, I hate to tell you how many repair shops are doing exactly what I do--making educated guesses. But you already know that. You see it posted every day here on Edmunds.

    I agree 100%. If I can't fix it I have one dealer and two indie shops I trust implicitly. But as you said, what does it hurt to take a shot at it yourself?

    Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2014 M235i; 2009 Cooper Clubman; 1999 Wrangler; 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i

  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

    Besides, at $150 shop rates in some zip codes, what does the "guesser" have to lose?

    When the guesser is a shop/technician what they have to lose is:
    The time they spend continuining testing until the failure is proven or until the owner says to stop.
    The cost of the part and the labor, even if it is agreed in advance to do the tryzee on the customer's dollar. There are many cases where the vehicle owner develops buyers remorse or amnesia and the publicity battle ensues if the customer has to pay for something that didn't fix their car.


    Besides, I hate to tell you how many repair shops are doing exactly what I do--making educated guesses. But you already know that. You see it posted every day here on Edmunds.

    Yeah and how many times are they told to go get their money back when the guess didn't work?
    BTW, they should be called uneducated guesses if they have to called anything more than just a guess.


    I must disagree about Eric--he reached a point on one video where he took a guess, but one based on prior knowledge of similar cars with similar symptoms, and because there was no real testing to go any further. The problem was simply too erratic.

    There is always real testing that can go further the only questions are can the tech figure out how to do it and how long will it take to perform.

    For the tech many times diagnostics would be sold for about an hours time assuming of course that any time is sold at all. Once that hour of time expires however quite often the tech is expected to invest what-ever amount of time that it takes to get to the answer. It's hard to argue against the choice of tossing a part versus spending who knows how many unpaid hours if you don't consider what the rest of the outcomes might be.

    One scenario is if you guess right and actually fix the car. But you don't really have any proof that it is fixed, you only really have a condition that hasn't happened again yet so the customer can easily be left with a vehicle that they cannot trust to woork correctly. Three years from now if the car presents a similar symptom you'll be told that you got it wrong.

    The other possibility of coruse is you toss a part and right away it is proven that it didn't fox it. Now you are in a situation where you spent the customers money (which they may still go back on that deal) and you owe them so the tech again will end up spending what ever time it takes and doing whatever test is rquired to figure out and finally get the problem repaired and not be paid for doing so.

    The only way to avoid both of these scenario's is with experience, knowledge and the discipline to apply those skills.

  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    https://forums.edmunds.com/messages/5838#Message_15689

    Hello Sir,
    How are you, hope all is well. How is work.

    Please I need your professional advice. I have been trying to get my truck to pass inspection in texas
    It 2006 Infinity QX56. I got P2A03 on bank 2 sensor 1 via my reader. I replaced the sensor, but i am still getting the same code. I have no leak or whatsoever. I took it to the exhaust shop to get it checked, No problem found.

    I run the readness for the emission after first failed.

    After I completed the drive cycle, everything I need shows ready, but it kicks the check engine light on.
    Whenever I delete the code, the emission READNESS would not be ready until the check engine kicks on.

    I know for sure, they would not reinspect my suv with the check engine light on.

    I know it will pass when the readness all shows complete.

    Please help me.

    I already reset my MAF sensor to clear the stored memory


    How about you help him your way? Unless you are willing to admit that your way has little to no chance of success and he needs my way. This isn't a mind numbing exercise it is a basic failure that can be correctly analyzed in under fifteen minutes the first time a properly prepared technician ever encounters it and he/she doesn't even need a factory flow chart.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    Your way won't work either, because you aren't there, and the poster obviously doesn't have the technical skill or tools to follow your guidance.

    So what do we know here? We know the PCM has found a problem with the upstream Sensor 1 on Bank 2. So we also know that the sensor is measuring ambient air content vs. exhaust content and that the sensor isn't sending the PCM the correct voltage values.

    His original "guess" wasn't that bad, was it? He suspects something is wrong with the MAF, and you know, he could be right.

    But he has no real technical knowledge, and he needs to pass smog.

    So he goes on the Internet, and finds out he should check for vacuum leaks, a bad MAF, exhaust leaks, damaged wiring or an engine misfire.

    So what's the harm is spending $27 bucks on a new MAF? Two screws, 3 minutes of work and maybe he'd got his solution. Or, ---what's the harm in him buying a cheap code reader? Maybe it'll tell him he DOES have a misfire? or something amiss with manifold pressure or TPS? Maybe he'll find some bad wiring next to a hot exhaust. Maybe he'll learn how to use a basic VOM meter?

    Sure, he could waste some time and money, but he could also be successful. There is no harm in encouraging him to do some basic research and exercise some basic skills.

    As we've all said before, a man has to know his limitations. But if he wants to risk $50 bucks, that's his business.

    If he makes 2 bad guesses and 1 good guess, who's to say he was a fool to try, in his stumbling way?

  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

    Your way won't work either, because you aren't there, and the poster obviously doesn't have the technical skill or tools to follow your guidance.

    It won't? Here is what I replied to him.

    Are you able to see data with your scan tool?

    If so, can you capture and post the freeze frame data? That's the data that the computer stores when a code sets. It should have three frames before the code is generated, the fame of the code maturing, and the next one after.


    His response was.

    I will do that now.


    So what do we know here? We know the PCM has found a problem with the upstream Sensor 1 on Bank 2. So we also know that the sensor is measuring ambient air content vs. exhaust content and that the sensor isn't sending the PCM the correct voltage values.

    The PCM has run tests on the signal and it is out of range/performance, that doesn't mean that the part is bad. Once I see that data I'll tell him what to do next.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    I'm finding all this a bit too bizarre....but go ahead, keep it rollin'.

    So he's got a tool capable of reading freeze frame data and yet he went out and bought an 02 sensor before checking anything? Say what?
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    He did exactly what you keep saying to do. Don't test, guess.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    So why does he have advanced testing tools? Something here makes no sense to me. He seems more like your typical example of an inept shop owner than a consumer with no technical skill.

    I'm not going to defend a person for guessing when he has a scan tool and enough technical expertise to use it.
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

    So why does he have advanced testing tools?

    You'll have to ask him.


    Something here makes no sense to me. He seems more like your typical example of an inept shop owner than a consumer with no technical skill.

    Definately a DIY'er


    I'm not going to defend a person for guessing when he has a scan tool and enough technical expertise to use it.

    Just because he replied with an answer that suggests he has the ability to gather that information doesn't mean that he actually does. What he posted so far is exactly what someone could have gotten by using Google to search the code.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    Well that tool isn't going to do what you asked him to do.
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    He responded with these.





  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    edited September 2018
    Well this is someone who can speak your language and understand your suggestions. Many people can't do this at all. What do they do for help? They dig around and take a good guess, is what they do.

    Besides that, there are plenty of people who can genuinely be helped by simple advice. They don't need a Doc. They need a pointer and some good information.

    E.G. https://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/52423/ford/mustang/engine-swap-upgrades-before-the-swap-to-prepare-for-more-torque#latest

    Your example is outside the realm of what we are talking about IMO.

    In any event, let's forget about THAT debate and play with this.
    So, next step seems to me that he should observe fuel trim at a higher rpm than he is using now and see what happens.
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

    Well this is someone who can speak your language and understand your suggestions. Many people can't do this at all. What do they do for help? They dig around and take a good guess, is what they do.

    The influx of technology in the cars over the last two decades has made that a questionable behavior and while someone can get lucky once in a while that isn't sufficient to justify the attempts. If anything it's little more than an extension of all of the effort to try and marginalize how hard techs really have to work to keep up with the changes in the cars. aka Keep trying to claim that it is simple and anyone can do it...….


    Besides that, there are plenty of people who can genuinely be helped by simple advice. They don't need a Doc. They need a pointer and some good information.

    Good information. Let's go with that. His last response included this little gem.

    Let me mention to you that I recently had downstream sensor 2 bank 2 code which was P0430.
    I used spacer on the sensor. Could this be the cause of the problem? I just ordered a new downstream sensor now when I read where you mention upstream uses downstream to determine.

    Do you think the spacer on the downstream sensor might be the issue here?


    He actually got part if that backwards, the system uses the downstream sensor to test the accuracy of the upstream sensor. Even though he didn't give me all of the freeze frame data that I wanted to see, which would have included both upstream air/fuel sensor signals and both downstream sensor signals what he provided was enough to not rule out an innacurate downstream sensor signal. Then he admitts that he installed antifoulers between the downstream sensors and the exhaust to try to stop a P0430 catalyst efficiency code from setting. That amounts to "simple advice" that some on this site have preached and it's completely wrong. It might succeed in preventing a test from running accurately, but it doesn't fix the problem. Today the system is capable of detecting a discrepancy in the response between the upstream and downstream sensors when someone tries that hack.

    Oh, and speaking of hackery....
    Now sure there are people who can do transplants and achieve a functional result, the vast majority cannot and they end up with a frankenstein that might be faster but does little else right. Even your link advises most people to just go find a used 5.0l and go from there.


    Your example is outside the realm of what we are talking about IMO.

    Funny my example is what I have always been talking about, it just happened to be occurring concurrent to this exchange.


    In any event, let's forget about THAT debate and play with this.
    So, next step seems to me that he should observe fuel trim at a higher rpm than he is using now and see what happens.

    Great Idea. We teach this using not just rpm but engine load. Go ahead and start the outline and let's see how you do. What are the primary areas of focus?



  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    edited September 2018
    http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/1595892-opinion-car-mechanics-shortchanged-by-how-they’re-paid

    Strange, the link won't copy correctly. You may have to search the article or type it in.


    OPINION: Car mechanics shortchanged by how they’re paid
    NICK GALLANT
    Published September 10, 2018 - 5:00am
    Last Updated September 10, 2018 - 5:00am
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    I don't feel I need to enforce what people do when attempting engine swaps. I thought the article was good enough to make him think twice about it!

    OF COURSE it makes no sense to swap a 5.0 into a 4 cylinder Fox body Mustang. LOTS of things people do to modify cars make no sense.

    Actually I often give people like this very good advice, which is: "If you want a faster car, go buy a faster car" .
  • roadburnerroadburner Posts: 12,246
    Swapping an E36 M3 motor into an E36/5 is a dead easy swap. LOTS of fun for not much money. If the Club Sport wasn't so rare I'd swap one into it. As it is I'l probably eventually fit a stroker motor ...

    Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2014 M235i; 2009 Cooper Clubman; 1999 Wrangler; 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i

  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092

  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    https://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/52373/chrysler/town-and-country/shuts-off-while-driving#latest

    Well will he refund your money if he's wrong?

    Well isn't that a sticky question. On one hand that is an integrity standard, and yet if held to that they really should simply turn the job down the moment that is asked. The shop can easily be correct here, right now we don't know. The question is just how much testing did they really do? Did they do some testing and are ready to shoot from the hip the way you felt that Eric said that it is OK to do? I case you don't remember.....


    Yeah, I know, but even Eric admits that he has to guess once in a while. He doesn't mind people guessing, and guessing wrong. As he puts it "If I were them, I'd probably try doing that, too".

    The point is that he is a professional, with a reputation to nurture and uphold. It's his livelihood, and that of his family. For most car owners, taking a good guess makes sense sometimes. The only consequence to us is to have failed and maybe dribbled away $50--$100 bucks.

    Besides all that, some problems on cars are not that hard to solve. They aren't all devilishly complicated rabbit-holes.

    "Guessing" is not illogical. It is getting to YES by discovering all the NOs

    In your statement back then you tried to limit the risk to $100 bucks, here the reality is closer to $700. The lack of consistency regardless of the price is a problem, you don't get to arbitrairily change the standards of what represents good workmanship over a few dollars. In fact it's the tendency of people on the outside of the trade trying to do that which causes the vast majority of issues.

    Right now the shop/tech doesn't get to be right if they spend all of the time necessary (and charge for it) to prove what is going on.
    They aren't right if they don't spend any more time and take the shot "IF" they are wrong. That being the case, it doesn't make any sense for them to stick their neck out if they don't really know for sure just in case they are wrong.

