Bitcoin Forum
June 16, 2024, 05:57:29 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 ... 164 »
1961  Other / Meta / Re: Suing Bitcointalk.org and Theymos for $20,000,000 for facilitating scams on: May 20, 2016, 04:09:50 PM
1962  Other / Meta / Re: bitcointalk run by jews? on: May 20, 2016, 08:36:04 AM
As the person who secretly runs BitcoinTalk I can confirm, having an intact dick and rather shapely nose, that the forum is a bastion of WASPism.
1963  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Bitfury: "16nm... sales to public start shortly" on: May 19, 2016, 10:17:14 AM
I am still hopeful, although if the 1 BTC bet payoff (no sign of it after over a month  Wink) ....

Really???
A department head of a multi million $ outfit makes a clear public bet and then welshes on paying when he loses?
Who the fuck do these people think they are?

The asshole needs red trust for that, let alone for his highly misleading posts and subsequent silence.
Still, I guess I shouldn't expect any better from someone who's bezzie buddies with the crew that run BitClub Network.

1964  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: ▁ ▂ ▄ ▅ ▆ Cloudmining 101 (ponzi risk assessment) ▆ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▁ on: May 19, 2016, 10:05:05 AM
Even if HashOcean is the #1 scam ponzi.... let it be. I don't mind.
As long I'm earning these little amount of money I'm happy.. >snip

Not wishing to kick this conversation to death, but this is the crux of the matter.
Not wishing either to get all idealistic but there is a concept in Bitcoin, like in many other places, called 'community'.
Sharing skepticism about 'investment opportunities' is part of that.
Ponzi schemes are a blight both in crypto and fiat, they are run with the intent to defraud, degrade the investing environment and prey on the vulnerable. Whether you believe that Caveat Emptor should reign supreme is up to your personal values.

By "not minding" about supporting schemes which are likely to be fraudulent, just so long as you make some money, you effectively facilitate them and encourage their proliferation thru greed.
If you're cool with doing that, there's nothing more to say, apart from "being part of the society" does not involve stealing from your neighbour.
1965  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: ▁ ▂ ▄ ▅ ▆ Cloudmining 101 (ponzi risk assessment) ▆ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▁ on: May 18, 2016, 08:40:28 PM
I'm not here to fight, argue or anything.
I just wanted to share my experience.
And no, i haven't lost any money

The point of this thread is to help people analyse the likelihood of schemes being scams, especially ponzis. Virtually every one of those listed as "collapsed as expected" did, for a period of time, pay out.
It is up to you whether you take any notice of these ratings before investing your money. You obviously don't, so what value is your "experience" to others?
We are all aware that people are saying they receive payment from HashOcean. They will continue saying that until it stops. That what ponzis do, pay out, then stop. That's when people lose money.
If you don't want to fight or argue, then I suggest you don't put yourself in a situation where it becomes likely, by making posts of no value as above.
1966  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: BREAKING NEWS: SATOSHI FINALLY REVEALED! on: May 16, 2016, 07:02:09 AM
................hits and clicks..........make some cash..........Posting stuff ...................

Yobit irony.
1967  Other / Meta / Re: Whats wrong about this guy?! on: May 13, 2016, 05:55:31 PM
Is this not allowed to ask?

You are being naive, he knows exactly what he's doing and doesn't care
A) Whether it will be used to scam
B) What you think

Because your broken-english posts are cluttering his attempt to sell accounts to scammers.  Don't complain when you get posts deleted from moderated threads.

"Broken english" isn't hyphenated.
1968  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 291.2409 BTC for a 0.0001 BTC transaction . on: May 13, 2016, 02:59:52 PM

But if I recall correctly, BitClub said they'll share a portion of that fee with their customers (those who purchased cloud mining with them).

You don't recall correctly.
1969  Economy / Investor-based games / Re: How About NEW LEGIT PONZI site on the future ? on: May 12, 2016, 08:50:34 PM
legit and ponzi don't go together, ever.

