Zeally said: My old roommate was a drug dealer, which led me to hanging out with some sketchy people lol. I mean my roommate was pretty chill but some of the people he was acquainted with were pretty skettttch Lol I feel you. Back in high school I was friends with a few druggies and the people they were involved with scared the shit out of me. |
Drunk-fu said: It's actually not like that. As long as you're intelligent, you can disagree as much as you want without being shunned. There's not much ass-licking at all; maybe even less than the average MAL club.To me, this club appears to be a bunch of casual, not really anime fan people licking eachothers ass on a regular basis. And if you don't join the human centipede, you'll be banished for eternity. |
| Give names, OP. edit: ah nvm, just saw the link. So, what's the minimum required IQ? |
SapewlothMay 1, 2015 4:12 PM
| Proud founder of The Official Anti-Ging Freecss Fan Club Join now! Kellhus said: GuusWayne said: there is a limit to the suspension of disbelief And it's the fan that did it. Not the smoking porn reading rubik cube genius rape ape with a magic boat. |
Solipsistic said: Drunk-fu said: It's actually not like that. As long as you're intelligent, you can disagree as much as you want without being shunned. There's not much ass-licking at all; maybe even less than the average MAL club.To me, this club appears to be a bunch of casual, not really anime fan people licking eachothers ass on a regular basis. And if you don't join the human centipede, you'll be banished for eternity. It was just a first impression, reading their forum that has been linked earlyer. Im not really into this club thing, i joined one when i had a relevant question, and another to skip searching for non existent subs for hours (subs fkin where?!). |
GangstaPriest said: There is none. You just have to write a well-thought out ~200 words explaining why you want to join.Give names, OP. edit: ah nvm, just saw the link. So, what's the minimum required IQ? |
cause said: We are a club full of bullies and assholes.Battlechili1 said: I strongly and respectfully disagree with your opinion. But I have no intention of trying to argue over this.Chat club isn't elitist or rude though. No one actually has a problem as long as you don't act like a complete fool there. They're just a fun talking club for people to hang out and talk about things. |
Comic_Sans said: Joining MAL was a mistake |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| show me your friends and i'll tell you who you are. |
cause said: Chat Club. damastah said: This club being mentioned in the OP is making me curious. Anyway, I agree on some people being too elitist and having the herd mentality when claiming to be part of a group with stellar intellect. http://myanimelist.net/clubs.php?cid=64507 You just had to bring it out in the open did you? |
 |
xEmptiness said: damastah said: You just had to bring it out in the open did you? I honestly didn't know people would stalk my list :[ I only shared the link with a few people in the past... Tell that to cause lol. Stalking is baaaaaaaaaaaad~   |
|
damastah said: Tell that to cause lol. Stalking is baaaaaaaaaaaad~ I was part of the club before. I know full well what Auto is talking about. Plus it's not hard to tell. Maybe you're just naive? Most people here knew exactly who was being talking about. |
cause said: damastah said: Tell that to cause lol. Stalking is baaaaaaaaaaaad~ I was part of the club before. I know full well what Auto is talking about. Plus it's not hard to tell. Maybe you're just naive? I am what you want me to be. I can be naive or perceptive. Young or old. Red or blue. Your pick, cause-san. |
|
damastah said: cause said: I was part of the club before. I know full well what Auto is talking about. Plus it's not hard to tell. Maybe you're just naive? I am what you want me to be. I can be naive or perceptive. Young or old. Red or blue. Your pick, cause-san. You are beautiful. |
xEmptiness said: cause said: I was part of the club before. I know full well what Auto is talking about. Plus it's not hard to tell. You ragequit after we gave you a recommendation to pursue higher education since we honestly thought it was the right thing. >.> Interesting story there. cause said: You are beautiful. You are the golden butterfly~ |
|
xEmptiness said: cause said: I was part of the club before. I know full well what Auto is talking about. Plus it's not hard to tell. You ragequit after we gave you a recommendation to pursue higher education since we honestly thought it was the right thing. >.> I quit the club about a month after that because of the amount of elitism being expressed on most discussions. I'm a very humble person. It wasn't about whether I was right or wrong, nor about the discussion itself since Rev was the one who asked me about my education in the first place. It was more about the elitism. The pompous expressions. Hell, you still are doing it. Looking down on others because of your own self conceived "better than you" perception. I don't enjoy people like that. Those types of people use some better than average personal trait and make it their pinnacle of existence. Yes, you may be smarter and more educationally gifted, but by no means does that give you the right to look down on others. That's why I left. Unlike Auto though, I had no need to make a big deal about it though, because like I said, I'm very humble. |
| Communities, in general, and especially online, have no power over anyone until they give it to them, which is why it's almost to get involved with the wrong communities. Simply reclaim your power and move on. I can understand that some people may have invested disproportionate time into someone else' pet project, but that doesn't matter as long as you see it as self-fulfillment rather than self-sacrifice. Whenever you make a community around a specific train of thought or value or inclination, though, it's almost impossible to avoid the stale power structure that's implicit even if you actively try to avoid it. That's why I, who had and still have no qualms taking someone down devastatingly, whether in debate or just trash talking, made the chat club to be unmoderated--where I will never or rarely use as my soap box, and anyone who does would be subject to the jokes of the majority. What this doesn't solve, I admit, is herd behavior; however, herd behavior is neither solved through elitist clubs (which are much worse), but by maintaining diversity. It is unfortunate that some people get intimidated by their fellow MAL users, but to call an open microcosm within MAL as "elitist" is very ironic, cause. The club was never meant to be one for superior intellect. If that was my intent, my club would only have two tiers: me, and everyone else. While some implicit social order might have settled in, as it happens in any community that lasts for awhile, none of that structure is encased and institutionalized. This property of it allows people to say whatever they want: chaos, which is the opposite of elitism. If you want to experience elitism, cause, have a chat with Nidhoeggr in his "The Anime Uber-Elitist Club" (the club is not elitist, but he is), or our favorite perennial xEmptiness in his " Danebenreden", or just start a chat with me about some stupid topic that pisses everyone off, like philosophy, religion, or politics. I am very rude, and not polite at all, when I encounter stupid shit. As for Autocrat, as long as you don't try to validate yourself and others through these "intellectual" cliques, nothing like this could ever happen. Because if you aren't invested in an argument, you can just ad hominem some faggot and move on. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Kek, just look at this, look at this self-righteousness. @katsucats, they're actually talking about Daneb club. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
katsucats said: I have no qualms with the entirety of your chat club. And I generally like most of the people there, as well as you. I know exactly what your intentions are. And I agree with them. But there have been times your club have been just as bad as places like Chang and Dan whatever-the-fuck-its-called. Group mentality. So as per your club guidelines, I was offended by some things and turned my computer, and the club off itself. |
| Oh, my bad. It seems Cause was on CC AND Daneb. I agree though, herd mentality is omnipresent on CC. So much yuetsu. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: So much yuetsu. That's true. It's the only club giving off the optimal yuetsu amount needed to last you for a while here on MAL. |
|
Immahnoob said: I know what Autocrat is talking about. I'm just responding to something on the first page, and putting this whole issue in context. Shit like the Daneb is pretty much anti-thesis to what I'm about, so I'll never get involved in the "wrong" club (although I have no animosity against that club).@katsucats, they're actually talking about Daneb club. (ninja'd) |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
xEmptiness said: How to be in both? They're literally the antithesis of each other. By the power vested in invites/join club links. |
|
xEmptiness said: Immahnoob said: Oh, my bad. It seems Cause was on CC AND Daneb. I agree though, herd mentality is omnipresent on CC. You have Dane, the individualist community where people put themselves in the center and disagree with others about everything. You have CC, the collective community where people think as a collective and agree with others about everything. How to be in both? They're literally the antithesis of each other. You were in both. Can't you answer your own question? |
xEmptiness said: Are you in mirror world? Haha.You have Dane, the individualist community where people put themselves in the center and disagree with others about everything. You have CC, the collective community where people think as a collective and agree with others about everything. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Well good on you for leaving behind communities which you considered toxic, Autocrat. Sometimes people don't realize just how elitist they appear. |
| At one point in my life I only hung out with drug addicts and my boyfriend at the time who said he could get off to breaking my arm. So...uh, yeah. |
Swiggy said: Sometimes people don't realize just how elitist they appear. That, or they're fully aware and they try to justify or correct other people's perception of them being elitist. |
|
Jaftond said: At one point in my life I only hung out with drug addicts and my boyfriend at the time who said he could get off to breaking my arm. So...uh, yeah. He got horny to the thought of breaking your arm? |
cause said: Jaftond said: At one point in my life I only hung out with drug addicts and my boyfriend at the time who said he could get off to breaking my arm. So...uh, yeah. He got horny to the thought of breaking your arm? Yep. Among other things. |
xEmptiness said: A middle ground is better. Although what I meant on "Cause was on" was meant as "He's talking about", because in my mind I had "What you on about?" when I wrote the reply.Immahnoob said: Oh, my bad. It seems Cause was on CC AND Daneb. I agree though, herd mentality is omnipresent on CC. You have Dane, the individualist community where people put themselves in the center and disagree with others about everything. You have CC, the collective community where people think as a collective and agree with others about everything. How to be in both? They're literally the antithesis of each other. So English failure. Anyway, both CC and Daneb are failures for me, but I'd still stick to CC. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Without tone to distinguish between seriousness and playfulness, all you have to go on is phrasing and context. Seeing as it has been shown to everyone I may as well point out that the 'IQ tier' list is trash. It's a pointless enough endeavour to try to divide people into ranks based on how well they discuss topics, but at least that isn't pretending to be anything other than an individual's pet project of quantifying eloquence in phrasing and argumentation. All you have to go off of when trying to rank user I.Q. is either a further abstraction of that subjective attempt at quantification or faith that each user can and will take time out of their day to find and report their I.Q. accurately, which they haven't. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
| I know a place where a guy will brag about watching Gintama, brings it up fourty times a day, calls everyone a casual if they watch anime that he doesn't. Its on XBL in party chat. I like him, but the party can be cringe. |
 |
xEmptiness said: I don't hold any personal grudges, actually. I made it clear on a couple of ocassions that I didn't dislike everyone, and some members have been in contact with me since, of which I told them I was wanting to remain in contact. The user who we are on about has a toxic personality, in my opinion, and I find the status they were granted in the club from the get-go, and on your ranking list, to undermine the sincerity of the club. The rest of the admins weren't involved too much, either, and it seemed like more of a case where people were acknowledged based on your personal preferences and not their apparent ability. This is where things got a bit elitist. You talked about the club on the forums from a high horse, isolating yourself from the users on the main forum more and more - something you openly stated you wished to do. We were grouped in with this, and the club was already so far away from its target image, with disdain from the board, inactivity on MAL and internal conflict, that we were being reduced in the same stroke. You acted like it was your club, and spoke for us with only your own ideas in mind, only serving to drag us into a pit of elitist isolation that not everyone desired. And even the club's policies of how to admit users into the circle was disregarded on numerous ocassions, myself being one example, funnily enough. That said, what solip said earlier was true, too. At times the discussions did show promise. Some of the members who cared to post were reasonable enough to hold an interesting discussion. These were so few and far between, though. You spammed the Skype chat over the last few days with that magic nonsense, and no other topic was really given a chance. I for one don't think you were fit enough to lead this group in the first place. The management was a shambles and your actions only made it worse. Daconator left for the reasons he stated. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a shame his discussion club didn't work out. Done right, I think the idea has the potential to bring together intelligent posters and strong characters. I'm still hopeful the idea can be picked up again and work out. |
| I wonder if Autocrat will notice something else. For now, it's pretty accurate. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| We don't all agree on who are intelligent and what intelligence is, so the idea of a club of intelligent users has one of two possibilities: 1. It adopts one user's idea of intelligence, and becomes elitist and arbitrary. 2. It accepts all user's ideas of intelligence, and becomes diluted and irrelevant. There can be no middle ground that is consistent. If you accept some members' ideas but not others based on some arbitrary metric, that deflates to #1. If you open it up, it leads to a slippery slope and deflates to #2. If either of these eventualities are undesirable, the best way to encourage intelligent discussions does not depend on gathering intelligent users. There are many better metrics (and other posters have noticed the parallel in the real world), such as interest and participation. It seems, now, that most people (besides maybe Claire) on xEmptiness' lists think his lists are trash. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| Kek, I'd have to change my opinion, you might be a bit more dense than Autocrat. I wonder what will Autocrat say. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
xEmptiness said: So how was it, positive or not?katsucats said: It seems, now, that most people (besides maybe Claire) on xEmptiness' lists think his lists are trash. Everyone in the first 3 tiers have given me feedback on the list. I won't divulge that information publicly though. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| I can learn from any type of community, so in my kind of thinking there is no wrong community, I just have to adapt and learn some more about things (in the internet at least) Although I do understand the feeling of annoyance from the people around you, I just suck it up and observe and learn some more. It's kind of a optimistic and masochistic way of thinking, I know. |
 |
katsucats said: We don't all agree on who are intelligent and what intelligence is, so the idea of a club of intelligent users has one of two possibilities: 1. It adopts one user's idea of intelligence, and becomes elitist and arbitrary. 2. It accepts all user's ideas of intelligence, and becomes diluted and irrelevant. There can be no middle ground that is consistent. If you accept some members' ideas but not others based on some arbitrary metric, that deflates to #1. If you open it up, it leads to a slippery slope and deflates to #2. If either of these eventualities are undesirable, the best way to encourage intelligent discussions does not depend on gathering intelligent users. There are many better metrics (and other posters have noticed the parallel in the real world), such as interest and participation. It seems, now, that most people (besides maybe Claire) on xEmptiness' lists think his lists are trash. A club based on intelligent users wouldn't have to exclusively intelligent in order to meet its goals, so that middle ground you just tried to use a dichotomy (a false dichotomy of 'one' or 'all') to erase from existence is still there. Even if a handful of less intelligent users were to get in, or if a handful of intelligent users didn't, the very concept of intelligence being valued would in and of itself help to foster more intelligent discussion, as less intelligent users 'prove that they really are intelligent': it's conceptually sound. A real problem is that it's a fragment of an already small community and based on implicitly exclusionary principles, which is bad for numbers. As for the lists, they have nothing to do with the club. I think one is harmless trash and the other is an interesting opinion. Finally, intelligence can (at least in theory) be objectively measured for a given environment, so discussing it as though it's entirely subjective is misleading. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
xEmptiness said: Immahnoob said: So how was it, positive or not? > 50% positive. Remember kids, 50% each between two opposing choices, isn't a conclusive result if you want to determine which of the two was prevalent. |
|
xEmptiness said: damastah said: Remember kids, 50% each between two opposing choices, isn't a conclusive result if you want to determine which of the two was prevalent. Why does it matter when the first line in that thread is literally "reflects my opinion only"? I've even been PMed by people asking why some are getting outraged over something with such an obvious disclaimer. Because Immahnoob's question in this current conversation was: "So how was it, positive or not?". 50% positive means the other 50% were negative. Meaning, the question wasn't really answered on whether "positive or not". Lol at the PMs though, more yuetsu in the end. |
|
xEmptiness said: damastah said: Because Immahnoob's question in this current conversation was: "So how was it, positive or not?". 50% positive means the other 50% were negative. Meaning, the question wasn't really answered on whether "positive or not". Lol at the PMs though, more yuetsu in the end. Positive on a population level means > 50% right? Half is still half, then again I suck at statistics so you may have a point lol. |
|
icirate said: It is not a false dichotomy for reasons I have already explained, which you've quoted. And I have not tried to "erase" the Danebedridden (sp?) from existence, nor do I have the mod powers to.katsucats said: A club based on intelligent users wouldn't have to exclusively intelligent in order to meet its goals, so that middle ground you just tried to use a dichotomy (a false dichotomy of 'one' or 'all') to erase from existence is still there. We don't all agree on who are intelligent and what intelligence is, so the idea of a club of intelligent users has one of two possibilities: 1. It adopts one user's idea of intelligence, and becomes elitist and arbitrary. 2. It accepts all user's ideas of intelligence, and becomes diluted and irrelevant. There can be no middle ground that is consistent. If you accept some members' ideas but not others based on some arbitrary metric, that deflates to #1. If you open it up, it leads to a slippery slope and deflates to #2. If either of these eventualities are undesirable, the best way to encourage intelligent discussions does not depend on gathering intelligent users. There are many better metrics (and other posters have noticed the parallel in the real world), such as interest and participation. It seems, now, that most people (besides maybe Claire) on xEmptiness' lists think his lists are trash. icirate said: It relies on one or several members conception of intelligence, which is a controversial topic in itself. There is no scientific consensus on what intelligence exactly constitutes, how it scales in later life, not to mention that it is impossible to actually gauge intelligence in the way that it is academically defined by MAL forum posts.Even if a handful of less intelligent users were to get in, or if a handful of intelligent users didn't, the very concept of intelligence being valued would in and of itself help to foster more intelligent discussion, as less intelligent users 'prove that they really are intelligent': it's conceptually sound. icirate said: Studies on intelligence have primarily focused on children and how much effect early-age intelligence has in later life. SAT tests could model intelligence, but become ineffective as a measure for those taking it after high school. The only IQ tests that exist involve identifying patterns, which is a test that could be learned, and is questionable how much connection that has to do with developing consistent world views, which is more important in MAL discussions than highly abstract thinking.Finally, intelligence can (at least in theory) be objectively measured for a given environment, so discussing it as though it's entirely subjective is misleading. I have never said here that intelligence is entirely subjective, but it's clear to anyone honest that there are problems with its application. The problem of intelligence isn't whether it's subjective or objective (what would "subjective intelligence" mean anyway?), but how it's defined, how much influence it has in life, whether it's fixed or dynamic, and how it's gauged. The suggestion that because intelligence has been demonstrated in some studies, any number of assumptions about it must be true is mistaken. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: Within the context of discussing in itself, there is a brand of intelligence that is desired and consistently validates itself. The ability to comprehend the posts of others, the social skills to read implicitly and act accordingly to ensure an amicable and successful debate and the knowledge to pose strong and productive arguments. Then there's the needed managerial intelligence to maintain and progress the club, and the social skills that come with that. In this sense it is not so much arbitrary, but rather essential relative to the context. It becomes hard when new users want admission as there is no significant prior knowledge of their abilities that members can democratically agree on. But this is another reason why they must be exclusive in terms of membership. So long as there's a way to not discourage prospective members with elitism, then only serious members dedicated to the the principles of constructively debating should be admitted. Lest the idea fall apart because of a mix in conviction to take the club seriously. My policy would be to admit anybody willing to respect the idea of a constructive discussion, regardless of their apparent ability. I believe members can learn from each other with harmony between the users and a collectively clear idea on what the club is about. Also, I believe everyone has something to teach everyone else. This is where mine and xEmptiness's ideas on a discussion club conflict. xEmptiness said: We disagree on what an ideal discussion club is, and so there's not much else to talk about. I'm not going to repetitively contradict you and bring ill will or a bad name to the club I was a part of. Good luck with the club, seriously. One more thing, for the rest of the users on MAL, don't think too badly of the club. The sense of elitism and attitudes of some members can come off badly, but practically everybody in that club are good and nice people when you talk with them. I had a lot of fun there. But yeah, good luck. |
| Dane never had a leader and was a democracy, yet Rev booted people as she pleased much to the chagrin of other users - sounds legit :p |
  Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet |
Autocrat said: What brand? Wal-mart of Coca-cola? Intelligence doesn't validate itself, it is not a subject. People validate intelligence for the values it brings to whatever they're trying to do. It's normative, not positive. The problem here is MAL is not at all homogeneous, and people, even within you guys' arbitrarily determined "intelligent" users, have different ideas of what is desired. Some of the people who xEmptiness considers "intelligent", I consider dumb as rocks.katsucats said: Within the context of discussing in itself, there is a brand of intelligence that is desired and consistently validates itself. Autocrat said: I hate to resort to cliche, but it's entirely relevant here: "That's subjective." Whether an argument is considered strong or productive depends on it falling within a band of variance not too far from the opposition, such that key ideas could be agreed upon to allow for the difference. When the magnitude of difference is too large, then any argument appears weak. It is nearly impossible in the forum format to bridge those differences, no one has the time.The ability to comprehend the posts of others, the social skills to read implicitly and act accordingly to ensure an amicable and successful debate and the knowledge to pose strong and productive arguments. Autocrat said: You need managing skills to prod along such a club. You're using the word "intelligence" too loosely. It is hard to correlate what scientists know about intelligence with managing skills. Having the ability to do something does not necessarily make it a function of intelligence.Then there's the needed managerial intelligence to maintain and progress the club, and the social skills that come with that. Autocrat said: You might successfully argue that intelligence is essential to the pursuit of creating a club, but it is still arbitrary what intelligence is, especially since you are not requiring everyone on MAL to take a MENSA test.In this sense it is not so much arbitrary, but rather essential relative to the context. Autocrat said: And another reason why elitism occurs.It becomes hard when new users want admission as there is no significant prior knowledge of their abilities that members can democratically agree on. But this is another reason why they must be exclusive in terms of membership. Autocrat said: This is almost contradictory.So long as there's a way to not discourage prospective members with elitism, then only serious members dedicated to the the principles of constructively debating should be admitted. Autocrat said: Fair enough, but you should also dispense with the illusion that being willing to respect constructive discussion has anything to do with intelligence.Lest the idea fall apart because of a mix in conviction to take the club seriously. My policy would be to admit anybody willing to respect the idea of a constructive discussion, regardless of their apparent ability. I believe members can learn from each other with harmony between the users and a collectively clear idea on what the club is about. Also, I believe everyone has something to teach everyone else. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
xEmptiness said: Immahnoob said: So how was it, positive or not? > 50% positive. And corrections: 1 person in the first 3 tiers didn't give feedback. What does "positive" actually mean here? Just because I said your list was mostly accurate doesn't mean I support the existence of the list. It only exists to foster resentment between users. It's precisely as Katsucats have said - I think the list deserves to be in the trash, and I'm sure most of the people on the lists think so too. |
xEmptiness said: You've already told me that before >.> I'm being serious though, why does the tier list exist when the first rule of Danebenreden is "Reinforce meaningful and respectful communication between members"? |
Autocrat said: Also, I believe everyone has something to teach everyone else. We all have our moments of unblemished idealism. Everything else you said was well reasoned. Unblemished by reality, that is. katsucats said: It is not a false dichotomy for reasons I have already explained, which you've quoted. And I have not tried to "erase" the Danebedridden (sp?) from existence, nor do I have the mod powers to.. The middle ground between the extremes of 'one' and 'all' was what I was implying you were 'erasing from existence'. katsucats said: We don't all agree on who are intelligent and what intelligence is, so the idea of a club of intelligent users has one of two possibilities: 1. It adopts one user's idea of intelligence, and becomes elitist and arbitrary. 2. It accepts all user's ideas of intelligence, and becomes diluted and irrelevant. There can be no middle ground that is consistent. If you accept some members' ideas but not others based on some arbitrary metric, that deflates to #1. A democracy might tend towards an oligarchy or aristocracy over time, but that alone surely doesn't make it a dumb thing to pursue in the first place. Similarly, it should be enough that there's some vague definition that a good portion of the people involved can agree on. Autocrat has already in this thread provided one that's good enough for the purpose. Besides, the very concept of an exclusive club based on any criteria is always going to come across as elitist to some. There's no winning in that regard. As xE has already pointed out, it's a ridiculously easy club to get into yet it's still being framed as elitist. There's no point worrying about that. katsucats said: If you open it up, it leads to a slippery slope and deflates to #2. That's an easily reversible problem, given how clubs work. Present a strong case for trimming the fat. Come to an agreement. Boot out the offending users. |
| Now you're wondering if there's white text in any of my other posts. Over there, I'm everywhere. I know that. |
More topics from this board
» Is MAL dead? ( 1 2 3 )-Mayhem- - Nov 30, 2022 |
115 |
by Rndmguypassingby
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» JokesZettaiken - Jun 6 |
9 |
by Rndmguypassingby
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» If you could time travel and teleport where and when would you go? ( 1 2 )Paladin23 - Jan 25 |
69 |
by Rndmguypassingby
»»
8 minutes ago |
|
» What anime or anime episodes give you a nostalgic summer feeling?heyaheya - Jun 6 |
20 |
by MalchikRepaid
»»
9 minutes ago |
|
» why spelling of english language is so hard? its the only language that has spelling competition?deg - Jun 7 |
35 |
by Kikugi
»»
16 minutes ago |