Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ForumWarrior
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.10.11 23:07:00 -
[1]
Ref: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1397849&page=1
I noticed scams here seem to be on a temporary lull since T4U, and wondered where they went.
Then I see a classic MD scam over in the sales forum.
Alt posting for the first time: Check Asking for blind trust with no collat: Check Offering unrealistic payouts vs investment: Check
So, is the era of the MD scam passed, or are they just temporarily migrating to lottos while things cool off here?
--- ôThere is a powerful tension in our relationship to technology. We are excited by egalitarianism and anonymity, but we constantly fight for our identity.ö |
mechtech
SRS Industries SRS.
|
Posted - 2010.10.11 23:16:00 -
[2]
I don't think so. That's just a Blink! ripoff.
Most of the big lottos are fully secured using Chribba's lotto program, and the ones that aren't secured (like Blink!) took some serious time to develop. I always assumed the small lottos from no-names are totally rigged though, there's no reason to assume otherwise.
|
ForumWarrior
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.10.11 23:26:00 -
[3]
Well, that would be my point. Blink is making ISK hand over fist, but is run by someone who's earned a reputation as trustworthy. It's big, but it's run by a "big name."
This one's trying to be the same, but run by a first-time alt.
It's secured by no-one. Hell, it's not even tied to whatever main belongs to that char.
Basically - has Blink paved the way for "me-too" scams in lotto format, now that MD is a bit hot for the "me-too" scams?
There's a lot of red-tape MD has in place (and previous styles of lotto had in place) to mitigate scam risk, that this style of lotto is fairly immune to.
--- ôThere is a powerful tension in our relationship to technology. We are excited by egalitarianism and anonymity, but we constantly fight for our identity.ö |
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.11 23:28:00 -
[4]
People have been failscamming lottos for a good while now, ever since they really took off a few months ago. However, I think you are correct that a noticeable portion of **** scamming has migrated from here to there, just that it's not as recent a phenomenon as you're suggesting.
|
ForumWarrior
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.10.11 23:32:00 -
[5]
Fair. I'm not a regular to the sales forums, or a gambler by habit, so I hadn't noticed the trend until I stumbled on that thread.
So, seeing as he's claiming 610m isk deposited in the first day, how realistic is that for this scam migration?
And, more importantly: Can we just unload all the MD scammers to the lotto format? :D
--- ôThere is a powerful tension in our relationship to technology. We are excited by egalitarianism and anonymity, but we constantly fight for our identity.ö |
Rasz Lin
Caldari Racketeers
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 00:04:00 -
[6]
ummm every lottery is a scam, its basically a tax on stupid
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 00:32:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Rasz Lin ummm every lottery is a scam, its basically a tax on stupid
I love when people hear some incomplete little factoid that makes them think they're smarter than everyone else.
Would you spend a penny for a 1 in 10,001 chance to win 100 dollars? I would. Does that make me stupid? No, it just means i have a slightly higher risk tolerance at values i think are insignificant. I'm sure you do all manner of things everyday that involve a greater than par risk tolerance. Alternatively, are people who purchase insurance idiots for having a lower than par risk tolerance? The reasoning is exactly the same.
Maybe you are smarter than everyone else, but it's definitely not because you don't play lottos.
|
Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente League of Gentlemen Warped Aggression
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 02:06:00 -
[8]
I wonder if the lotto scams are why I'm having so much trouble selling mine...
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Gabriel Virtus
hirr
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 02:06:00 -
[9]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: Rasz Lin ummm every lottery is a scam, its basically a tax on stupid
I love when people hear some incomplete little factoid that makes them think they're smarter than everyone else.
Would you spend a penny for a 1 in 10,001 chance to win 100 dollars? I would. Does that make me stupid? No, it just means i have a slightly higher risk tolerance at values i think are insignificant. I'm sure you do all manner of things everyday that involve a greater than par risk tolerance. Alternatively, are people who purchase insurance idiots for having a lower than par risk tolerance? The reasoning is exactly the same.
Maybe you are smarter than everyone else, but it's definitely not because you don't play lottos.
In your rush to flame, did you stop to consider that he might have had some combination for calling it stupid. You argument entirely misses the possibility that he calls them stupid because he thinks that are unfair scams. You are assuming that they are not scams or are at the very list, completely fair.
Even without scamming, lotteries are just a great way of inflating sale price.
-GV
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 02:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Gabriel Virtus In your rush to flame, did you stop to consider that he might have had some combination for calling it stupid. You argument entirely misses the possibility that he calls them stupid because he thinks that are unfair scams. You are assuming that they are not scams or are at the very list, completely fair.
Even without scamming, lotteries are just a great way of inflating sale price.
-GV
Nonresponsive. Try again maybe? I cant be bothered to try and properly formulate your arguments for you.
|
|
Gabriel Virtus
hirr
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 02:28:00 -
[11]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: Gabriel Virtus In your rush to flame, did you stop to consider that he might have had some combination for calling it stupid. You argument entirely misses the possibility that he calls them stupid because he thinks that are unfair scams. You are assuming that they are not scams or are at the very list, completely fair.
Even without scamming, lotteries are just a great way of inflating sale price.
-GV
Nonresponsive. Try again maybe? I cant be bothered to try and properly formulate your arguments for you.
Or bothered to read the post I guess, lol. Thinking before writing helps I think.
-GV
|
Misty McGinnity
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 05:28:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Misty McGinnity on 12/10/2010 05:30:28
Originally by: Dethmourne Silvermane bla bla bla.
Your having trouble selling yours coz every man & his dog is in the 'lotto trade', theres more lotto tickets available than active players.
Hell you can't even find a good deal on the sell order forums now coz its flooded with lotto's
Quote: Sticky: Sell Order Rules and Resources ThreadCCP Zymurgist1793932010.02.05 05:19:00 by: Casiella Truza Sticky: [Info] Shops and Services List Pages: 1 2 3Vrikaan Phoenix6146262010.10.09 13:29:00 by: Riley Moore WTS Centii A-type and other faction armor modsLucas411232010.10.12 05:21:00 by: Das Governator [Lottery] Win an Erebus Titan! (DARK27) 75% sold Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (20)Darknesss575169212010.10.12 05:16:00 by: Sadis Kale [Store] Sentinum Research BPC Store. !Cheap Ships Copies! 09/10Riley Moore256952010.10.12 04:54:00 by: Riley Moore [Store] Sentinum Research BPO Store. Updated 10/10 Pages: 1 2 3Riley Moore7430322010.10.12 04:53:00 by: Riley Moore Lotto49's ~76~ The Ultimate Ultimate 21!(OPEN)(57% SOLD) Pages: 1 2Lotto49353722010.10.12 04:52:00 by: Mythos Photis SOMER.blink - Now blinking for an **UTU** Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (15)Somerset Mahm449130522010.10.12 04:50:00 by: leJaro [INFO] Shops and Services List Mk.IV !Post your shops and Services! Pages: 1 2Riley Moore383522010.10.12 04:49:00 by: Riley Moore [WTS] Phoneix/Rev Dreads + Thany (Price Lowered)Fitz VonHeise2832010.10.12 04:42:00 by: Fitz VonHeise [Lotto] UWIN.'s - Industrial Gallore [66.5% Sold] Pages: 1 2Kyra Mercury3819692010.10.12 04:32:00 by: gettintoit [Blake Lotto] *Win a Freki or 22b Isk* (Chribba Secured)552/1050 Pages: 1 2 3 4Blake Lotto10137362010.10.12 04:29:00 by: Thorvik Faction/Deadspace mods/ships (navy domi, vindicator, gila)firewalker220134322010.10.12 04:24:00 by: firewalker220 [Service] Alliance/Corporation creation and update. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Pheobe McIntyre23971662010.10.12 04:09:00 by: Pheobe McIntyre [SERVICE]High Sec POS Construction, Corp 4 sale, FW and FREE 3RD PARTY Pages: 1 2 3 4 5GENERAL CONSTANTINO13051752010.10.12 04:04:00 by: GENERAL CONSTANTINO WTS - Armor TenguLumii0232010.10.12 04:03:00 by: Lumii WTS Uninhabited Class 1 Wormhole with many sitesxenodia0112010.10.12 03:46:00 by: xenodia WTS - Battleship BPOs - Prices lowered, now at or near NPC pricesParaiyan62982010.10.12 03:43:00 by: Paraiyan WTS bhaalgorn w/ 3x large trimark I'sGD's Alt0162010.10.12 03:14:00 by: GD's Alt CM Capital Ship BPC Pack ShopSpringun165222010.10.12 03:13:00 by: Springun [WTS] Researched T2 Component BPOs, NPC +10%Racoome0152010.10.12 02:53:00 by: Racoome [Lotto] Capital ships blowout lottery - F90OEX SECURED *467 left* Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6Garkonite17469982010.10.12 02:49:00 by: aurora sune GALLENTE DREAMERS LOTTERY **Secured** 5 winners 40% sold Pages: 1 2 3 4SwoopingHawkeye10637392010.10.12 02:45:00 by: Gunnyt31 [WTS] Researched Raven BPOLord Agorian72152010.10.12 02:43:00 by: Lord Agorian ==> Officer + Faction <==schatgraver137672010.10.12 02:36:00 by: I likegirls faction officer deadspace mods/shipstrance atlas53462010.10.12 02:34:00 by: trance atlas WinYourFortune.com, an exciting new way to wager for items and ISK!Kynn Hellion164232010.10.12 02:10:00 by: Kervee Eatas
That and the ridiculous about of people offering "3rd party services" & posting with an alt army verifying there 'trustworthy', honestly, is there really a need for 15-20 "honest" 3rd party services?
this one takes the cake:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1391390
Alt army posting that they bought tickets: yup Alt army claiming that they won a prize that isnt even listed in original topic: yup
lol @ lotto scams.
-Misty
|
AtheistOfFail
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 09:24:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Misty McGinnity this one takes the cake:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1391390
Alt army posting that they bought tickets: yup
Couple with the fact that "third party" threatened to smear my services with his army of alts, i would not risk a single 0.01 on him. Completely un-competitive behavior.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 09:32:00 -
[14]
Edited by: 49473 on 12/10/2010 09:34:18 Partipating in nearly any lottery is irrational in the economic sense.
Participating in a lottery where your risk of loss is significantly increased due to lack of security/rigging only increases the degree to which it is irrational to participate.
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 12:55:00 -
[15]
Edited by: SetrakDark on 12/10/2010 12:58:52
Originally by: 49473 Edited by: 49473 on 12/10/2010 09:34:18 Partipating in nearly any lottery is irrational in the economic sense.
Once again, false.
Edit: an incomplete economics education (or even exposure) is a crime against casual conversations about almost any social topic, but only because economics amateurs seem to overestimate themselves and underestimate "the layman" far more than any other discipline.
|
Brian Ballsack
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 13:15:00 -
[16]
Originally by: SetrakDark an incomplete economics education (or even exposure) is a crime against casual conversations about almost any social topic, but only because economics amateurs seem to overestimate themselves and underestimate "the layman" far more than any other discipline.
QFT
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 13:44:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Claire Voyant on 12/10/2010 13:48:38
Originally by: SetrakDark Edit: an incomplete economics education (or even exposure) is a crime against casual conversations about almost any social topic, but only because economics amateurs seem to overestimate themselves and underestimate "the layman" far more than any other discipline.
Setrak, are you taking the position that any common economic behavior is "rational" because a large number of people do it or do you have a more specific argument to justify your position? The field of economics is certainly split on this question so claiming that someone is ignorant about economics just because they don't agree with the economists that you agree with doesn't cut it. Justify your position with an argument or stop flaming.
|
My Postman
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 13:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: Rasz Lin ummm every lottery is a scam, its basically a tax on stupid
I love when people hear some incomplete little factoid that makes them think they're smarter than everyone else.
Would you spend a penny for a 1 in 10,001 chance to win 100 dollars? I would. Does that make me stupid? No, it just means i have a slightly higher risk tolerance at values i think are insignificant. I'm sure you do all manner of things everyday that involve a greater than par risk tolerance. Alternatively, are people who purchase insurance idiots for having a lower than par risk tolerance? The reasoning is exactly the same.
Maybe you are smarter than everyone else, but it's definitely not because you don't play lottos.
Where i live lottery is called "Deppensteuer" which exactly means "tax on stupid", and everybody knows.
A whole nation can¦t be wrong.
Fake edit: And half of the nation participates, and i do as well. Never won anything significant. Alas, there must be truth in it.
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 14:17:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Claire Voyant Setrak, are you taking the position that any common economic behavior is "rational" because a large number of people do it or do you have a more specific argument to justify your position? The field of economics is certainly split on this question so claiming that someone is ignorant about economics just because they don't agree with the economists that you agree with doesn't cut it. Justify your position with an argument or stop flaming.
I'm suggesting that the people to whom I am responding are applying an incomplete theory (expected value theory) without an integral aspect of it. This would be fine if they were attempting to apply analysis with an incomplete skill-set, which can often still offer insight. However, instead they are making blanket value judgments about the decisions of others based on a supposed understanding of optimization and rationality in human behavior, which they do not actually possess.
Expected value theory without risk is an overly simplistic model of human behavior, and not a valid tool for evaluating many uncertain economic choices, of which lotteries are a prime example.
As to your greater question: yes, I do believe that people can make irrational choices, and in some cases lotteries may be an irrational choice for the person playing them.
|
ForumWarrior
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:02:00 -
[20]
Originally by: My Postman
Where i live lottery is called "Deppensteuer" which exactly means "tax on stupid", and everybody knows.
The whole of Austria just trolled this thread. Win.
--- ôThere is a powerful tension in our relationship to technology. We are excited by egalitarianism and anonymity, but we constantly fight for our identity.ö |
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:04:00 -
[21]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: Claire Voyant Setrak, are you taking the position that any common economic behavior is "rational" because a large number of people do it or do you have a more specific argument to justify your position? The field of economics is certainly split on this question so claiming that someone is ignorant about economics just because they don't agree with the economists that you agree with doesn't cut it. Justify your position with an argument or stop flaming.
I'm suggesting that the people to whom I am responding are applying an incomplete theory (expected value theory) without an integral aspect of it. This would be fine if they were attempting to apply analysis with an incomplete skill-set, which can often still offer insight. However, instead they are making blanket value judgments about the decisions of others based on a supposed understanding of optimization and rationality in human behavior, which they do not actually possess.
Expected value theory without risk is an overly simplistic model of human behavior, and not a valid tool for evaluating many uncertain economic choices, of which lotteries are a prime example.
As to your greater question: yes, I do believe that people can make irrational choices, and in some cases lotteries may be an irrational choice for the person playing them.
Please don't presume to know anything about my education or my supposed lack thereof.
There are several papers that ask the question and argue for the view that playing the lottery can be "rational" in a wider economic sense.
Here is but one
However I would like to see you justify the view that for sole purpose "isk accumulation" the lotteries of the kind we see marketed on these forums are a "rational" way to go.
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:15:00 -
[22]
Originally by: 49473 Please don't presume to know anything about my education or my supposed lack thereof.
There are several papers that ask the question and argue for the view that playing the lottery can be "rational" in a wider economic sense.
Here is but one
However I would like to see you justify the view that for sole purpose "isk accumulation" the lotteries of the kind we see marketed on these forums are a "rational" way to go.
Considering you're quoting some random as.s paper from a law and economics program whose topic is tangential to the one we're discussing and yet you require me to "justify" a point that is based on standard contemporary microeconomic theory, I'm going to continue to presume things about your education or lack thereof.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:16:00 -
[23]
Please justify why playing the lottery is rational.
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:23:00 -
[24]
Originally by: 49473 Please justify why playing the lottery is rational.
Please learn standard contemporary microeconomic theory. Grab a textbook; if you can understand expected value, risk theory is not much of an extra step. I'm not going to waste my time attempting to teach someone graduate level economics on a spaceship message board, though I am more than happy to put a sock in people who attempt to incorrectly teach others sophomoric economic theory when discussing internet spaceships.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:33:00 -
[25]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: 49473 Please justify why playing the lottery is rational.
Please learn standard contemporary microeconomic theory. Grab a textbook; if you can understand expected value, risk theory is not much of an extra step. I'm not going to waste my time attempting to teach someone graduate level economics on a spaceship message board, though I am more than happy to put a sock in people who attempt to incorrectly teach others sophomoric economic theory when discussing internet spaceships.
Oh, do indulge me with your sophisicated knowledge of contemporary microeconomic theory. Your position seems to be, presume the level of understanding of others while alluding to some superior knowledge you yourself possess which you will not demonstrate because it is above you when discussing "internet spaceships".
Perhaps you should just not to enter discussions that you feel are beneath you.
|
Cyaxares II
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:35:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Cyaxares II on 12/10/2010 16:40:14
Originally by: 49473 Here is but one
seriously?
"In all things economic, there is a diminishing marginal something." - that sentence made me at least chuckle...
As far as I could determine from reading the first third or so of the paper and browsing the rest, this paper does not provide a well-founded theory and very little in terms of empirical evidence to support the presented "theory" (asides from anecdotes), possible alternative explanations for the phenomena cited as evidence are not even mentioned.
The central idea of "the possibility of escaping oneÆs current life by acquiring great wealth" being a determining factor aside from "rational" consideration of payouts and probabilities is nice but - as far as I could recognize - the author fails to develop that idea over the course of his paper and doesn't even try to integrate it into any conventional (read: usable) model.
The summary is one of the most long-winded and apologetic pieces of text I have read in any academic paper and its conclusion "Playing the lottery is a recreation." is the same result any economist applying a theory based on rationality would arrive on.
This article was apparently only published in the student-run "Wake Forest Law Review" and while I recognize that not every single great idea gets automatically accepted/published in a reputable journal this appears quite fitting to me.
edit: that being said - I think a more careful search would find enough decent papers supporting your view (and at least as many contesting it) -- but that you present us this piece of text as the pinnacle of contemporary microeconomic research on lotteries is pretty astonishing.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:41:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Cyaxares II
Originally by: 49473 Here is but one
seriously?
"In all things economic, there is a diminishing marginal something." - that sentence made me at least chuckle...
As far as I could determine from reading the first third or so of the paper and browsing the rest, this paper does not provide a well-founded theory and very little in terms of empirical evidence to support the presented "theory" (asides from anecdotes), possible alternative explanations for the phenomena cited as evidence are not even mentioned.
The central idea of "the possibility of escaping oneÆs current life by acquiring great wealth" being a determining factor aside from "rational" consideration of payouts and probabilities is nice but - as far as I could recognize - the author fails to develop that idea over the course of his paper and doesn't even try to integrate it into any conventional (read: usable) model.
The summary is one of the most long-winded and apologetic pieces of text I have read in any academic paper and its conclusion "Playing the lottery is a recreation." is the same result any economist applying a theory based on rationality would arrive on.
This article was apparently only published in the student-run "Wake Forest Law Review" and while I recognize that not every great idea is automatically published in a reputable journal this appears quite fitting to me.
Note that I don't endorse the article and would urge others to find sources to "justifiy the rationality of the lottery", it was one I found off hand.
Discussions of the rationality of insurance in relation to risk theory are probably more apt, however it's a bit of stretch to apply them to lotteries.
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:43:00 -
[28]
Originally by: 49473 Your position seems to be, presume the level of understanding of others while alluding to some superior knowledge you yourself possess which you will not demonstrate because it is above you when discussing "internet spaceships".
Perhaps you should just not to enter discussions that you feel are beneath you.
I'm "presuming" your level of knowledge based on direct comments you are making and lack of awareness of the very subject you're talking about. I think I'm making more than fair assumptions based on the evidence before more.
Once again, everything I'm alluding to is there for the taking. Just go read it.
Finally, the only time I do this is when people such as yourself step up to get bonked in the first place. I have no idea why economics is one of the few subjects that breeds overconfident social commentators, but I make a special effort to shut them up. Otherwise, I try to use my economic knowledge in a way that enhances discussions about social issues yet keeps the subject within the range of those who are discussing it.
|
Kervee Eatas
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:50:00 -
[29]
Originally by: ForumWarrior Alt posting for the first time: Check Asking for blind trust with no collat: Check Offering unrealistic payouts vs investment: Check
To address your points:
1- Why can't a new player open a lotto just like everyone else has in the past without getting harped on by everyone & their dog? I haven't been playing the game very long, but I know what I want to do, and what I want to do does not involve any form of scamming. I understand this game is full of scammers, hell my roommate got scammed last week. I also understand there's nothing I can say or do to change your opinion on the matter, simply because I do not have a character with years of game time and:
2- We tried to secure the balances through third parties but no one wanted to make the commitment. Sorting through all the data and somehow ensuring it's legitimate is too much hassle for a third party, and the time versus reward is terrible for both sides.
3- This is just wrong. Other sites run a similar service but with lower payouts versus investments, every single table on the site covers itself, except for the special promos that are quite obviously not there to scam people out of ISK but rather to get the site rolling with some good rewards for practically no ISK investment to the player.
|
49473
Jita Trade and Research Institute
|
Posted - 2010.10.12 16:51:00 -
[30]
Originally by: SetrakDark
Originally by: 49473 Your position seems to be, presume the level of understanding of others while alluding to some superior knowledge you yourself possess which you will not demonstrate because it is above you when discussing "internet spaceships".
Perhaps you should just not to enter discussions that you feel are beneath you.
I'm "presuming" your level of knowledge based on direct comments you are making and lack of awareness of the very subject you're talking about. I think I'm making more than fair assumptions based on the evidence before more.
Once again, everything I'm alluding to is there for the taking. Just go read it.
Finally, the only time I do this is when people such as yourself step up to get bonked in the first place. I have no idea why economics is one of the few subjects that breeds overconfident social commentators, but I make a special effort to shut them up. Otherwise, I try to use my economic knowledge in a way that enhances discussions about social issues yet keeps the subject within the range of those who are discussing it.
What you are doing is stating that I lack knowledge about something that you yourself have not demonstrated any knowledge in whatsoever and when asked to demonstrate any knowledge won't.
From this position you have taken I will assume that you don't actually understand risk theory, contemporary microeconomic theory or anything else for which you have attempted to chastise myself for apparently not knowing.
I don't know why it is that you feel that your continued attitude of "go read a textbook" is the proper response to be asked about your own views and your own justifications.
You have not actually demonstrated any knowledge, nor have you constructively contributed to this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |