SOMEONE'S getting cock

Page 10 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by PayJ on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:30 pm

Dead Herald wrote:
PayJ567 wrote:Anyone who kills themselves cause they got humiliated doesn't deserve the gift of life same as anyone who can't play piano doesn't deserve the gift of fingers and anyone who kills themselves to prevent lethal secrets from being revealed also doesn't deserve life in the first place.

Wow...Insensitive...
Ah I have no time for sensitivity it is for the weak and the decadent.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Fix me a hot dog with jelly on
I've had cravings since withdrawing from
Low grade acid and cocaine bumps
I can't sleep at night or hold a decent job."
-Matt Berry
avatar
PayJ
And I'll Do Fitness

Posts : 13111
Leprechaun Gold : 47347
Pineapple Power : 22778
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 24
Alignment : Right or Left
Location : South East of England

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Dead Herald on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:36 pm

Yet plenty of time for hitting on me whilst drunk.


Last edited by Dead Herald on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:37 pm; edited 1 time in total

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
<br>

Dead Herald
I hate Obama

Posts : 4987
Leprechaun Gold : 9150
Pineapple Power : 1652
Join date : 2010-12-19
Age : 1017
Location : People's Republik of Kalifornia.

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by PayJ on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:36 pm

Not been drunk for weeks.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Fix me a hot dog with jelly on
I've had cravings since withdrawing from
Low grade acid and cocaine bumps
I can't sleep at night or hold a decent job."
-Matt Berry
avatar
PayJ
And I'll Do Fitness

Posts : 13111
Leprechaun Gold : 47347
Pineapple Power : 22778
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 24
Alignment : Right or Left
Location : South East of England

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Dead Herald on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:37 pm

No, I will not be in your dick film.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
<br>

Dead Herald
I hate Obama

Posts : 4987
Leprechaun Gold : 9150
Pineapple Power : 1652
Join date : 2010-12-19
Age : 1017
Location : People's Republik of Kalifornia.

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by PayJ on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:39 pm

http://tf2wiki.net/w/images/4/49/Medic_autodejectedtie01.wav

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Fix me a hot dog with jelly on
I've had cravings since withdrawing from
Low grade acid and cocaine bumps
I can't sleep at night or hold a decent job."
-Matt Berry
avatar
PayJ
And I'll Do Fitness

Posts : 13111
Leprechaun Gold : 47347
Pineapple Power : 22778
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 24
Alignment : Right or Left
Location : South East of England

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Dead Herald on Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:42 pm

http://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/f/fc/Medic_jeers12.wav

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
<br>

Dead Herald
I hate Obama

Posts : 4987
Leprechaun Gold : 9150
Pineapple Power : 1652
Join date : 2010-12-19
Age : 1017
Location : People's Republik of Kalifornia.

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Guest on Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:08 pm

PayJ567 wrote:Anyone who kills themselves cause they got humiliated doesn't deserve the gift of life
Well, you would have to define "Humiliated".
For example, she might have started to get bullied over the nature of her humiliation and bullying has lead to countless suicides.
PayJ567 wrote:Anyone who kills themselves to prevent lethal secrets from being revealed also doesn't deserve life in the first place.
Notsureifserious.jpg

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by PayJ on Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:25 pm

I wasn't serious over any of it.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Fix me a hot dog with jelly on
I've had cravings since withdrawing from
Low grade acid and cocaine bumps
I can't sleep at night or hold a decent job."
-Matt Berry
avatar
PayJ
And I'll Do Fitness

Posts : 13111
Leprechaun Gold : 47347
Pineapple Power : 22778
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 24
Alignment : Right or Left
Location : South East of England

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Sik on Tue Jun 28, 2011 8:16 pm

Demented Teddy wrote:However, they are still criminals, they have broken the law, that is a pure objective statement that can not be argued against.

Point not contested.

Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
2. Indeed, LulzSec's actions are to be properly regarded as vandalism. That's why I would compare them to people who do graffiti.

They do far more than that, they steal personal information, reveal said information publicly, look at classified government files and so on, they are far more than petty vandals.
Furthermore, graffiti is damaging public property, what they are doing is more akin to vandalising someone's house, vandalising personal property is a far more serious offence.
Besides, I find even graffiti intolerable.

You are right, I've focussed on their defacing of websites to the exclusion of some of their other activities. Compromising personal info etc. do not fit well with the comparison to graffiti artists, but neither do they fit the comparison to gangbangers.

Also, FYI, drawing a tag on a private house is just as much graffiti as doing so on public property.

Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
3. You can't say something like "There is legislation against activities revolving around hacking for many reasons guys." and expect to be taken seriously. Laws that are there are there because some people, at some time, thought they were a good idea. Without expounding on the actual reasons, and explaining why they're valid, your sentence may as well not exist.

So, would you say that the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism and what have you are all there for no reason?
Do you not have respect for the law?

No, what in my post makes you think that? I merely stated that the argument 'It's illegal for a reason' carries no persuasive weight. It's illegal for a reason, but without discussing the validity of that reason, you've said nothing valuable. I think there are good reasons for the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism, and a lot of others, but I nevertheless take a critical approach to that law. To be fair, we are unevenly armed here, I studied law at uni and so have ben trained to view the law as not much more than a series of decisions by people. Once you've accepted that, having more respect for it than any other group's series of decisions is hard.

Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
4. What Herald said was:
"I've lived around vandals and gangbangers all my life. I don't see how
they suddenly become better people if you let them ply their trade in
cyberspace."
There is no way that someone can intimidate in a similar or even analogous way online. There just isn't a threat of physical violence, and it isn't reasonable to be intimidated by threats like losing your data/personal info in the same way as it is with being stabbed, shot, or beaten. The type of threat is categorically and instinctively different, and to pretend that LulzSec constitute a similar threat to a gangbanger but online distorts the debate beyond any value.
Cyber-criminals can do serious damage to a person or group, ever here of cyber-bullying? Furthermore via the Internet you CAN find where someone lives and THEN assault and murder them, it has happened.

Irrelevant. I said "similar or analogous way". I don't think you'd make your comment if you noticed that.

Dead Herald wrote:
Sik wrote:
Dead Herald wrote:You must be in total denial of how much damage people can do with just a few keystrokes.

Not really. There are two approaches I can see to your position. Either it's the one that says skilful hackers could feasibly knock a plane out of the sky (or some other similarly physical-injury-creating attack). To that I have no real answer - it is an exception to the general case.

The second is more interesting - getting punched in the face clearly isn't as damaging as having your identity stolen and your credit rating blackballed (again, you can pick the examples if you don't like my ones). You are nevertheless not really fearing for your life, but rather for loss of convenience (to put it rather insensitively). This is why comparing gangbangers to hackers (and much less script kiddies like LulzSec) isn't really sensible.

In other words, I don't disagree with you that cybercrimes should be treated just as seriously as their real-life counterparts, I disagree about how you are categorising them. It's the same as when everyone went mental about piracy. The industry can scream all it wants, but piracy has never amounted to stealing, which at its core involves depriving someone of something that is not yours. I think that piracy is illegal, and moreover wrong (though I have and do engage in it), but that doesn't make it stealing. (properly analysed software piracy ought to be considered 'copyright infringement' and 'unjust enrichment' imo)

Are you really thinking this is all about lulzsec and Sony? Wow, talk about missing the point. And if you think cybercrime doesn't hurt anyone, you should tell that to the parents of the Boston girl who killed herself after being humiliated over facebook.

This conversation was all about LulzSec. I never said that cybercrime doesn't hurt anyone, and if you've taken that from my posts here then you've not really bothered to read them. Also, if there's anyone to blame for the death of a kid who killed themselves over humiliation on Facebook, it's that kid's parents, so it would probably be for the best if I didn't express my views around those kinds of people.
avatar
Sik
Swift and painful justice
Swift and painful justice

Posts : 551
Leprechaun Gold : 2849
Pineapple Power : 5
Join date : 2011-05-20
Age : 29
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by MilkyFresh on Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:55 am

Kommissar Kharloth wrote:
Sik wrote:I'm not really sure where to go with that. I'll take it as internet speak for 'You're right, I really don't know anything about hip-hop and won't make comments about its origins based on nothing more than the fact that the gangbangers where I grew up listened to it and that I've heard of gangster rap.' My response: don't be too hard on yourself, that association is strongly promoted today as it's a way for labels to make money from a certian subset of stupid people. Without any kind of interest in the genre, there's almost no reason for you to have learned better.
You're the bluntest person I've ever met.


I like you.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
WHY MONKEY, WHY?
No one loves a prick,
No one loves a coffee sniffing motherfucker.
avatar
MilkyFresh
Wizard of Piss

Posts : 9787
Leprechaun Gold : 38705
Pineapple Power : 22738
Join date : 2010-10-26
Age : 23
Alignment : Arseheart
Location : Australia

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Furburt on Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:52 am

Dead Herald wrote:No, I will not be in your dick film.

Wait, what?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This device will make me famous
This device will make me fly
This device will make me holy
This device defies all laws

Laws that are stupid, and make no sense.

Big Black, Newman Generator

The New Adventures of Momo Murphy
avatar
Furburt
Arrested For Copying Dogs

Posts : 16683
Leprechaun Gold : 71901
Pineapple Power : 42707
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 24
Alignment : The Clan MacGinty, the Clan Nangle, The Clan O'Neill and the Clan Moriarty
Location : Éire.

http://steamcommunity.com/id/Furburt

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by reg42 on Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:08 am

MilkyFresh wrote:
Kommissar Kharloth wrote:
Sik wrote:I'm not really sure where to go with that. I'll take it as internet speak for 'You're right, I really don't know anything about hip-hop and won't make comments about its origins based on nothing more than the fact that the gangbangers where I grew up listened to it and that I've heard of gangster rap.' My response: don't be too hard on yourself, that association is strongly promoted today as it's a way for labels to make money from a certian subset of stupid people. Without any kind of interest in the genre, there's almost no reason for you to have learned better.
You're the bluntest person I've ever met.


I like you.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Fuck, fuck, fuck/Mutha, mutha fuck/Mutha, mutha fuck fuck/Mutha fuck, mutha fuck/Noinch, noinch, noinch

1-2-1-2-3-4/Noinch, noinch, noinch/Smokin' weed/Smokin' wiz/Doin' coke/Drinkin' beers/Drinkin' beers, beers, beers

Rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts/Who smokes the blunts/We smoke the blunts/Rollin' blunts and smokin...

Oh, let me get a nickle bag

15 bucks little man/Put that shit in my hand/If that money doesn't show/Then you owe me owe me owe

My jungle looooove/Oh-e-oh-e-oh/I think I wanna know ya, know ya"
avatar
reg42
Uncle Mint Floss

Posts : 3298
Leprechaun Gold : 36034
Pineapple Power : 30214
Join date : 2010-10-10
Age : 23
Alignment : Chaotically good looking
Location : The Deep South

http://www.last.fm/user/reg42

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Guest on Wed Jun 29, 2011 3:02 pm

sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
2. Indeed, LulzSec's actions are to be properly regarded as vandalism. That's why I would compare them to people who do graffiti.

They do far more than that, they steal personal information, reveal said information publicly, look at classified government files and so on, they are far more than petty vandals.
Furthermore, graffiti is damaging public property, what they are doing is more akin to vandalising someone's house, vandalising personal property is a far more serious offence.
Besides, I find even graffiti intolerable.

You are right, I've focussed on their defacing of websites to the exclusion of some of their other activities. Compromising personal info etc. do not fit well with the comparison to graffiti artists, but neither do they fit the comparison to gangbangers.

Also, FYI, drawing a tag on a private house is just as much graffiti as doing so on public property.
I wasn't the one whom compared them to gangbangers, Sik.

Anyway, yes, it is still graffiti but it is still a worse form of it, also, I was speaking in a more broad sense when I was said vandalizing.
Sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
3. You can't say something like "There is legislation against activities revolving around hacking for many reasons guys." and expect to be taken seriously. Laws that are there are there because some people, at some time, thought they were a good idea. Without expounding on the actual reasons, and explaining why they're valid, your sentence may as well not exist.

So, would you say that the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism and what have you are all there for no reason?
Do you not have respect for the law?

No, what in my post makes you think that? I merely stated that the argument 'It's illegal for a reason' carries no persuasive weight. It's illegal for a reason, but without discussing the validity of that reason, you've said nothing valuable. I think there are good reasons for the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism, and a lot of others, but I nevertheless take a critical approach to that law. To be fair, we are unevenly armed here, I studied law at uni and so have ben trained to view the law as not much more than a series of decisions by people. Once you've accepted that, having more respect for it than any other group's series of decisions is hard.
The law prevents degeneracy and immoral acts, there are those whom have no morality and the deterrent of punishment is the only thing that keeps them in line. If you can't have respect for that then fine but I do.

