Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Feedback


  • Please log in to reply
1380 replies to this topic

#1081 G-52

G-52

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 694 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 12

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:33 PM

Feedback:

The forum is hosted by somebody terrible, huge lag spikes all day long. Please get a higher bandwidth server designed for higher traffic.

The new background since Luongo was removed is just horrendous.
  • 0

Posted Image


#1082 :D

:D

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,703 posts
  • Joined: 14-August 03

Posted 15 January 2013 - 10:42 PM

The new background since Luongo was removed is just horrendous.


Is this one one of the other themes or something?
It's always just been a blue fuzzy Rogers Arena crowd for me.
  • 0

#1083 G-52

G-52

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 694 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 12

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:33 PM

Is this one one of the other themes or something?
It's always just been a blue fuzzy Rogers Arena crowd for me.


That was directed more towards the main Canucks site, but there is no feedback for that area of the site.
  • 0

Posted Image


#1084 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 11:41 AM

Will the forum be in performance mode tomorrow night?
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1085 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,317 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:16 PM

Will the forum be in performance mode tomorrow night?


If it can't handle over 200 members online then probably.
  • 1

307mg00.jpg


#1086 Nathan MacKinnon

Nathan MacKinnon

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,242 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 04:57 PM

If it can't handle over 200 members online then probably.


What's the over under on how many members will be online?

I'm putting money on 1,000
  • 0

+1 this post!

Posted Image

Credit to Intoewsables :wub: :wub: :wub:

Formerly known as UMADBRO?

Luongo Supporter. Does not deserve any of this BS


#1087 G-52

G-52

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 694 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 12

Posted 19 January 2013 - 03:18 PM

What's the over under on how many members will be online?

I'm putting money on 1,000


Probably a lot more, and the server seems to struggle at anything higher than 50..
  • 0

Posted Image


#1088 canuck_trevor16

canuck_trevor16

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,657 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 07

Posted 19 January 2013 - 04:00 PM

it needs to be either peformance mode or somehow permits member only on here........there are more guest than members on here making it slow
  • 0

One day some of us will look back on the year and look at the chicago, and most of us will realize that it was a small bump in the road to the cup


WIN THE CUP FOR SALO CAMPAIGN

#1089 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 22 January 2013 - 02:42 AM

I very rarely come into this section of the boards, so apologies because I assume something like this has been suggested sometime in the past but .... is it possible we could have a minimum # of post replies before a new user is allowed to make a new thread? Something like, 50 comments then they gain permission to start a thread. Or, it could be time based, say 1 month after joining (although people could easily circumvent that by stocking accounts for later use).

I don't know, just feel like something like that might help combat the knee jerk, bandwagoner hate threads that dominate everytime they lose.
  • 0

#1090 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,317 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:51 AM

I very rarely come into this section of the boards, so apologies because I assume something like this has been suggested sometime in the past but .... is it possible we could have a minimum # of post replies before a new user is allowed to make a new thread? Something like, 50 comments then they gain permission to start a thread. Or, it could be time based, say 1 month after joining (although people could easily circumvent that by stocking accounts for later use).

I don't know, just feel like something like that might help combat the knee jerk, bandwagoner hate threads that dominate everytime they lose.


I asked this question before and here is what the Admin said:

We've tried it and it hasn't gone well. New users get too confused and discouraged, and it creates a class system. In the rare event new threads from new users becomes a problem, we temporarily switch Canucks talk to require new topic approval.


  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#1091 sameer666

sameer666

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,243 posts
  • Joined: 26-September 06

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:18 PM

Can you guys switch Canucks talk to require new thread approval?

I mean looking at the first page right now this is what I see.....

-7 different threads with Kassian in it

-A stupid rant about the lack of information of Kesler's injury (http://forum.canucks...-kesler-injury/)

-A thread about which news outlet will break the Luongo trade first (http://forum.canucks...go-trade-first/)

-A rant saying a player should be on a different powerplay unit (http://forum.canucks...powerplay-unit/)

-Someone asking what song is in a Canucks commercial (http://forum.canucks...l-on-sportsnet/)

-Someone already complaining Schroeder should play with better linemates after only one game (http://forum.canucks...n-finish-plays/)




This is getting ridiculous. You guys say you don't want to have a system where new users can't post cause it creates a class system, but having it this way, any users with something to actually contribute are turned off. And even then, thats not even the problem, as many older users are creating these pointless threads.

There was 30 threads created the day we beat Calgary, and 20 threads the day prior. Would it be that hard to have a thread approval system? As long as the main threads are in place(GDTs and PGTs) why can't the other threads just wait on approval? I would really like to answer to this, it would mean a lot.

Thank you
Sam
  • 0

#1092 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:19 PM

BRUTAL lag right now.... can we look forward to this every night?
  • 0

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#1093 BananaMash

BananaMash

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,052 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:31 PM

BRUTAL lag right now.... can we look forward to this every night?


Stealth is pedaling the little electricity generating bike as fast as he can to keep the servers running.
  • 0

Posted Image


#1094 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:13 PM

Am I the only one seeing a different background for the message board pages?

Posted Image


Stealth is pedaling the little electricity generating bike as fast as he can to keep the servers running.



:lol:

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 24 January 2013 - 11:42 PM.

  • 0

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#1095 Where's Wellwood

Where's Wellwood

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,071 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 25 January 2013 - 06:52 PM

Am I the only one seeing a different background for the message board pages?

Posted Image





:lol:


I don't see it anymore. it's back to the fuzzy blue rogers arena crowd.
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to khalifawiz501 for the sig.
My old sig: http://tinypic.com/v...=5#.UlSrrlAWJ7U

#1096 Armada

Armada

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,970 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 28 January 2013 - 11:17 AM

Can you guys switch Canucks talk to require new thread approval?

I mean looking at the first page right now this is what I see.....

-7 different threads with Kassian in it

-A stupid rant about the lack of information of Kesler's injury (http://forum.canucks...-kesler-injury/)

-A thread about which news outlet will break the Luongo trade first (http://forum.canucks...go-trade-first/)

-A rant saying a player should be on a different powerplay unit (http://forum.canucks...powerplay-unit/)

-Someone asking what song is in a Canucks commercial (http://forum.canucks...l-on-sportsnet/)

-Someone already complaining Schroeder should play with better linemates after only one game (http://forum.canucks...n-finish-plays/)




This is getting ridiculous. You guys say you don't want to have a system where new users can't post cause it creates a class system, but having it this way, any users with something to actually contribute are turned off. And even then, thats not even the problem, as many older users are creating these pointless threads.

There was 30 threads created the day we beat Calgary, and 20 threads the day prior. Would it be that hard to have a thread approval system? As long as the main threads are in place(GDTs and PGTs) why can't the other threads just wait on approval? I would really like to answer to this, it would mean a lot.

Thank you
Sam


Does it really bug you that much?

Just ignore it. The mods will deal with it and have since the dawn of CDC.
  • 0
Posted Image
______________Eat, Sleep,Posted ImageRave, Repeat

#1097 Kassian's Face

Kassian's Face

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 682 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 01:55 AM

I made a rant about this in Canucks Talk. I obviously posted it in the wrong spot. I will put a new summed up rant here, but since no one ever scrolls down this far I doubt it will get much attention.

The search function of this site is NOT user friendly. Try typing Luongo Trade into the search function to find relevant new information. You can't you get 10,000 posts mainly compsed by the same small group of people just arguing completely meaninglessly with each other.

ANY THREAD on this site that is more than 2-3 days old or is longer then 3-4pages just turns into the same small group of people arguing with each other. Yet I am expected to read through 20 pages of that in the hopes that someone posted something that might actually be relevant. And just as bad, if I find some breaking news and post it in one of these giant 20+ "official" threads, no one even gets to find out because guess what? NO ONE wants to read through 80 pages of "Luongo is better" "No Schnieder is better" "You are a troll" "No your a troll".

At the moment the ONLY way to find new information is to look for locked threads. Many of the locked threads start with someone relaying breaking news about a topic. 20 people start having a genuine conversation about the new latest news. 1 person with 10,000+ posts (oddly the same people who just argue on the official threads and actually contribute nothing to this site) will complain that someone started a thread about the discussed player in 2007 and so it is redundant. A minute later it is locked, and we are referred to the thread with no information that is comprised of 3 year olds arguing about nothing even close to the topic at hand, or even hockey.

Now I understand it is ridiculous to load the first page and see 7 topics with the headline KASSIAN. But is it too much to ask that just because a thread concerns a player or topic that has been started before, to let it live? To let the people who come to this site to discuss hockey do just that.

For example: Every NHL sportscaster has opinions every night regarding Luongo. Everyone in the media thinks there is enough new information to discuss the new topics revolving around Luongo's trade every night. Yet even though he is on our team, us fans can not discuss late breaking news without being told we are redundant and being refferred to a ridiculous thread containing NO relevant information or even a decent conversation. Its just loaded with the same people arguing stats and fighting.

It seems like locking the majority of threads is catering to the 1% of people who use this site as their sole source of validation in this world and want everyone to read how cleverly they insult one another instead of the other 99% of us who come to this site because we are Canucks fans and want to discuss the Canucks.

I know you aern't about to go and change the way you guys do things, as you are the best source of hockey bantar on the internet. If nothing changes and no one even reads this post you bet I will still be here tomorrow and the day after that. I really appreciate all the work that the webmasters and moderators do on this site to make is so successful. But PLEASE do something. I know the moderators read the posts people make and the majority of people here agree with me that it can be alot better on here.

My big suggestion is to have another forum all together. You can call it Locked or whatever and when a topic is deemed redundant you can put it there so that you are still catering to your 1% but still allow us people who came to canucks.com to talk about the Canucks to continue our conversations.

Thanks to anyone who took the time to read my rant.
  • 0

#1098 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:40 AM

Thanks to anyone who took the time to read my rant.


I have to disagree with you. I have never seen a problem with locked topics. The two main reasons topics get locked are for redundancy and spam (not well thought out).

You claim the only way to get new information is from locked threads? How can that be when they are redundant?


You also complain about people with over 10,000 posts doing the complaining about redundancy??? ::D
Well those people have a lot of posts because they are here a lot. They know what is going on. And they get sick of seeing the same nonsense reposted time and again. Stick around for a while and you will see what I mean.


You bring up the Luongo topic. There are two topics specifically designated for discussing his situation. If we didn't consolidate to those two topics we would have pages and pages of topics about him.


I have been known to complain about mods in the past (Hi Deb :P ) but this is something I can not complain about. If I were to complain about it I would say the opposite of you and say they don't clean up stuff and lock threads quick enough (that complaint would be without merit though since they are human and would like to have lives ouside of this website.)


Happy posting :)
  • 1
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1099 Kassian's Face

Kassian's Face

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 682 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:35 AM

Sooo even though you have to go back PAGES to find the word Luongo on the Luongo thread, it is redundant to actually talk about him in another thread? If anything every topic that has to do with anything not Luongo related should be locked and redirected to that thread.

I also don't find it odd at all that someone with close to 20,000 posts in 7 years would complain that not enough posts get locked. At that rate you are posting nearly 3000 posts a year. Yes you and that other handful of people who spend more time on this website then you do sleeping are being catered too because of your constant complaining. How about instead of trying to be a mini mod you just come here and talk hockey.

Obviously you havent read the Luongo thread. It is ridiculous. And what about new information? Are us casual visitors, who do not have the time to sit at our computers all day hitting refresh on a topic in hopes that someone will post something new and relevant instead of reading you long timers bantar with each other, not allowed to have access to new information on a topic and discuss it?

Read the topics about Luongo that have been locked in the last 24 hours. The only people who are not participating in a great conversation about new news are those of you trying to be mini mods and complaining. There is a world outside of this site, and there are more then 5 of you that post here. I guess thats breaking news for you.
  • 0

#1100 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:50 AM

^^^ So you don't think that the people who actually spend time here have any finger on the pulse of this board, any insight on what works and what doesn't? Wow...... so we should be catering to the casual user who shows up only periodically? Fab idea......

If you want to snarkily go after someone, try me. Almost 10 years on this board and "only" 8,997 posts.....does that satisfy your personal measurement of someone who doesn't live here 24/7 and doesn't sleep?

I would rather go to the one or two designated threads for a topic than wade through 9 or 10 topics that are all saying the exact same thing, while looking for new info. Isn't the time commitment virtually the same? Why should this board cater to the lowest common denominator of lazy user?

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 29 January 2013 - 10:02 AM.

  • 1

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#1101 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:06 AM

Obviously you havent read the Luongo thread. It is ridiculous.


I went in there. I see people discussing who should be packaged with him and who is a better return.


Then I come across this...........


Yeah it sucks there was some really good threads started today about Luongo but since this thread exists they were locked, so I come here to continue the conversation. And all I see is pages and pages of you morons arguing with each other about nothing that has to do with Luongo. Instead of moderators locking redundant threads, maybe they could ban all you that come here to argue with one another. This thread should not be named Luongo Trade Thread it should be named the argue with old news and smashinkassian about stuff that has NOTHING to do with Luongo. You guys ruin this site.


:shock: Hypocrite much????

You came to get into the conversation? Really?

Why didn't you mention how his trade value should be high after a great game last night?
Why didn't you discuss who should be calling Gillis right now?
Why didn't you suggest holding on to two goalies for a while longer.................


If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.
  • 1
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1102 Kassian's Face

Kassian's Face

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 682 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:14 AM

Yeah sorry I thought I typed in CANUCKS.com to come to a site to talk about the canucks. You self entiltled mini mods should go start your own site so all 5 of you can talk about how redundant all of your posts are and let canucks fans actually discuss hockey. If you all got your way there would only be one thread on CDC and it would be called "All other threads are redundant"
  • 0

#1103 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:19 AM

Yeah sorry I thought I typed in CANUCKS.com to come to a site to talk about the canucks. You self entiltled mini mods should go start your own site so all 5 of you can talk about how redundant all of your posts are and let canucks fans actually discuss hockey. If you all got your way there would only be one thread on CDC and it would be called "All other threads are redundant"


^^^
Post Content Requires Chill Pill.

"Self-entitled mini-mods"......so much for anyone trying to explain something for you..........is everyone here who disagrees with you a 'self-entitled mini-mod' because it sure would seem that way.

The system currently in place works just fine for those who don't feel a sense of self-entitlement that the contents of a message board should leap immediately to their fingertips already filtered of discussion and anything they don't want to read. Perhaps the lazy could just use Google as it does seem more to the point without the superfluousness of chatter?

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 29 January 2013 - 10:28 AM.

  • 1

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#1104 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:24 AM

Not a mini-mod

Just a member that doesn't like clutter


Good luck on your crusade :lol:
  • 1
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1105 Kassian's Face

Kassian's Face

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 682 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 11

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:41 AM

I went in there. I see people discussing who should be packaged with him and who is a better return.


Then I come across this...........




:shock: Hypocrite much????

You came to get into the conversation? Really?

Why didn't you mention how his trade value should be high after a great game last night?
Why didn't you discuss who should be calling Gillis right now?
Why didn't you suggest holding on to two goalies for a while longer.................


If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.


Yeah except after I made that post one of the arguers apologized and there has been nothing but relevant posts since. That post was part of the solution.



Also I never asked the mods to stop catering to you, I just suggested that there be another forum to send the "Locked" threads too, so those of us Canucks fans who like discussing new information on "redundant" threads can continue to do so, you long timers can just ignore it. Like really, is people discussing a variation of a topic in 2 different threads that harmful to you? There are way too many off topic conversations and there is no way to tell if someone has added anything new or relevant. It is frustrating and so I ranted. And yes calling you all mini mods was uncalled for, and for that I apologize. Not every person with thousands of posts is a mini mod, just most of you.
  • 0

#1106 Bertuzzi Babe

Bertuzzi Babe

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,239 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 03

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:44 AM

Yeah except after I made that post one of the arguers apologized and there has been nothing but relevant posts since. That post was part of the solution.


So 'mini-modding' worked for you, congratulations. Hmmmm........ .

Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 29 January 2013 - 10:48 AM.

  • 1

"Sursumredditio" non usquam in hac mea loquantur!



Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.....



#1107 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:47 AM

So 'mini-modding' worked for you, congratulations. Hmmmm........



:lol:

Posted Image


Apology accepted KF :)

I understand frustration. It can come from many things. For some it is seeing the same topic posted over and over again.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1108 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:42 AM

Now I understand it is ridiculous to load the first page and see 7 topics with the headline KASSIAN. But is it too much to ask that just because a thread concerns a player or topic that has been started before, to let it live? To let the people who come to this site to discuss hockey do just that.


Yeah, except it's a fine line. 2 threads become 5 threads become 7 until it takes up the entire page. Keep in mind that half the problem is the fact that fans become easily fixated on one particular player if they've played well/poor; the other half of the problem is that having a front page dominated by that name enables the other half to act like sheep and join in the chorus.

I've wondered in the past about the idea of having a single thread dedicated to each active player on the team. Like an ongoing GDT for every player. So if you want to vent about how frustrated you are over, say, Daniel Sedin's performance last night, you click into his thread and let loose. Ideally these would be stickied, but 25 or so sticky topics would be fairly overwhelming. Alternatively they could be free-floating threads but if someone tries to start a new topic with a player's name in the title, they instead get a prompt suggesting they put their post in the ongoing thread.

We've already got some pretty prolific examples of these types of threads on the boards: Burrows - Do We Really Need Him?, Bieksa: What Have You Done For Me Lately, and the many incarnations of the Lu Trade Rumours are good examples.

Anyways, just ideas, just feedback.
  • 0

#1109 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 30 January 2013 - 08:43 AM

I've wondered in the past about the idea of having a single thread dedicated to each active player on the team. Like an ongoing GDT for every player. So if you want to vent about how frustrated you are over, say, Daniel Sedin's performance last night, you click into his thread and let loose. Ideally these would be stickied, but 25 or so sticky topics would be fairly overwhelming. Alternatively they could be free-floating threads but if someone tries to start a new topic with a player's name in the title, they instead get a prompt suggesting they put their post in the ongoing thread.

We've already got some pretty prolific examples of these types of threads on the boards: Burrows - Do We Really Need Him?, Bieksa: What Have You Done For Me Lately, and the many incarnations of the Lu Trade Rumours are good examples.

Anyways, just ideas, just feedback.


I have often thought about that too. In fact it is already done with prospects. At the very least it is worthy of discussion.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1110 pwnstar

pwnstar

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,311 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 10

Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:34 PM

CDC is fairly limited on my iPad
  • 0

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.