TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > TiVo TV Talk > Now Playing - TV Show Talk
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-29-2012, 11:39 AM   #31
milo99
Registered User
 
milo99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 3,128
I loved the Shawshank Redemption reference, "who actually looks at a man's shoes".

count me in the group of people who saw Rachel being at the door from a mile away. Really annoyed by that, and i too thought the Hardman wrap up was kind of trite. But eh, i'm kind of glad to be done with that part of the story line.
milo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 01:46 PM   #32
john4200
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by milo99 View Post
But eh, i'm kind of glad to be done with that part of the story line.
I'll bet Hardman is NOT over.
john4200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 02:23 PM   #33
markz
Hilarity Ensues
 
markz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connersville, IN
Posts: 12,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agatha Mystery View Post
Daniel is really good at the long game.
TWSS


Sorry!
__________________
- Mark

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
markz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2012, 03:01 PM   #34
scandia101
Just the facts ma'am
 
scandia101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: MN, greater TC metro area
Posts: 9,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idearat View Post
Mike passed the Bar Exam so it appears that he's a lawer in NY state. However NY has attendance at law school as a requirement to be eligible to take the exam, so would seem to invalidate his results. On the show though it seems they've been fixated on him not going to Harvard, violating the firm's policy rather than not being a lawyer at all.
I'm sure that he's never taken the LSAT or the Bar exam using his own name because it wasn't in his plans to fake being a lawyer. Also, I'm pretty sure that everyone that knows he's a fraud, knows that he never went to law school anywhere.
__________________
discipuli nostrum bardissimi sunt.
scandia101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 01:08 PM   #35
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanC View Post
What is Mike's legal status anyway?

I know he didn't go to Harvard, and I can believe the story lines that revolve around that secret.

I have a real hard time believing though that Mike is not a lawyer at all but is practicing law at a major New York law firm. Well actually I can believe that someone would lie to a law firm to practice law when they are not a lawyer, it happens all the time. The part I can't believe at all is that some of the partners in the law firm are complicit in the fraud.

Do we know if Mike passed the bar taking the test as himself?
That's what's always bugged me as well, because I don't remember there ever being any mention of him taking the bar exam in his own name. I know they've doctored the Harvard records to show that Mike went there and has a diploma, but I don't recall them ever saying that Mike took the NY bar exam and was admitted as a licensed lawyer in NY. He would have had to take the bar exam sometime after joining the firm and them doctoring the Harvard records, because there's no way he was allowed to sit for the exam in his own name prior to that.

Basically, doctoring the Harvard records was just a way to keep the other lawyers at the firm in the dark about Mike's past. It's fraudulent, but relatively minor. But submitting the fake records to the NY State Bar and becoming a licensed attorney based on those fake records is a pretty massive fraud that I agree Harvey and Jessica would not be a part of. If they really liked Mike's abilities and wanted to employ him, they could have easily employed him as a law clerk rather than an actual attorney, and Mike could have done almost everything he's done so far by simply preparing all the documents and then having Harvey sign off on them.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 01:36 PM   #36
john4200
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,460
If Mike did not pass the New York bar in his own name, that would have easily turned up when Jessica (or Louis or Hardman) did a background check on Mike. But no one ever mentioned that Mike had not passed the NY bar.

Therefore, if New York requires documentation of a law degree before taking the bar exam, then I only see two possible explanations:

1) Mike falsified a law degree some time ago and passed the NY bar in his own name

2) After Mike got his fake Harvard Law credentials, he immediately took the NY bar (off screen). When Jessica did her background check, someone was sloppy and did not notice that Mike passed the bar AFTER he joined the firm

Both of those explanations seem unlikely. (1) because why would Mike bother to do that? And (2) because that kind of sloppiness does not fit well with Jessica, who is by all appearances an excellent lawyer who would not make such sloppy mistakes.

But then there is my premise (above), that New York requires documentation of a law degree to sit the bar exam. Did anyone here ever confirm that? If so, are there any possible loopholes? I guess some loophole could be retcon'ed to fill this plot hole.
john4200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 02:25 PM   #37
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by john4200 View Post
If Mike did not pass the New York bar in his own name, that would have easily turned up when Jessica (or Louis or Hardman) did a background check on Mike. But no one ever mentioned that Mike had not passed the NY bar.

Therefore, if New York requires documentation of a law degree before taking the bar exam, then I only see two possible explanations:

1) Mike falsified a law degree some time ago and passed the NY bar in his own name

2) After Mike got his fake Harvard Law credentials, he immediately took the NY bar (off screen). When Jessica did her background check, someone was sloppy and did not notice that Mike passed the bar AFTER he joined the firm

Both of those explanations seem unlikely. (1) because why would Mike bother to do that? And (2) because that kind of sloppiness does not fit well with Jessica, who is by all appearances an excellent lawyer who would not make such sloppy mistakes.

But then there is my premise (above), that New York requires documentation of a law degree to sit the bar exam. Did anyone here ever confirm that? If so, are there any possible loopholes? I guess some loophole could be retcon'ed to fill this plot hole.
I agree about possibility #1. No way did Mike ever falsify a law degree and then sit for the bar exam in his own name prior to joining the firm. There's no indication that he ever had any interest in that prior to the circumstances of the pilot episode.

Regarding possibility #2, most states only give their bar exams twice a year (usually February and July). You have to register several months in advance, and then you have to wait several months to receive your score. I don't think there's any way Mike took the test since he started at the firm without that being mentioned in the show.

According to this, an applicant can sit for the NY bar exam without graduating from an ABA accredited law school. However, such an applicant must meet other requirements, all of which include completeing some amount of law school classwork. Had they written in one of those loopholes during the first season, it would have been plausible. But at this point, they've backed themselves into a corner. Everyone at the firm believes he's a Harvard grad, so they can't use one of those other loopholes.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 03:34 PM   #38
Zevida
witless and unarmed
 
Zevida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13,308
You guys are over thinking this. No one in Jessica's position would ever take this risk. It's fiction and just not believable. I accept that and just enjoy the show.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- billypritchard
Zevida is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 03:44 PM   #39
john4200
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevida View Post
You guys are over thinking this. No one in Jessica's position would ever take this risk.
You are underthinking this. You could claim no one in Hardman's position would ever take the risk of stealing money from the firm and then setting up another lawyer to take the fall. But you would be wrong about that too.

Besides, if Mike is caught, Jessica could claim to not know about it, so as long as Harvey and Mike don't implicate her, they would go down, but Jessica and the firm could survive it.
john4200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 03:59 PM   #40
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
On a different note, why would Rachel care that Mike hooked up with Tess? As far as Rachel knows, Tess is an old girlfriend in town for Grammy's funeral. She doesn't know Tess is married. Mike and Rachel aren't together. Rachel already said she doesn't want Mike to make decisions in his current emotional state. So as far as Rachel is concerned, Mike is just making a poor decision based on his emotional state, and once he comes to terms with Grammy's death, he'll be back to normal (somewhat). Why should Mike hooking up with Tess cause Rachel to change her feelings about Mike at all?
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 04:20 PM   #41
john4200
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
So as far as Rachel is concerned, Mike is just making a poor decision based on his emotional state, and once he comes to terms with Grammy's death, he'll be back to normal (somewhat). Why should Mike hooking up with Tess cause Rachel to change her feelings about Mike at all?
I'd be surprised if Rachel is logical about the situation. I suspect she will be very emotional about it.
john4200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2012, 04:23 PM   #42
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by john4200 View Post
I'd be surprised if Rachel is logical about the situation. I suspect she will be very emotional about it.
Of course she will, because that's what TV characters do, and that's how TV writers create tension and drama. But in reality, would that really be an issue for her? I could see Rachel having a problem if she walked in on Mike getting back together with Jenny. But if it's some random old girlfriend, I don't really see the issue.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 01:03 AM   #43
Peter000
Registered User
 
Peter000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Red Wing, MN
Posts: 18,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
But in reality, would that really be an issue for her? I could see Rachel having a problem if she walked in on Mike getting back together with Jenny. But if it's some random old girlfriend, I don't really see the issue.
Yeah, that explanation would go over great with Rachel. Have you ever actually tried that line with someone?

The issue Rachel has is that Mike was trying to convince her to sleep with him, for what she assumed were for emotional reasons. Then within a DAY, he's sleeping with his old girlfriend without a thought about how Rachel would feel about it. That can't make her feel she was anything more than a conquest for Mike.
Peter000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 12:37 PM   #44
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 35,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter000 View Post
Yeah, that explanation would go over great with Rachel. Have you ever actually tried that line with someone?

The issue Rachel has is that Mike was trying to convince her to sleep with him, for what she assumed were for emotional reasons. Then within a DAY, he's sleeping with his old girlfriend without a thought about how Rachel would feel about it. That can't make her feel she was anything more than a conquest for Mike.
Yep, this is how I saw it. And also, it's apparent that the writers have Rachel being head over heals in love with Mike, despite all her protests. So this is purely an emotional response, not a rational one.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 01:11 PM   #45
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter000 View Post
Yeah, that explanation would go over great with Rachel. Have you ever actually tried that line with someone?

The issue Rachel has is that Mike was trying to convince her to sleep with him, for what she assumed were for emotional reasons. Then within a DAY, he's sleeping with his old girlfriend without a thought about how Rachel would feel about it. That can't make her feel she was anything more than a conquest for Mike.
So Mike was emotionally distraught and trying to find some companionship to help him through his difficult time. He tried for Rachel, and she turned him down. So he went elsewhere. I don't see how Rachel can have any complaint about Mike's actions. Did she really think that rejecting him was going to make him LESS emotionally needy? Obviously her rejection made things worse, which is why he turned to a married woman (although Rachel doesn't know that).
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 01:18 PM   #46
Zevida
witless and unarmed
 
Zevida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
So Mike was emotionally distraught and trying to find some companionship to help him through his difficult time. He tried for Rachel, and she turned him down. So he went elsewhere. I don't see how Rachel can have any complaint about Mike's actions. Did she really think that rejecting him was going to make him LESS emotionally needy? Obviously her rejection made things worse, which is why he turned to a married woman (although Rachel doesn't know that).
Rachel likes Michael. They were going to date. He broke up with her. When he came to her, she (correctly) assumed that it meant he still had feelings for her, but recognized that he might have only been showing them due to his emotional state, so she stopped things. But she would have thought that he wanted her, not just that he wanted something.

So then she thinks on it, realizes she does want him too, goes to him, and finds out he didn't want her, he just wanted sex, she wasn't special, and he doesn't feel the same way about her. Now she's heartbroken again because she was ready to let him in even after he'd broken her heart before. Double heartbreak!

I'm kind of surprised that's not obvious!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- billypritchard
Zevida is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 01:27 PM   #47
Peter000
Registered User
 
Peter000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Red Wing, MN
Posts: 18,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
So Mike was emotionally distraught and trying to find some companionship to help him through his difficult time. He tried for Rachel, and she turned him down. So he went elsewhere. I don't see how Rachel can have any complaint about Mike's actions. Did she really think that rejecting him was going to make him LESS emotionally needy? Obviously her rejection made things worse, which is why he turned to a married woman (although Rachel doesn't know that).
Lots of men don't **** the first woman that comes along after their grandmother dies. No matter how much they love their grandmother. The whole thing just makes Mike look like a huge sleazeball.
Peter000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 02:03 PM   #48
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevida View Post
Rachel likes Michael. They were going to date. He broke up with her. When he came to her, she (correctly) assumed that it meant he still had feelings for her, but recognized that he might have only been showing them due to his emotional state, so she stopped things. But she would have thought that he wanted her, not just that he wanted something.

So then she thinks on it, realizes she does want him too, goes to him, and finds out he didn't want her, he just wanted sex, she wasn't special, and he doesn't feel the same way about her. Now she's heartbroken again because she was ready to let him in even after he'd broken her heart before. Double heartbreak!

I'm kind of surprised that's not obvious!
I think the bolded part is the flaw in your analysis. I think Mike does have feelings for Rachel and would much have preferred to be with her. But he was emotionally vulnerable and she shot him down, making things even worse for him. The fact that he sought solace in a replacement doesn't nullify his feelings for Rachel, or make her any less special to him. It just means she wasn't available to him when he needed someone, and her rejection of him made him need someone even more.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 02:06 PM   #49
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter000 View Post
Lots of men don't **** the first woman that comes along after their grandmother dies. No matter how much they love their grandmother. The whole thing just makes Mike look like a huge sleazeball.
No. Some men are not phased by something like that. Some drink away the pain, or self-medicate in other ways. Some bottle up their feelings. Everyone deals with the death of a loved one differently. All we can go on is how Mike dealt with this death, not how other people in the real world might have dealt with similar deaths. And Mike clearly was dealing with Grammy's death by numbing the pain with pot and then wanted to feel close to someone emotionally. Rachel shot him down.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 02:15 PM   #50
Zevida
witless and unarmed
 
Zevida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
I think the bolded part is the flaw in your analysis. I think Mike does have feelings for Rachel and would much have preferred to be with her. But he was emotionally vulnerable and she shot him down, making things even worse for him. The fact that he sought solace in a replacement doesn't nullify his feelings for Rachel, or make her any less special to him. It just means she wasn't available to him when he needed someone, and her rejection of him made him need someone even more.
I agree that Mike does have feelings for Rachel. But we're privy to much more info than Rachel - we know that he really likes her, we know he didn't want to break up with her and that he still loves her.

Rachel doesn't know any of that for sure and can't take that for granted.

She went out on a limb after he had rejected her and in the very short amount of time while she thought about it, he'd already gone and found a different girl to hook up with. It makes it looks like Rachel was not special. We only know that's not the case because we are an omniscient third party.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- billypritchard
Zevida is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 02:29 PM   #51
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
By the way, I'm not saying Mike's actions weren't sleazy. But my opinion is based more on him hooking up with a woman he knew was married. As far as Rachel is concerned, she doesn't know Tess is married and has no claim to Mike. Sure, she would feel rejected because she decided to give Mike a chance and he's found someone else. But it wasn't really reasonable of her to expect that he'd just be sitting alone in his apartment pining for her like some cliche rom-com after she'd rejected him.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 03:43 PM   #52
Zevida
witless and unarmed
 
Zevida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13,308
It's very similar to the Rachel/Ross "we were on a break" question.

On the one side, they were not in a relationship (or broken up), so Mike/Ross was free to do whatever he wanted and Rachel/Rachel should have no expectations.

On the other side, even if the relationship was not official, there was an emotional connection between two people dancing around a relationship and thus when Mike/Ross hooks up with another girl, it is disrespectful to Rachel/Rachel and the prospective relationship.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- billypritchard
Zevida is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 03:52 PM   #53
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Ha. Mike/Ross.

But I'll never be able to look at the Ross/Rachel "We were on a break" analogy through logical eyes. I HATED the character of Ross Gellar and couldn't stand that the writers kept trying to put Rachel together with him. It just made no sense to me. So when that whole thing happened, I was just giddy with enjoyment, even if the arguments were reasonable.

Anyway, I just don't think Rachel had a right to expect Mike to remain celibate until she came around. She clearly turned him down. Anything he did after that was fair game. It might have been stupid of Mike if he still had feelings for Rachel, but he shouldn't be expected to wait for her to change her mind.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 04:49 PM   #54
scooterboy
Wookin' Pa Nub
 
scooterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: East Kingston, NH USA
Posts: 28,161
Note to self: don't ask DevdogAZ for advice about women.


__________________
Try the original auto-correct: Proofreading.
scooterboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 04:54 PM   #55
wprager
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
Ha. Mike/Ross.

But I'll never be able to look at the Ross/Rachel "We were on a break" analogy through logical eyes. I HATED the character of Ross Gellar and couldn't stand that the writers kept trying to put Rachel together with him. It just made no sense to me. So when that whole thing happened, I was just giddy with enjoyment, even if the arguments were reasonable.

Anyway, I just don't think Rachel had a right to expect Mike to remain celibate until she came around. She clearly turned him down. Anything he did after that was fair game. It might have been stupid of Mike if he still had feelings for Rachel, but he shouldn't be expected to wait for her to change her mind.
Abstaining for a few days is not celibacy.
wprager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 05:13 PM   #56
Azlen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 2,080
I know plenty of women, and men as well actually, who would have been hurt had they been in Rache's position. When you are going to declare your love for someone and when you find them, they are hooking up with someone else, it's going to lead to damaged emotions, regardless of how meaningful that hook up is. Now maybe she doesn't have a logical right to be angry with him, but logic and emotions don't always run hand and hand. I definitely think she is justified in being hurt by it though.
Azlen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 05:29 PM   #57
DevdogAZ
Give em Hell, Devils
 
DevdogAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 38,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterboy View Post
Note to self: don't ask DevdogAZ for advice about women.



I'm sure my wife and four daughters would agree with you on that.
__________________
"You don't own a TV? What's all your furniture pointed at?" Joey Tribbiani
DevdogAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2012, 10:43 AM   #58
cheesesteak
Meh.
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 15 mins from Philly
Posts: 25,874
My feelings would have been hurt if I were in Rachel's shoes. Yes, they're not a couple and Mike can do what he wants until then but she doesn't want to see first hand, up close and personal evidence that he's doing somebody else.
__________________

Savoir-Faire is everywhere!
cheesesteak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2012, 12:31 PM   #59
whitson77
Director Level
 
whitson77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 19,241
I just want to say I love the show. Look forward to every week.

But this finale was the worst episode of the season. The wrap us was weak, and the Ross/Rachel ending was awful.

As was Mike and the weed relapse with Harvey.
whitson77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2012, 12:53 PM   #60
markz
Hilarity Ensues
 
markz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connersville, IN
Posts: 12,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesesteak View Post
My feelings would have been hurt if I were in Rachel's shoes. Yes, they're not a couple and Mike can do what he wants until then but she doesn't want to see first hand, up close and personal evidence that he's doing somebody else.
I agree. Logic doesn't always come into play when emotions are involved.
__________________
- Mark

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
markz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoŽ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56 PM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |