Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1923. (Read 3313485 times)
elrippo let's not make a bit deal about what gets deleted and what doesn't. No one is trying to censor you. I deleted two posts at the same time because they both quoted the whole long message and added little to it. One of them happened to be yours. Next time, please quote less and/or add more.
Deleted rangedriver's and elripp's replies that both quoted BlockaFett's post but added no meaningful content
So far freedom of speach goes down the drain in this forum
The fact that BlockaFett's quoting is meaningful in your opinion, does not really raise my cocnitive aspiration.
Maybe you should consider not beeing so bullish towards your supporters....
You overshot this one pretty clearly smooth
elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.
smooth, cool down, take a good cup of tea and let me say what i want to, when i want to. I don't charge you for your words, so please do not charge mine.
"quit pro quo"
It's "quid pro quo", and this thread is moderated, with clear-ish rules laid out in the OP. It is smooth's prerogative to moderate it how he sees fit.
Being a supporter has no bearing on your entitlement to post off-topic stuff. Note: I didn't read either of the posts that got deleted, so this isn't directed at what either of you said. It's just how things should work in general.
Quote from: op
Off topic posts will be removed. Off topic includes any extensive discussion of other coins, promoting other coins, or posting of promotional materials from other coins.
Non-substantive comments such as Monero sucks, Monero is a scam, Monero is great, Monero to the moon, etc. are considered off topic. Every post and reply should add to the discussion.
Non-substantive comments such as Monero sucks, Monero is a scam, Monero is great, Monero to the moon, etc. are considered off topic. Every post and reply should add to the discussion.
If smooth doesn't remove OT posts, then he's somewhat of a liar (keeping in mind post quality is often subjective).
The quit was meant to be a little sarcastic, but it didn't land like it should.
Below find my post, it's up to you if it's OT or not. I won't post or talk about this "posting/quoting" from my perspective further, due ot it's meaninglessness in this world (not my posting/Quoting, but the discussion of it in a kind of heated state of mind from smoothy).
If it is smoothys responsibility to aim at his own rules, that's fine for me, and i think for smoothy too, but i kind of tend to call this "censorship" in a heated state of mind. So in respect to that, i won't be bullish because a quoting of mine got removed, but i don't like beeing censored, as a supporter/nonsupporter/critic and/or fan of something in this "NSA and Friends" surveiled world.
Enough, cup of tea and popcorn
So what's the reason this time for the dumps?
Just my opinion, but something to do with your toxic core devs running around BCT trying to denigrate the competition, instead of the *much needed* development that would get your wallet to a functional level that would let exchanges like Cryptsy have the confidence to add it, let alone real users in a real market... who according to your devs are 'too stupid' to use the dysfunctional code they are in 'stewardship' of that is in essentially the same state as when they cloned it from the 'Bytecoin scam' one year ago - way to attract new buyers. (But don't worry, according to them they at least removed the scam code embedded in the software that they admitted gave the developers a deliberate and unfair advantage after other people had to point it out to them - nice to know).
After one year of zero innovation on top of Bytecoin (apart from MyMonero.com, the first of several centralized payment websites envisaged, owned, developed and operated by your lead Dev FluffyPony, soon to be followed by PayBee.com that will presumably require more "investment" from you guys, and hopefully turn out better than his VertPay website that he tried to raise $200k from Vertcoin investors for right before he joined Monero), it's becoming ridiculous to keep saying 'Monero is the only safe way to store money, how come it's dumping' - like the other day when FluffyPony's centralized payment website went down and no one could deposit coins to Poloniex and his solution was to "call him on his mobile if he is asleep" - the system doesn't work.
Essentially, the bubble of bullsh*t is bursting.. Monero is not unique at this stage, it is just another cryptonote clone, and it's credibility is so tarnished thank to the dev's scammy behaviour (my subjective opinion), DSH on Poloniex is probably a better investment right now IMO, at least it *doesn't* have this kind of dev team.
I think that's the real reason why no one on the dev team is pushing for new exchanges - without everything going through Poloniex, which is controlled by a few whales like Warz, the bullsh*t bubble would have burst a long time ago, e.g. if it was also on Cryptsy / Finex and the non-Poloniex volume was <$1000 per day across all these big exchanges, just like it is like that now with Bittrex / BTER, market demand would start to look more fake than it does already (with the only XMR in buy books apparently being 4 huge whale buy walls now which I suspect will be 'on the move' when the price gets near as usual). Take Poloniex out of the equation and XMR in this state would be < $200k within a few days I suspect, i.e. without the ability to run a marketing scam by controlling the conversation on BCT <-> Poloniex trollbox and try to make this off-the-shelf clone-code appear to have any use / value and hide the fact that they have done zero innovation as they should have to earn the value they are claiming.
Less bullsh*t, more development. Value has to be earned, not propped up on a fake exchange and trolled by fake devs who like to talk a lot instead of delivering anything, and offending 100s of people around BCT each day.
V. surprised some real devs haven't just forked Bytecoin, added a GUI and local DB and seen if this tech can actually go somewhere in the real market, or maybe that is a comment on the CryptoNote tech itself, IDK.
If you want to see what your 'devs' are really like, check how right now all they are doing is trying to get Dash 2 little stars on a 3rd party guide site even after they got laughed out for saying Dash was a premine: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11215773
Most toxic dev team on earth. Your responsibility as investors - fix it.
I am glad to live in a world where i enjoy to have a choice if i want to or not. I think i do not have to give you an awnser mate
More Like 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1....
OK, So I still think we can expect .002 - .0018 to be the low before a big upswing back above .003+. What I'm not sure on is the time frame.
These whale dumps are nothing but shots across the bow and can be proved by the troll support and FUD campaign that coincides. This is so predictable it really is laughable. Only differance this time is it took 2 Whale dumps to scare people and tauntstewy didn't show up.
This is really a good thing as the coin becomes more diversified as well as dropping into the hands of those with true vision. E.I. Able to see the end game not just short term profits.
When I first researched this coin I spent months monitoring the various threads before coming to the realization that this is a truly dedicated team with a goal that IS achievable and is sorely needed. I think there can be NO debate on those points.
The only real concern I have is because the Development is funded so slowly there may be a contender that will build off of all this hard work with a bankroll behind it that will achieve Monero's roadmap quicker. That is the reason I decided not to just hold after purchase and will play the game to accumulate as the war rages. There will be, as we have seen over and over, massive swings as the whales attempt to manipulate and the small fish continue to panic in the maelstrom. I have no doubt that in the end XMR will be the defacto currency for those that are bright enough to see the writing on the wall. Control through assets is growing every day and most of the population is too uneducated to see it for themselves and of those that it is pointed out to only a small percentage actually grasp the gravity of the situation.
When highway robbery is back nothing is safe.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/us/asset-seizures/
My point being unless you haven't gleaned it from the preceding is that this project cannot logically fail except for the one scenario which I have outlined above. Unless of course the big 3 letter organizations make a concerted effort, and I don't see that happening until the threat is at such a high level that those of us that see what I've outlined above will have already observed those signs and will be moving in the next direction. AfA that case scenario, I would estimate at least 5 years before there would be a need to be concerned about that. And by that time less than a handful of todays coins will still be alive, I'll not name my thoughts on which as I don't want to send this into an off topic direction.
Just for laughs I wish Warz and Otoh had made vids for prosperity.
https://vid.me/ima7
Here's where Warz grabbed 11k.
http://pastebin.com/pPNf8y6L
Deleted rangedriver's and elripp's replies that both quoted BlockaFett's post but added no meaningful content
So far freedom of speach goes down the drain in this forum
The fact that BlockaFett's quoting is meaningful in your opinion, does not really raise my cocnitive aspiration.
Maybe you should consider not beeing so bullish towards your supporters....
You overshot this one pretty clearly smooth
elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.
smooth, cool down, take a good cup of tea and let me say what i want to, when i want to. I don't charge you for your words, so please do not charge mine.
"quit pro quo"
It's "quid pro quo", and this thread is moderated, with clear-ish rules laid out in the OP. It is smooth's prerogative to moderate it how he sees fit.
Being a supporter has no bearing on your entitlement to post off-topic stuff. Note: I didn't read either of the posts that got deleted, so this isn't directed at what either of you said. It's just how things should work in general.
Quote from: op
Off topic posts will be removed. Off topic includes any extensive discussion of other coins, promoting other coins, or posting of promotional materials from other coins.
Non-substantive comments such as Monero sucks, Monero is a scam, Monero is great, Monero to the moon, etc. are considered off topic. Every post and reply should add to the discussion.
Non-substantive comments such as Monero sucks, Monero is a scam, Monero is great, Monero to the moon, etc. are considered off topic. Every post and reply should add to the discussion.
If smooth doesn't remove OT posts, then he's somewhat of a liar (keeping in mind post quality is often subjective).
I'm here because i just spent 2 days arguing with them during their 'bum-rush' of the CoinMarketCap thread and when I asked them basic questions they run off.
...
If your toxic devs weren't ... I wouldn't be here.
...
If your toxic devs weren't ... I wouldn't be here.
If you are saying that you are here bent on retaliation, then you are welcome to leave.
If you have substantive points to make, you're welcome to make them, but continuing to repeat that Monero devs are "toxic" according to you "toxic" because we feel that instamined coins should be clearly identified as such does not count as substantive points.
My substantive point is that it's my opinion that Monero's value is being rapidly reduced by the toxic actions/behaviour of the Monero core devs (LIKE YOU) and I am giving the reasons for that and asking your investors to fix it for 3 reasons 1) You are taking up a hell of a lot of other people's time including me 2) you are saying 'fuck you' to every Monero investor when you do this sh*t 3) you are the biggest hypocrite on BCT I ever saw - how can you even show your face to your community when you are doing this instead of ***developing***.
You jumping in here within 5 seconds and trying to police that / silence me is hardly surprising.
BlockaFett, if I wanted to police/silence you here, your posts would already be deleted.
What evidence is there for Poloniex being a "fake exchange"?
Who pointed out the crippled mining code to us?
"BlockaFett, if I wanted to police/silence you here, your posts would already be deleted." Except then you would look more scammy than you already do.
"What evidence is there for Poloniex being a "fake exchange"? I don't - it's a subjective opinion. People don't need to prove opinion's Smooth, this is basic argumentation.
"Who pointed out the crippled mining code to us?" I don't know but this suggests that you don't either? Why are you asking me?
So I responded to your questions, but main thing I notice is you evaded my point - interesting that you don't deny the real point I am making, on this, a thread speculating on Monero value.
djeezes dude, I've been reading the forum for several years now, I almost never post... but I gotta say, you are the worst discussion-partner I ever read, this isn't even trolling, it's worse...
best regards though, and good luck in life with your 'opinions'
+1
i did scrolled down a lot of blockafett's posts...sometimes i really feel sorry for smooth..
I like blockafett and even think he has somewhat good intentions - see his involvement in the mintpal thread.
but the fun fact is that blockafett does not understand the implication of ninja/insta/fastmines.
distribution is not just about being fair (whatever that should be), but about the possibility to network in an economic sense. fast/ninja/instamines are massively hindering this process.
but the fun fact is that blockafett does not understand the implication of ninja/insta/fastmines.
distribution is not just about being fair (whatever that should be), but about the possibility to network in an economic sense. fast/ninja/instamines are massively hindering this process.
What the Dash supporters don't understand is that market cap as a naked number is not an indicator of success. They look at the charts and the market and think everything is just fine and the instamine doesn't matter.
It is in fact an indicator of nothing because you can get high market cap both due to good distribution or bad distribution, as we just discussed in the case of Bytecoin, possibly the coin with the worst distribution in history (okay there others that tie it). Those two cases are very different in underlying dynamics however.
I like blockafett and even think he has somewhat good intentions - see his involvement in the mintpal thread.
but the fun fact is that blockafett does not understand the implication of ninja/insta/fastmines.
distribution is not just about being fair (whatever that should be), but about the possibility to network in an economic sense. fast/ninja/instamines are massively hindering this process.
but the fun fact is that blockafett does not understand the implication of ninja/insta/fastmines.
distribution is not just about being fair (whatever that should be), but about the possibility to network in an economic sense. fast/ninja/instamines are massively hindering this process.
(Smooth above) I've made the case -- with supporting evidence -- that his behavior surrounding the launch was misleading and deceptive, which it was. I can't speak for his intention, but you know my inference, I know yours. We disagree. That isn't lying. You are lying when you say it is.
"was misleading and deceptive" you cannot prove that because you need to show intent. The dev gave a full account of it and claimed it was a mistake which is, legally, plausible
"was misleading and deceptive" you cannot prove that because you need to show intent. The dev gave a full account of it and claimed it was a mistake which is, legally, plausible
I disagree. When you tell people the launch won't happen for a few days, and then when asked, again, by someone who wanted to make sure he wasn't misunderstanding, if it will happen in hours you say "Definitely not" (<- actual quote), and then you launch in a few hours, that was misleading and deceptive on its face. There is no need to get into intention at that point.
Maybe he suffered or suffers from a colossal case of airheadedness and it wasn't intentionally misleading and deceptive, because he just got mixed up, by mistake, about the difference between days and hours. I find that somewhat implausible, but not impossible.
I sent you a pm over a week ago, but you didn't respond. I was wondering if I offended you in some way.
Sorry, it got bumped to the second page of my PMs and I forgot to answer it. I'll reply now.
Deleted rangedriver's and elripp's replies that both quoted BlockaFett's post but added no meaningful content
So far freedom of speach goes down the drain in this forum
The fact that BlockaFett's quoting is meaningful in your opinion, does not really raise my cocnitive aspiration.
Maybe you should consider not beeing so bullish towards your supporters....
You overshot this one pretty clearly smooth
elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.
smooth, cool down, take a good cup of tea and let me say what i want to, when i want to. I don't charge you for your words, so please do not charge mine.
"quit pro quo"
I wish we could get some fucking price talk in here geez.
Okay, the price is down.
Whoever it was who pointed out lower highs was correct, although I don't really consider the 0.01 high to be part of a meaningful trend. That was more of a unique situation. Nevertheless since the summer high around 0.0055, the highs have been progressively lower. This is not a generally favorable trend over the medium term until there is a significant change.
Over the short term, I see market-wide factors that are playing a major role. XMR is down significantly over the past month but since our friend from Dash is joining us, I will point out that Dash is as well. The price ratio between the two is currently about 6.5 which is within the recent trading range and well within the historical trading range (which peaked at almost 20). Likewise BTC is down significantly. It has not been a good month for cryptos.
I wish we could get some fucking price talk in here geez.
I've already explained this to you, so you know all about it. I'm not sure why you seem confused now:
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
I would dispute that because there are developers (apparently skilled in their art) who say it was:
Yes but you are missing that thankful_for_today was not the original developer of the code. He just forked it.
I agree with dga that the original developers of the code deliberately crippled it. That was Bytecoin, not Bitmonero.
We don't know that thankful_for_today ever even looked at that code any more than the typical copy/paste Bitcoin-forking altcoin developer reads all of the Bitcoin code.
Quote
Example of you lying? Yesterday you said you only posted twice on the Dash thread
No I said I remembered two occasions (and I identified them: 1) the dashcoin "buy out", 2) the coinmarketcap discussion.
I did not say two posts, that was another one of your signature misquotes.
Quote
But this is diverting - my point is that you and FluffyPony are accusing your competitors devs of *fraud*. And you are doing it daily (mostly you). You can call Dash an "instamine" because that's subjective and people are free to agree or disagree. But saying this then equates to a "scam" ...
I consider instamines to be inherently a scam, by virtue of having a severely unhealthy front-loaded distribution, so there's really nothing needed to get from instamine to scam in my opinion. The only exception would be if something were done to correct the unhealthy distribution, such as burning the extra coins.
I also consider coins that significantly cut their money supply (thereby multiplying the value of existing coins) to be scams.
I don't really see how Dash could possibly not be a scam, or why you think I'm overstepping by saying so. But obviously I expect you to dispute it.
Quote
and that the Dash dev is a fraudster, is criminal behaviour
I've made the case -- with supporting evidence -- that his behavior surrounding the launch was misleading and deceptive, which it was. I can't speak for his intention, but you know my inference, I know yours. We disagree. That isn't lying. You are lying when you say it is.
Not reading this sh*t - why don't you leave the fucking text where it is Smooth? I asked you this lot of times. If you quote someone leave their fucking text *they are not your words to change*. Just like you want to change the definitions of CoinMarketCap to be "correct" for your interpretation. You're a real piece of work and a scammer in literally every way. Cheers.
EDIT: I will respond to this part because it's my key point:
(Smooth above) I've made the case -- with supporting evidence -- that his behavior surrounding the launch was misleading and deceptive, which it was. I can't speak for his intention, but you know my inference, I know yours. We disagree. That isn't lying. You are lying when you say it is.
"was misleading and deceptive" you cannot prove that because you need to show intent. The dev gave a full account of it and claimed it was a mistake which is, legally, plausible
"I can't speak for his intention" Then your'e a fucking idiot, because before you commit defamation you need to prove intention because that's the proof that he milead, was deceptive, i.e. the Fraud you are accusing him of.
You have the legal, argumentative and logical capabilities of a Baboon - and you don't mind commiting crimes to try to pump your sh*t by defaming your competition using gibberish.. Good job the Dash dev obviously ignores everything you say and just develops his coin, if you were saying this about me you would be in the middle of a Dante's inferno of legal proceedings right now and telling your wife that you had to move under a bridge because of your big, libelous, fallacious mouth. The fact you are wearing a Monero Core Dev hat, with the rest of the community *supporting* your attacks instead of *improving* Monero is sickening. Cheers
Logically:
1: "x"
2: "you saying "x" makes "y" worth less, and "z" look better."
1: "well, no, "y" is in no way affiliated with "x" or "z"."
2: "okay, "w". "w" = "x". "
1: "definitely not, just because "w" and "x" are both letters, they're not the same thing."
2: "you said "x" again, making "y" worth less, therefore "z" can't be described by "w" or "x" but "y" can."
1: "x"
2: "w"
1: "x"
2: "w"
1: "x"
2: "w"
Am I getting this?
1: "x"
2: "you saying "x" makes "y" worth less, and "z" look better."
1: "well, no, "y" is in no way affiliated with "x" or "z"."
2: "okay, "w". "w" = "x". "
1: "definitely not, just because "w" and "x" are both letters, they're not the same thing."
2: "you said "x" again, making "y" worth less, therefore "z" can't be described by "w" or "x" but "y" can."
1: "x"
2: "w"
1: "x"
2: "w"
1: "x"
2: "w"
Am I getting this?
I've already explained this to you, so you know all about it. I'm not sure why you seem confused now:
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
I would dispute that because there are developers (apparently skilled in their art) who say it was:
Yes but you are missing that thankful_for_today was not the original developer of the code. He just forked it.
I agree with dga that the original developers of the code deliberately crippled it. That was Bytecoin, not Bitmonero.
We don't know that thankful_for_today ever even looked at that code any more than the typical copy/paste Bitcoin-forking altcoin developer reads all of the Bitcoin code.
Quote
Example of you lying? Yesterday you said you only posted twice on the Dash thread
No I said I remembered two occasions (and I identified them: 1) the dashcoin "buy out", 2) the coinmarketcap discussion) of having posting there, after being mention by name, by someone else on the thread. Conversations followed, in which I participated.
I did not say two posts, that was another one of your signature misquotes.
Quote
But this is diverting - my point is that you and FluffyPony are accusing your competitors devs of *fraud*. And you are doing it daily (mostly you). You can call Dash an "instamine" because that's subjective and people are free to agree or disagree. But saying this then equates to a "scam" ...
I consider instamines to be inherently a scam, by virtue of having a severely unhealthy front-loaded distribution, so there's really nothing needed to get from instamine to scam in my opinion. The only exception would be if something were done to correct the unhealthy distribution, such as burning the extra coins.
I also consider coins that significantly cut their money supply (thereby multiplying the value of existing coins) to be scams.
I don't really see how Dash could possibly not be a scam, or why you think I'm overstepping by saying so. But obviously I expect you to dispute it.
Quote
and that the Dash dev is a fraudster, is criminal behaviour
I've made the case -- with supporting evidence -- that his behavior surrounding the launch was misleading and deceptive, which it was. I can't speak for his intention, but you know my inference, I know yours. We disagree. That isn't lying. You are lying when you say it is.
........
lol - "instamine" is a generalization that implies a "fast" emission with fast being whatever the individual believes is fast for whatever their value judgement is on what emission *should be*. And is a subjective term...the accusation that "instamine" = "scam" is an extension of that and also a subjective opinion, such as when applied to the Dash launch. I.e. it is an unproved opinion that the Dash *developer* intentionally created the instamine and benefited from it.
lol - "instamine" is a generalization that implies a "fast" emission with fast being whatever the individual believes is fast for whatever their value judgement is on what emission *should be*. And is a subjective term...the accusation that "instamine" = "scam" is an extension of that and also a subjective opinion, such as when applied to the Dash launch. I.e. it is an unproved opinion that the Dash *developer* intentionally created the instamine and benefited from it.
I used the term instamine because it seems thats what has been used to describe it. You can call it ninjamine, super fast mine or "just a mistake that spewed 100's of thousands of coins" mine - it doesn't change the numbers and the fact the "community" decided that it's fine (someone said something about a vote) .
I've already explained this to you, so you know all about it. I'm not sure why you seem confused now:
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
There was no proof of thankful_for_today's intentions. He might have known about the crippled miner, and he might have mined a small number of coins with an advantage from it, or he might not. We don't know.
Also, if you're going to accuse me of "lying daily" (<- actual quote), I'm going to ask you to back that up. Can you?
Which "other people" (<- actual quote) had to tell us about the crippled miner?
I would dispute that because there are developers (apparently skilled in their art) who say it was:
http://da-data.blogspot.de/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html
Like I said, IDK, it's my opinion this is true because I see you lying so much, and no proof you even developed anything..
Example of you lying? Yesterday you said you only posted twice on the Dash thread - you are one of the biggest posters there, 4 weeks ago you were on a list showing you had posted 103 times just in the prior month https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10976128. Including this last 4 weeks too, you have more posts on the Dash thread than I do. You're a blatant liar.
Sure I saw a post where you said you admitted that the miner was intentionally crippled at launch, or did you always maintaint that the miner wasn't intentionally crippled?
But this is diverting - my point is that you and FluffyPony are accusing your competitors devs of *fraud*. And you are doing it daily (mostly you). You can call Dash an "instamine" because that's subjective and people are free to agree or disagree. But saying this then equates to a "scam" and that the Dash dev is a fraudster when you can't prove the intention, is criminal behaviour - and you are hurting Monero's price and reputation by doing it. (...the point that you won't respond on).
I sent you a pm over a week ago, but you didn't respond. I was wondering if I offended you in some way.
Deleted rangedriver's and elripp's replies that both quoted BlockaFett's post but added no meaningful content
So far freedom of speach goes down the drain in this forum
The fact that BlockaFett's quoting is meaningful in your opinion, does not really raise my cocnitive aspiration.
Maybe you should consider not beeing so bullish towards your supporters....
You overshot this one pretty clearly smooth
elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.
smooth, is everything alright?
Huh?
Deleted rangedriver's and elripp's replies that both quoted BlockaFett's post but added no meaningful content
So far freedom of speach goes down the drain in this forum
The fact that BlockaFett's quoting is meaningful in your opinion, does not really raise my cocnitive aspiration.
Maybe you should consider not beeing so bullish towards your supporters....
You overshot this one pretty clearly smooth
elrippo I have nothing against your contributions but when you quote 50 lines and then add one line that doesn't actually say anything, I'm sure you can do better.
smooth, is everything alright?
Jump to: