T
thx1038
Guest
This Just In..
The DockS night Club loses liquor license due to noise complaints….
1038
The DockS night Club loses liquor license due to noise complaints….
1038
|
|
|
A
adma
Guest
Model 1:        After Chernobyl, my penis ... is falling off.
Moe:                And "penis" is Russian for ... ?
Moe:                And "penis" is Russian for ... ?
F
fiendishlibrarian
Guest
With the number of condos increasing in the core, I have a feeling this will be the first of many clubs to fall.
D
Darkstar416
Guest
Almost every club/bar in this city has lost their liquor license at some point. Generally, due to the infraction they are forced to close down for two to three weeks and most establishments simply use it as an opportunity to do some minor renovations (e.g., Dance Cave / Lee's Palace pretty much every year).
What's not common is for a club to permanently lose their license. Are we sure that is what happened here?
What's not common is for a club to permanently lose their license. Are we sure that is what happened here?
T
thx1038
Guest
A
adma
Guest
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
From the Globe:
Docks nightclub fights liquor ruling
Appeal questions validity of complaints; mayor says noise is a 'huge' issue
OLIVER MOORE AND JENNIFER LEWINGTON
The Docks entertainment complex is refusing to lie down in its fight with neighbours irate about noise from the nightclub.
Residents of the nearby islands, who say they have been subjected to years of house-rattling music, celebrated with champagne Monday upon receiving the news that the club had been stripped of its liquor licence.
But club lawyer Nicholas Macos said that an appeal of the decision was filed yesterday in Divisional Court.
The appeal could take months but the club is also seeking a stay that would allow it to serve alcohol in the interim. The application for the stay will be heard on Friday.
The appeal is based in part on whether complaints from neighbours, which the lawyer said is the traditional local test, should be applied to a bar such as the Docks, which attracts people from all over.
He said the club is getting support from patrons and he has been hearing voices of concern from other entertainment promoters worried they might be next.
"They feel that the Docks is probably as diligent as any facility," Mr. Macos said. "If it can happen to us, it can happen to them."
Indeed, Mayor David Miller said yesterday that noise is a "huge topic" across the community.
"Everyone deserves to live in a quiet neighbourhood," he told reporters at city hall.
"Every time I have a phone-in show, people call in about noise in nightclubs."
Mr. Miller said the decision of the provincial Alcohol and Gaming Commission "sends a strong message to liquor-licence holders that it is a privilege [to have a licence] and you have to follow the rules.
"We are a big city, and noise and quiet matter to people, whether it is on the waterfront or elsewhere. It isn't an issue in one neighbourhood; it is an issue around the city."
This week, council is expected to debate calls to strengthen existing noise bylaws.
Councillor Kyle Rae, who is among those trying to tighten up bylaw changes made last year, said they have to reflect the reality that residential and commercial neighbourhoods coexist.
He added that some recent changes, such as a rule that permits loudspeakers to be played at 7 a.m., "are not in the best interest of residents."
AoD
Docks nightclub fights liquor ruling
Appeal questions validity of complaints; mayor says noise is a 'huge' issue
OLIVER MOORE AND JENNIFER LEWINGTON
The Docks entertainment complex is refusing to lie down in its fight with neighbours irate about noise from the nightclub.
Residents of the nearby islands, who say they have been subjected to years of house-rattling music, celebrated with champagne Monday upon receiving the news that the club had been stripped of its liquor licence.
But club lawyer Nicholas Macos said that an appeal of the decision was filed yesterday in Divisional Court.
The appeal could take months but the club is also seeking a stay that would allow it to serve alcohol in the interim. The application for the stay will be heard on Friday.
The appeal is based in part on whether complaints from neighbours, which the lawyer said is the traditional local test, should be applied to a bar such as the Docks, which attracts people from all over.
He said the club is getting support from patrons and he has been hearing voices of concern from other entertainment promoters worried they might be next.
"They feel that the Docks is probably as diligent as any facility," Mr. Macos said. "If it can happen to us, it can happen to them."
Indeed, Mayor David Miller said yesterday that noise is a "huge topic" across the community.
"Everyone deserves to live in a quiet neighbourhood," he told reporters at city hall.
"Every time I have a phone-in show, people call in about noise in nightclubs."
Mr. Miller said the decision of the provincial Alcohol and Gaming Commission "sends a strong message to liquor-licence holders that it is a privilege [to have a licence] and you have to follow the rules.
"We are a big city, and noise and quiet matter to people, whether it is on the waterfront or elsewhere. It isn't an issue in one neighbourhood; it is an issue around the city."
This week, council is expected to debate calls to strengthen existing noise bylaws.
Councillor Kyle Rae, who is among those trying to tighten up bylaw changes made last year, said they have to reflect the reality that residential and commercial neighbourhoods coexist.
He added that some recent changes, such as a rule that permits loudspeakers to be played at 7 a.m., "are not in the best interest of residents."
AoD
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
From the Star, by Hume:
Waterfront belongs to us all
Jul. 29, 2006. 01:00 AM
Toronto's cultural wars have moved to the waterfront.
The latest skirmish, fought between the residents of the islands and the Docks nightclub, has not been a pretty sight. It's hard to say who's least sympathetic, the management of an entertainment venue known for its civic indifference or a small group of locals determined to keep the rest of the city at bay.
The same scenario has been played out again and again throughout the city. The combatants vary but the issue is always the same: Who controls the city and do we have the right to choose our neighbours?
Though reports that Canada is a democracy have been greatly exaggerated, still no one has the right to say who lives next door, down the road or across the lake.
Like so many neighbourhood groups, Toronto islanders are reluctant to share their little part of the city with anyone or anything that doesn't meet with their approval. For now, their efforts have been focused on the Docks, but what's next? Centreville? The Guvernment nightclub? Party boats? The Redpath Sugar refinery? The Molson Indy? The Molson Amphitheatre? Caribana? Waterfront revitalization?
On the other hand, it's hard to feel sorry for the Docks, which has been convicted of several noise violations. Judging by its website, Docks patrons largely seem to be young men for whom the thump of the bass fills a deep inner void. We may not like them, but like death and taxes, they are inevitable. Besides, eventually they grow up and want to move to places like Ward and Algonquin islands to live happily  and quietly  ever after.
That's why we need rules. Even though they will never eliminate conflict, Toronto has no shortage of them  bylaws, regulations, zoning ordinances and so on.
But conflict is inevitable, as much a part of urban life as police sirens, traffic jams and construction cranes.
Down by Lake Ontario, the saga of the Docks versus the islanders is just a prelude. Once waterfront revitalization gets going in earnest this fall, the fighting will become incessant, and vicious.
If lakeside residents and businesses remain true to form, we face decades of fighting.
The tendency to intolerance may be inescapable, but in Toronto it's growing worse. We pride ourselves on being a city of diversity but it turns out that's not true when it comes to our own tiny piece of turf.
To make matters worse, the nature of civic governance in this city is such that municipal politicians prefer to play to their constituents' weaknesses, rather than their strengths. The term is NIMBYism, but that hardly does justice to an appalling phenomenon that sees otherwise nice, normal, middle-class neighbours organizing to stop shelters for single mothers, high-rise condos, even hospitals, parks and other public amenities.
Their arguments that such additions are bad for property values are not only bogus, they're misguided, selfish and hysterical. A vibrant waterfront guarantees rising real estate prices.
Dire predictions that rebuilding the waterfront will fail if the Docks ultimately ends up losing its liquor licence are nonsense, best viewed as corporate scare tactics.
Right now only a few hundred people live on the islands, but anyone who has seen what's happened on Queens Quay W. in the last decade or two knows that the waterfront has become a neighbourhood. Supermarkets and drug stores have appeared. Next month, two lanes of Queens Quay will be closed to cars for 10 days to be turned into a bike trail and a linear park. Next year, these changes will be made permanent.
Planners expect that when complete, the new waterfront neighbourhoods will be home to 60,000 people, many of them families living in multi-unit residential buildings. There will also be business, shops, restaurants, bars and, yes, nightclubs.
If the Docks thinks it has problems now, just wait. Things will only get worse.
And how will islanders respond to all the changes, the tall buildings, streetcar noise, social housing and the hordes that will be moving to their area?
A pox on both their houses.
Remember, we live in a city that doesn't belong to any one person, neighbourhood, group or business, but to all.
For too many Torontonians, however, it's easier to love thy neighbour when he doesn't live next door.
_________________________________________________
I think that's a fair assessment, and if Sparckman thinks he could go against the waterfront development to come in a planning perspective (which he have a history of doing), double pox on his house.
AoD
Waterfront belongs to us all
Jul. 29, 2006. 01:00 AM
Toronto's cultural wars have moved to the waterfront.
The latest skirmish, fought between the residents of the islands and the Docks nightclub, has not been a pretty sight. It's hard to say who's least sympathetic, the management of an entertainment venue known for its civic indifference or a small group of locals determined to keep the rest of the city at bay.
The same scenario has been played out again and again throughout the city. The combatants vary but the issue is always the same: Who controls the city and do we have the right to choose our neighbours?
Though reports that Canada is a democracy have been greatly exaggerated, still no one has the right to say who lives next door, down the road or across the lake.
Like so many neighbourhood groups, Toronto islanders are reluctant to share their little part of the city with anyone or anything that doesn't meet with their approval. For now, their efforts have been focused on the Docks, but what's next? Centreville? The Guvernment nightclub? Party boats? The Redpath Sugar refinery? The Molson Indy? The Molson Amphitheatre? Caribana? Waterfront revitalization?
On the other hand, it's hard to feel sorry for the Docks, which has been convicted of several noise violations. Judging by its website, Docks patrons largely seem to be young men for whom the thump of the bass fills a deep inner void. We may not like them, but like death and taxes, they are inevitable. Besides, eventually they grow up and want to move to places like Ward and Algonquin islands to live happily  and quietly  ever after.
That's why we need rules. Even though they will never eliminate conflict, Toronto has no shortage of them  bylaws, regulations, zoning ordinances and so on.
But conflict is inevitable, as much a part of urban life as police sirens, traffic jams and construction cranes.
Down by Lake Ontario, the saga of the Docks versus the islanders is just a prelude. Once waterfront revitalization gets going in earnest this fall, the fighting will become incessant, and vicious.
If lakeside residents and businesses remain true to form, we face decades of fighting.
The tendency to intolerance may be inescapable, but in Toronto it's growing worse. We pride ourselves on being a city of diversity but it turns out that's not true when it comes to our own tiny piece of turf.
To make matters worse, the nature of civic governance in this city is such that municipal politicians prefer to play to their constituents' weaknesses, rather than their strengths. The term is NIMBYism, but that hardly does justice to an appalling phenomenon that sees otherwise nice, normal, middle-class neighbours organizing to stop shelters for single mothers, high-rise condos, even hospitals, parks and other public amenities.
Their arguments that such additions are bad for property values are not only bogus, they're misguided, selfish and hysterical. A vibrant waterfront guarantees rising real estate prices.
Dire predictions that rebuilding the waterfront will fail if the Docks ultimately ends up losing its liquor licence are nonsense, best viewed as corporate scare tactics.
Right now only a few hundred people live on the islands, but anyone who has seen what's happened on Queens Quay W. in the last decade or two knows that the waterfront has become a neighbourhood. Supermarkets and drug stores have appeared. Next month, two lanes of Queens Quay will be closed to cars for 10 days to be turned into a bike trail and a linear park. Next year, these changes will be made permanent.
Planners expect that when complete, the new waterfront neighbourhoods will be home to 60,000 people, many of them families living in multi-unit residential buildings. There will also be business, shops, restaurants, bars and, yes, nightclubs.
If the Docks thinks it has problems now, just wait. Things will only get worse.
And how will islanders respond to all the changes, the tall buildings, streetcar noise, social housing and the hordes that will be moving to their area?
A pox on both their houses.
Remember, we live in a city that doesn't belong to any one person, neighbourhood, group or business, but to all.
For too many Torontonians, however, it's easier to love thy neighbour when he doesn't live next door.
_________________________________________________
I think that's a fair assessment, and if Sparckman thinks he could go against the waterfront development to come in a planning perspective (which he have a history of doing), double pox on his house.
AoD
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
And from the Globe:
Docks toasts court's decision
OLIVER MOORE
The Docks is wet again.
The party is back on at the sprawling waterfront entertainment complex after it won a round yesterday in its decade-long battle with city hall and nearby residents over noise complaints. The 10,000-capacity venue got its liquor licence back, for now, after arguing in court that a continued ban would drive it out of business.
The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario had responded Monday to years of noise complaints by pulling the club's liquor licence, effective immediately.
But yesterday, Madam Justice Katherine Swinton of the Ontario Superior Court -- who heard from the club that half of its acts had cancelled since the licence was revoked and that hundreds of seasonal jobs hung in the balance -- concluded that the club would suffer "irrevocable damage" if it were not allowed to serve alcohol. She then stayed the AGCO's decision until it can be appealed, likely not before the new year.
The decision was rendered after a brief recess in which an emotional Jerry Sprackman, the owner of the Docks, accused critics of mounting a vendetta against his business.
Speaking while his lawyers were out of the room, he was ostensibly addressing AGCO lawyer Richard Kulis but his remarks concerned opponents both present and absent.
Mr. Sprackman argued that he is up against a small minority of anti-development activists who have opposed every expansion of his business, regardless of the noise potential. "I'm harassed by inspectors . . . I'm tired of being accused of things I haven't done," he said.
The Docks owner blamed illegal raves at nearby Cherry Beach for many of the noise complaints lodged against his club. He promised to have his lawyers move against organizers, send Docks security staff to monitor the spot and notify police as needed.
Moments later, Judge Swinton returned to deliver her decision. She stayed the licence revocation and imposed a series of conditions, including a ban on outdoor concerts and a shutdown of the patio music system by 11 p.m. She also said the stay would be lifted upon proof in court that any of the conditions had been violated.
Although clearly pleased his business is still afloat, Mr. Sprackman remained convinced that the Docks has been singled out for persecution. He argued that there are city-sanctioned events, including Wakestock and Caribana, which generate more noise than his establishment does.
City of Toronto spokesman Brad Ross confirmed that special-events permits are issued using different rules than those for permanent businesses. The Indy car race, for example, could not exist if subject to the city's normal noise bylaws.
"It's on a case-by-case basis, depending on the event," he said.
Mr. Sprackman also had harsh words for politicians and city staff. He accused Mayor David Miller, councillors Pam McConnell and Paula Fletcher and city lawyer Dawne Jubb of engaging in a "smear campaign" and causing his business considerable damage.
"It's unfortunate that it's always somebody else," said Ms. Fletcher, whose ward includes the Docks. She had locked horns with Mr. Sprackman before and called it "unfortunate" he was resorting to "bluster and threats."
Ms. Jubb laughed off the allegation that she misled city council. "I certainly uphold the position we took," she said.
AoD
Docks toasts court's decision
OLIVER MOORE
The Docks is wet again.
The party is back on at the sprawling waterfront entertainment complex after it won a round yesterday in its decade-long battle with city hall and nearby residents over noise complaints. The 10,000-capacity venue got its liquor licence back, for now, after arguing in court that a continued ban would drive it out of business.
The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario had responded Monday to years of noise complaints by pulling the club's liquor licence, effective immediately.
But yesterday, Madam Justice Katherine Swinton of the Ontario Superior Court -- who heard from the club that half of its acts had cancelled since the licence was revoked and that hundreds of seasonal jobs hung in the balance -- concluded that the club would suffer "irrevocable damage" if it were not allowed to serve alcohol. She then stayed the AGCO's decision until it can be appealed, likely not before the new year.
The decision was rendered after a brief recess in which an emotional Jerry Sprackman, the owner of the Docks, accused critics of mounting a vendetta against his business.
Speaking while his lawyers were out of the room, he was ostensibly addressing AGCO lawyer Richard Kulis but his remarks concerned opponents both present and absent.
Mr. Sprackman argued that he is up against a small minority of anti-development activists who have opposed every expansion of his business, regardless of the noise potential. "I'm harassed by inspectors . . . I'm tired of being accused of things I haven't done," he said.
The Docks owner blamed illegal raves at nearby Cherry Beach for many of the noise complaints lodged against his club. He promised to have his lawyers move against organizers, send Docks security staff to monitor the spot and notify police as needed.
Moments later, Judge Swinton returned to deliver her decision. She stayed the licence revocation and imposed a series of conditions, including a ban on outdoor concerts and a shutdown of the patio music system by 11 p.m. She also said the stay would be lifted upon proof in court that any of the conditions had been violated.
Although clearly pleased his business is still afloat, Mr. Sprackman remained convinced that the Docks has been singled out for persecution. He argued that there are city-sanctioned events, including Wakestock and Caribana, which generate more noise than his establishment does.
City of Toronto spokesman Brad Ross confirmed that special-events permits are issued using different rules than those for permanent businesses. The Indy car race, for example, could not exist if subject to the city's normal noise bylaws.
"It's on a case-by-case basis, depending on the event," he said.
Mr. Sprackman also had harsh words for politicians and city staff. He accused Mayor David Miller, councillors Pam McConnell and Paula Fletcher and city lawyer Dawne Jubb of engaging in a "smear campaign" and causing his business considerable damage.
"It's unfortunate that it's always somebody else," said Ms. Fletcher, whose ward includes the Docks. She had locked horns with Mr. Sprackman before and called it "unfortunate" he was resorting to "bluster and threats."
Ms. Jubb laughed off the allegation that she misled city council. "I certainly uphold the position we took," she said.
AoD
B
beaconer
Guest
noise also comes from party boats, The Guvernment, water taxis.
Toronto Star-Sounds of silence come from Docks
Sounds of silence come from Docks
Club's licence is back pending appeal
Seagulls drown out patio noise on island
Jul. 31, 2006. 05:34 AM
TAMARA CHERRY
STAFF REPORTER
The neon-lit palm trees draping over the Docks patio are so loud, you can almost hear them.
At 1:30 a.m. Sunday, the Cherry St. hotspot is flooded with people inside and out. But the rhythm of the music is felt only through the pulsating lights seen through the closed windows and doors.
Docks regular Clint Mack stands on the patio, drink in hand.
"It's a nightclub inside," he says. "But you can't hear anything out here."
Business doesn't seem to have dropped since last week, when the Docks had its liquor licence temporarily revoked over noise complaints and then reinstated, with restrictions, pending an appeal.
For years, Toronto island residents have complained about emotional stress and sleep deprivation due to noise coming from the nightclub. But as this water taxi drifts from the Docks to the Cove — the island spot where taxi driver George McQuinn says residents get the brunt of the so-called noisy storm — the ambient sound of chatter coming from the patio is quickly trumped by seagulls.
After 10 seconds of silence and concentration, a distant bass vibrates through the air. We trace it to the source: About a mile away, The Guvernment nightclub blasts music from its rooftop patio on the harbourfront. Closer to the island, reggae beats belt out from party boat Enterprise 2000.
Party boats like this are a sign of summer, says Cove resident Jimmy Wicks in a ride from the city to the island. And many times, they create just as much, if not more noise than the Docks, which has been plagued by islander complaints for a decade in a battle to turn down the music.
That battle seemingly ended last week when the nightclub had its liquor licence revoked in a precedent-setting decision — the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario has suspended, but never removed, a licence solely because of noise issues. Days later, a judge reinstated the licence pending appeal, saying the venue would suffer "irreparable harm" if it was banned from serving alcohol.
"I can't say that it has never been obnoxious, because it has," Wicks says, pointing to times when the Docks has hosted outdoor concerts. "It's just one of those things you get used to."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`I hear the Docks on Algonquin ... sometimes it drives me nuts'
Sarah Willinsky, island resident
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algonquin island resident Sarah Willinsky hears things differently.
"I hear the Docks on Algonquin and it wakes me up," she says. "Sometimes I don't mind it, sometimes it drives me nuts. It depends what mood I'm in."
McQuinn thought the Docks issue was taken care of a couple years ago when he began taxiing an employee to the island each weekend to test sound levels. The trips tapered off after a while but began again with last week's controversy, McQuinn says.
The "sound guy" will likely spend weekends for the next while out on the island, McQuinn says. From 11 p.m. to 3 a.m., he walks around the island, walkie-talking information back to the nightclub on what he hears.
The Docks isn't the only thing McQuinn hears the islanders talking about.
There's the port authority, the airport, the airport bridge, the party boats, the dirty harbour, he says.
It's 2 a.m. As the water taxi roams into the island lagoon, the sound of the motor is the only noise.
McQuinn shuts off the engine; a lone cricket takes over.
The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario has until January to appeal the judge's decision to reinstate the Docks' liquor licence.
"If I was the owner of the Docks and I had a liquor licence revoked, I would throw an all-ages party and be f-----g loud," Wicks says.
At 2:30 a.m., we float between the island and a bustling city in serene silence. Seconds later, Brooks and Dunn's "Hard Workin' Man" blasts through the air. The source? None other than McQuinn's own little party boat.
Toronto Star-Sounds of silence come from Docks
Sounds of silence come from Docks
Club's licence is back pending appeal
Seagulls drown out patio noise on island
Jul. 31, 2006. 05:34 AM
TAMARA CHERRY
STAFF REPORTER
The neon-lit palm trees draping over the Docks patio are so loud, you can almost hear them.
At 1:30 a.m. Sunday, the Cherry St. hotspot is flooded with people inside and out. But the rhythm of the music is felt only through the pulsating lights seen through the closed windows and doors.
Docks regular Clint Mack stands on the patio, drink in hand.
"It's a nightclub inside," he says. "But you can't hear anything out here."
Business doesn't seem to have dropped since last week, when the Docks had its liquor licence temporarily revoked over noise complaints and then reinstated, with restrictions, pending an appeal.
For years, Toronto island residents have complained about emotional stress and sleep deprivation due to noise coming from the nightclub. But as this water taxi drifts from the Docks to the Cove — the island spot where taxi driver George McQuinn says residents get the brunt of the so-called noisy storm — the ambient sound of chatter coming from the patio is quickly trumped by seagulls.
After 10 seconds of silence and concentration, a distant bass vibrates through the air. We trace it to the source: About a mile away, The Guvernment nightclub blasts music from its rooftop patio on the harbourfront. Closer to the island, reggae beats belt out from party boat Enterprise 2000.
Party boats like this are a sign of summer, says Cove resident Jimmy Wicks in a ride from the city to the island. And many times, they create just as much, if not more noise than the Docks, which has been plagued by islander complaints for a decade in a battle to turn down the music.
That battle seemingly ended last week when the nightclub had its liquor licence revoked in a precedent-setting decision — the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario has suspended, but never removed, a licence solely because of noise issues. Days later, a judge reinstated the licence pending appeal, saying the venue would suffer "irreparable harm" if it was banned from serving alcohol.
"I can't say that it has never been obnoxious, because it has," Wicks says, pointing to times when the Docks has hosted outdoor concerts. "It's just one of those things you get used to."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`I hear the Docks on Algonquin ... sometimes it drives me nuts'
Sarah Willinsky, island resident
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Algonquin island resident Sarah Willinsky hears things differently.
"I hear the Docks on Algonquin and it wakes me up," she says. "Sometimes I don't mind it, sometimes it drives me nuts. It depends what mood I'm in."
McQuinn thought the Docks issue was taken care of a couple years ago when he began taxiing an employee to the island each weekend to test sound levels. The trips tapered off after a while but began again with last week's controversy, McQuinn says.
The "sound guy" will likely spend weekends for the next while out on the island, McQuinn says. From 11 p.m. to 3 a.m., he walks around the island, walkie-talking information back to the nightclub on what he hears.
The Docks isn't the only thing McQuinn hears the islanders talking about.
There's the port authority, the airport, the airport bridge, the party boats, the dirty harbour, he says.
It's 2 a.m. As the water taxi roams into the island lagoon, the sound of the motor is the only noise.
McQuinn shuts off the engine; a lone cricket takes over.
The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario has until January to appeal the judge's decision to reinstate the Docks' liquor licence.
"If I was the owner of the Docks and I had a liquor licence revoked, I would throw an all-ages party and be f-----g loud," Wicks says.
At 2:30 a.m., we float between the island and a bustling city in serene silence. Seconds later, Brooks and Dunn's "Hard Workin' Man" blasts through the air. The source? None other than McQuinn's own little party boat.
D
Darkstar416
Guest
A
adma
Guest
I already posted that up above (though it was a subtle one).
Brooks & Dunn, huh? Now, *that's* gay;-)
(uh, I think I've been reading too many gay-related threads here)
Brooks & Dunn, huh? Now, *that's* gay;-)
(uh, I think I've been reading too many gay-related threads here)
299 bloor call control.
Senior Member
khris
Senior Member
Damn it, I missed GWAR!