Member List
Calendar
F.A.Q.
Search
Log Out
Pokemon Forum - Pokemon Elite 2000  
 

Go Back   Pokemon Forum - Pokemon Elite 2000 » Other Boards » Discussion

Discussion This is for discussion about current events (news), issues, politics, and any other topics of serious discussion. For more casual talk, go to the Other Chat board. Proper sentences, spelling, and grammar is especially strict in this board.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 12-16-2010, 01:34 PM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PainKiller View Post
Greed is only a concept. It only exists the way you perceive it in your own reality, nobody else's. Your argument is flawed.
Flawed is just a word it exists the way you perceive it in your own reality, nobody else's.

See where that kind of thinking takes us? Absolutely nowhere.
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-16-2010, 05:31 PM
Mawile-Danmaku's Avatar
Mawile-Danmaku Offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ponyville, riding Rarity
Posts: 2,107
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Just so you all know, the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil". I think that's going somewhere; if you love money too much, you'd do anything to get it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-16-2010, 05:36 PM
Master Groudon's Avatar
Master Groudon Offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Terra Cave
Posts: 921
Send a message via AIM to Master Groudon Send a message via Yahoo to Master Groudon
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

I beleive it is. Due to economy these days, people will do anything for money. I wish i could tell a story about my statement, but i got to go to algebra I.....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-16-2010, 11:30 PM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Red Lucario View Post
Following what I stated before Money can be anything and everything. The moment you trade your car for food it becomes a form of money therefore making your argument false saying value exists when money does not exist.



Oh there's your problem. You don't even know what money is.

Quote:
mon·ey (mn)
n. pl. mon·eys or mon·ies
1. A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquefiable account.
2. The official currency, coins, and negotiable paper notes issued by a government.
Money, by definition, is not a good or service. A car is a good. Food is a good. Hence, neither can be money. Money, by definition, is inherently without value. Value is only given to it by society. No object that intrinsically has value can be considered money.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-17-2010, 12:01 AM
Lan.exe's Avatar
Lan.exe Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,192
Send a message via AIM to Lan.exe
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mawile_rocks View Post
Just so you all know, the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil".
Indeed.

And look at the biggest example, cigarette companies. Hey, who cares if our product is highly addictive and the leading killer in North America the World, we make billions of dollars.

Yet this and other things are somehow okay with people because of the influence greedy corporations have on our society and the sheer stupidity of society in general.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-17-2010, 12:27 AM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Temporal Snake View Post
Indeed.

And look at the biggest example, cigarette companies. Hey, who cares if our product is highly addictive and the leading killer in North America the World, we make billions of dollars.

Yet this and other things are somehow okay with people because of the influence greedy corporations have on our society and the sheer stupidity of society in general.
The people who buy cigarettes are making the choice to buy cigarettes. It's not the manufacturer's fault that people are stupid enough to buy their products. It's not like tobacco companies advertise on television, or claim that their product doesn't kill people anymore.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-17-2010, 01:19 AM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lusankya View Post
Oh there's your problem. You don't even know what money is.



Money, by definition, is not a good or service. A car is a good. Food is a good. Hence, neither can be money. Money, by definition, is inherently without value. Value is only given to it by society. No object that intrinsically has value can be considered money.
I'm sorry but I am not going to repeat myself over and over again.

"A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquefiable account."

Last I checked this was exactly what I said. Now lets learn some new vocabulary:

"Liquidity-the ability or ease with which assets can be converted into money."

Lets see, hmmm, that means each good and service has a value related to money because a good or service can be converted in to money, and vice-versa

A medium can be anything or everything as long as it follows the purpose you have just defined.

Yes money by definition can only be considered without value if, as I have stated multiple times, value wasn't given to it. But because in society objects have value-which is why we can exchange them for goods and services, money has a direct relation to a tangible form of value. The more money, as in any medium that can be exchanged for goods and services which each have their own values, a person has the greater that person's net value is.

So yes, I know very well what money is. A good can become currency. Junk can become currency. Why? Because money is a medium in which things of value are exchanged. You are contradicting yourself by giving the definition then preceding to disqualify it.

I've tried to make it as clear as possible for you to understand what I am saying. Money is obtainable value because it is a medium for exchanging "goods" on your terms and objects of value on my terms. The only thing that classifies money as money is the very value and importance with which society gives it.

You can say if society didn't value things we wouldn't have money or greed but then we will fall into the difficult problem of figuring out how to exchange necessities. Oh wait, we won't value necessities which will lead to us all dying because we never desire anything even when we actually need them. If we don't have something we need its value as a necessity drives us to try to acquire it.
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-17-2010, 01:33 AM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Red Lucario View Post
I'm sorry but I am not going to repeat myself over and over again.

"A medium that can be exchanged for goods and services and is used as a measure of their values on the market, including among its forms a commodity such as gold, an officially issued coin or note, or a deposit in a checking account or other readily liquefiable account."

Last I checked this was exactly what I said. Now lets learn some new vocabulary:

"Liquidity-the ability or ease with which assets can be converted into money."

Lets see, hmmm, that means each good and service has a value related to money because a good or service can be converted in to money, and vice-versa

A medium can be anything or everything as long as it follows the purpose you have just defined.

Yes money by definition can only be considered without value if, as I have stated multiple times, value wasn't given to it. But because in society objects have value-which is why we can exchange them for goods and services, money has a direct relation to a tangible form of value. The more money, as in any medium that can be exchanged for goods and services which each have their own values, a person has the greater that person's net value is.

So yes, I know very well what money is. A good can become currency. Junk can become currency. Why? Because money is a medium in which things of value are exchanged. You are contradicting yourself by giving the definition then preceding to disqualify it.

I've tried to make it as clear as possible for you to understand what I am saying. Money is obtainable value because it is a medium for exchanging "goods" on your terms and objects of value on my terms. The only thing that classifies money as money is the very value and importance with which society gives it.

You can say if society didn't value things we wouldn't have money or greed but then we will fall into the difficult problem of figuring out how to exchange necessities. Oh wait, we won't value necessities which will lead to us all dying because we never desire anything even when we actually need them. If we don't have something we need its value as a necessity drives us to try to acquire it.
I know what you are saying. What you are saying is wrong. Your concept of money is so completely and utterly wrong I have trouble believing you can even concieve of such a notion. Get an Economics textbook, for goodness's sake. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Goods are not a currency. A medium of exchange is DIFFERENT from direct exchange of two goods or services. If I trade a car for food, I am not using money. I am trading. There is no medium of exchange. There is only a medium if I sell my car, then use the money to buy food. THAT is a medium of exchange. Money is not value, and anything to the contrary is just plain wrong. It is a measure of money, the same way an inch is a measure of distance. Does that make a ruler the same thing as distance? No. Stop saying it does. If a good becomes a currency, then it is not a good.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-17-2010, 03:05 AM
The Maple Syrup Baptist Offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In Canada being Canadian.
Posts: 7,123
Send a message via AIM to The Maple Syrup Baptist Send a message via MSN to The Maple Syrup Baptist
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Selfish intentions are the root of all evil. Money is the root of nothing, it's just a vessel.

I'm also on lunch break and rushing out a quick say on this so that might make no sense. =P
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-17-2010, 03:07 AM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lusankya View Post
I know what you are saying. What you are saying is wrong. Your concept of money is so completely and utterly wrong I have trouble believing you can even concieve of such a notion. Get an Economics textbook, for goodness's sake. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Goods are not a currency. A medium of exchange is DIFFERENT from direct exchange of two goods or services. If I trade a car for food, I am not using money. I am trading. There is no medium of exchange. There is only a medium if I sell my car, then use the money to buy food. THAT is a medium of exchange. Money is not value, and anything to the contrary is just plain wrong. It is a measure of money, the same way an inch is a measure of distance. Does that make a ruler the same thing as distance? No. Stop saying it does. If a good becomes a currency, then it is not a good.
I do believe you misunderstand me again. I told you you were right about money not being value. I even stated that money in absence of society has no value on its own. You don't have to tell me what I already agreed with you about.

I then changed my point to say what the relationship between money and value was.

The only thing I stated you were wrong about was your statement that goods cannot be a form of money.

If you traded your car you are using your car as a medium of exchange. How so? If you didn't have something to exchange how would you trade? You traded using your car as a means of trade. A direct exchange cannot exist without a means of exchange because there will be no way to trade.

If I work at a factory and they pay me _____ I can use ______ to get goods, because my only means of trade is what they pay me. So if they pay me in skunks I can only trade skunks for goods. Now when I trade I will barter to argue the value of my form of currency, skunks, because that is the only means of trade I have unless I use the goods I already have.

Our ideas of medium of exchange are completely different. From what I understand you think that medium of exchange means the "middle man" between the trading of two goods.

So following your definition a trade will work like this:

Good--->Money---->Another good

Which is valid.

My definition cuts the middle man because bartering existed long before a uniform form of currency existed.

So following my thought process. A trade will work like this:

Good<--->Another good

Because "good" is traded for "another good" both are means of trade because without either neither party will be able to exchange unless one simply gives a good for nothing in exchange.

You are not wrong to say that money is not a good. You are wrong to say that goods cannot be money or currency. World War II vets used Cigarettes as a form of currency while in prison to trade for more food, clothing, or other things they may want. Cigarettes, a good, was used instead of a dollar as a form of currency. But it was still a good because they smoked some of the cigarettes they traded for. In essence cigarettes became the new dollar while in that prison.

An economics textbook won't tell you about that. Because bartering is a bit of a thing of the past except in Spain and Mexico.
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG

Last edited by Blood Red Lucario; 12-17-2010 at 03:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-17-2010, 04:14 AM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Red Lucario View Post
I do believe you misunderstand me again. I told you you were right about money not being value. I even stated that money in absence of society has no value on its own. You don't have to tell me what I already agreed with you about.

I then changed my point to say what the relationship between money and value was.

The only thing I stated you were wrong about was your statement that goods cannot be a form of money.

If you traded your car you are using your car as a medium of exchange. How so? If you didn't have something to exchange how would you trade? You traded using your car as a means of trade. A direct exchange cannot exist without a means of exchange because there will be no way to trade.

If I work at a factory and they pay me _____ I can use ______ to get goods, because my only means of trade is what they pay me. So if they pay me in skunks I can only trade skunks for goods. Now when I trade I will barter to argue the value of my form of currency, skunks, because that is the only means of trade I have unless I use the goods I already have.

Our ideas of medium of exchange are completely different. From what I understand you think that medium of exchange means the "middle man" between the trading of two goods.

So following your definition a trade will work like this:

Good--->Money---->Another good

Which is valid.

My definition cuts the middle man because bartering existed long before a uniform form of currency existed.

So following my thought process. A trade will work like this:

Good<--->Another good

Because "good" is traded for "another good" both are means of trade because without either neither party will be able to exchange unless one simply gives a good for nothing in exchange.

You are not wrong to say that money is not a good. You are wrong to say that goods cannot be money or currency. World War II vets used Cigarettes as a form of currency while in prison to trade for more food, clothing, or other things they may want. Cigarettes, a good, was used instead of a dollar as a form of currency. But it was still a good because they smoked some of the cigarettes they traded for. In essence cigarettes became the new dollar while in that prison.

An economics textbook won't tell you about that. Because bartering is a bit of a thing of the past except in Spain and Mexico.
Nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Barter is a method of exchange by which goods or services are directly exchanged for other goods or services without using a medium of exchange, such as money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
A medium of exchange is an intermediary used in trade to avoid the inconveniences of a pure barter system.
By contrast, as William Stanley Jevons argued, in a barter system there must be a coincidence of wants before two people can trade – one must want exactly what the other has to offer, when and where it is offered, so that the exchange can occur. A medium of exchange permits the value of goods to be assessed and rendered in terms of the intermediary, most often, a form of money widely accepted to buy any other good.
Again, you show your complete misunderstanding of the subject. Bartering is by definition, trade without using a medium of exchange. A medium of exchange, is, by definition, the "intermediary". You are completely wrong in affirming otherwise. Thus, bartering is, by definition, trade without using money. Hence, there exists trades that do not use money. Hence, money is not necessarily value. Hence, you are wrong. Again.

Stop trying to logic and example your way out of this. People much smarter than either of us have decided on the definitions of these terms a long time ago, and you are completely messing them up.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."

Last edited by Lusankya; 12-17-2010 at 04:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-17-2010, 05:55 AM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lusankya View Post
Nonsense.





Again, you show your complete misunderstanding of the subject. Bartering is by definition, trade without using a medium of exchange. A medium of exchange, is, by definition, the "intermediary". You are completely wrong in affirming otherwise. Thus, bartering is, by definition, trade without using money. Hence, there exists trades that do not use money. Hence, money is not necessarily value. Hence, you are wrong. Again.

Stop trying to logic and example your way out of this. People much smarter than either of us have decided on the definitions of these terms a long time ago, and you are completely messing them up.
Medium has a definition of a means of doing something.

Ex: Exercising is a medium of relieving stress

So that means that money as a "medium of exchange" can be considered as "a means" of exchange. This is where my theory of money comes from. Money from the definition you posted is, yes, only an intermediary. The definition refers to money in its literal sense. A unified means of trade in which value can be assessed. That means the more money something is worth the more value it has.

You stated before that a ruler is not distance itself but a measure of it. The measure of something is a quantifiable example of what it measures[Definition 8]. The more money a person has the greater his value. The more valuable goods he has the greater his value. He can only get both goods and money by being evil and taking them for a selfish gain or trading either money or goods/services for more goods in what is deemed by both parties a fair exchange.

I am not trying to logic or example my way out of anything. I use examples to explain my point. I use logic to break down how I come to my conclusions.

Since money is "a quantity, degree, or proportion" of value, greedy people will desire what will make their value increase and therefore desire money. They will desire goods as well. But they can get goods with more money.

The main fact is this Greed is a root to evil and money- as a quantity of value- is a root to greed. Directly relating money to evil. Money causes greed and greed causes/is evil.

Your own definition defines money as a measure of value. Every single point I have made has been to show you the relation of money to greed. In our debate over this issue we have focused too much on the definition of money.

I am sure you and I both can agree that Money is a measure of value.

And from what I understand you agree that Greed is a root to evil.

So if a greedy person desires money or some way to increase his value Wouldn't you say that money or the measure of value leads to greed?
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-17-2010, 06:45 PM
Masami Offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Im British, Its not a big deal.
Posts: 898
Send a message via AIM to Masami Send a message via MSN to Masami
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Religion.
gg.
inb4 word rule.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-17-2010, 08:58 PM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood Red Lucario View Post
Medium has a definition of a means of doing something.

Ex: Exercising is a medium of relieving stress


So that means that money as a "medium of exchange" can be considered as "a means" of exchange. This is where my theory of money comes from. Money from the definition you posted is, yes, only an intermediary. The definition refers to money in its literal sense. A unified means of trade in which value can be assessed. That means the more money something is worth the more value it has.
Sigh.

Your theory of money is worthless. It is meaningless. It is pointless. Nobody cares about your theory of money. Nobody even wants to know your theory of money. Because money is a well-established concept, a term that already has a strict definition that is used by millions of people every single day. Your definitions are meaningless. They do not matter. Stop using them.

So far, you have failed to correctly use a single important term in any of your posts. You very clearly do not know anything about what you are saying. You have some strange, self-defined terms that makes sense in your own mind, but that do not relate or are important to anything that occurs in reality. So stop trying to argue using "your" definition of money, or "your" theory of value. Your theories don't matter. Until you find a credible source that defines money the way you do, everything that you say based off "your" theory of money is inherently worthless.

Quote:
So if a greedy person desires money or some way to increase his value Wouldn't you say that money or the measure of value leads to greed?
No. I wouldn't. Because a greedy person can easily desire water. He could desire affection. He could desire power. He could desire any number of things that have absolutely nothing to do with money. Furthermore, greed isn't even the only kind of evil. There are an infinite number of possible crimes that are committed that have nothing to do with money. EVEN IF your theory of money had any sort of validity, YOU WOULD STILL BE WRONG, because EVEN IF money was the source of all greed, greed is not the only form of evil.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-17-2010, 10:24 PM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Is money truley the root of all Evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lusankya View Post
Sigh.

Your theory of money is worthless. It is meaningless. It is pointless. Nobody cares about your theory of money. Nobody even wants to know your theory of money. Because money is a well-established concept, a term that already has a strict definition that is used by millions of people every single day. Your definitions are meaningless. They do not matter. Stop using them.

So far, you have failed to correctly use a single important term in any of your posts. You very clearly do not know anything about what you are saying. You have some strange, self-defined terms that makes sense in your own mind, but that do not relate or are important to anything that occurs in reality. So stop trying to argue using "your" definition of money, or "your" theory of value. Your theories don't matter. Until you find a credible source that defines money the way you do, everything that you say based off "your" theory of money is inherently worthless.



No. I wouldn't. Because a greedy person can easily desire water. He could desire affection. He could desire power. He could desire any number of things that have absolutely nothing to do with money. Furthermore, greed isn't even the only kind of evil. There are an infinite number of possible crimes that are committed that have nothing to do with money. EVEN IF your theory of money had any sort of validity, YOU WOULD STILL BE WRONG, because EVEN IF money was the source of all greed, greed is not the only form of evil.
"My" theory of money is not worthless in a philosophical question that the original poster has asked. You are sticking so firmly to the literal form of money you are not even taking into consideration what its figurative meaning is. In philosophy the literal and the figurative both share an equal worth. So the accepted concept of money has as much worth as "my" theory because in a philosophical debate such as this both "my" theory and the literal meaning have to be taken into consideration because the quote "money is the root of all evil" is open for interpretation. Money may just be a general term for a number of things depending on how one thinks the original speaker meant money to be used or it can be as literal as you have stated it to be. Since "money" figuratively is a symbol of wealth and value one could interpret the original speaker meant money as a general term to refer to objects of value.

As for credible evidence I have stated several examples that validate my points. You continue to ignore them by calling them worthless and saying everything I say is invalid. You are now not arguing you are now being dismissive. Because you interpret money literally based on known definitions you refuse to acknowledge any other interpretation because you believe your literal interpretation is the only correct interpretation.

If you really know what I am saying you wouldn't try to call me wrong on some thing I never said. I never said Greed was the only kind of evil. Now you are putting words into my mouth. I've said several times greed is a root to evil. The first post that I linked money to evil I said "money is a root to evil".The only thing I have been trying to prove to you is that money is quantifiable value and greed is the desire for quantifiable value or things of value. All of the objects and substances each have their own value and can be bought with money or used as a form of currency.

And I also never said greedy people only want money. You may comprehend my logic to mean that but I have said the greedy want money". I said "greedy people want money or anything of value" Here I refer to money as you defined it and anything of value as water, affection, power, Etc. Surely if you knew what I was saying you would have realized this.
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG

Last edited by Blood Red Lucario; 12-17-2010 at 10:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Style Design: AlienSector.com