derKai
Posts: 2 |
hey,
i found your site with a lot of amazing textures but can't find how i can use this filters. i'm student and in my spare time i develope games, i earn no money with them and but would like to use some textures (e.g. the low resolution ones everybody can see on the website). what do i have to consider? do i need a purchased accound? or is "filterforge" in credits (or may in the intro) enough? thank you !! |
|||||||
Posted: April 16, 2010 11:32 am | ||||||||
ronjonnie
![]() |
Hi derKai,
Welcome to Filter Forge Forums. ![]() No, you do not need a purchase account. You can download the program free for 30 days. Go to Home page / Downloads. Download & install Filter Forge on your computer. Find the filter you want, go to File, save image as, & save it to your computer. Enjoy! ![]() Ron zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time. |
|||||||
Posted: April 16, 2010 12:37 pm | ||||||||
derKai
Posts: 2 |
thank you..
that means i can use these textures for free? |
|||||||
Posted: April 16, 2010 1:21 pm | ||||||||
angelboiii |
derKai: Use them, modify them, or even create the new ones you need.. and then even upload them for others to use.. and even.. get a free copy of FF if you create good ones!!
|
|||||||
Posted: April 16, 2010 2:01 pm | ||||||||
LeoLion |
I have a question as a newb as well. Is it considered okay to 'save image' from the Basic Edition (meaning can't create my own filter) and then resell them as textures?
These is terrific software and still figuring out how to use it. ~A candle loses nothing in lighting another candle~ |
|||||||
Posted: May 7, 2010 5:14 pm | ||||||||
tigerAspect |
Actually, could somebody answer the OP's question? I'd often wondered it myself before the Mac version was available:
What are the usage restrictions on the Filter Library samples for non-licence holders? |
|||||||
Posted: May 7, 2010 6:05 pm | ||||||||
Carl
![]() |
Leolion - yes you can do legally what ever you like with FF, ....... but keep in mind some author find it morally corrupt to use verbatim the presets as tile resells
lifting samples images from threads and website is a breach of copyright, also copyright is held by the author on any image or filter in threads until it is uploaded to the library where the auther gives FF all rights ... |
|||||||
Posted: May 7, 2010 10:17 pm | ||||||||
Kraellin
![]() |
actually, the author never loses copyright rights. he's simply giving FF the right to license his work how FF wishes to. it's a bit of nitpicking, but that's how i read it. and mind you, that's how i read it and i'm not a lawyer nor a representative of FF, inc. one shld read the end user EULA and the author's EULA and determine for oneself exactly what all that means.
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
|||||||
Posted: May 8, 2010 6:51 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
Let's not beat around the bush, gentlemen
![]() ![]() Sorry.....knee-jerk reaction.....nevermind..... ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 8, 2010 9:17 pm | ||||||||
CFandM
![]() |
hehe ![]() ![]()
Yep, IANAL but.....This would be the same as say...Going to a photo selling site and instead of paying for the photo you just do a screenshot of the photo and use it that way....In the threads and the fourms the posters own those copyrights to the images and textures that they post.....Unless you contact them directly for usage rights and or ask them nicely to use them.....The low res images that you see on the filters webpages...(I do not speak for the Filter Forge company)...Is property of Filter Forge Inc and you would need to download the trial and or purchase the software to agree to the terms of their LIC before you can use any of those images and textures..... Stupid things happen to computers for stupid reasons at stupid times! |
|||||||
Posted: May 8, 2010 9:43 pm | ||||||||
Kraellin
![]() |
despite steve's frequently re-occurring 'kneejerk', no one has to post his/her filters to the public library. those filters NOT posted to the FF public library are owned by the original author with all rights reserved by that person. the public library is just that, a public library done in the spirit of open source sharing. that means ANYONE may use those filters and their results for free. that some authors object to this are trying to have their cake and eat it too. if they dont want others to use their filters and presets then they shldnt post them in the PUBLIC library. and not all of us want that changed.
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
|||||||
Posted: May 8, 2010 11:59 pm | ||||||||
tigerAspect |
Hmm, no-one's answering the website filter preview question. I'm still interested in this.
Now, the author of a given filter has, by submitting the filter to the library, given FF inc. a non-exclusive sub-license-able, right to do basically what they want with that filter. Now, as part of that, the filter's presets are rendered out and used on the website for promotional purposes. What isn't really clear is what terms FF is making those images available under. As far as I can tell from the website's TOS, everything on the website is usable only for personal, non-commercial use. Now, just downloading the trial doesn't circumvent this, as you only move up a chunk in the licensee chain for as long as the trial lasts, unless there's a clause in the agreement for the trail I don't know about. So no. What I can figure out is this: If you want to use the filter results, on the website or otherwise, for commercial purposes, you have to buy the program in one form or another. |
|||||||
Posted: May 10, 2010 7:59 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
There are no usage restrictions on anything.....from eiher buying the program, trial version, or ripping images from website.....nothing. I guess the upside of all this is that FF spends absolutely no money, man-hours. or effort to protect anything.....
Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 10, 2010 9:42 pm | ||||||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
Our Terms of Use state that "Except as otherwise provided, the Content published on this Website may be reproduced or distributed in unmodified form for personal non-commercial use only."
This doesn't cover the usage of images made with Filter Forge — it is described in the EULA. |
|||||||
Posted: May 11, 2010 2:19 am | ||||||||
James |
I don't think that this information is made very clear, if you read the filter library or main pages text it almost sounds like everything is free, there is a program that you could buy but you could also get that for free. On the texture pages they would download from there is a link to the program but no text saying they cannot use the images or even linking to the terms of use.
So basically what i am saying is if you did not know otherwise or read the terms of use it seems like a giant free texture library and a program that can make them also if you want to use it. The thing with this is they asked about a month ago, the main replies would have seemed like yes you can use the websites images without buying anything. |
|||||||
Posted: May 11, 2010 1:48 pm | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
I'll try this another way.....
![]() There's no restrictions on anything..... ![]() Sorry to say, but FFs EULA is the biggest waste of type that I've ever seen.....all that legal jargen boils down to mean absolutely nothing.....that FF has no usage restrictions at all..... ![]() Impossible to prove that "images" did not come from a legit FF copy.....and FF is certainly not going to waste any resources on it unless someone comes right out and says "Hey, I illegally ripped this image from FF in violation of their EULA" or "Hey, I got a pirated copy of FF and I'm illegally selling straight texture results.....here's my name, phone number, and address if you want to buy some of my pirated stuff"..... ![]() ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 11, 2010 4:32 pm | ||||||||
LeoLion |
Wow...didn't know what I'd started when I asked my simple (or not so simple) question.
When I tried the Beta, I was thrilled with FF. I had the trial for a few days and knew I had to have it so I bought the Basic Edition but it left me no ability to make my own filters. I thought to myself, "Self, it will take a while to get salty on this app, so observe and listen and learn." Meanwhile there's a plethora of filters to use and filter images to use for textures and for my builds. Now it seems that when and if I sell these textures inworld (SL) I will be a scum-sucking low-life without a moral compass to some, and to others I will be well within my rights to do so as those who have posted the filters to this public domain have done so with full knowledge that they are giving them away with the express understanding that they will be used without restriction. So... I've looked at FF from both sides now, from up and down and still somehow, it's FF's EULA'sions I recall, I really don't know wtf is going on at all. Best Regards, LeoLion ![]() ~A candle loses nothing in lighting another candle~ |
|||||||
Posted: May 11, 2010 6:19 pm | ||||||||
CorvusCroax
![]() |
Hey LeoLion: Yes, it's a tense subject within the community. And, frankly, some people have some odd notions about what 'copyright' means, and what kinds of things are copyright-able. Also, seems people are sick of arguing about it, so ... I'm guessing that's why there was such silence on the original post.
Here are the rules*: 1) According to the software license (aka the EULA) you can render whatever you want out of FF and do whater you want with them, including sell them. 2) It annoys the community if you just render presets and sell them. It is of course, entirely permitted by the EULA, but be prepared to get flak from the community of you do this. (I'm looking at you, Dover Books** !) Also, it's lame. 3) If you submit something to the filter library, it falls under the EULA, and others can render it out as per point 1. No amount of text on your submitted filter saying "you can do this but not that with my filter" takes precedence over the EULA. If you don't want other people rendering and selling your filter, don't submit it. 4) It is NOT OK to just copy textures off the website and sell them. Refer to the 'Terms of Use' link in the lower right hand corner of this page. *(as I understand them... I'm not a lawyer, and I don't speak for FF policy) ** For Example: (some are presets, some are not) http://store.doverpublications.com/0486990192.html http://store.doverpublications.com/0486990206.html http://store.doverpublications.com/0486990494.html |
|||||||
Posted: May 11, 2010 7:16 pm | ||||||||
James |
Seems i was wrong in some of what i said after reading CorvusCroax point 4) now so as i can't edit my above post the new version is -
"On the texture preview pages they would download from there is a link to the program but no text saying they cannot use the images commercially. The Terms of Use link is not very noticeable at the bottom of the page and on the seamless preview not visible with nothing in the text about the terms of use." |
|||||||
Posted: May 12, 2010 2:38 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
"Terms of Use" or not.....impossible to enforce.....who is to say that a user, who rips images from website, didn't get/buy them from someone with a legitimate copy of FF.....
That's why it makes alot more sense to give authors "tangible" copyrights to those images and let them protect them.....and take advantage of it here.....IMHO..... ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 12, 2010 10:17 pm | ||||||||
James |
Yeah i agree, although sadly i doubt there will ever be anything changed to give users copyrights to those images they submit or stop direct re-selling of textures as this would have already happened a long time ago. I still hope things change with this also though.
|
|||||||
Posted: May 13, 2010 4:34 am | ||||||||
ronjonnie
![]() |
Good morning everyone.
Steve is correct! AMEN! We pray for a change. Have a GREAT day! ![]() Ron zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time. |
|||||||
Posted: May 13, 2010 6:41 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
Me too.... ![]()
Ron, I wish the women in my relationships had given me just a fraction of the loyalty and support that I've got from you..... ![]() ![]() ![]() Ron, we're going to make this happen!!! Never say die!!! Release the Krakkon!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 13, 2010 10:59 pm | ||||||||
ronjonnie
![]() |
Good morning everyone,
Hey Steve, Thanks. If you are not married, keep your eyes peeled, she's out there! Better days are comming! ![]() ![]() ![]() Ron zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time. |
|||||||
Posted: May 14, 2010 5:56 am | ||||||||
LeoLion |
Umm, Just remember to read the EULA thoroughly before you do anything rash. ![]() j/k ![]() Great weekend all! LeoLion ~A candle loses nothing in lighting another candle~ |
|||||||
Posted: May 14, 2010 12:31 pm | ||||||||
Kraellin
![]() |
you already have copyrights to all filters you submit and to all images rendered from said filter. it's just that you've licensed to FF, inc. the right to use those filters and those images, without restriction, to however FF, inc. deems fit. you did that when you submitted the filter. i cant believe this debate is still going on after 7000+ filters in the public library. i mean come on, sour grapes for crying out loud. quit blaming the re-sellers for you not having read and understood what you were doing when you submitted. it's the old game of if you dont like the rules, dont play. simply quit submitting filters to the public library and you retain all control over the filter and the images produced. simple. this is like the old censorship game; if you dont like what's being displayed or broadcast, quit watching. lol. that you want to change the rules is fine, but you have to propose a sensible, easily understood system that makes sense to authors, end users and especially FF, inc. we have 7000+ filters in the library. your new rules cant affect them by law. so, the only thing you can change is for future submissions. steve has proposed several ideas, which is good. i dont necessarily agree with them, but i'm not FF, inc. either. also, this endless bickering/debate amongst ourselves is also fairly pointless. engage FF, inc. in the conversation, but to do so, you have to drop the schoolyard tactics of attacking people and character asassination and so on. present your facts, opinions, arguements and suggestions in a straightforward, logical, rational manner and let the 'bosses' decide. all we are currently doing is making it harder for them to communicate anything. If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
|||||||
Posted: May 15, 2010 12:11 pm | ||||||||
James |
Kraellin if you think i or others don't know that already then you don't catch on very fast and i doubt most people are referring to old/current textures when they say that there should be a updated EULA/system also.
In fact knowing this i have not submitted anything new in years and have watched the standards of the library fall as time passes also so it's clear there should be changes made. I see a load of great textures in the beta gallery threads but much less of it in the filter library now. I can tell people are holding on sharing them more now days, that is probably down to the fact they would get re-sold also and people already own or have a free copy of FF. You will also know that in many cases i don't start these topics i just take part like others that have the same opinion about it. The endless bickering is not helped by you either constantly saying the same things back to people because you clearly disagree also, so there is no point in bringing up something like that when you play a part of it also. Maybe you are referring to others here when you say tactics but all i do is say my opinion. I see tactics in your post though like for example bringing the topic back to focus when the discussion had basically ended, quoting me with the name attached and then quoting StevieJ after without it to make it seem like i said what he did. Maybe you do that thinking it is easier to direct things towards me rather than StevieJ who is more of a regular around here thinking i won't reply back. I am guessing you are referring to StevieJ's earlier comment but you go about things the wrong way when you quote like that. What i said in this thread was mainly that the usage terms of the website images is not made very clear and then saying i still agree that things should change. Maybe doing the quotes like that was a mistake but that is how it seems anyway and i can say for a fact there is no tactics/attacks on my part, i just give my opinion/vote as like many others here i think that things should change. I am guessing that was a mistake and that was a general reply rather than towards me so i suggest maybe replying to each quote separately in the future so it is clear who you are talking to. |
|||||||
Posted: May 16, 2010 5:17 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
I think using the term "Texture Resellers" has become a touchy subject around here.....like it has some kind of negative connotation that sounds like they are doing something in violation of FF's EULA. As far as I'm concerned, I use it to describe exactly what is going on here.....it's straight texture result reselling.....plain and simple.....and not to offend, attack, or character-assassinate anyone.....as I have stated a kazillion times before in regard to this subject.....
I make no bones about it.....I want to see straight texture result reselling restricted.....I want FF to take control of it here and put resellers out of business.....and I strongly feel that it's 110% in FFs best interests to do so.....
This is very true, IMO.....thus, I strongly feel that FF should start putting some long-term thought into where they want the mean quality of the library to go.....because I think the ratio of sub-ops to quality filters is way out of control.....and is now working against FF......like "have fun digging through 20,000 filters to find the quality one you want" type of thing..... Restrict straight texture reselling.....give "tangible" copyrights and let authors protect them.....take advantage of the restriction to justify author storefronts to sell royalty-based texture packs with copyrights.....diffusing straight texture reselling at major sites and bringing all that business here.....use author storefronts to create new reward levels and incentives to draw in new authors and re-involve veteran authors.....etc, etc, etc.....have I mentioned this stuff before??? ![]() ![]() A new "competitiveness" over getting into storefronts and royalty $$$ will surely "raise the bar" on quality filter submissions.....it will keep on growing with no end in sight.....making FF "THE" place to go for all your texture and effect needs. I'd even be willing to bet that a move like this would put Genetica out of business.....or at least grab a good percent of their customer base..... Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 16, 2010 11:06 am | ||||||||
ronjonnie
![]() |
Hey everyone,
I must say that is very well said Steve! I for the life of me can't figure out ![]() why the Filter Forge company would rather let others have the money? Maybe it's just that they really don't need any more? It might just be a, share the wealth thing, yah suppose? ![]() I must admit, I have been with holding filters back, for, well,.... I believe we all have heard why. In addition,.. trying to make a decision, then waiting,.... on, Filter Forge to make one. ![]() Have a good evening. ![]() Ron zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time. |
|||||||
Posted: May 16, 2010 4:05 pm | ||||||||
Kraellin
![]() |
james, kindly look at your statement that i quoted and tell me what i missed. i can only go by what you said. steve, if i'm a photoshop user shld i have to worry about copyrights and using a photoshop filter on an image? and what happens if you get your way? what happens when ID Software or Lucas Arts sees your new eula? surely they qualify for being resellers and even if they dont under your terms, isnt this going to scare off professionals that expect to use a program such as photoshop and FF free of charge once they've paid for it? and how are you going to word the new eula so that only those you dont like dont get to have things for free? how do you draw that line? mind you, i'm not against some of the principles you put forth. an online shop within FF is a good idea, at least for authors and perhaps even FF, inc. one could sell textures or filters and we've got a new income for authors and FF, inc. it's the implementation i'm concerned with and the blocking of certain individuals from using the filters and textures but not blocking others. it seems unfair to me. is it ok for someone to sell textures within second life but not on a texture selling web site? the wording of your eula would almost have to name the names of those you dont want reselling to include all the possible exceptions and cases that would exist. surely, that's going to be a nightmare headache for FF, inc? it also bothers me that no one in your camp seems to pay any attention to when i suggest that maybe an author or other user shld start a web site for authors and texture selling and filter selling. surely, if all these quality authors are holding back their filters from the public library, then wouldnt they be happy and eager to have an outlet for all those filters and textures they are currently withholding? basically, i'm on your side, though i know it doesnt always look like it. it's just the model you're holding up had a couple flaws in it, as pointed out by myself and fred and some others. what if, instead of trying to restrict resellers, you let that part go for the current library. just leave that open source like it's been. then, whatever else you're trying to implement do it as a new, more restricted area, pay for type thing. that's all i'm asking. this leaves the choice up to the authors, go open source in public library or put it in the restricted, pay for area and go for the gold. wouldnt that be somewhat workable? If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
|||||||
Posted: May 16, 2010 11:10 pm | ||||||||
James |
The fact you wrote most of the previous comment like it's directed towards me and everything else i said maybe. There were a few points i agree with though which is why you have that quote but don't try to twist things like i fully agree with you. It's more of a case of what you miss when you read other people comments. Anyway in this thread i was not planning to get deep into this again before in my opinion getting dragged into it. I am guessing you were not expecting me to reply back though or just made a mistake you don't want to admit to which was quoting me and directing your reply to someone else or others in general. With just my name there in the original quotes it seems like it was all towards me yet i doubt that was the case and why i replied back.
I don't know about others but that is mainly the type of things i have suggested before. I still don't agree with re-selling but it's not like i think that things could change for the old textures as they have been available with no restrictions for a long time. A new no cost library with optional terms of use for each texture could get started also if they did not want a texture re-sold, this is what refer to when i say changes to the (or another) library a lot of the time but it would need to be official FF based for people to take notice of it. If they were being sold also there should be some sort of can re-sell and cannot re-sell license thing also. The ones people can re-sell at a much higher price otherwise lower priced for learning and non commercial use. With them being sold though there would probably be more of a interest from texture creators though as they get a return back. A commercial based thing would probably be better for much higher quality textures also. Both ideas together could be good also as some people just want to share anyway. With a no cost library there should still have the option to set some sort of usage terms like creative commons for others though. I don't see why you couldn't have all 3 things though, the current library as a open/stock library, another no cost library with optional user terms and a commercial library to give sellers a return back. That has actually been my opinion for a while yet there seems to have been some argument against it or what i say mistaken after others read another users comments. People often just think i am in some group of users that want to turn the current library into one that cannot be re-sold but that is actually nothing like what i want to happen. --- Since it sort of went off topic for the thread and what i previously said, all i wanted to say originally put simply was - 1) FF should make the use of the texture library images on the website more clear by having some sort of text/images on the pages (rather than a link people probably won't click on) 2) I still agree with StevieJ's general opinions about having a better system/library, +1 vote |
|||||||
Posted: May 17, 2010 3:32 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
I only want a restriction on cranking out straight texture results and reselling them in texture packs.....and these texture resellers would be the only ones affected by it.....nobody else. It will have absolutely no affect on textures used in any other creative capacity.....so ID Software, Lucas Arts, etc would not be affected at all by it..... The Affected resellers are such a totally negligable percent of customers.....yet their opposition has come off like it has been in representaion of a huge percentage of users.....when 99.9999% percent of users would be totally unaffected by it..... I still think FF getting into pay pro filters is a huge mistake. The main "draw" of buying this program is free access to all filters.....and I think charging for access to the best filters would force Vlad to carry at least a continuous 75% discount on the program to counter-act it to keep sales up..... Let's get real.....we've all heard all the beeeotching, moaning, and threats that the program won't get used if any restriction of any kind is placed on it. What do you think would happen if there is an access restriction placed on all the best filters??? I mean, really.....the largest customer demographic are people who don't have a whole lot of money to burn.....and at least with texture packs, if customers can't afford to buy the program (and the additional cost to access the filters they want), then at least they would have a low-cost option to get what they need and can afford.....and they will still be spending some money here as opposed to spending nothing at all..... In addition, FF has to someohow start addressing the mean quality of the library.....because the "FilterMeister Syndrome" with an overwhelming amount of sub-ops to quality filters is getting really bad.....and it's not going to matter how much the program is enhanced to counter-act it..... So I believe the ten million dollar questions are..... 1) How does FF get quality filter submissions to at least overshadow sub-op submissions without turning authors off/away from getting involved??? 2) How does FF create a draw for new authors to get involved and strive to submit quality filters??? 3) How does FF create ongoing incentives to keep new authors and veteran authors continuously producing quality works here??? Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 17, 2010 9:05 pm | ||||||||
Kraellin
![]() |
ok, thanks guys. i think we've covered most all of the bases.
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
|||||||
Posted: May 17, 2010 11:25 pm | ||||||||
ronjonnie
![]() |
Good morning everyone,
![]() OUTSTANDING! I am soo glad to finally hear a mutual agreement! I would like to make this perfectly clear, once again, I VOTE FOR STEVE! Have a GREAT day! ![]() Ron zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time. |
|||||||
Posted: May 18, 2010 6:32 am | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
I wish.... ![]() ![]()
Hold on, Bubba ![]() ![]() ![]() Let's talk about the "Losses" versus "Gains" to FF by putting a restriction on straight texture result reselling..... LOSSES: 1) A negligable group of users will be upset that they can't just crank out straight textures from filters and sell them as their own anymore without agreement from the filter author..... 2) FF will have to endure some beeeotching, moaning, and fear-mongering threats that the program will be boycotted if any kind of usage restriction is placed on it.....but they will get over it and still buy and use the program..... GAINS: 1) New and veteran authors will submit better quality texture filters....and not be predisposed to withhold them from submission. Cases and points; Dilla, one of FFs most talented filter authors, actually started this whole "movement" when he got sick and tired of seeing all of his textures being resold at other sites.....and stopped producing here because of it. I never submitted any textures because of the same reason.....and I've got tons of them just collecting dust..... 2) Giving authors "tangible" texture result copyrights can be used to "justify" and create much-needed new draws and incentives for a continuous flow of quality filterworks from new and veteran authors..... Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 18, 2010 12:10 pm | ||||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
![]() ![]() DISCLAIMER: The above characters are ficticious and in no way reflect or represent the positions or opinions of any FF team member..... ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||||
Posted: May 18, 2010 12:28 pm |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,712 Registered Users
+19 new in 30 days!
153,534 Posts
+31 new in 30 days!
15,348 Topics
+72 new in year!
32 unregistered users.