"The World" is boring

El Negro · November 2016

I looked at "Yahoo! News" and saw some stuff about Trump.

Apparently, the news are trying to be dramatic by saying that the markets flossed down, players (sports players, not those CSGO wankers) hate them and Trump became the president.

Please, just stop it.

This thing they call "the world", or Earth or even freaking "life" itself is nothing. It's boring.
I don't care about life, "life". We all know it's a very crappy thing and it's more about suffering than enjoying and such.
Well not for me; life is more about suffering and enjoying at the same time, which gets boring very damn quick.

Now what's the problem?
Trump is a nobody, everybody loves to make jokes about him. Hillary is too similar to Trump.
And now, the only thing for me to interest about this is, if the "voting for Trump" was really a joke and there will be an hyperbole as seen in South Park's episode, "Where my country gone?".

If there's gonna be a guy that rapes Trump, to death (just how the hell can you die from a rape?!), I think what would be more impressive is how somebody died from rape, RAPE DIRECTLY, not because the rapist used a knife to penetrate his anus, that's bleeding until dead by supposed anal rape, not DIRECT rape.

What will there be with Trump?
Probably a Ronald Reagan Version 2. Or a Subtle Ronald Reagan. Or a Ronald Reagan without his "Empire of Evil" (The Soviet Union).
Ronald Reagan all over again. How fun! The same crap painted differently.

The world is trying to be dramatic when there's nothing interesting.

Nive · November 2016

We all know you're against the world.
It's painfully, dreadfully obvious...

lokkdokk · November 2016

TRUMP FOR RUSSIA.
LOL=.

El Negro · November 2016

Nive wrote:

We all know you're against the world.
It's painfully, dreadfully obvious...

I don't like you.

Combine · November 2016

Zzzzzz.....

Colonel · November 2016

Reagan had a political background before he ran for president.

El Negro · November 2016

And he said "Make America great again" better than Trump did.

Beroxardas · November 2016

El Negro wrote:

This thing they call "the world", or Earth or even freaking "life" itself is nothing. It's boring.
I don't care about life, "life"

You should not present your personal views as facts, unless they are objectively proven. Of course, you can but this makes you look silly, and I bet you did not wished to sound silly. I would be glad to hear any arguments from which you concluded this words.

El Negro wrote:

We all know it's a very crappy thing and it's more about suffering than enjoying and such.

Logical fallacy here. Where it comes to judgement of abstraction, there is no such thing that "we all" would know, thing that would unite the views around the world.
In fact, concluding existance of "common feelings" towards something is a mistake. It may seem a bright/dark plain conception, but it never is if you conclude it just by your perception.

El Negro wrote:

Well not for me; life is more about suffering and enjoying at the same time, which gets boring very damn quick.

Finally! For "you" you can express whatever you want. "For me, life is a computer simulation." This is way better then "We all know life is a computer simulation".

El Negro wrote:

Now what's the problem?
Trump is a nobody,

He is a president.

El Negro wrote:

everybody loves to make jokes about him.

No. I know people who don`t love it. Check your everybody. You meant "majority of examples that I experienced"?

El Negro wrote:

Hillary is too similar to Trump.
And now, the only thing for me to interest about this is, if the "voting for Trump" was really a joke and there will be an hyperbole as seen in South Park's episode, "Where my country gone?".

Good question! I personally met a person who would vote "for joke", and I can bet my money that there occured such things. The thing is: do you think they were majority of votes?

El Negro wrote:

If there's gonna be a guy that rapes Trump, to death (just how the hell can you die from a rape?!), I think what would be more impressive is how somebody died from rape, RAPE DIRECTLY, not because the rapist used a knife to penetrate his anus, that's bleeding until dead by supposed anal rape, not DIRECT rape.

I feel like this part of what you said is absolutely pathetic. I can not get to the point, and honestly I don`t think there was a point at all. Was it meant to be edgy? Funny? Does painfull death is impressive for you? Anal Bleeding to death can occur without using any sharp tools. Secondly, what a direct death term is for you? People die because their organs stop to function, it can happen by a loss of blood, it can happen by poisoning, it can happen by physical damage... After all, if I were to use your logic, I`d say give me example of direct death by AIDS. If direct death term is understood in this perspective, we could go further concluding all deaths are only caused by death itself. Infections during rape, as well as physical damage are real, and they can cause death. In this way you can die from a rape itself. But still, using a word "impressive" in this way is just pathetic. You were trying to say "we all" in previous points, but now it looks like you are the last person who could associate to the common sense, as expressed in this lack of empathy and fascination with cruelness. Appealing to common sense is wrong after all, but I doubt "everybody" you are talking about share those traits.

El Negro wrote:

The world is trying to be dramatic when there's nothing interesting.

You are trying to sound wise, when there is truly not much to talk about in your words.

El Negro · November 2016

"You should not present your personal views as facts, unless they are objectively proven. Of course, you can but this makes you look silly, and I bet you did not wished to sound silly. I would be glad to hear any arguments from which you concluded this words."
Who says I should not and who said I'm presenting "facts"?

"Logical fallacy here. Where it comes to judgement of abstraction, there is no such thing that "we all" would know, thing that would unite the views around the world.
In fact, concluding existance of "common feelings" towards something is a mistake. It may seem a bright/dark plain conception, but it never is if you conclude it just by your perception."
Hehe, look at you, trying to sound like a smart-arse by typing like you are a philosopher. "Logical fallacy" is getting a bit too common though, right? So I guess it is slowly starting to lose its real meaning now.
Nice study you got, but having that study doesn't mean you should start typing technical terms as if it makes you look smarter or even anybody else understands you.
Besides, whatever you stated after you typed "In fact"...The hell is this now? Trying to prove a point saying it's a fact?

I can make this whole paragraph laconic and easily understandable;
"There's never an 'all'.
What you just said is just your opinion."

You seem to be only making an argument as to how I express myself and what I say instead of getting my point.

"Finally! For "you" you can express whatever you want. "For me, life is a computer simulation." This is way better then "We all know life is a computer simulation"."
And I never said this is a "computer simulation", Jester.

"He is a president."
What's your point? He's a president?
I said he's a "nobody", obviously that's my opinion because if it wasn't then he'd really be a nobody.

But hey, Robinson Crushoe is a nobody as well, right?

"No. I know people who don`t love it. Check your everybody. You meant "majority of examples that I experienced"?"

Yet again you attack (very passively this time) me thinking, this time, that I'm being too literal with "Everyone".
And then you ironically tell me what I wanted to mean.

No, what I meant is "From what I can see on my personal experience, even including the news and the news bulletin, it seems that the majority of likeness to Trump seems to be based on jokes, but not just likeness, also dislike. Trump is better known, especially by the youth culture including the so-called memelords, as the president who has a lot of jokes and worse yet memes.
You can easily take that frog-thing meme as the example. Even Hillary takes in consideration of that frog-thing."

"do you think they were majority of votes?"

I don't care.

"I feel like this part of what you said is absolutely pathetic."
https://www.youtube....=youtu.be&t=426

"I can not get to the point, and honestly I don`t think there was a point at all."
Well then, if you don't understand the point, calling that paragraph of mine "absolutely pathetic" actually makes you an arsehole. And then, implying honestly thinking there was no point, it just makes you a dumb arsehole.
Oh and just to make this clear for EVERYBODY, I'm not saying you fools think that because Beron said that it makes him an arsehole, it's because him saying that it makes ME consider him an asshole. Simple as that, but sadly it's not that simple as I imagined.

"Was it meant to be edgy? Funny? Does painfull death is impressive for you?"
Now you're getting just stupid. "Edgy", a buzzword. At least you didn't say I'm autistic.
I don't get why you're trying to find a meaning to that paragraph, it's like you're trying to figure out if a joke is funny or not.
A joke IS ALWAYS supposed to be funny, so analyzing a joke would be silly.

What I did was simply commemorate South Park, because I like the deadly rampant satire in that show. It's simple as that.
Found it "edgy"? Found it funny? Found it pathetic?
I quoteth thee; "Well, that's just your opinion".

"Anal Bleeding to death can occur without using any sharp tools."
I'm going to consider this as you implying that I'm a full-on idiot instead of a simple fool.
And read, "consider".

"Secondly, what a direct death term is for you? People die because their organs stop to function, it can happen by a loss of blood, it can happen by poisoning, it can happen by physical damage... After all, if I were to use your logic, I`d say give me example of direct death by AIDS."
It's simple; One where you die DIRECTLY FROM (not AFTER, it counts as a factor instead) anal rape.

Oh and AIDS never killed anybody. Nope. AIDS is smart, just like me, it gets into people's immune system, starts to control it (not totally annihilate it) and make sure his virus, evil bacteria, parasite and all kind of disease buddies get into you, then patiently wait until you die from any of those diseases.
Dying from AIDS? Impossible if directly, I'm sure, as it only attacks your immune system, so you won't have any immunity but that's it.
Meanwhile, knowing your immune system got very weak, you're going to die from various disease all thanks to AIDS. AIDS is a great contributing factor, he's always the player in the corner who does more than you think.

And seriously, it's not like everybody has AIDS or can get it on first try or something, it's only very easy to get.

"But still, using a word "impressive" in this way is just pathetic."
Well, let me help being very specific about that for you then;
"Despite death being taboo and a very controversial term to talk about, I do find death fascinating, it is of course macabre itself.
Having somebody to die from a shot is impressive already, but it's not, let's just say "artistic".
If we were to have some kind of extremely macabre (and a bit sexualized) way of somebody to die, anal bleeding due caused by stabbing would be one."

Get it?
You're attacking me directly saying I'm pathetic for being fascinated by something I'm fascinated about. Despite that, you're trying to act like you're attacking my bad use of words AGAIN.
My real nickname is "Iewu", for I am Death, my fascination is Death itself.
I DO NOT CARE at all about your morals, which it seems you've just showed (else you wouldn't call my "impression" of anal bleeding caused by stabbing as pathetic) not if Death itself is taboo and very controversial.

And boy, "controversy" is what must be risen up, from beyond the stars. We're all so happy hidden in our little lives!

"You were trying to say "we all" in previous points, but now it looks like you are the last person who could associate to the common sense, as expressed in this lack of empathy and fascination with cruelness. Appealing to common sense is wrong after all, but I doubt "everybody" you are talking about share those traits."

Hmm, are you even sure about that yourself?
I would like to make a perfect comparison, but this one will bring more arguments into it, probably unnecessary ones.

Now, you doubt "everybody" share what traits exactly?
Because I KNOW that humans ARE fascinated by macabre things. They can't help it, but it's normal.
We all see something strange, we get our curiosity going high. (Why is that, ask anybody.)

Unless you're a soldier who has seen more than 2 of your comrades get shot, 2 of them get stabbed and even one get "raped to death" or whatever, you WILL be naturally interested by Death itself, that is what is macabre.
So, saying I'm the one and only guy who's fascinated by death is, quoteth thee, a "fallacy".

Oh and you should be happy that I am actually fascinated by it. Because, if I wasn't, there would be an issue with my emotions, just like from a psychopath. These guys only kill for thrill, they don't really care how or why, which is what I do.
And if you're really, including any potential reader here, going to think that just because I said that I care how and who I kill makes me an arsehole as that means I'm a killer, gee just think about, fool.
I'm sure even you would think why the hell you killed your father, if you ever did.

Besides, "lack of empathy". Boy, just because I never said something like "it would suck but" doesn't mean I lack it. I mentioned NOTHING about empathy, that should mean I'm neutral, but you went ahead and started thinking I'm that.
I have better empathy than anybody else, especially to the real "warriors", those who love to fight yet know the risk is as dangerous as "Death" itself.
Who the hell cares if they're making a sacrifice "to their country"? These men are at a war, a complete danger, where their lives could end, it's THEM who should matter. THEM. THEM. The individuality of the soldiers, not their goddamn death-wish desire to protect their country! That shouldn't mean anything, but sadly it does. People do not care about soldiers at all. <--- Don't bother trying to understand that, reader, seriously.
And yes, I do actually have an empathy to psychopaths and criminals. I really want to understand them, because I know nobody else does and they're just as bloodthirsty as the killer, they want "justice" to kill somebody who kills. I don't find that ironic myself.
And now if you're wondering if I have empathy for Donald Trump? Not to him because I'd kinda expect it with all that talk about Mexican Walls and crap, but to other people, sure. I wouldn't want to be butt-stabbed either.

And do you really have a problem with my "fascination with cruelness", or even that in general? Because I have a problem with people's fascination with futanari and hentai, yet I don't care that much and would prefer finding benefits of it than spew completely unnecessary (and impractical) hatred about it.
I suppose your next argument about that would be that fascination with cruelness is "less severe" than fascination with futanari. Yeah, right. They're both the same, except one likes this and the other that, they each got their own levels.
"Would you be so willing as to be cruel?", that highly depends on me, baby.
Oh and I should have said this in the first place but even if I'm fascinated with cruelness, it doesn't mean a damn thing that I really like it so much or/and I would do it if I had the chance.
I find cruelty only interesting, but not so highly so. I don't think I would ever do it, but nobody knows

"You are trying to sound wise, when there is tuly not much to talk about in your words."

I'd say "tu quoque" but I like your silly argument even if it was completely needless. (The reason I like it is because I'm a Blood Knight in nature)
I didn't try to sound wise, the heck? And to make it more specific, I didn't try to sound, read, look and whatever the heck else wise.

I'll give out my verdict on you;
You completely tried to understand my point and while doing so, you either didn't understand it at all or wanted to understand me as just some "pathetic idiot who's trying to sound smart". I'd go with the latter, but that's just me, you know.
So, because of that, you decided to go ahead and attack my expressions instead of trying to further understand me.
You didn't even try being prudent and ask me. Only a very few times, but those are very few times, so I disagree you being prudent. You spew your opinions more than trying to 'make me wrong'.
Then, you wanted to pretty much fight me personally, else you wouldn't make any kind of mention about how I have a lack of empathy and how I am fascinated by cruelness which by you it seems that it's a very terrible bad thing, the both of them, then you have some funny attempt of trying to say that I'm trying to sound wise but I fail, yet I fail because of my words and not because of being me, HAHAHAHAH! I'm being hyperbole for you being hyperbole.

Felis · November 2016

El Negro · November 2016

That guy is balding, why the hell didn't he shave it off?

Being bald is volatilely wonderful!

Mayday · November 2016

El Negro wrote:

"You should not present your personal views as facts, unless they are objectively proven. Of course, you can but this makes you look silly, and I bet you did not wished to sound silly. I would be glad to hear any arguments from which you concluded this words."
Who says I should not and who said I'm presenting "facts"?

"Logical fallacy here. Where it comes to judgement of abstraction, there is no such thing that "we all" would know, thing that would unite the views around the world.
In fact, concluding existance of "common feelings" towards something is a mistake. It may seem a bright/dark plain conception, but it never is if you conclude it just by your perception."
Hehe, look at you, trying to sound like a smart-arse by typing like you are a philosopher. "Logical fallacy" is getting a bit too common though, right? So I guess it is slowly starting to lose its real meaning now.
Nice study you got, but having that study doesn't mean you should start typing technical terms as if it makes you look smarter or even anybody else understands you.
Besides, whatever you stated after you typed "In fact"...The hell is this now? Trying to prove a point saying it's a fact?

I can make this whole paragraph laconic and easily understandable;
"There's never an 'all'.
What you just said is just your opinion."

You seem to be only making an argument as to how I express myself and what I say instead of getting my point.

"Finally! For "you" you can express whatever you want. "For me, life is a computer simulation." This is way better then "We all know life is a computer simulation"."
And I never said this is a "computer simulation", Jester.

"He is a president."
What's your point? He's a president?
I said he's a "nobody", obviously that's my opinion because if it wasn't then he'd really be a nobody.

But hey, Robinson Crushoe is a nobody as well, right?

"No. I know people who don`t love it. Check your everybody. You meant "majority of examples that I experienced"?"

Yet again you attack (very passively this time) me thinking, this time, that I'm being too literal with "Everyone".
And then you ironically tell me what I wanted to mean.

No, what I meant is "From what I can see on my personal experience, even including the news and the news bulletin, it seems that the majority of likeness to Trump seems to be based on jokes, but not just likeness, also dislike. Trump is better known, especially by the youth culture including the so-called memelords, as the president who has a lot of jokes and worse yet memes.
You can easily take that frog-thing meme as the example. Even Hillary takes in consideration of that frog-thing."

"do you think they were majority of votes?"

I don't care.

"I feel like this part of what you said is absolutely pathetic."
https://www.youtube....=youtu.be&t=426

"I can not get to the point, and honestly I don`t think there was a point at all."
Well then, if you don't understand the point, calling that paragraph of mine "absolutely pathetic" actually makes you an arsehole. And then, implying honestly thinking there was no point, it just makes you a dumb arsehole.
Oh and just to make this clear for EVERYBODY, I'm not saying you fools think that because Beron said that it makes him an arsehole, it's because him saying that it makes ME consider him an asshole. Simple as that, but sadly it's not that simple as I imagined.

"Was it meant to be edgy? Funny? Does painfull death is impressive for you?"
Now you're getting just stupid. "Edgy", a buzzword. At least you didn't say I'm autistic.
I don't get why you're trying to find a meaning to that paragraph, it's like you're trying to figure out if a joke is funny or not.
A joke IS ALWAYS supposed to be funny, so analyzing a joke would be silly.

What I did was simply commemorate South Park, because I like the deadly rampant satire in that show. It's simple as that.
Found it "edgy"? Found it funny? Found it pathetic?
I quoteth thee; "Well, that's just your opinion".

"Anal Bleeding to death can occur without using any sharp tools."
I'm going to consider this as you implying that I'm a full-on idiot instead of a simple fool.
And read, "consider".

"Secondly, what a direct death term is for you? People die because their organs stop to function, it can happen by a loss of blood, it can happen by poisoning, it can happen by physical damage... After all, if I were to use your logic, I`d say give me example of direct death by AIDS."
It's simple; One where you die DIRECTLY FROM (not AFTER, it counts as a factor instead) anal rape.

Oh and AIDS never killed anybody. Nope. AIDS is smart, just like me, it gets into people's immune system, starts to control it (not totally annihilate it) and make sure his virus, evil bacteria, parasite and all kind of disease buddies get into you, then patiently wait until you die from any of those diseases.
Dying from AIDS? Impossible if directly, I'm sure, as it only attacks your immune system, so you won't have any immunity but that's it.
Meanwhile, knowing your immune system got very weak, you're going to die from various disease all thanks to AIDS. AIDS is a great contributing factor, he's always the player in the corner who does more than you think.

And seriously, it's not like everybody has AIDS or can get it on first try or something, it's only very easy to get.

"But still, using a word "impressive" in this way is just pathetic."
Well, let me help being very specific about that for you then;
"Despite death being taboo and a very controversial term to talk about, I do find death fascinating, it is of course macabre itself.
Having somebody to die from a shot is impressive already, but it's not, let's just say "artistic".
If we were to have some kind of extremely macabre (and a bit sexualized) way of somebody to die, anal bleeding due caused by stabbing would be one."

Get it?
You're attacking me directly saying I'm pathetic for being fascinated by something I'm fascinated about. Despite that, you're trying to act like you're attacking my bad use of words AGAIN.
My real nickname is "Iewu", for I am Death, my fascination is Death itself.
I DO NOT CARE at all about your morals, which it seems you've just showed (else you wouldn't call my "impression" of anal bleeding caused by stabbing as pathetic) not if Death itself is taboo and very controversial.

And boy, "controversy" is what must be risen up, from beyond the stars. We're all so happy hidden in our little lives!

"You were trying to say "we all" in previous points, but now it looks like you are the last person who could associate to the common sense, as expressed in this lack of empathy and fascination with cruelness. Appealing to common sense is wrong after all, but I doubt "everybody" you are talking about share those traits."

Hmm, are you even sure about that yourself?
I would like to make a perfect comparison, but this one will bring more arguments into it, probably unnecessary ones.

Now, you doubt "everybody" share what traits exactly?
Because I KNOW that humans ARE fascinated by macabre things. They can't help it, but it's normal.
We all see something strange, we get our curiosity going high. (Why is that, ask anybody.)

Unless you're a soldier who has seen more than 2 of your comrades get shot, 2 of them get stabbed and even one get "raped to death" or whatever, you WILL be naturally interested by Death itself, that is what is macabre.
So, saying I'm the one and only guy who's fascinated by death is, quoteth thee, a "fallacy".

Oh and you should be happy that I am actually fascinated by it. Because, if I wasn't, there would be an issue with my emotions, just like from a psychopath. These guys only kill for thrill, they don't really care how or why, which is what I do.
And if you're really, including any potential reader here, going to think that just because I said that I care how and who I kill makes me an arsehole as that means I'm a killer, gee just think about, fool.
I'm sure even you would think why the hell you killed your father, if you ever did.

Besides, "lack of empathy". Boy, just because I never said something like "it would suck but" doesn't mean I lack it. I mentioned NOTHING about empathy, that should mean I'm neutral, but you went ahead and started thinking I'm that.
I have better empathy than anybody else, especially to the real "warriors", those who love to fight yet know the risk is as dangerous as "Death" itself.
Who the hell cares if they're making a sacrifice "to their country"? These men are at a war, a complete danger, where their lives could end, it's THEM who should matter. THEM. THEM. The individuality of the soldiers, not their goddamn death-wish desire to protect their country! That shouldn't mean anything, but sadly it does. People do not care about soldiers at all. <--- Don't bother trying to understand that, reader, seriously.
And yes, I do actually have an empathy to psychopaths and criminals. I really want to understand them, because I know nobody else does and they're just as bloodthirsty as the killer, they want "justice" to kill somebody who kills. I don't find that ironic myself.
And now if you're wondering if I have empathy for Donald Trump? Not to him because I'd kinda expect it with all that talk about Mexican Walls and crap, but to other people, sure. I wouldn't want to be butt-stabbed either.

And do you really have a problem with my "fascination with cruelness", or even that in general? Because I have a problem with people's fascination with futanari and hentai, yet I don't care that much and would prefer finding benefits of it than spew completely unnecessary (and impractical) hatred about it.
I suppose your next argument about that would be that fascination with cruelness is "less severe" than fascination with futanari. Yeah, right. They're both the same, except one likes this and the other that, they each got their own levels.
"Would you be so willing as to be cruel?", that highly depends on me, baby.
Oh and I should have said this in the first place but even if I'm fascinated with cruelness, it doesn't mean a damn thing that I really like it so much or/and I would do it if I had the chance.
I find cruelty only interesting, but not so highly so. I don't think I would ever do it, but nobody knows

"You are trying to sound wise, when there is tuly not much to talk about in your words."

I'd say "tu quoque" but I like your silly argument even if it was completely needless. (The reason I like it is because I'm a Blood Knight in nature)
I didn't try to sound wise, the heck? And to make it more specific, I didn't try to sound, read, look and whatever the heck else wise.

I'll give out my verdict on you;
You completely tried to understand my point and while doing so, you either didn't understand it at all or wanted to understand me as just some "pathetic idiot who's trying to sound smart". I'd go with the latter, but that's just me, you know.
So, because of that, you decided to go ahead and attack my expressions instead of trying to further understand me.
You didn't even try being prudent and ask me. Only a very few times, but those are very few times, so I disagree you being prudent. You spew your opinions more than trying to 'make me wrong'.
Then, you wanted to pretty much fight me personally, else you wouldn't make any kind of mention about how I have a lack of empathy and how I am fascinated by cruelness which by you it seems that it's a very terrible bad thing, the both of them, then you have some funny attempt of trying to say that I'm trying to sound wise but I fail, yet I fail because of my words and not because of being me, HAHAHAHAH! I'm being hyperbole for you being hyperbole.

K

Bagas · December 2016

El Negro wrote:

That guy is balding, why the hell didn't he shave it off?

Being bald is volatilely wonderful!

Some men don't have the balls to shave... the type of "men" that listens to what women say.

Women usually say "oh let your hair grow, I like hair..."
That guy in the image must listen and do whatever women say...
Those type of people shouldn't be called men, they are the girl in the relationship...

Its funny that they like hair on the head but down there you gotta shave it, because nowadays its "normal/fashion"

Dignitias · February 2017

Okay, Edgy Mc.cutmyselfalot.

El Negro · February 2017

Dignitias wrote:

Okay, Edgy Mc.cutmyselfalot.

Ohio has the worst potatoes ever, that's sad because I love potatoes.

Dignitias · May 2017

El Negro wrote:

Ohio has the worst potatoes ever, that's sad because I love potatoes.

Well, unfortunately, you mistake us with Idaho, because I sure ain't no hoe. Really, Ohio's better known for it's maple syrup. That's some good stuff.

Hurtcules · May 2017

El Negro wrote:

Ohio has the worst potatoes ever, that's sad because I love potatoes.

Ohio has the worst everything(except me)

El Negro · May 2017

Hurtcules wrote:

Ohio has the worst everything(except me)

Except Lil' Ol' Hurtcules, yeah...

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

"The World" is boring

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

"The World" is boring

Comments