    Guess that leaves the vehicle owner stuck with only one valid choice and that is to simply dump the car and buy a different one.

    As someone who actually has solved numerous similar issues on this vehicle make and model I know both how fast this can sometimes be done and how long and drawn out of a routine it might end up being and it is completely out of the techs control when it comes to the time that is required.
  • guitarzanguitarzan OhioPosts: 817
    Compare this to the medical industry where most guessing has been outlawed. The government which insures the largest part of the population, and the insurance companies, will not pay doctors for tests that come up negative. Many problems display the identical symptoms and doctors must to know the problem before they can figure out what part of the body to address. Thus troubleshooting is defined as running tests until one of them flags the problem. People can suffer for long periods of time while doctor's try to identify the right troubleshooting method, but attempting such in isolation.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490

    https://forums.edmunds.com/discussion/52373/chrysler/town-and-country/shuts-off-while-driving#latest

    Well will he refund your money if he's wrong?

    Well isn't that a sticky question. On one hand that is an integrity standard, and yet if held to that they really should simply turn the job down the moment that is asked. The shop can easily be correct here, right now we don't know. The question is just how much testing did they really do? Did they do some testing and are ready to shoot from the hip the way you felt that Eric said that it is OK to do? I case you don't remember.....


    Yeah, I know, but even Eric admits that he has to guess once in a while. He doesn't mind people guessing, and guessing wrong. As he puts it "If I were them, I'd probably try doing that, too".

    The point is that he is a professional, with a reputation to nurture and uphold. It's his livelihood, and that of his family. For most car owners, taking a good guess makes sense sometimes. The only consequence to us is to have failed and maybe dribbled away $50--$100 bucks.

    Besides all that, some problems on cars are not that hard to solve. They aren't all devilishly complicated rabbit-holes.

    "Guessing" is not illogical. It is getting to YES by discovering all the NOs

    In your statement back then you tried to limit the risk to $100 bucks, here the reality is closer to $700. The lack of consistency regardless of the price is a problem, you don't get to arbitrairily change the standards of what represents good workmanship over a few dollars. In fact it's the tendency of people on the outside of the trade trying to do that which causes the vast majority of issues.

    Right now the shop/tech doesn't get to be right if they spend all of the time necessary (and charge for it) to prove what is going on.
    They aren't right if they don't spend any more time and take the shot "IF" they are wrong. That being the case, it doesn't make any sense for them to stick their neck out if they don't really know for sure just in case they are wrong.

    Guess that leaves the vehicle owner stuck with only one valid choice and that is to simply dump the car and buy a different one.

    As someone who actually has solved numerous similar issues on this vehicle make and model I know both how fast this can sometimes be done and how long and drawn out of a routine it might end up being and it is completely out of the techs control when it comes to the time that is required.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I think my point in mentioning Eric's "guess" is that he had plenty of circumstantial evidence that he was correct (he was in fact) but for various reasons couldn't lock it down 100%.

    I have no idea how much diagnosis the tech did in the town & country. If that tech isn't are sure as Eric was, he should pass on the job. What are you thinking here? That the PCM isn't grounding when required?
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092


    I think my point in mentioning Eric's "guess" is that he had plenty of circumstantial evidence that he was correct (he was in fact) but for various reasons couldn't lock it down 100%.

    That may be all the tech trying to diagnose that Town and Country has too. There is virtually no difference between the two scenarios from this perspective. Then again maybe the tech has approached this correctly and absolutely nailed the diagnosis. Again we don't know, but I know how the tech will and should feel if challenged about the diagnosis if that is the case.


    I have no idea how much diagnosis the tech did in the town & country. If that tech isn't are sure as Eric was, he should pass on the job. What are you thinking here? That the PCM isn't grounding when required?

    I wouldn't even say anything that precise, in fact there are traces of information that would have me not expecting a ground circuit issue at this time. Right now I want to know which modules have been checked for codes and whether any codes were found in modules other than the PCM. DIY tools quite often only support some of the global OBDII system and if it's even available the user has to pay extra to get support for other modules. I'm approaching this car with the Chrysler factory tool, the DRB-III. Once I have that answer, that information would only be enough for me to create my testing plan that I would set up and carry out during the next failure event, nothing more.


    If that tech isn't are sure as Eric was, he should pass on the job.

    How does one judge how sure someone is as compared to another in a different event? Does that really have any bearing on the potential result? I keep trying to demonstrate why that approach is flawed and shouldn't be part of the picture. Attempting to guess when a guess might or might not work isn't supported by any logical plan. The only way to solve that Town and Country the first time is to use the kinds of routines that I have been sharing and by staying disciplined in the approach. That get's really hard to do while everything around you tries to make the tech do anything but that.

    FWIW
    I solved a Jeep issue about two months ago that would be described by a DIY'er almost exactly the same as this Town and Country problem. That one was a PCM that would simply stop generating the 5v reference for the sensors and for the communication output. One of the most important things that I had to proove is whether during the failure if something external of the PCM was pulling the reference voltage to ground or not. This Jeep had already had the PCM replaced that week and it turned out to be a defective replacement that just happened to generate an almost identical symptom as observed from the drivers seat. I might make that case study be my next video.
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092
    guitarzan said:

    Compare this to the medical industry where most guessing has been outlawed. The government which insures the largest part of the population, and the insurance companies, will not pay doctors for tests that come up negative.

    With a $5000 deductable per year they have both found a way around a lot of that. When I think about what our insurance currently costs us ($1400+ a month) and then have to come up with that deductable if we actually need to use it I really wonder why we bother trying.

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490


    I think my point in mentioning Eric's "guess" is that he had plenty of circumstantial evidence that he was correct (he was in fact) but for various reasons couldn't lock it down 100%.

    That may be all the tech trying to diagnose that Town and Country has too. There is virtually no difference between the two scenarios from this perspective. Then again maybe the tech has approached this correctly and absolutely nailed the diagnosis. Again we don't know, but I know how the tech will and should feel if challenged about the diagnosis if that is the case.


    I have no idea how much diagnosis the tech did in the town & country. If that tech isn't are sure as Eric was, he should pass on the job. What are you thinking here? That the PCM isn't grounding when required?

    I wouldn't even say anything that precise, in fact there are traces of information that would have me not expecting a ground circuit issue at this time. Right now I want to know which modules have been checked for codes and whether any codes were found in modules other than the PCM. DIY tools quite often only support some of the global OBDII system and if it's even available the user has to pay extra to get support for other modules. I'm approaching this car with the Chrysler factory tool, the DRB-III. Once I have that answer, that information would only be enough for me to create my testing plan that I would set up and carry out during the next failure event, nothing more.


    If that tech isn't are sure as Eric was, he should pass on the job.

    How does one judge how sure someone is as compared to another in a different event? Does that really have any bearing on the potential result? I keep trying to demonstrate why that approach is flawed and shouldn't be part of the picture. Attempting to guess when a guess might or might not work isn't supported by any logical plan. The only way to solve that Town and Country the first time is to use the kinds of routines that I have been sharing and by staying disciplined in the approach. That get's really hard to do while everything around you tries to make the tech do anything but that.

    FWIW
    I solved a Jeep issue about two months ago that would be described by a DIY'er almost exactly the same as this Town and Country problem. That one was a PCM that would simply stop generating the 5v reference for the sensors and for the communication output. One of the most important things that I had to proove is whether during the failure if something external of the PCM was pulling the reference voltage to ground or not. This Jeep had already had the PCM replaced that week and it turned out to be a defective replacement that just happened to generate an almost identical symptom as observed from the drivers seat. I might make that case study be my next video.
    There are some situations where you cannot be 100% sure. That's called "life".
  • thecardoc3thecardoc3 Posts: 5,092


    There are some situations where you cannot be 100% sure. That's called "life".

    They are also known by another word. Incompetence.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    Being a real human being is incompetent? :p
Sign In or Register to comment.