(ิ_ิ)-̾ Intellectuals [Pompous Blowhards] (196)

157 Name: ( ˃ ヮ˂) : 1993-09-5379 01:29

>>155
Your main point seems to be that by virtue of >>154's pompous, flawed method of belittling all foregoing posters, you have contradicted his post entirely. However, this is not his thread, as was made clear from the original statement. Therefore your argument is null and void. Q(uantum)E(electrically)D(ispwned).

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...
Verification: