Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: Was the series ready for Cartoons and Comics back then?

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
    I did say I was planning on doing the manuals soon. And none of what you emphasise has any meaning whatsoever. You can find the same paralels in europe / japanese canon and some of those are COMPLETELY ridiculous,
    I've already been over this with you. The difference was in what ideas were emphasized. The Japanese storyline emphasized venturing off to find the emeralds. America's emphasized on Sonic fighting to restore freedom in the manuals. In fact, the first US manuals don't really discuss them all that much if at all.


    The Sally comparision, I have no words. The little squirrel and princess Sally are not the same character, so saying she's the same as Amy, an established character in the games, is blatantly grasping at straws.
    Sally showed up in an American title (Spinball). Even if you want go off about the games, she had a relationship to SoA's story and second besides Sonic, Robotnik, and perhaps Tails none of the game characters are fundamental to the games to be complaining about like that anyway (and she was the same age as Tails). Bear in mind, Archie and SatAM interpreted Sonic to be a teenager, SEGA let that slide. Archie figured to interpret that as Sonic caring for Amy like a brother would a sister. Again SoA let that slide. There's too much going around to portray them as rebels and not enough recognition that SEGA allowed these interpretations to go through in the first place.


    And really more AAAMMY AMMMY AM!!!11 stuff again. Oh boooooy. At least try focusing on a character like Tails. You have more ground there than complaining about Amy all the time...

  2. #22
    Senior Member Cassandra Fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Speed Highway
    Posts
    1,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xXMikoXx View Post
    And really more AAAMMY AMMMY AM!!!11 stuff again. Oh boooooy. At least try focusing on a character like Tails. You have more ground there than complaining about Amy all the time...
    To be honest, the original American Sonic CD manual replaced Amy's name with Princess Sally.
    And I did hear a rumor that Amy's spinball sprite was replaced with Sally's. I don't think this is true, but its worth bringing to the table.

    Anyway, about Tails the only things I can really think of is Sally taking his place as the brains of the cast and best friend. He literally says that in an earlier comic. I feel really bad for the little fox. He's starting act like a miniature Sonic that sticks only with his airplane these days.
    Quote Originally Posted by Twylis View Post
    The canon is such a mess that I stopped caring about it (. .)

  3. #23
    Senior Member RedMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xXMikoXx View Post
    I've already been over this with you. The difference was in what ideas were emphasized. The Japanese storyline emphasized venturing off to find the emeralds. America's emphasized on Sonic fighting to restore freedom in the manuals. In fact, the first US manuals don't really discuss them all that much if at all.
    No. The emphasis of japanese storyline to fight Eggman and restore freedom is exacly the same. In fact, I can't remember one instance where the manga talked about emeralds or if they did, it was pretty minor. It was about rescuing animals and foiling Eggman's plans (or that crocodile's plans). Again, I'll make this post later. Like the X-treme one and the bible one, these things take time to re-research. I have good memory, but I like to get my facts straight. Something I cannot say for others, no offence.

    ally showed up in an American title (Spinball). Even if you want go off about the games, she had a relationship to SoA's story
    No. Princess Sally is not mentioned anywhere in the SOA stories. She appeared as a bonus character in that Spinball thing, and her role was ZERO. The same as a small animal in the games. As such, she had no relationship whatsoever with the SOA story. Saving pink Sally or saving a turd would have amounted to the same. Besides, Spinball is not canon (everyone knows you don't agree) and was only made to promote the comics / show.

    The rest of that paragraph is irrelevant. I'm not going to expose their ridiculous Sally obsession for the umptieth time. My objective with the bible post was to show the myth that Archie / SatAM is SOA's story to be unfounded and clutching at straws.

    And really more AAAMMY AMMMY AM!!!11 stuff again. Oh boooooy. At least try focusing on a character like Tails. You have more ground there than complaining about Amy all the time...
    Ehr Miko, shut up before the hole you're digging right now reaches China. You're the one who brought Amy up in your Sally comparision. Your complaints that I am complaining about her once again is ridiculous. I repeat, you were the one that brought her up.
    Last edited by RedMenace; 12-09-2011 at 07:59 PM.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    637

    Default

    What the- what's that to do with anything on this thread? Weren't we speaking about SOA's stories and what they really meant? About this stupid myth that SOA/west story is Archie / SatAM? Why are you bringing plotholes up all of a sudden?
    In Archie/SatAM's defense, SEGA not only reviewed and ok'ed their universes, but was actually trying to find ways to incorporate many aspects of these cartoons into their story before the Japanese usurped total control. Sally and a few of the Freedom Fighters have already made appearances in their games. They were already part of the story. even if SoA didn't add everything in the show to a tee, it was obvious they recognized it just by how much more they were willing to add. Western!Sonic wasn't "SatAM" or "Archie", but they shared an inter-relationship with them and exchanged some ideas. The comics and cartoons would take some things from the games and the people from the games would in turn, take some things that they liked from them. Even if there were inconsistencies between the comics and cartoons, I don't see how any of that's a relevant reason to devalue them while putting Modern!Sonic on a pedistol. Not even SEGA seems to take the continuity of its games as seriously as you and many others are making it. We've got several unexplained plotholes and executives going on record to say that many continuity changes WERE in fact reinventions of things.


    You're the one who brought Amy up in your Sally comparision. Your complaints that I am complaining about her once again is ridiculous. I repeat, you were the one that brought her up.
    Um ... where?

  5. #25
    Senior Member RedMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramchopz View Post
    In Archie/SatAM's defense, SEGA not only reviewed and ok'ed their universes, but was actually trying to find ways to incorporate many aspects of these cartoons into their story before the Japanese usurped total control. Sally and a few of the Freedom Fighters have already made appearances in their games. They were already part of the story. even if SoA didn't add everything in the show to a tee, it was obvious they recognized it just by how much more they were willing to add.
    PFFFTTT NO. Just no.

    Realise one damn thing. WHY would SOA/SOE care about these cartoon's concepts, when A) the games were still thousands of times more popular and B) they would not have creative control over what the spinoffs came up with? It's giving power to a third party and there's no reason to. You people keep this autistic (no offence) notion that DIC's or Archie's plans are or were somewhat important. They are third party people, Sega doesn't care! It's just like expecting Sega to give a **** about Chronicles and Julie-Su expy which I can't remember the name. Guess what, they don't! They might even promote in some way, because all publicity is good publicity, and put one of the stages in the Mario & Sonic Winter Games but they don't care, because of A) and B) explained above. They don't win anything by giving power away! I know Sega has a lot of dubious business decisions but they're not that stupid, again no offence.



    Western!Sonic wasn't "SatAM" or "Archie", but they shared an inter-relationship with them and exchanged some ideas. The comics and cartoons would take some things from the games and the people from the games would in turn, take some things that they liked from them.
    No, there was no inter-relationship. But I'll entertain this again. What exacly were they willing to add? What did they add to the games until 1998 that... uhm... was part of the spinoffs. Make me a list. Go on. I'm waiting.

    Spinball is a spinoff, made to promote the comics and the show. It's so obviously this, that Sally is pink. If they were really interested in the concept of Sally, then they would have added her concept properly. They wouldn't have shoehorned her in (along with the others) in a spinoff game, which no one cares about these days, in an obscure reference (because she's never there) and out of model. Same for Mean Machine which tied in with AOSTH and was just a shameless revamp of Puyo Puyo. And please, please don't bring up X-treme. That's possibly the worst example ever as explained elsewhere.

    What else is there? Princess Sally in Sonic CD? Let me refresh your memory and tell you that SOE had Amy. You know, this Sally-kins thing, was not west approved. She was shoved in that american manuals probably in a drunk day, because why else was that changed? To the SatAM crowd, the sprite was not Sally (LOL) and to the games crowd who... uhm didn't give a crap about the show and comic (the large majority), really didn't care what the heck that girl name was.

    Even if there were inconsistencies between the comics and cartoons, I don't see how any of that's a relevant reason to devalue them while putting Modern!Sonic on a pedistol. Not even SEGA seems to take the continuity of its games as seriously as you and many others are making it. We've got several unexplained plotholes and executives going on record to say that many continuity changes WERE in fact reinventions of things.
    ...

    I'm sorry, I'll ask again because you didn't understand the first time. What has plotholes have ANYTHING to do with what we're discussing? This is a talk about how SOA/SOE story is NOT Archie / SatAM. It's not because of the damn moon re-establishing itself.

    Um ... where?
    I'm not entertaining that. I know exacly what's the strategy there. Just answer the discussion and leave the misdirections and bias attacks out of this. I'm sure neither of us is 6 to be that childish.
    Last edited by RedMenace; 12-10-2011 at 09:54 AM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,230

    Default

    No Red, answer the question. YOU brought up whining over Amy first:

    This again. SOA's story for Sonic is not the one for Archie / SatAM. Every time this problem arises, here comes one or two trying to pass off those storylines as the west alternative story when it isn't. SOA's story is what you can read in the manuals (and ignore the Amy / Sally thing. SOE used Amy correctly, princess Sally was only mentioned to promote the shows in america) and that Sonic bible thing.

    You read those and there is as much of a rift between SOA and SOJ stories as there is between SOA and Archie / SatAM spinoffs as there is between SOJ and that WWII tale stories.
    To which I responded: Sally Acorn was just like Amy little more than a female face to be rescued. Amy herself would never become all that much more significant until '98 and while STC did adapt her, it wasn't long until she was rewritten to fit a third wave archetype of writing by a feminist editor.


    Spinball is a spinoff, made to promote the comics and the show.
    That's not what a spinoff is.

    spinoff=/= AU. Spinoff is the same storyline focusing on things like other characters, etc. Shadow is a spinoff, Knuckles Chaotix is a spinoff.
    Last edited by xXMikoXx; 12-10-2011 at 12:12 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Member RedMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xXMikoXx View Post
    No Red, answer the question. YOU brought up whining over Amy first:



    How's that have anything to do with Amy as a character? The complain would still be valid if they had substituted Taills' or Knuckles name for Amy. It was just a female in that game and SOA decided on a freaky friday that they should mention the one from the spinoffs (or AUs, whatever you want to call it) to better appease the viewers of that thing, because the majority didn't know each. I don't get your point on this.

    To which I responded: Sally Acorn was just like Amy little more than a female face to be rescued. Amy herself would never become all that much more significant until '98 and while STC did adapt her, it wasn't long until she was rewritten to fit a third wave archetype of writing by a feminist editor.
    But they were not in the same league and that's my problem with what you wrote. Amy was an established character in the games. Princess Sally was made up by the spinoffs and the Spinball cameo was due to that, not the other way around. You can switch Amy for Tails in that sentence as well, but to be honest that's not the point. Giving a spinoff character importance over an official one was a mistake. That is the point.

    That's not what a spinoff is.

    spinoff=/= AU. Spinoff is the same storyline focusing on things like other characters, etc. Shadow is a spinoff, Knuckles Chaotix is a spinoff.
    Spinoff has been used AU as well, but whatever. We'll call it AUs if you prefer. I do prefer that as well.

    Still, Spinball is a spinoff of the cartoon / shows. Ah!

    Mean Machine and Spinball are also AUs (along with Chaotix now, unfortunetly).
    Last edited by RedMenace; 12-10-2011 at 12:21 PM.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Realise one damn thing. WHY would SOA/SOE care about these cartoon's concepts, when A) the games were still thousands of times more popular
    Even if theoretically, they were, that doesn't mean they couldn't have found merit within the comics and cartoons' ideas. People bought the games for its gameplay, not because it had a compelling or superior story. SoA/SoE used outside media to make the mythos more endearing and entertaining to people to encourage them to invest more in Sonic beyond his games.

    And 4-8 million copies sold is not going to make a character a household name. Nor are these kinds of sales the type that would would readily compete well with Mario to START a console war, when the latter had sold about 50 million and was in 1 of every 4 households. Sonic's success had to come in part from marketing him in other ways such as TV shows, comic books and other merchandise. Even Ryan Drummond when asked about it admitted that things like the TV shows and comics served as long-spanning commercials to advertise the games. So yes, they did play a major part in Sonic's success and likely have a part to play on why he isn't as popular.

    But y'know what? This is besides the point. You're just enforcing your OWN opinions on SEGA's business practices when prior evidence points to otherwise. SEGA forwarded the Sally mini-series because they were thinking of putting her in a game. Sally's life was spared within Endgame because SEGA had numerous projects they were working on that featured her and the other Freedom Fighters. If SEGA didn't care about the cartoon and comic concepts none of the Freedom Fighters would have been in Spinball at all and nor would they have been considered for scrapped games like Sonic Mars. In the end SoA didn't use them very much, but you can't say they didn't care about these characters enough to at least CONSIDER making them mainstream in the games.

    Although, what I find the most interesting about your logic Red, is that if you were to apply it towards the entire company as a whole, and not just SoA when convenient, SoJ wouldn't have even bat an eyelid at characters such Amy and Charmy who were even less popular in their debut cartoons than even the Freedom Fighters before being adapted. I guess they shouldn't exist in the games either. TIME PARODOOOOX!


    B) they would not have creative control over what the spinoffs came up with?
    Red, what the hell are you talking about? SEGA's ALWAYS had creative control over spinoff games and cartoons and have set certain mandates in place that they've expected to be carried out since the 90's. That's why Sonic still isn't allowed to cry or have a steady girlfriend, or why Robotnik had to return after Endgame. Its also why we still have game adaptations and to a lesser extent, its because of their intervention that Sally was alive in the comics. If SEGA doesn't step in, its not because they lack control, but because they don't see any problems big enough for them to take a stand on. The third party may share some of the profits at the end of the day, but all the intellectual rights go to SEGA. The characters, the plotpoints, everything. You think they'd be pushing this hard against Penders in court if this WASN'T their policy? C'moon!

    They are third party people, Sega doesn't care! It's just like expecting Sega to give a **** about Chronicles and Julie-Su expy which I can't remember the name. Guess what, they don't!
    SoJ might not have had as close a relationship with the other western universes, but that doesn't mean SoA rolled the same way. Thats my problem with most of what you're saying. You just assume SoA and SoJ followed the exact same business practices and perspectives in 90s as one another. And speaking of SoA and Sonic Chronicles, if they didn't care so much about the other universes, why would THEY have given Bioware actual Archie comics to reference from for a story?

    They might even promote in some way, because all publicity is good publicity, and put one of the stages in the Mario & Sonic Winter Games but they don't care, because of A) and B) explained above. They don't win anything by giving power away!
    And yet Sonic lost most of his influence in the west and became a laughingstock when the Japanese stripped power from every other SEGA division to run everything. Talk about irony. Oh and don't get me started on how the Japanese's pride issues drove Sony away and the people who made the components of N64. Both came to SEGA first and they rejected them. Now they're without a console when they could have WON the console wars over a decade ago. So much for the 'power of teamwork' or 'opening up your heart', huh? Too bad they don't use Sonic themes as much in their business practices.

    Although when it comes to them being collective company for 'Sonic', they doesn't lose power when they collaborate with other companies. They share profits with them, but will ultimately have the final say in what can and can't be done with their characters and any intellectual property that's is being used under their franchise unless a contract says otherwise.


    I'm sorry, I'll ask again because you didn't understand the first time. What has plotholes have ANYTHING to do with what we're discussing? This is a talk about how SOA/SOE story is NOT Archie / SatAM. It's not because of the damn moon re-establishing itself.
    You're the one who is using SoJ's behavior towards the subject of canon and the franchise as a model for how every other branch behaved or thought.


    Mean Machine and Spinball are also AUs (along with Chaotix now, unfortunetly).

    And what proof do you have that Spinball and Mean Bean Machine were AUs for SoA's storyline? That's what we want to know, Red. Until you can come up with an explanation I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the post you mentioned towards me.
    Last edited by Ramchopz; 12-10-2011 at 12:59 PM.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
    How's that have anything to do with Amy as a character?

    Doesn't matter if you don't bring up her personality, you were still comparing the characters, placing Amy on a pedestal again because she was "established" while Sally was not and again moaning over the Amy/Sally thing in CD to illustrate examples. You've got other examples? Good. So stop bringing Amy up every time someone talks about Sally. Making it Amy vs. Sally AGAIN is old.


    The complain would still be valid if they had substituted Taills' or Knuckles name for Amy.

    I mention this. That's why I said stop bringing Amy up.


    It was just a female in that game and SOA decided on a freaky friday that they should mention the one from the spinoffs to better appease the viewers of that thing, because the majority didn't know each. I don't get your point on this.
    1. Spinoff=/=AU. And again SoA had as was mentioned an interrelationship with these storylines.

    2. We know that's not at all the perspective they had. They had considered the FFs in general for other games. Therefore, we know even if those projects fell through, that they didn't add those elements in spinball with the intent of communicating that Spinball was part of an isolated universes=/story just to promote the cartoon and the comic. Sally was an established SoA character. You are shoe horning your personal attitudes onto SoA when evidence points to their sentiments being the exact opposite.
    Last edited by xXMikoXx; 12-10-2011 at 12:53 PM.

  10. #30
    Senior Member RedMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,814

    Default

    [QUOTE=Ramchopz;6974712]
    SoA/SoE used outside media to make the mythos more endearing and entertaining to people to encourage them to invest more in Sonic beyond his games.

    And 4-8 million copies sold is not going to make a character a household name. Nor are these kinds of sales the type that would would readily compete well with Mario to START a console war, when the latter had sold about 50 million and was in 1 of every 4 households. Sonic's success had to come in part from marketing him in other ways such as TV shows, comic books and other merchandise. Even Ryan Drummond when asked about it admitted that things like the TV shows and comics served as long-spanning commercials to advertise the games. So yes, they did play a major part in Sonic's success and likely have a part to play on why he isn't as popular.

    But y'know what? This is besides the point. You're just enforcing your OWN opinions on SEGA's business practices when prior evidence points to otherwise.
    SOA/SOE doesn't give a crap about people investing beyond the games besides cash and reel in people for the games. Endear people to things outside of their domain doesn't give them any beneficts. If only, it transfers the power they have over the franchise away.

    The comics and shows, as you say yourself, serve to advertise the games. It's called marketing. What's the use of these advertisements if there's nothing to market? Business doesn't work like you want it to.

    SEGA forwarded the Sally mini-series because they were thinking of putting her in a game. Sally's life was spared within Endgame because SEGA had numerous projects they were working on that featured her and the other Freedom Fighters. If SEGA didn't care about the cartoon and comic concepts none of the Freedom Fighters would have been in Spinball at all and nor would they have been considered for scrapped games like Sonic Mars. In the end SoA didn't use them very much, but you can't say they didn't care about these characters enough to at least CONSIDER making them mainstream in the games.
    This again. The horrors of non research. Then just repeating what they've heard in forums as opinion and then trying to pass off as fact.

    *sigh*

    These are facts:

    1. SEGA forwarded the Sally mini-series because they were thinking of putting her in a game.

    This might have a basis of truth. At least the mini-series project could have been been pitched as to test her market value. You see, the SOA game you speak of went did have at one point a storyline that would include Sally. However, by the time the mini-series was over (June 1995) that storyline had already been replaced by another, which did not include her (before April 1995 - Sonic Saturn). As such, by the end of mini-series publishment and when the final numbers poured in, there was nothing worth testing. She had already been written out long before.

    2. Sally's life was spared within Endgame because SEGA had numerous projects they were working on that featured her and the other Freedom Fighters.

    This is a blatant lie though. Sally had already been written out from the SOA project in early 1995 and endgame came out in 1997. The only other project Sega was working on was Sonic Adventure. I like the word "numerous" most. I wonder if that was your own input.

    3. If SEGA didn't care about the cartoon and comic concepts none of the Freedom Fighters would have been in Spinball at all and nor would they have been considered for scrapped games like Sonic Mars. In the end SoA didn't use them very much, but you can't say they didn't care about these characters enough to at least CONSIDER making them mainstream in the games.

    You didn't answer what I asked before. If they cared that much, then why include her off-model pink version? Spinball adding the FFs was only to promote the comics and the show.

    Sonic 16 and Mars were names the X-treme project went by very early in development. The SatAM storyline was part of the pitch of these two phases. This is not opinion, this is what the develiper guy said about it: such storyline was only part of the project very early in development, was only part of a possibility in internal documents and was phased out because of lack of interest. You know, exacly like Madonna. Are you going to defend SOJ cares about Madonna a lot because they considered this concept at one point? SOA never cared about Sally.

    Although, what I find the most interesting about your logic Red, is that if you were to apply it towards the entire company as a whole, and not just SoA when convenient, SoJ wouldn't have even bat an eyelid at characters such Amy and Charmy who were even less popular in their debut cartoons than even the Freedom Fighters before being adapted. I guess they shouldn't exist in the games either. TIME PARODOOOOX!
    What's that to do with anything? I don't even have a damn clue why Amy and Charmy were ever retooled and added to Japanese canon. I don't think they cared much either. They probably just liked the designs or something. I don't know. BTW they didn't debut in cartoons, it was a manga.

    I like how you scream Time Paradox so enthusiastically. I hope you did it every single time you read the numbered points above.


    Red, what the hell are you talking about? SEGA's ALWAYS had creative control over spinoff games and cartoons and have set certain mandates in place that they've expected to be carried out since the 90's. That's why Sonic still isn't allowed to cry or have a steady girlfriend, or why Robotnik had to return after Endgame
    Too bad he does. But that's a story for another time.

    . Its also why we still have game adaptations and to a lesser extent, its because of their intervention that Sally was alive in the comics. If SEGA doesn't step in, its not because they lack control, but because they don't see any problems big enough for them to take a stand on. The third party may share some of the profits at the end of the day, but all the intellectual rights go to SEGA. The characters, the plotpoints, everything. You think they'd be pushing this hard against Penders in court if this WASN'T their policy? C'moon!
    I have no clue what you're defending here. I don't recall saying Sega had lack of control. What I said was that adapting **** from the comics and shows to the games would lead to lack of control. I think you got your tenses switched here.

    SoJ might not have had as close a relationship with the other western universes, but that doesn't mean SoA rolled the same way. Thats my problem with most of what you're saying. You just assume SoA and SoJ followed the exact same business practices and perspectives in 90s as one another. And speaking of SoA and Sonic Chronicles, if they didn't care so much about the other universes, why would THEY have given Bioware actual Archie comics to reference from for a story?
    Not that I'm denying the uncanny plot, because it's very alike, but SOA giving Bioware Archie comics is a rumour as far as I know. Got a source on that?

    And yet Sonic lost most of his influence in the west and became a laughingstock when the Japanese stripped power from every other SEGA division to run everything. Talk about irony.
    You know what's irony? You thinking this would have prevented Sonic from becoming a laughingstock and that this made it one.

    You have no clue what it was like in 1998. It was huge. People thinking the Adventures ruined the franchise and made Sonic a joke were not there to see what was going on in 1998 through 2000.

    Oh and don't get me started on how the Japanese's pride issues drove Sony away and the people who made the components of N64. Both came to SEGA first and they rejected them. Now they're without a console when they could have WON the console wars over a decade ago. So much for the 'power of teamwork' or 'opening up your heart', huh? Too bad they don't use Sonic themes as much in their business practices.
    SOJ has nothing to do with Sally being dropped by SOA. SOA never cared and the proof was out in the open three years before SOJ imposed japanese canon.

    The console war things, I won't go there. I don't want to make this thread offtopic but hey, from your tone, I suppose all your knowledge on the matter is the same as above: rumours you heard somewhere.

    You're the one who is using SoJ's behavior towards the subject of canon and the franchise as a model for how every other branch behaved or thought.
    I did? Oh my. Here I thought I was making summaries on how SatAM / Archie =/= SOA.

    And what proof do you have that Spinball and Mean Bean Machine were AUs for SoA's storyline? That's what we want to know, Red. Until you can come up with an explanation I'm not even going to bother with the rest of the post you mentioned towards me.
    It's always funny when demagogy strikes. I have to provide facts and whatever. You people don't. Thankfully I do have facts on my side.
    Last edited by RedMenace; 12-10-2011 at 02:50 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •