Karma for Sparta

[Libera]

The OP is like the TMZ to our Britney Spears.

Shall we get out of a limo with a miniskirt? I'm not entirely sure anyone wants to see Wilhelm's or Tulak's "happy face."

Edited February 28, 2010 by Libera

[Trinite]

MK will roll us as soon as the war is over for ruining the game faster than them.

[Aeternos Astramora]

Sparta insults the name of the real Spartan military machine.

[Voytek]

[quote]O really? I am sorry you guys don't have balls to attack us if you think we are such a bad alliance! By the way we are number 4 alliance! Attack us and I bet you we won't be one burning! And Sparta ain't going down this year we just need to re-adjust things after this war!

Doxa Sparta!!!!! [/quote]

Behold, the might of Spartan propaganda!

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='28 February 2010 - 03:09 PM' timestamp='1267391553' post='2208791']
If this is the opinion of their enemies then I'll gladly burn with them.

Sparta are great people, have an active and friendly community. Their leaders are awesome people when you get to know them and their military is getting much better. I'd like to see you turn their number of nations into the unbelievable fighting force you (and others) try to impose on them. It takes time, time they've used to improve their military for awhile now.

As an ally, I can tell you that I see the exact opposite you seem to see.

At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that.

E: Also, the bias in this poll is ridiculous.
[/quote]

The fact is that all mass-recruiting alliances are going to have trouble becoming a military powerhouse outside of meatshield capability due to inactivity. That being said, Polar has done a fine job at showing what a mass recruiting alliance can do, MK (while I wouldn't consider them "mass recruiting" they do recruit (may be wrong but pretty sure they do), Sparta, who has been on the winning side of plenty of wars as of late (due in part to dropping their allies on one side or another, Karma war is a huge example of this), that they should of had the time, the money, and the ability to build a better war machine. This is what I think most people are getting at.

Yes the pole is biased. Biased doesn't make things untrue though.

And of the major alliances they have not taken the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve. Karma they said they were going to expel/ZI those that refused to fight (they didn't for their top tier). I'd say IRON/NPO/TPF have taken the biggest steps towards cleansing their membership by being on the bad end of a beatdown/war. Nothing clears out the crap members like that. Another reason why I believe in more wars, and in white pecae which in turn which causes more wars due to the higher speed of the war/peace cycle.

It is good though that they've been good allies to you. Obligatory "until they drop you."

That being said, Sparta is by no means NPO, and was by no means the worst parts of Q. It may indeed have been all a sneaky plan to get the world to think them irrelevant and allow them to be opportunistic. Sadly, if that is the case I wish they would of done more with the time they bought and a. become a true military powerhouse a la TOP, dropped down to 300 members and maintain that number no matter what, c. Made Trinite a court Jester.

Edited February 28, 2010 by LiquidMercury

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='28 February 2010 - 04:39 PM' timestamp='1267393382' post='2208830']
The fact is that all mass-recruiting alliances are going to have trouble becoming a military powerhouse outside of meatshield capability due to inactivity. That being said, Polar has done a fine job at showing what a mass recruiting alliance can do, MK (while I wouldn't consider them "mass recruiting" they do recruit (may be wrong but pretty sure they do), Sparta, who has been on the winning side of plenty of wars as of late (due in part to dropping their allies on one side or another, Karma war is a huge example of this), that they should of had the time, the money, and the ability to build a better war machine. This is what I think most people are getting at.

Yes the pole is biased. Biased doesn't make things untrue though.

And of the major alliances they have not taken the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve. Karma they said they were going to expel/ZI those that refused to fight (they didn't for their top tier). I'd say IRON/NPO/TPF have taken the biggest steps towards cleansing their membership by being on the bad end of a beatdown/war. Nothing clears out the crap members like that. Another reason why I believe in more wars, and in white pecae which in turn which causes more wars due to the higher speed of the war/peace cycle.

It is good though that they've been good allies to you. Obligatory "until they drop you."

That being said, Sparta is by no means NPO, and was by no means the worst parts of Q. It may indeed have been all a sneaky plan to get the world to think them irrelevant and allow them to be opportunistic. Sadly, if that is the case I wish they would of done more with the time they bought and a. become a true military powerhouse a la TOP, dropped down to 300 members and maintain that number no matter what, c. Made Trinite a court Jester.
[/quote]

Sparta does not wish to be the #1 alliance in the game, which they've stated repeatedly. And what did they do when they reached that height post-war? They attacked I'd say 2mil's worth of NS in nations who refused to participate. The "none" nations were extremely rampant with black sphere people post-cleansing. They then did this a second time (2mil in total between both I'd estimate) and so far it has shown well. BUT, if you time things properly my estimates is it takes 6-9 months to completely rebuild an alliance's military image or start from scratch, so perhaps with 2-3 more months things could be completely different.

And I said "some of the most initiative" meaning they've done among the top 3 or so in most improvements. TPF shouldn't be counted among that because they aren't a big alliance anymore. NPO I am not sure of yet, they have a lot to still do if anyone wants to consider them more than just a number's game (nation count vs actual military might) NpO is perhaps the only alliance that was not already very strong in terms of military I'd consider made the biggest changes. IRON definitely cleaned ranks, but their military might I am not sure of since they've only been on the side of beatdowns and nothing which can show if given a relatively normal war if they'd win or take large damages still.

Yes, they've been great allies. And when I compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves) I'd say they've been among the best Asgaard could have hoped for. We aren't fodder to them, we're equals despite our differences in strength. They actually treat you like a normal person... I've seen far too many people simply try to manipulate smaller alliances.

With the poll, I'd like to see simply a plain "never" not a never with a catch to it.

E: The upper tier is pretty relative, they had a high average NS protectorate merge into them after Karma who were never part of a war yet, so if those are among the "problem" nations you're trying to point out, then they've yet to experience problems to correct until now.

Edited February 28, 2010 by lonewolfe2015

[Believland]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='28 February 2010 - 04:50 PM' timestamp='1267394036' post='2208846']
Yes, they've been great allies. And when I compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves) I'd say they've been among the best Asgaard could have hoped for. We aren't fodder to them, we're equals despite our differences in strength. They actually treat you like a normal person... I've seen far too many people simply try to manipulate smaller alliances.

E: The upper tier is pretty relative, they had a high average NS protectorate merge into them after Karma who were never part of a war yet, so if those are among the "problem" nations you're trying to point out, then they've yet to experience problems to correct until now.
[/quote]
If you're saying that TOP abuse the weak then you're just plain silly. I loved TOP when I was under their wing. Helped a lot. Anything they could do to help us. Which they've done with other allies. IRON, FOK, FACE and a couple others.

Also, if they're at a high ns and still don't know how to fight then that's just plain silly.

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='Believland' date='28 February 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1267394310' post='2208851']
If you're saying that TOP abuse the weak then you're just plain silly. I loved TOP when I was under their wing. Helped a lot. Anything they could do to help us. Which they've done with other allies. IRON, FOK, FACE and a couple others.

Also, if they're at a high ns and still don't know how to fight then that's just plain silly.
[/quote]

Perhaps to you, but I've seen them shutout others (no names) who were allies. And I've seen them act high and mighty simply because of their alliance's position versus others.

Point is, no one is perfect but I don't see how LM/TOP can claim the high road over Sparta in terms of whose the better ally without either exposing their flaws. LM, you are speaking with TOP in the back of your mind I'd assume, right?

Either way, far too many large alliances treat smaller alliances as their means towards tech and a future merger unless it's their own protectorate. Even though sometimes those small alliances do grow up and they wonder why some have a chip on their shoulders...

[Hymenbreach]

The correct answer to the OP question is: "Not soon enough."

If Sparta did try to ruin the game, they'd only make things better. Hmmm...

Consistency of morality and belief (even if it is a belief that I do not follow) make you respected, if not liked in CN. Sparta need to learn that lesson.

[Matthew The Great]

[quote name='King Louis the II' date='28 February 2010 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1267388106' post='2208707']
I really tought that you were someone that used logic. I really did. You have all the right to hate us, and have a different oppinion. However, to talk crap about Sparta military is just plain delusional. If you prefer to live your own fantasy it is your right to do so. However, if yoiu are really interested to know the truth try to learn about Sparta accomplishments during this war. Ask TOP top tier about their fights against us. Ask Liquid mercury, ask Extremerely Average. Ask most of IRON fighters.

Take a look at rankings and see how we did after fighting TOP/IRON/Legion/TOOL/OMFG.

I have read many of your postings and I really liked many of them (specially your peaceful phase). It is really disapointing to see that you become delusional.


If you want to say crap against us is your right. However to say lies just will make you a clown.
[/quote]


the damage you did was mainly due to your allies...im not saying that I dislike Sparta im actually indifferent to their existense but please don't talk about how good Sparta is at war when your allies did all the heavy lifting and talking trash about the damage you are causing TOP/IRON is just laughable...everyone is attacking them

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='28 February 2010 - 03:50 PM' timestamp='1267394036' post='2208846']
Sparta does not wish to be the #1 alliance in the game, which they've stated repeatedly. And what did they do when they reached that height post-war? They attacked I'd say 2mil's worth of NS in nations who refused to participate. The "none" nations were extremely rampant with black sphere people post-cleansing. They then did this a second time (2mil in total between both I'd estimate) and so far it has shown well. BUT, if you time things properly my estimates is it takes 6-9 months to completely rebuild an alliance's military image or start from scratch, so perhaps with 2-3 more months things could be completely different.

And I said "some of the most initiative" meaning they've done among the top 3 or so in most improvements. TPF shouldn't be counted among that because they aren't a big alliance anymore. NPO I am not sure of yet, they have a lot to still do if anyone wants to consider them more than just a number's game (nation count vs actual military might) NpO is perhaps the only alliance that was not already very strong in terms of military I'd consider made the biggest changes. IRON definitely cleaned ranks, but their military might I am not sure of since they've only been on the side of beatdowns and nothing which can show if given a relatively normal war if they'd win or take large damages still.

Yes, they've been great allies. And when I compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves) I'd say they've been among the best Asgaard could have hoped for. We aren't fodder to them, we're equals despite our differences in strength. They actually treat you like a normal person... I've seen far too many people simply try to manipulate smaller alliances.

With the poll, I'd like to see simply a plain "never" not a never with a catch to it.

E: The upper tier is pretty relative, they had a high average NS protectorate merge into them after Karma who were never part of a war yet, so if those are among the "problem" nations you're trying to point out, then they've yet to experience problems to correct until now.
[/quote]

Attacking 2 mil NS when you're more then 5x their size isn't that big of a deal, so I'm not sure the point you're trying to make there.

You didn't say most initiative towards improving, you said they'd taken the most initiative towards cleansing. That is why I brought up TPF/NPO/IRON. Wars like they have been in cleanse poor members usually. Essentially, you've said "I don't know" a lot in regards to a lot of different alliances in how they compare militarily and how they've changed.

"Compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves), not sure what you're getting at here, we're not allies. Everyone is going to have allies they think are great, and allies they don't. It's when your allies are put in awkward situations see: what we've done to all our allies this war and what many of our allies did to us during Karma that the true test of the relationship comes to pass. Respect is earned, not given. Many smaller alliances fail miserably at running their alliance, at engaging in politics, and generally just don't do much to progress the game. This is why I'm generally an avid fan of micro-alliance wars and people not making new alliances. Very few things are "unique" in idea or form and you're not offering anything that hasn't been before (you being microalliances not you personally LW). Every now and then a diamond comes up amongst the rubble, Argent comes to mind. They are smallish, highly active, a very good military alliance that have played an important role in many politics (in this war they tied TOP to TOOL/white).

As far as the merge of nations coming into Sparta, no that is not what I'm talking about what so ever. I'm talking about the top tier in Sparta (whom are still there) that were derelict in orders during the war against NPO. Sparta told everyone that they'd be expelling/ZIing said members post-war. They never were.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

Sparta will get closer to SF in coming months. SF will take advantage of this and just use them as meat shields in the next great war.

That's my prediction.

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='28 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1267396979' post='2208920']
Attacking 2 mil NS when you're more then 5x their size isn't that big of a deal, so I'm not sure the point you're trying to make there.

You didn't say most initiative towards improving, you said they'd taken the most initiative towards cleansing. That is why I brought up TPF/NPO/IRON. Wars like they have been in cleanse poor members usually. Essentially, you've said "I don't know" a lot in regards to a lot of different alliances in how they compare militarily and how they've changed.

"Compare Sparta to other allies (including yourselves), not sure what you're getting at here, we're not allies. Everyone is going to have allies they think are great, and allies they don't. It's when your allies are put in awkward situations see: what we've done to all our allies this war and what many of our allies did to us during Karma that the true test of the relationship comes to pass. Respect is earned, not given. Many smaller alliances fail miserably at running their alliance, at engaging in politics, and generally just don't do much to progress the game. This is why I'm generally an avid fan of micro-alliance wars and people not making new alliances. Very few things are "unique" in idea or form and you're not offering anything that hasn't been before (you being microalliances not you personally LW). Every now and then a diamond comes up amongst the rubble, Argent comes to mind. They are smallish, highly active, a very good military alliance that have played an important role in many politics (in this war they tied TOP to TOOL/white).

As far as the merge of nations coming into Sparta, no that is not what I'm talking about what so ever. I'm talking about the top tier in Sparta (whom are still there) that were derelict in orders during the war against NPO. Sparta told everyone that they'd be expelling/ZIing said members post-war. They never were.
[/quote]

I clearly said "At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that."

This is because they [i]have[/i] been among the most active to improve their ranks.

Legion cries fowl to them doing the most damage, but Sparta's ranks were focused on IRON/TOOL because their allies hit Legion harder to free their slots up some. When I told Sparta that we'd need a bit of 2nd wave support on Legion since most of our guys were in nuclear anarchy they said they'd allocate slots there because they weren't really before. Legion didn't even hit the most active ones... they hit regular joes a lot who everyone knows in a big alliance won't be the best fighter.

No, we've never been allies, but I can compare my allies to friends who you've been allied to. That comparison is how I find in favor of Sparta.

It doesn't matter if things are unique or not in small alliances, big alliances have a set community already with set leaders, to become important you have to spend a lot of effort and activity, sometimes which you don't want to do. So a smaller alliance allows you to mean more to it and to have a different experience to the game. If we all joined established alliances we'd be playing a Bob of 80 alliances all self-sufficient sentient communities. Is that what you wish to see? There are more diamonds in the rough than you think, many of these "micros" are made up of very good people who if given support would be the best allies you've ever had.

Last thing, can you clarify your first sentence? Attacking 2mil is in reference to the strength of the combined nations they expelled from Sparta.

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' date='28 February 2010 - 05:49 PM' timestamp='1267397562' post='2208928']
Sparta will get closer to SF in coming months. SF will take advantage of this and just use them as meat shields in the next great war.

That's my prediction.
[/quote]

Wouldn't they have already of done this with the length of time they've been direct allies to SF and/or CnG? Something tells me while they like the specific alliances they are allied to, they aren't interested in being directly in either bloc.

Edited February 28, 2010 by lonewolfe2015

[Rocky Horror]

[quote name='Pearl' date='28 February 2010 - 12:39 PM' timestamp='1267382575' post='2208587']
Who said we thought we were unbeatable? I really don't see too many Spartans out making calleous warmongering 'WE R INVICIBLE' remarks like some other alliances I know. Someone post quotes if I am wrong.


Sparta is just trying to get along in this cyberverse
[/quote]Read the post I quoted.

[Pearl]

[quote name='Rocky Horror' date='28 February 2010 - 05:01 PM' timestamp='1267398311' post='2208956']
Read the post I quoted.
[/quote]
Read my clarification after that.

[Rocky Horror]

[quote name='Pearl' date='28 February 2010 - 05:11 PM' timestamp='1267398870' post='2208975']
Read my clarification after that.
[/quote]I'm not seeing it.

[Jens of the desert]

It is really impossible to tell, but not in the next couple of months, that's for sure.

[Bush_84]

I don't understand how all of a sudden we are rep mongers. We have never been big for demanding reps, but you have to look at the two alliances we received reps from. TOOL attacked us, which wouldn't have been that big of a deal. Ya they were just following their treaties, as we all are. On the other hand this is the second time they have offensively attacked us in a relatively short amount of CN time. Fool me once, ok fine. Fool me twice? Ya won't happen.

Legion also attacked us. No also wouldn't be such a big deal if that's all it was. We don't have any past with them, but there were a lot of people in Sparta that weren't happy with the way Legion acted during this conflict. I guess I can personally say that they people I fought were are cordial, but others have had some experiences that weren't so pleasant. Then pair that with the run around we received from them about surrendering. It left a very sour taste for many of us. How would you feel if somebody attacked you, gave you the finger, and then continued to give you the finger even after they gave up?

I don't have any authority on the matter, but that's my take on it.

[Iosif]

[quote name='Bush_84' date='01 March 2010 - 12:39 AM' timestamp='1267400558' post='2209011']
How would you feel if somebody attacked you, gave you the finger, and then continued to give you the finger even after they gave up?
[/quote]

Been there, ignored it. Everyone was happy.

[Urmom]

[quote name='King Louis the II' date='28 February 2010 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1267388106' post='2208707']
I really tought that you were someone that used logic. I really did. You have all the right to hate us, and have a different oppinion. However, to talk crap about Sparta military is just plain delusional. If you prefer to live your own fantasy it is your right to do so. However, if yoiu are really interested to know the truth try to learn about Sparta accomplishments during this war. Ask TOP top tier about their fights against us. Ask Liquid mercury, ask Extremerely Average. Ask most of IRON fighters.

Take a look at rankings and see how we did after fighting TOP/IRON/Legion/TOOL/OMFG.

I have read many of your postings and I really liked many of them (specially your peaceful phase). It is really disapointing to see that you become delusional.


If you want to say crap against us is your right. However to say lies just will make you a clown.
[/quote]
Sorry, being honest here, but I don't get the point of asking TOP about how good you were at fighting. Nearly all TOP'ers would agree that we were crossing our fingers to be attacked by a Spartan than a CnG'er...

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='28 February 2010 - 04:52 PM' timestamp='1267397756' post='2208932']
I clearly said "At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that."

This is because they [i]have[/i] been among the most active to improve their ranks.

Legion cries fowl to them doing the most damage, but Sparta's ranks were focused on IRON/TOOL because their allies hit Legion harder to free their slots up some. When I told Sparta that we'd need a bit of 2nd wave support on Legion since most of our guys were in nuclear anarchy they said they'd allocate slots there because they weren't really before. Legion didn't even hit the most active ones... they hit regular joes a lot who everyone knows in a big alliance won't be the best fighter.

No, we've never been allies, but I can compare my allies to friends who you've been allied to. That comparison is how I find in favor of Sparta.

It doesn't matter if things are unique or not in small alliances, big alliances have a set community already with set leaders, to become important you have to spend a lot of effort and activity, sometimes which you don't want to do. So a smaller alliance allows you to mean more to it and to have a different experience to the game. If we all joined established alliances we'd be playing a Bob of 80 alliances all self-sufficient sentient communities. Is that what you wish to see? There are more diamonds in the rough than you think, many of these "micros" are made up of very good people who if given support would be the best allies you've ever had.

Last thing, can you clarify your first sentence? Attacking 2mil is in reference to the strength of the combined nations they expelled from Sparta.
[/quote]

I'm not sure what you're bringing Legion's arguments for? I haven't brought them up at all. Yes you clearly said "At least acknowledge that of the major alliances they have taken some of the most initiative to cleanse their ranks and improve, because you're throwing them under a bus when they deserve none of that." And I clearly do not acknowledge that due to the fact that they did not take any initiative to cleanse the ranks from the most vile offenders in Karma, i.e. members derelict of orders. Had they done that, then yes I'd of absolutely agreed that they've done just as good of a job getting ghosts off their AA as anyone else (which isn't that hard).

So now you're saying that my allies aren't worthy to be Sparta's allies essentially? I'd say that Umbrella, Argent, Gremlins, FCC, OG, OMFG, IRON have all indeed been swell allies. FOK as well. Any day, any time, I'd take any of them, over Sparta. I think many people would agree to that with the exception of IRON as many people just flat out don't like them due to their hegemonistic past. That being said, my opinion of IRON has changed immensely of them post-karma.

So what you're saying in regards to micro alliances, is that they are made by people who aren't willing to do the work in a traditional alliance so they go and make one? Since they will not put in the effort and activity in a community their own community idea most be infinitely better since the qualities of hard-working and active are not within the context of the alliance? Hmm, I would hate to be apart of a culture that encourages that sort of behavior, one that encourages you to just leave if you don't want to put in hard-work (and go make your own thing). A member in a small alliance doesn't mean any more to the alliance then they would in a big alliance if there is no hard-work and no activity. A non-contributing member is just NS regardless of the alliance structure. Do I wish to see 80 good alliances on CN and not 100's of ones that don't ever attribute to anything? Yes. It'd make war planning a lot easier. It'd make finding tech easier. It'd make war more wide-scale and infinitely more fun. We're in a large war now but due to the proliferation of micro-alliances there is so much NS uninvolved that this shouldn't be called a Great War. Many micros, if/when they disband and merge back into the parent alliance see RoK/Athens (as both have had plenty of merges iirc) could of just worked at being a good member at an established alliance to make it all that it can be. Since most alliances are inherently in part, a meritocracy, hard work can get people to places where their desire to be "political leaders" or have the power to say "do what I want" and inherently give them more power then if they were to make a microalliance. Now, the benefits of micro-alliances are their ability to screw up more so then most major alliances and set off wars. See OV for Karma War, see the almost war of Athens vs KoN (KoN should of been smart and got a protectorate, Athens should of been smart and realized that it would of been a trigger point for war), and many other past examples. So in that sense, micro-alliances do serve a purpose to speed up the cyclical nature of war and peace which I am always a fan of. But what it comes down to are many people in micro-alliances taking the quick and easy way to less power to appease their self inflated egos by making their own "thing". These of course are my personal opinions of why I'm not a fan of micro-alliances in this day and age (2 years ago I was).

[ROMMELHSQ]

[quote name='King Louis the II' date='28 February 2010 - 11:11 PM' timestamp='1267388106' post='2208707']
I really tought that you were someone that used logic. I really did. You have all the right to hate us, and have a different oppinion. However, to talk crap about Sparta military is just plain delusional. If you prefer to live your own fantasy it is your right to do so. [b]However, if yoiu are really interested to know the truth try to learn about Sparta accomplishments during this war. Ask TOP top tier about their fights against us. Ask Liquid mercury, ask Extremerely Average. Ask most of IRON fighters.

Take a look at rankings and see how we did after fighting TOP/IRON/Legion/TOOL/OMFG. [/b]

I have read many of your postings and I really liked many of them (specially your peaceful phase). It is really disapointing to see that you become delusional.


If you want to say crap against us is your right. However to say lies just will make you a clown.
[/quote]
You are sucking in this war, totally. I'm in TOP, fought 3 spartans, and they sucked. I'm in the military of TOP command, and we know you suck at a grand level. All the people from the alliances you listed mentioned how you sucked to me.

The only thing you are good at is attacking your members who surrender to our side.

Edited March 1, 2010 by ROMMELHSQ

[Sephiroth]

Someone should keep track of all the reps alliances ask for in this war so we have a list to look at later and see how much relevance that has to do with what happens later on.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Methrage' date='28 February 2010 - 06:08 PM' timestamp='1267402294' post='2209065']
Someone should keep track of all the reps alliances ask for in this war so we have a list to look at later and see how much relevance that has to do with what happens later on.
[/quote]

Wait until you see the latest batch asked for.

[ROMMELHSQ]

[quote name='LiquidMercury' date='01 March 2010 - 03:25 AM' timestamp='1267403319' post='2209083']
Wait until you see the latest batch asked for.
[/quote]
They were entertaining!!!

Edited March 1, 2010 by ROMMELHSQ