The technical implementation is of extreme relevance due to the nature of the transactions. Intent is not relevant. Bitcoin are like contracts. If you sign a contract you cannot back out of it simply by saying "i didnt intend to sign", you have already agreed to it. Dont intend to have things automatically signed for you? Then dont setup buggy software, simple.
You know what this means? Laws have been deprecated! Woo! We are no longer slaves! FREEDOM! |
|
|
|
These laws would be applicable had intersango not voluntarily relinquished ownership of the coins. When you send bitcoins, you are no longer the owner of those bitcoins. They are therefore not your property and there is no legal right to them. Does everyone forget that these transactions are digitally signed? Intersango "agreed" by signing the coins away to bendavis that they are no longer the owners. Unlike mistakenly sending a tangible item that at the very simplest form you could simply "go and retrieve", once you are no longer the owner of the bitcoin, that's it and nothing can or will be done.
edit: in fact, since bendavis was the owner of the bitcoin after the transactions, i'd say intersango likely opens themselves up for a counter-suit for attempted extortion.
This (transfer vs possession) is interesting discussion (started a new thread for this) that contains some comments from this thread: [05:19] <phantomcircuit> it is our property [05:19] <phantomcircuit> he is merely in possession of it Not true. The blockchain is a record of who possesses what. It is not a record of ownership or title.
If you send me 100 BTC for safekeeping, or loan me your car, I possess it, but you still own it. Real fast. Bitcoins are network access and certain network authentication services. The legal term is an incorporeal hereditament. Yes they can be stolen. Yes there is title to them. Possession alone passes no title even for negotiable instruments, which happen to construe possession most strongly.
There is no legal or moral excuse for this behavior. At the very least there is UNJUST ENRICHMENT which is a tort.
Anyone claiming otherwise is a fool and an idiot. You are so dependent on the nanny state to define your rights you forget them some rights are strictly sui generis.
|
|
|
|
It absolutely does matter if it's a currency, since as you state... ?? tangible and intangible personal property, ...
There is absolutely no way to establish that BTC has any value whatsoever, though. ?? The value is whatever the high bid price is on the exchanges. It most certainly has a value. Of course they have value or nobody would waste all the time and electricity required to mine for them. Would you spend the money on the hardware to build a massive bitcoin mining operation if they had no value? Wrong. bitcoins have value whether it benefits me to say they do or not. If they had no value nobody would buy them or mine them. The fact they have value, as shown on the bid sheets at the exchanges makes them treasure trove and up for grabs. Look at the bid sheets the same as you look at gold and silver charts. If gold is treasure, then so are bitcoins. If it didn't have value before you sold it, nobody would have bought it from you. You might also want to read things like http://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2005-12-02/315676/. Whether it's an intangible good or not is also irrelevant. You did not _take_ someone's property, but you did not make a reasonable effort to return it to them, and instead posted on facebook (of which there is documentation) about "free money" and started preaching about how the victim was in the wrong. Definitely not good faith, and it'll look bad when the law gets involved. I could accidentally send you my collection of used women's panties (hypothetically  ) and if you kept it, you'd be liable. No, used panties are not legal tender. No, they have no market value. But you still took my stuff, and made no effort to return it to me. Sure, you wouldn't be liable for much, but you would definitely be in the wrong. Over $4000? You should be worried. Nonsense from start to finish. The exchange of data is a token to memorialize the transfer of the ownership interest in the intangible property. That ownership interest has a very real value, and the markets are very, very liquid, so the value is quite certain. Do you think your house has no value because it isn't at this moment undergoing a sale? That is not true. They have an easily established value. All of this talk about "a judge won't recognize these as having value" is complete nonsense. Absolutely certain of it.
Not only that, but with the way you are brazenly shirking this, the person who may very likely be liable for the lawyer fees in the end is the clown who took the 511 BTC he wasn't entitled to and who claims he "OWNS" them.
Patrick, FYI, I have saved this entire thread to a PDF file, just in case mr. DAOG realizes that deleting his own posts is a wise idea. I am in the US and am able to produce an affidavit in support of your complaint against this guy, assuming you can identify him, in support of the fact that bitcoins have value and such questions that would be asked by the authorities in Oregon.
Pretty sure it'd be hard to back up, seeing as how it's already documented that you've mined for them, proving that you already think they're of some value (time invested, power spent, etc). And if you have a record that can be traced back to an Exchange (as in, you've already traded them for currency)... hard to claim you think they're 'worthless' and have 'no value'. The thing is. The judge will ask not you. The judge will ask an expert witness, probably invited by claimant. The expert will pull out mobile phone check current mtgox rate and say "As of this moment this day and this month of year 2012, based on current exchange rate on leading exchange, which is 356.33 $ per 1 BTC, fair market value of 512 BTC can be estimated as USD182440.96". Gold has tremendous value
Please tell me the current value of 1 oz of gold, and what you did to get to that value. I see where you are going with this. Good point. egold doesn't have any value until you exchange it either but that didn't stop the Justice Dept and the Treasury from going after them. i have a business selling specialty socks that i, and my family knit ourselves.
i built a website for selling these socks to people who recognize the inherent comfort and value of such socks.
one day, i accidentally mail 500 socks to a registered buyer on the website.
the socks, unlike gold, are not a 'precious metal', and are not considered a 'currency' by any nation on the planet.
yet they do have a value to my family and i, as it took thread to make, and an investment of our time.
.. therefore, i go ahead and verify that the buyer did indeed receive the amount of socks in question,
and cordially request that the buyer help resolve this mistake amicably.
to which, they become hostile, citing 'finders-keepers'.
i'm not a legal expert,
but i've seen stupider cases on judge judy.
i believe i can sue, since, the original buyer acknowledged the mistake, and kept the product regardless.
to think otherwise is stupidly naive.
...
...
also, the argument that bitcoins are worth nothing is by its nature, flawed,
as, like knitting socks,
there are electrical costs, and an investment of time, required to mine a single bitcoin.
it is this inherent value, that you would be potentially suing for.
..
you would essentially be saying 'pay me the amount in electricity that it would cost to mine another 512 bitcoins, and compensate me for my time', or give back the coins.
|
|
|
|
Ethically, I think it'd be nice if the Bitcoins were returned.
However, technically speaking, I'm not sure this is legally required. here's the Oregon law on the matter: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/164.htmlI'll quote the relevant section (164.015): (2) Commits theft of property lost, mislaid or delivered by mistake as provided in ORS 164.065;
Furthermore, because its value is greater than $1000 (164.055), it counts as a theft in the first degree. Oregon State's definition of "Thief": 64.005 Definitions. As used in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) “Appropriate property of another to oneself or a third person” or “appropriate” means to:
(a) Exercise control over property of another, or to aid a third person to exercise control over property of another, permanently or for so extended a period or under such circumstances as to acquire the major portion of the economic value or benefit of such property; or
(b) Dispose of the property of another for the benefit of oneself or a third person.
(2) “Deprive another of property” or “deprive” means to:
(a) Withhold property of another or cause property of another to be withheld from that person permanently or for so extended a period or under such circumstances that the major portion of its economic value or benefit is lost to that person; or
(b) Dispose of the property in such manner or under such circumstances as to render it unlikely that an owner will recover such property.
(3) “Obtain” includes, but is not limited to, the bringing about of a transfer or purported transfer of property or of a legal interest therein, whether to the obtainer or another.
(4) “Owner of property taken, obtained or withheld” or “owner” means any person who has a right to possession thereof superior to that of the taker, obtainer or withholder.
(5) “Property” means any article, substance or thing of value, including, but not limited to, money, tangible and intangible personal property, real property, choses-in-action, evidence of debt or of contract. [1971 c.743 §121] You all might wanna chew on this especially the thief. Popular law library, Putney... By Albert Hutchinson Putney Section 76. Delivered By Mistake.
Where the owner of money or property delivers it to another by mistake and that person, knowing the mistake at the time he receives it, conceals the mistake intending at the time to appropriate it to his own use, he is guilty of larceny. Thus for example, when a bank by mistake handed the accused five hundred dollars more than his check called for, and the accused at the time he received the money
"Johnson vs. People, 113 111., 103. Hughes, Cr. Law, Sec. 402.
Section 77. Finding Goods And Appropriating.
So if one finds the goods of the owner in the highway or elsewhere, containing marks which identify the owner, and the one finding them converts the same to his own use with criminal intent, he is guilty of larceny; but otherwise if there be no marks to identify the owner.29
Section 80. Value Of The Property Taken.
The article or thing taken must be of some value to make it the subject of larceny and the value must be alleged and proven. It is especially necessary to prove the value of the property stolen for the purpose of determining whether the offense is grand or petit larceny; for grand larceny is a felony and petit larceny a misdemeanor.
But the value of several articles stolen at different times by distinct acts, although from the same person, cannot be added together to make the offense grand larceny.34
The value of an article or thing is its market value, and not what it may be worth to the owner. A treatise on the law of crimes, Volume 2 By William Lawrence Clark, William Lawrence Marshall[/i]
In several cases, for example, it has been held that, when money or property is delivered to a person by mistake, the taking is not complete, and he does not acquire possession, until he discovers the mistake, and that he is guilty of larceny if he then forms and carries out an intent to appropriate the property or money to his own use. Reg. v. Ashwell, 16 Cox, C. C. 1, Beale's Cas. 566; State v. Ducker, S Or. 394. <---LAST CASE IS OREGON State v. Woll, 668 P. 2d 610 - Wash: Court of Appeals, 2nd Div. 1983 The wrongful appropriation of property mistakenly delivered appears to have been considered larceny at common 565*565 law only if, upon receipt, the recipient knew that it was mistakenly delivered and at that time formed the intent to keep it.[5] However, State v. Olds, 39 Wn.2d 258, 235 P.2d 165 (1951) and State v. Heyes, 44 Wn.2d 579, 269 P.2d 577 (1954), construing Rem. Rev. Stat. § 2601(4) (the statutory forerunner of RCW 9A.56.020(1)(c)), distinguished this statutory offense from common law larceny.[6] In State v. Olds, supra, the court expressly held that, in order to sustain a conviction under Rem. Rev. Stat. § 2601(4), no evidence of original felonious intent was necessary. One noted authority interpreted State v. Olds, supra, as holding that Washington's statutory offense of wrongfully appropriating misdelivered property is distinguishable from common law larceny:
The wrongful withholding of property delivered by mistake, with knowledge of the mistake acquired subsequent to the receipt, may be punishable by statute under the name of larceny, but it is an offense distinct from common law larceny.
(Italics ours.) R. Perkins, Criminal Law 254 n. 76 (2d ed. 1969).
[2] Thus, the common law of larceny required proof that the defendant's intent to steal concurred with his mistaken receipt of the property,[7] whereas, under RCW 9A.56.020(1)(c) 566*566 the "intent to deprive" must exist at the time of the appropriation. In the case at bench, Woll was charged with having committed the crime on or about April 18, 1979. Thus, under the charge and under the trial court's instruction, the prosecution had to prove defendant's intent on the date he transferred the funds — not the date or dates on which he subsequently spent the money. Under Washington law, "[t]he gravamen of the offense is the appropriation of the property after having received it". (Italics ours.) State v. Heyes, 44 Wn.2d at 588. Bitcoins are not yet a legal currency. It doesn't matter if the item in question is a currency. It could have been 511 stuffed animals and the case would still be the same, EXCEPT, this is NOT the stuffed animal community and then would not take place on this forum. Lastly, it will probably be necessary to repeat this every two or three posts, but https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg498999#msg498999If the bank credits your account by mistake and you withdraw the funds they will come after you. This is probably the same thing.
On the other side of the coin why was this code tested on a live site and not testnet coins ?
This code was thoroughly tested using testnet. The issue was with the server configuration, the database user did not have the proper permissions and the code failed in an unexpected way. I have now changed to relevant code such that any failure of any kind will stop the script cold. |
|
|
|
he realises and admits the coins are in error https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg500176#msg500176[04:52] <@BenDavis> But I don't know what you are talking about!
[04:54] <@BenDavis> Patrick Strateman, I have no clue what you are talking about.
[04:54] <@BenDavis> I don't even mine for coins.
[04:55] <@BenDavis> I have no clue what you are talking about!
[04:57] <@BenDavis> Yeah, I do not believe I took anything.
[04:58] <@BenDavis> Can you tell me how I took anything? |
|
|
|
|
Re: this issue, ED anyone?
|
|
|
|
I agree with geebus' point
There's nothing to agree with, no special rules or regulations that somehow only apply to Bitcoin etc. The law is very clear on this matter, and the fact that so many who post here seem ignorant on the law doesn't change it  Actually..... I think he's on to something. For example one could disprove gravity by jumping until they no longer fall each time. Similarly, one could disprove other laws in similar fashions. |
|
|
|
The important thing is, why there was a bug that allowed so many bitcoins to be sent to the WRONG person?
Congratulations! You have become better at reading! +1 |
|
|
|
It's an odd situation.
Clearly, an honest person would do the decent thing and return the coins. In response to that, a genuine business would then pay a proportion of those coins back again, in compensation for the time and hassle.
But if it's too easy for businesses to get back coins that they accidentally send, they're going to keep accidentally sending them. If they don't get the coins back, you can be sure they'll make sure it doesn't happen again.
I would imagine that if an organization were to experience this situation recurringly, that after second and third times of repeating the same mistake would establish recognition that it may be a form of scheming and considered rather scandalous or malicious and affect the reputation of that organization. Encouraging and promoting option of pursuing illegal activities (e.g. not returning the coins) in relation to 'teaching lesson' effort seems kinda ... well... uhh... hmm, criminal? (for lack of a better description) But if it's too easy for businesses to get back coins that they accidentally send, they're going to keep accidentally sending them. Are you sure the condition for that if statement is accurate? if (too easy for businesses to get back coins accidentally sent) { accidentallysendcoins(); } if (not easy for businesses to get back coins accidentally sent) { tryanotherstrategy(); } Are you sure 'businesses" is correct way to reference these types of ethics/morals? Perhaps something more evil or scammalicious is suitable in place of "business?" Or, perhaps an additional descriptive word before business? Although, there are many consensually agreed upon businesses that are evil (e.g. Sony, Microsoft, SCO, etc.), yet, trying to think of a business that is opposite, good, actually seems a bit difficult. Even Nintendo has its share of evils. Therefore, perhaps "business" alone is indication of evilness? |
|
|
|
BenDavis's debt should be no more than 98% of the value at time of transfer, with any transaction/conversion fees in BenDavis's favor. If this were the case, perhaps it would be wise to use an exchange that had a 99.9% transaction/conversion fee. |
|
|
|
This doesn't seem to apply to some people in this thread, but I thought I'd share anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K75w6p7cKB8I'm sorry, but I don't want to be an emperor. That's not my business. I don't want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone, if possible, Jew, gentile, black man, white. We all want to help one another. Human beings are like that. We want to live by each other's happiness — not by each other's misery. We don't want to hate and despise one another.
In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed has poisoned men's souls, has barricaded the world with hate, has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.
The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood, for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world — millions of despairing men, women and little children — victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me, I say — do not despair. The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed — the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people and so long as men die, liberty will never perish.
Soldiers! Don't give yourselves to brutes — men who despise you — enslave you — who regiment your lives — tell you what to do — what to think or what to feel! Who drill you, diet you, treat you like cattle, use you as cannon fodder. Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men — machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don't hate! Only the unloved hate — the unloved and the unnatural!
Soldiers! Don't fight for slavery! Fight for liberty! In the 17th Chapter of St. Luke it is written: "the Kingdom of God is within man" — not one man nor a group of men, but in all men! In you! You, the people have the power — the power to create machines. The power to create happiness! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure.
Then, in the name of democracy, let us use that power! Let us all unite! Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give youth the future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie! They do not fulfill their promise; they never will. Dictators free themselves, but they enslave the people! Now, let us fight to fulfill that promise! Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men's happiness.
Soldiers! In the name of democracy, let us all unite! |
|
|
|
This all just comes back to the fact that the anonymity means there's a lot of deniability, and it puts the onus on the sender to make sure they're not sending their money to the wrong place. You're not sending bitcoins to a person, you're sending them to an address. You can't prove that the address is connected to the person. http://blockexplorer.com/address/1LmHwPxGdUbnSMyomDeWtz85GkxUG2c31XAugust 15/16 (depending on time zone), 2011 in #bitcoinpool <BenDavis> 1LmHwPxGdUbnSMyomDeWtz85GkxUG2c31X <BenDavis> At Block 143440 (2011-09-01 05:36:32) BenDavis had 0 bitcoins at that address. ... By Block 143458 (2011-09-01 09:13:50) BenDavis had received a total of 95 bitcoins from phantomcircuit due to bug. ... By Block 143460 (2011-09-01 09:37:52) BenDavis had received a total of 111 bitcoins from phantomcircuit due to bug. By Block 143461 (2011-09-01 09:40:55) BenDavis had received a total of 510 bitcoins from phantomcircuit due to bug. This is 399 bitcoins received in this block alone. At Block 143461 (2011-09-01 09:40:55) BenDavis had also sent 94 bitcoins to 1M8v28U9SnxMgebJM5wmNdkd5TB9V7haUX At Block 143461 (2011-09-01 09:40:55) BenDavis had also sent 17 bitcoins to 1CYGeK9mozuLWsGxYdhYw1RYtpXZAdiUse At Block 143462 (2011-09-01 09:46:44) BenDavis had also sent 200 bitcoins to 1CYGeK9mozuLWsGxYdhYw1RYtpXZAdiUse At Block 143463 (2011-09-01 09:47:37) BenDavis had also sent 199 bitcoins to 1M8v28U9SnxMgebJM5wmNdkd5TB9V7haUX thus having a 0 bitcoin balance at this point. Although the following quotes are hypothetical and not declarative: If you wake up, and there are 511 BTC in your wallet, THEY ARE YOURS. If I wake up in the morning, and I find 511 BTC in my account, how did I steal it? Please explain that. The data above proves that BenDavis was active immediately upon receiving the bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Stop being a detective pussy lmfaooo he already has my name, where I work, where I live, pictures of me, so stop being a little bitch and being a detective lmfaoooo you my friend, are a pussy.
Perhaps, but that information is not yet publicated. So, I'm working on finding out also. |
|
|
|
finished updating, feel free to continue this elsewhere such as wiki, maybe ED?The victim has all the necessary information (including where the thief lives) to file a police report. I'm not sure it'd be kosher to publish it on a public forum, though. Lots of crazies around here
You are WRONG. I am NOT in possession of anyone elses property. Once the Bitcoin transfer was complete, it is MY property now. You ALL know this. That is how the game goes. Stop acting like a bitch because you are jealous it didn't happen to you.
If I send you 500 BTC, it is YOUR property now. NOT mine. That is how BTC works. WE ALL know this.
I am quite certain that's not how it works in Oregon. Do we have this guy's real name and address? This is definitely attorney-worthy. I imagine you can find information searching google and other sites starting from alias BenDavis. From already public informations, here's information that I found: aliases: BatumKaboom 7, BenDavis (IRC), BenDavis503 7, benjohnson503 14, bennydavis 5, Bills_Fan_503 0, Dante_Cunningham 7, DLowDAOG 4, neBo503 3, Patty_Mills 7, Tyler_Hansborough 7location: Newberg1, Oregon, US (From IRC: 50-39-204-35.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net (Portland, Oregon)) age: 30 1,6 (born: 9/11/1980) 8,12accounts: aim: neBo503 11,13email: enDavis503@GMail.com13msn: davissaveus@live.com11myspace: http://www.myspace.com/4202032214myspace: http://myspace.com/benjohnson50314myspace: http://myspace.com/bennydavis5,13sidekick: BenDavis503@TMail.com13jobs: SAVANT CCA 111 SW 5TH AVE, STE 4090 PORTLAND, OR 97204-3648 (503) 914-5584 14pictures: mirror http://c2sopublic.reverbnation.com/Photo/1956755/image/l_3b4781ab11aa45e29c4788a148719dcf_1266951297.jpg2mirror http://www.parentingforums.org/customavatars/avatar1470_1.gif9mirror http://nyc3img.soundclick.com/21/imgPages/9/2/2560249_298878.jpg?version=13810mirror http://a1.l3-images.myspacecdn.com/profile01/127/d6e318ab47ff408199561ddb211b1d58/l.jpg14sources: 0 http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=10987402#10987402 (Google search BenDavis Newberg Oregon) 1 http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=12173091 (Google search BenDavis Newberg Oregon) 2 http://www.reverbnation.com/bendavisbeats503 (Google search BenDavis Newberg Oregon -"Bendavis, MO" -"Bendavis, Missouri" -Missouri) 3 http://www.bitcoinpool.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7674 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg500160#msg5001605 http://www.softwaretipsandtricks.com/forum/members/nebo503.html (Google search neBo503) 6 http://www.xfire.com/profile/nebo503/ (Google search neBo503) 7 http://sportstwo.com/threads/146731-I-am-29-today.?p=2112786&viewfull=1#post2112786 (Google search neBo503 birthday) 8 http://sportstwo.com/threads/146731-I-am-29-today. (Google search neBo503 birthday) 9 Google Images search BenDavis503 10 http://www.soundclick.com/members/default.cfm?member=bendavis503 (Google search BenDavis503) 11 http://sportstwo.com/threads/152296-Poster-BenDavis503-Threatens-to-Hack-My-PC?daysprune=-1 (Google search BenDavis503) 12 http://www.basketballforum.com/portland-trail-blazers/370367-heard-something-today-work-about-shane-battier-trade.html#post4929586 (Google search BenDavis503) 13 http://board.rapmusic.com/13254086-post1.html (Google search neBo503) 14 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.msg501565#msg501565
|
|
|
|
You are WRONG. I am NOT in possession of anyone elses property. Once the Bitcoin transfer was complete, it is MY property now. You ALL know this. That is how the game goes. Stop acting like a bitch because you are jealous it didn't happen to you.
If I send you 500 BTC, it is YOUR property now. NOT mine. That is how BTC works. WE ALL know this.
I am quite certain that's not how it works in Oregon. Do we have this guy's real name and address? This is definitely attorney-worthy. I imagine you can find information searching google and other sites starting from alias BenDavis. |
|
|
|
That is NOT the case. Patrick and Donald sent email after email threatening BenDavis and his family. His children. His freedom. You make an EPIC mistake like this, and then you threaten someones KIDS about it? That is NOT the way to get what you want back.
This is interesting. DLowDAOG confirms that BenDavis (IRC nick on Freenode) received email from Patrick and Donald, which presumably was sent to his not public email address. However, then why: [04:52] <@BenDavis> But I don't know what you are talking about!
[04:54] <@BenDavis> Patrick Strateman, I have no clue what you are talking about.
[04:54] <@BenDavis> I don't even mine for coins.
[04:55] <@BenDavis> I have no clue what you are talking about!
[04:57] <@BenDavis> Yeah, I do not believe I took anything.
[04:58] <@BenDavis> Can you tell me how I took anything?
Also, it seems BenDavis does mine for coins: http://bitcoinpool.com/index.php?do=userprofile&id=BenDavishttps://i.imgur.com/MjeKP.png |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