Why not? We have already seen honest programs like N9N, Delta Investments etc. don't say bullshit please.

Delta wasn't a ponzi. Gladimor paid everyone when it closed. Ponzis don't repay everyone when they close. That's what makes them a ponzi. Durrr.

HYIP = high-yield investment program != Ponzi scheme  Wink
I don't see any connection between HYIP term and Ponzi scheme, that's just a misunderstand created by ignorant people, so yes Delta Investments was a HYIP (although many DT / high ranked members claimed it was a Ponzi scheme).

It is possible to create an investment program which gives a (comparatively) high yield, like Gladimor did. He was essentially speculating (gambling) on alt coin price movements and promising to make good any losses from his own reserve. It didn't come to that. His trading was successful and it was my understanding he broke the T&C's of his service provider and had to shut it down. There was no dishonesty that I could see, he published his trades and took an agreed percentage as his payment.
I said this in my trust feedback for him. What other people say is up to them.

The term HYIP was hijacked by the scam industry for pretend credibility and is synonymous with Ponzi Scheme because the yield to investors is not created by legit business activity and funded by profits, but paid out from new investor deposits. When they slow down, the scheme collapses.
Look at the HYIP's on the monitor sites, they are claiming to be "forex trading" or "arbitraging" or other such lies.

The fact that the term "ponzi game" has been created to describe something which pays out early investors at the cost of later ones, but doesn't claim to do anything else, is a relatively new invention. It is still the basis for a scam, despite the operators claiming like this guy Cryptopot, to be honest blahblah.

The main problem for me with these games ever being legit or fair is the fact that other players can never be sure that the early (winning) deposits are not those of the admin.

Despite this Cryptopot's flashy website, I don't see them solving that problem, so they must be considered a scam by default.
If people like you think they can outwit the inherent fact that, by definition, there will be more losers than winners, even if the admin doesn't run off with all the money first, that's entirely up to them.
But when they start promoting scam sites by publically claiming large returns in order to tempt in new investors and increase their own payout at their expense, then they are no better than the scammers themselves and end up with the same red trust.
1970  Economy / Investor-based games / Re: How About NEW LEGIT PONZI site on the future ? on: May 11, 2016, 09:41:25 PM
legit and ponzi don't go together, ever.

Why not? We have already seen honest programs like N9N, Delta Investments etc. don't say bullshit please.

Delta wasn't a ponzi. Gladimor paid everyone when it closed. Ponzis don't repay everyone when they close. That's what makes them a ponzi. Durrr.
1971  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Forum moderation policy on: May 11, 2016, 01:15:42 PM
The policy to not remove anything worked when the forum was small. Now that we have thousands of posts a day, we can't afford 50% of them being junk. The moderators are now instructed to be less tolerant of low-value posts.

Some guidelines:

1. Free speech - you can say anything as long as it is relevant and presented in a calm and polite manner. Swearing, SHOUTING etc. make your post more likely to be removed.
2. No zero value posts or threads, like "SELL SELL SELL"
3. No pointless or uninteresting threads.
4. No referral code spam
5. No NSFW content
How difficult would it be to implement a voting system for posts using the current forum software?
i agree with you it is  difficult would it be to implement a voting system for posts using the current forum software?
this is  difficult would it be to implement a voting system for posts using the current forum software.
By the "voting system" that you all are talking about, am I correct in assuming that it is a voting system to automatically remove a thread? That would be a great addition to easily reduce the junk threads in the forum like those random-generated usernames that posts with junk.

No voting system would work because multiple accounts are allowed and 'brigading' would follow, leading to neverending disputes. Basic junk is handled ok presently. Signature campaigns create most of the worthless posts problem imo.
1972  Economy / Reputation / Re: KWH IS USING TRUST INCORRECTLY? GIVE YOUR OPINION! on: May 10, 2016, 08:28:01 PM

I have taken a vouch copy of a very new member on this site, he said it was an kind of illegal method.

Why would you do that in the first place?
Unless you live under a rock, you must have known there is a push back going on here against crappy scamming/illegal stuff and negative trust is being left for people supporting/facilitating it.

Don't blame/harass KWH, this is called consequences of actions.
1973  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: HashOcean.com - Cloud Mining Service on: May 10, 2016, 12:39:56 PM
One idea!

I think they dont mine with hardware they collect the Bitcoins and make speculation on the bitcoin markets. Maybe with good bots and they have earnings much more as 40% in one month. In this case they can pay over years good earnings and make by themselves good earnings.

Some people earn their money at forex. This people make it with bitcoins. If they are good or have good bots they can do a long time but not for ever that is clear.



Yeah, but that's not quite the point is it?
For that total guess to hold water, it means they are also big time liars with all the nonsense about being 'cloudmining' a total fabrication.
I don't know about you, but I don't fancy giving money to some anon in the internet who is telling complete fiction.

Re: Forex trading and making loadsa mone, there's an much quoted stat in the biz called 90/90/90 which stands for 90% of traders lose 90% of their money in the first 90 days.
The idea that you plug in a bot and watch the profits roll in is laughable, nearly as laughable as someone paying 50% a month interest on their stake money.
Fail.
1974  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Bitfury: "16nm... sales to public start shortly" on: May 10, 2016, 09:52:20 AM
Anyone notice that hashrate has started climbing fairly fast again, after almost a month of near-flat?

 Smells a bit of SOMEONE bringing some new gear online somewhere.....


Fwiw the guy from Mining Sweden was going on about a Bitmain S9 being ready for release very soon, can't find the post at the mo.
1975  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs on: May 09, 2016, 12:52:59 PM
To our valued customers ,

As of May 4, 2016 Spondoolies-tech has ceased operations.

It has been a great privilege to serve the Bitcoin mining community and especially our customers. We deeply appreciate the support and faith that you have placed in us and wish you success in your future endeavors.

Sincerely,

Guy Corem CEO
Spondoolies-tech

So what are you and the other guys (no pun) going to do now? Seems like you had a good team that made some good product.
Do you think there's any space in the mining environment for small/medium size businesses?
1976  Economy / Speculation / Re: Lose all your capital fast, with MatTheCat and his TA 101A! on: May 09, 2016, 12:43:12 PM
That was a good hold last week in the low 40's.
I added a little more, but will stop it out at break even if we get back there this week as that would be a lower short term high, not fitting the bull side for me, being so close to important resistance around 70. A bit weak handed, I don't mind buying breakouts, but not so much anticipating them.
If we do break out above 70 it will be interesting to see how far it runs on short covering. Might even get tempted to add a bit more on a 78/80 daily confirm for a run into the 500's, but that would be too logical.  

If you are referring to that zerohedge article anticipating a massive short squeeze, what I would say to that is "where are the shorts"?...


I do read ZH mainly for its comedic value, but no, not for that reason. Despite people saying that TA doesn't 'apply' to Bitcoin because Bitcoin, I trade it just like anything else and know from experience that when you have a series of attempts on previous highs that you only need a few shorts for a squeeze to kick in on very low volume when they break.
There may not be much buying on stops if we do get to 470/500 but I think there maybe even less selling. Why would there be long liquidation in any volume just above previous highs?
1977  Economy / Speculation / Re: Lose all your capital fast, with MatTheCat and his TA 101A! on: May 09, 2016, 11:40:50 AM
That was a good hold last week in the low 40's.
I added a little more, but will stop it out at break even if we get back there this week as that would be a lower short term high, not fitting the bull side for me, being so close to important resistance around 70. A bit weak handed, I don't mind buying breakouts, but not so much anticipating them.
If we do break out above 70 it will be interesting to see how far it runs on short covering. Might even get tempted to add a bit more on a 78/80 daily confirm for a run into the 500's, but that would be too logical. 
1978  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin IS basically DESTROYED on: May 08, 2016, 08:56:55 PM
It's interesting how often China is mentioned in this thread!

What's your point?  Obviously China will be mentioned if it's subject matter in OP...you mining signature payouts or something?

Hello Arrakeen.

No, of course, China is mentioned. I was talking about the frequency of it being mentioned - it seems to be the center of discussion.

I would have expected many arguments to be found against China ruling Bitcoin, but there are little presented so far.

You have not contributed anything so far either Smiley

Would you regard all of this as pure hyperbole then?

I am speaking on behalf of TPTB_need_war aka AnonyMint, who is quoted in the OP, because he is currently banned for 9 more days due to calling theymos and gmaxwell out on their censorship of a potential technical back door in Bitcoin. There is a simpler explanation of Satoshi's obviously intentional technical error. It is obviously intentional because it was quite well known by 2009 that the HMAC formulation is more secure yet Satoshi used the more suspect double hashing everywhere in BitCON.

I will be editing this post and adding answers and rebuttals to the various incorrect posts that litter this thread. Please check back and read this post, because I will not be posting again in this thread, and instead I will edit this post to add new information as others continue to make posts that need to be refuted.

Please quote my post because the mods will probably delete it and ban me again.

"Blockstream implementing their SegWit soft fork Trojan Horse"

Lmao this guy is losing it. The blockstream FUDsters know no limits on their nonsense. The trojan horse was the Bitcoin XT, then Bitcoin Classic hard fork attempts, not segregated witness, segwit is actual advance in scaling Bitcoin. Whatever, it's a waste of time dealing with this shit.

Segregrated Witness is not the problem. The problem is that Blockstream is sneaking in a new soft fork versioning protocol at the same time. This new versioning protocol when combined with collusion with China's oligarchy control over mining, will insure together the elite can change the protocol of Bitcoin at-will any time. Why do you think Blockstream has received $70+ million in investor funding from the financial community. Blockstream has no viable way to make a profit. The company exists as a way to take control over Bitcoin. Note that Classic and XT didn't really solve the centralization problem either, but at least they didn't hand soft fork versioning control to the devil.

They will send their propaganda machine here to discredit me. They always do that. Then they ban me. They don't want you to know the truth. I don't care anymore. You fools are doomed. This is my last post on this matter. I have other programming work to do. It is up to you fools to get organized and stop being useless eaters and cattle for the elite. I can lead you to water, but I can't teach your dumb asses to drink. I tried to teach, but I get drowned out by the trolls and propaganda who are hired to keep the truth from you.

Instead of a tinfoil hat, I swear the guy has an entire tinfoil skull.  The sky is perpetually falling every day and it's always Armageddon forever.  A healthy dose of skepticism is fair enough, but don't take it to extreme, bordeline-crackpot, levels.

Bitcoin is just fine.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

So how many years from now china will own 98 % of mining power HuhHuh??

Here is a link to the cryptocoinnews.com article and also an estimate follows in the linked thread. Realize that is just one former cattle farmer who currently mines 50 of the 1200 BTC per day and he plans to increase that to 200 BTC of the 600 mined per day after the halving. Just one cattle farmer will be mining 30% of Bitcoin.

Why would they do anything detrimental to Bitcoin? It would hurt them more than anyone financially.

With an oligarchy in control of the mining, they can choose to increase transaction fees to the maximum the market can bear, not the competitive rate for transaction fees. They could also work together with Blockstream to increase the 21 million coin limit, so they can earn more coins. None of this would hurt Bitcoin, because obviously none of you care. You will suck BitCon's cock because you think it is a "better gold" as Satoshi advertised it to you in the white paper.

Additionally these mega mining farms in China don't attain their loans and nearly free electricity without returning favors to the elite who are in charge. In effect, this means Bitcoin has become just another fiat system. They can KYC identification requirements on it the future and pretty much do what ever they want. And you will lick their balls because you have no other choice. Don't tell me you will switch coins, because no other coin will have the adoption and mining security.

I find it really hilarious how you think you are supporting something that will change the world in a better way, yet it is just more of the same oligarch controlled BS that we've always had.

how is that centralised? there's over a billion chinese  Huh

It is rather good for Bitcoin, if a lot of people in China have some bitcoins

A billion aren't mining, only a few very well connected few. An oligarchy is taking form. The coins are only going to a few oligarchs

why they should destroy their own business? 51% will never happen, with their cheap electricity they are earning a shitload of money...

They want to maximize their profit and be in control of their destiny.

Most of these Chinese mining firms are pools, so like most pools that are extremely big, if they get too big, miners will hop to a different one.

It isn't just the pools that are the problem, but that the mining farms are large and concentrating the 51+% amongst a few oligarchs. This will only grow more centralized over time, because TPTB_need_war explained in his technical analysis, that profitable proof-of-work always accrues over time to maximum economies-of-scale. There are several reasons for that including propagation advantages of being the first to win more blocks, so don't waste hashrate mining on the wrong fork for a short period, which over time gradually depletes the other miners of relative profits. It is more complex than that. You need to read his entire analysis to understand.

I don't care if China controls most of the mining market, if people do care about that, they can purchase the mining power and start mining.

That is an incorrect understanding. As I explained above, the mining hashrate economically accrues to those miners with the greatest economies-of-scale. No one can buy mining equipment to offset that, because the miners in China are ostensibly getting nearly free electricity and nearly 0% interest loans. It is a corruption charged to the collective. Don't you understand how Communism works? We have this system now in the West too. Capitalism is dead. Long live Marxism!

I really don't care because I agree with you and many of us still don't sell our Bitcoins because if it goes mainstream in China or even a little popular, we'll be all rich/millionaires. The whole idealistic anarco utopia many still think Bitcoin is long dead, that's why Ethereum and other cool projects are emerging (even if they end up having the same fate eventually).

Look to be straightforward BTC hasn't been destroyed yet. It is very much living. I would suggest you to not worry about China and mining and focus on making profit with this system now.  Wink

Exactly. You guys don't care whether Bitcoin ends up as a totalitarian digital hell. You only care about making a profit hell or highwater, come what may.

So if China owns a large portion of the system, we're doomed? But what if bitcoins are centralized in America or in Europe? It's going to be an entire story, right? I mean, once again western power has an influence to this point.

Why are you building a strawman argument to deflect the debate away from the important issue. Obviously it doesn't matter where the oligarchy on mining is located. The only thing that matters is that profitable proof-of-work will always end up entirely centralized. TPTB_need_war has explained why this is the case because he an expert on the economics and technology, despite what some trolls might want to mislead you to believe.

BTC will do right when there will be decentralized exchangers.

And that will only happen because of my work to fix the jamming problem that plagued all DE designs. The trolls want to ridicule me, and I don't yet get the recognition. But that is okay. I just want you to know the truth.

.... with their cheap electricity they are earning a shitload of money...

What you mean is they're stealing a shitload of money.  

Taxpayer money converted into electricity by government-owned power utility.

Electricity converted into bitcoin and bitcoin into privatized money by miners.

In China bitcoin mining is essentially just a channel to steal tax money.  The fact that it hasn't been forced to shut down or use non-subsidized electricity by now is probably evidence that someone is taking bribes.  (What a surprise!  That NEVER happens in China!   Cheesy)

Finally someone with a brain stem! Congrats!

Yeah it is more of charging the expenses to the collective and keeping the profits for themselves. Same as the banksters did with the bailouts.

$1 million of your investor money every day going to those fat cats. And circulating back around as $70 million in grease money for Blockstream to rape you with.

Like the Capitalist West have been doing for years? The Chinese took a opportunity when they saw it and they used it... How can you blame them?

Yeah why care if the banksters keep the profits and charge the bailouts to the people. Love that Communist/Fascism, don't you?

well good for them if they are able to steal unfair and legal scam from government, called tax

Yeah it was great when the banksters stole the bailouts from the government! Excellent logic.  Roll Eyes

Good to see you want BitCON to be all about stealing. Nice world you want to promote.

Personally I'd be more worried if the hashrate was under NSA's jurisdiction.

Chinese miners have acted OK so far

You haven't studied the history of oligarchies. They can only act one way. Give it a little time. The collusion is taking form. By the time, you realize it, it will be too late to do anything about it or to change. Bitcoin will be too well established by that time, just like fiat is now. You will bend over and take in your ass, because you didn't think it was a problem when I told you and then when you realize you will have no more choice nor options to pursue.
1979  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: ▁ ▂ ▄ ▅ ▆ Cloudmining 101 (ponzi risk assessment) ▆ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▁ on: May 08, 2016, 08:33:27 PM
It seems haobtc.com has already gone.

so it wasnt so legit... or did the refund people?
What are y'all talking about? All they did was lower the interest rates...


Hao announced a while ago that they would be reducing interest rates due to the halving, which is logical. I know it's not here yet, but maybe it's a defensive move until they see what happens to the price.
At least its logical, unlike blatant scams like HashOcean which say they can magically maintain ROI's no matter what.

https://www.bikeji.com/t/3343

Quote from: HaoBtc 24th Feb 2016
With Bitcoin mining the arrival of the second period by half, and our daily earnings also will be reduced to about half its current, so the corresponding month interest also account for the decline in adjusted.
Adjustment time: halving the period in mid-June, so we adjust the interest period from May 1 onward, the new contracts will be issued from May 1 start of interest in accordance with the new standards.

Don't know what gnumgnum means but their website is fine


1980  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 291.2409 BTC for a 0.0001 BTC transaction . on: May 07, 2016, 08:47:32 PM
Please provide a link to an official public statement made by Bitclub. ty.


If you had bothered to follow that link you would have found this, it was sent to BitClub members thru their internal system.
As far as I am aware, there was no "official statement" per se.

Quote
BITCLUB NEWS

Record Setting Block... By Mistake!
Date: April 26th
Our mining pool got very very lucky today! We mined a block that was worth a total of 316.523 Bitcoin (about $147,000 USD) Here is the block - https://blockchain.info/block-height/409008 However, this was clearly a mistake made from a single transaction within the block that accidentally sent 291 Bitcoin as the transaction fee instead of putting it to the receiving address. We have actually seen this happen before many times but never on this scale. In fact, looking at all the blocks ever mined this may be the biggest mistake of all time. After doing some research into this transaction it seems to be a very unique transaction. Our initial thoughts are possibly a mixing service or some type of automated payment script that may have malfunctioned and put the wrong amount in the wrong place. (this is just a guess). We are currently waiting for someone to reach out and claim their mistake so we can verify them and send this Bitcoin back. But so far, as of this posting, nobody has been able to verify it. If we cannot verify the details then we are giving it all back to the Bitcoin community! We feel like this Bitcoin does not belong to us or our members and because it was a mistake made from what looks to be a pretty shady source we can use it for good if nobody comes forward to claim it. This gives us an opportunity to prove we are one of the good guys in this industry and despite the stigma of being an MLM and being in the Bitcoin space we can operate in an ethical manner for the benefit of everyone. So, here is what we are going to do... We are going to give the rightful owner 1 week to contact us and verify themselves. If nobody emerges during this time then we are going to donate the entire 291 Bitcoin back to the community or to a Bitcoin related charity. Ideally, we would like to provide a portion to Bitcoin core development, the Bitcoin Foundation, and we will be open for other allocation options that benefit the community as a whole! We hope this opens up some eyes as to what kind of organization we are, but honestly people will more than likley continue to believe what they want and we will continue to do what we've been doing since we launched BitClub Network 18 months ago... EXECUTE OUR MODEL! We will keep you posted as we try and validate the owner of this transaction, but one thing is for sure... We will not be keeping this Bitcoin either way!
Sincerely, -BCN Support Team


Anyway the week's long up, so who are they giving the money to, is the next question?

Quote
we will be open for other allocation options that benefit the community as a whole

Like what, I wonder?
Pages: « 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 ... 164 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!