Also, you say "series of decisions" as if a bunch of people got together and said "just because", that is hardly the case.
In regards to cybercrime, surely you can see the damage that can result in stealing personal information and vandalizing websites, it should go without saying what the reasons behind those laws are.
sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
4. What Herald said was:
"I've lived around vandals and gangbangers all my life. I don't see how
they suddenly become better people if you let them ply their trade in
cyberspace."
There is no way that someone can intimidate in a similar or even analogous way online. There just isn't a threat of physical violence, and it isn't reasonable to be intimidated by threats like losing your data/personal info in the same way as it is with being stabbed, shot, or beaten. The type of threat is categorically and instinctively different, and to pretend that LulzSec constitute a similar threat to a gangbanger but online distorts the debate beyond any value.
Cyber-criminals can do serious damage to a person or group, ever here of cyber-bullying? Furthermore via the Internet you CAN find where someone lives and THEN assault and murder them, it has happened.

Irrelevant. I said "similar or analogous way". I don't think you'd make your comment if you noticed that.
Elaborate.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Sik on Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:59 am

Demented Teddy wrote:
sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
2. Indeed, LulzSec's actions are to be properly regarded as vandalism. That's why I would compare them to people who do graffiti.

They do far more than that, they steal personal information, reveal said information publicly, look at classified government files and so on, they are far more than petty vandals.
Furthermore, graffiti is damaging public property, what they are doing is more akin to vandalising someone's house, vandalising personal property is a far more serious offence.
Besides, I find even graffiti intolerable.

You are right, I've focussed on their defacing of websites to the exclusion of some of their other activities. Compromising personal info etc. do not fit well with the comparison to graffiti artists, but neither do they fit the comparison to gangbangers.

Also, FYI, drawing a tag on a private house is just as much graffiti as doing so on public property.
I wasn't the one whom compared them to gangbangers, Sik.

Anyway, yes, it is still graffiti but it is still a worse form of it, also, I was speaking in a more broad sense when I was said vandalizing.
Sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
3. You can't say something like "There is legislation against activities revolving around hacking for many reasons guys." and expect to be taken seriously. Laws that are there are there because some people, at some time, thought they were a good idea. Without expounding on the actual reasons, and explaining why they're valid, your sentence may as well not exist.

So, would you say that the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism and what have you are all there for no reason?
Do you not have respect for the law?

No, what in my post makes you think that? I merely stated that the argument 'It's illegal for a reason' carries no persuasive weight. It's illegal for a reason, but without discussing the validity of that reason, you've said nothing valuable. I think there are good reasons for the laws against murder, theft, assault, vandalism, and a lot of others, but I nevertheless take a critical approach to that law. To be fair, we are unevenly armed here, I studied law at uni and so have ben trained to view the law as not much more than a series of decisions by people. Once you've accepted that, having more respect for it than any other group's series of decisions is hard.
The law prevents degeneracy and immoral acts, there are those whom have no morality and the deterrent of punishment is the only thing that keeps them in line. If you can't have respect for that then fine but I do.

Also, you say "series of decisions" as if a bunch of people got together and said "just because", that is hardly the case.
In regards to cybercrime, surely you can see the damage that can result in stealing personal information and vandalizing websites, it should go without saying what the reasons behind those laws are.
sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
4. What Herald said was:
"I've lived around vandals and gangbangers all my life. I don't see how
they suddenly become better people if you let them ply their trade in
cyberspace."
There is no way that someone can intimidate in a similar or even analogous way online. There just isn't a threat of physical violence, and it isn't reasonable to be intimidated by threats like losing your data/personal info in the same way as it is with being stabbed, shot, or beaten. The type of threat is categorically and instinctively different, and to pretend that LulzSec constitute a similar threat to a gangbanger but online distorts the debate beyond any value.
Cyber-criminals can do serious damage to a person or group, ever here of cyber-bullying? Furthermore via the Internet you CAN find where someone lives and THEN assault and murder them, it has happened.

Irrelevant. I said "similar or analogous way". I don't think you'd make your comment if you noticed that.
Elaborate.

Sorry about the delay Teddy, I will reply to you, but I've been swamped at work last couple of days.
avatar
Sik
Swift and painful justice
Swift and painful justice

Posts : 551
Leprechaun Gold : 2849
Pineapple Power : 5
Join date : 2011-05-20
Age : 29
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Guest on Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:50 pm

That is no problem, work is the priority after all.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Dead Herald on Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:03 am

Mmm, cock!

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
<br>

Dead Herald
I hate Obama

Posts : 4987
Leprechaun Gold : 9150
Pineapple Power : 1652
Join date : 2010-12-19
Age : 1017
Location : People's Republik of Kalifornia.

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Sik on Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:12 pm

Demented Teddy wrote:I wasn't the one whom compared them to gangbangers, Sik.

Anyway, yes, it is still graffiti but it is still a worse form of it, also, I was speaking in a more broad sense when I was said vandalizing.

I know you weren't, but my comments were based around the appropriateness of that as an analogy. As for graffiti, it depends on what you mean by 'worse'. In my jurisdiction there is no distinction, legally. You may be merely expressing your own opinion though as to which is more blameworthy, and if that is the case, then to a large extent I agree with you.

Demented Teddy wrote:
The law prevents degeneracy and immoral acts, there are those whom have no morality and the deterrent of punishment is the only thing that keeps them in line. If you can't have respect for that then fine but I do.

Also, you say "series of decisions" as if a bunch of people got together and said "just because", that is hardly the case.
In regards to cybercrime, surely you can see the damage that can result in stealing personal information and vandalizing websites, it should go without saying what the reasons behind those laws are.

Law doesn't prevent degeneracy or indeed immoral acts. If it did, we either wouldn't have law or we wouldn't have immoral acts. Since we have both, this statement is prima facie untrue. It's likely you meant that the law is supposed to do these things, where again I would have to disagree with you. Law's role in legislating morality is actually very limited. The overwhelming majority of laws have nothing to do with morality or degeneracy, but rather are ways in which members of society can regulate their relationships. It is easier to understand the law if you see it as incentivising and disincentivising certain behaviours. Stealing is undesirable in our society as it reduces people's personal security, reducing trade, and therefore reducing growth. This is why the law has penalties against it, making it less attractive an option. That many people would also say that it is immoral to steal is neither here nor there on this question, the law is about efficiency.

If you think that the reasons behind a law 'go without saying' then you are wilfully deciding not to debate, and are hiding behind the fact that it is illegal to pretend that it is justified. Quick example: in the UK, speeding limits were set in the 1970s with a temporary top national speed limit of 70mph, since then, the safety of vehicles and quality of roads has improved dramatically (by a large factor) and yet this 'temporary' speed limit has not been reviewed. Why we might want a top speed limit goes without saying, but that it should be 70 requires some justification, and without considering that justification the conversation is about nothing except one person repeatedly bleating 'it's illegal to drive at 80 therefore it is wrong!'.

Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
Demented Teddy wrote:
Sik wrote:
4. What Herald said was:
"I've lived around vandals and gangbangers all my life. I don't see how
they suddenly become better people if you let them ply their trade in
cyberspace."
There is no way that someone can intimidate in a similar or even analogous way online. There just isn't a threat of physical violence, and it isn't reasonable to be intimidated by threats like losing your data/personal info in the same way as it is with being stabbed, shot, or beaten. The type of threat is categorically and instinctively different, and to pretend that LulzSec constitute a similar threat to a gangbanger but online distorts the debate beyond any value.
Cyber-criminals can do serious damage to a person or group, ever here of cyber-bullying? Furthermore via the Internet you CAN find where someone lives and THEN assault and murder them, it has happened.

Irrelevant. I said "similar or analogous way". I don't think you'd make your comment if you noticed that.
Elaborate.

When you walk past a gangbanger, you fear for your immediate physical safety because he might shoot or stab you right there (not what I think they would do, but nevertheless a reasonable fear). When you go on the internet, this isn't possible short of someone telling you they're in or around your house, which is not at all what LulzSec are about. Even the bullying example doesn't begin to match up with the 'immediate physical danger' of walking past open criminals.
avatar
Sik
Swift and painful justice
Swift and painful justice

Posts : 551
Leprechaun Gold : 2849
Pineapple Power : 5
Join date : 2011-05-20
Age : 29
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Pararaptor on Wed Jul 06, 2011 4:12 am

So yeah, Teddy kinda left.
avatar
Pararaptor
10 Foot Tall Walking Avocado

Posts : 7823
Leprechaun Gold : 63802
Pineapple Power : 50698
Join date : 2010-10-10

http://steamcommunity.com/id/pararaptor

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by MilkyFresh on Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:08 pm

You won anyway

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
WHY MONKEY, WHY?
No one loves a prick,
No one loves a coffee sniffing motherfucker.
avatar
MilkyFresh
Wizard of Piss

Posts : 9787
Leprechaun Gold : 38705
Pineapple Power : 22738
Join date : 2010-10-26
Age : 23
Alignment : Arseheart
Location : Australia

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Sik on Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:15 am

TECHNICAL KNOCK OUT.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
avatar
Sik
Swift and painful justice
Swift and painful justice

Posts : 551
Leprechaun Gold : 2849
Pineapple Power : 5
Join date : 2011-05-20
Age : 29
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Re: SOMEONE'S getting cock

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 10 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum