neored9 wrote:LOL get a load of this guy. I know who my next thread is gonna be about.
I certainly feel honored, my good Sir.

neored9 wrote:LOL get a load of this guy. I know who my next thread is gonna be about.
Claeyt wrote:jorb wrote:Yupp. Ban. Vox populi, vox Dei!
You should have done it while you had the chance.![]()
![]()
![]()
Veritas est veritas unius hominis.
You've already been warned once tonight, Claeyt, for inappropriate material. User banned one day for lack of English translation.
TotalyMeow
TotalyMeow wrote: Claeyt's perspective of Salem and what it's about is very different from the devs and in many cases is completely the opposite of what we believe.
neored9 wrote:Prove him wrong! Protip, you can't.
Kaios wrote:neored9 wrote:Prove him wrong! Protip, you can't.
What? My "stfu" was in regards to the clear double standard that was just displayed. If Claeyt hadn't been warned already, it would have just been a warning rather than a ban. But Jorb is allowed without repercussion because why exactly? His ***** taste too damn good?
Kaios wrote:neored9 wrote:Prove him wrong! Protip, you can't.
What? My "stfu" was in regards to the clear double standard that was just displayed. If Claeyt hadn't been warned already, it would have just been a warning rather than a ban. But Jorb is allowed without repercussion because why exactly? His ***** taste too damn good?
Kaios wrote:What? My "stfu" was in regards to the clear double standard that was just displayed. If Claeyt hadn't been warned already, it would have just been a warning rather than a ban. But Jorb is allowed without repercussion because why exactly? His ***** taste too damn good?
JC wrote:I'm not fully committed to being wrong on that yet.
Potjeh wrote:Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests