Are we at an impasse? BIDS| QUANTITY | CURRENCY | BID | CURRENCY | 10 | SYNC | .15 | BTC | 50 | SYNC | .05 | BTC |
ASKS| QUANTITY | CURRENCY | BID | CURRENCY | 3 | SYNC | .30 | BTC | 10 | SYNC | .50 | BTC |
|
|
|
|
then make a counter ask
Actually, even 0.1BTC seems cheap right now considering the fact that all those inactive wallets could probably be gone. In that case the total supply is reduced drastically which will increase the price of SYNC even more. But I think I will agree to sell my SYNC at 0.3BTC each  thank you George for the trade! I got my fill at .3 btc/each and I cant afford more there but anybody else, PM me for SYNC, I am buying at .15 each, if you want more liquidity |
|
|
|
then make a counter ask
Actually, even 0.1BTC seems cheap right now considering the fact that all those inactive wallets could probably be gone. In that case the total supply is reduced drastically which will increase the price of SYNC even more. But I think I will agree to sell my SYNC at 0.3BTC each How about .2BTC , I'll buy 10 SYNC for .2BTC/ea. 7 SYNC for .3BTC/ea. BIDS| QUANTITY | CURRENCY | BID | CURRENCY | 07 | SYNC | .30 | BTC | 10 | SYNC | .20 | BTC | 50 | SYNC | .05 | BTC |
ASKS| QUANTITY | CURRENCY | BID | CURRENCY | ? | SYNC | .30 | BTC | ? | SYNC | .50 | BTC |
If you give me a steeper discount, I'll go ahead and pay for the rest of the votes at Novaexchange. |
|
|
|
since its like 2014 never ended, I'm buying @ $10 each, will prepare altcoin escrow if necessary or we can do in chunks (or we can use my stellar trust rating)
if you need liquidity let me know, PM me
I honestly doubt that anyone will sell their SYNC that cheap. then make a counter ask |
|
|
|
|
since its like 2014 never ended, I'm buying @ $10 each, will prepare altcoin escrow if necessary or we can do in chunks (or we can use my stellar trust rating)
if you need liquidity let me know, PM me
|
|
|
|
xdn worth 5x more than bbr that's sad to see
shame for those that believed in this project really.
abandoned and left to die
luckily I'm not one of those that went all in on bbr but I know some that did just that.
It is a shame that the project has been neglected during this massive bullrun across the general cryptocurrency space. I've personally given up on waiting for underwater unicorns to save this project and have decided to become one. I'm working on a proposal to bring this project up to speed with its predecessor that would close the gap on the years of neglect by the lead developer. His role in this endeavor is not needed but would be appreciated. I will keep everyone here informed on progress made on this front. I'm also putting together a fund for this project that will go towards development, marketing and social media. This will be a real effort, not one lead by some bullshit company that didn't accomplish shit for 6 months then jump ship at the first sign of distress. If you're interested in helping in any aspect be that donations, social media or development send me a PM. The delisting of Boolberry was seen as a death sentence for the project and caused about an 80% decrease in it's price against Bitcoin, but as of late Bittrex's volume has been steadily increasing against Poloniex. What was perceived as a death sentence is now beginning to present itself as a buying opportunity. IMO, it won't be long before Bittrex's volume surpasses Poloniex just like so many other altcoin exchanges in the past. Poloniex is ran by a guy who majored in music.. Bittrex is ran by the heads of cyber security for Amazon and Microsoft.. who would you rather trust with your coins? One sign of distress was watching you continue to donate to zoidberg despite all obvious indicators of "hey maybe thats not a good a idea" if you think that looked like 'consensus' and 'good business' for my firm, in the middle of the biggest altcoin rally in history, then you're mistaken I was very clear that if a deeper market developed anywhere, then the opportunity cost wouldn't be too great to easily align economic incentives to continue contributing. It isn't hard to move a community to another exchange extremely quickly. Siacoin last week had a a variety of issues with Poloniex, and in the middle of the week got Bittrex to list it, and the market quickly became deep enough to move large positions. Boolberry's community runs around like a chicken with its head cut off, if you gain consensus and make progress on getting nodes to run your improved code, awesome |
|
|
|
|
what is private about this coin? I was just looking at the block explorer and its transparent
is there a second state like darksend or tcoins?
|
|
|
|
|
Can I withdraw this to an Ethereum wallet or do I have to use the Ark client
PM me, not checking
|
|
|
|
And not being able to buy ALOT prevents you from developping the coin? I still don't follow you, can you elaborate more of how not being able to buy more coins prevent you from developing it?
Dude in case you haven't noticed this guy 1block is just talking BS. He is a pump and dumper and has done ZERO development whatsoever. He bought BBR, talked a bunch of stupid shit about changing the ticker and implementing masternodes, then dumped when Poloniex announced delisting (if not before) All of his shit talk about "needing a liquid market" is exactly that.. shit. And you find that controversial? There was an opportunity cost to dealing with the Boolberry project, and that came with lack of consensus from the community, lack of consensus from the nodes and miners, some donators were still throwing away their money at CZ The only way to align the economic incentive meant taking a capital position in Boolberry, and if thats also not possible, then the opportunity cost is too great. My firm nor myself have owned any Boolberry since before March, in fact all altcoin positions were liquidated ahead of the March Bitcoin ETF announcement. But let me guess, you find that controversial too, you basically embody exhibits A, B and C of why I'm done with this community Despite what was said publicly on various forums, the aggregate market clearly has zero faith in CZ's ability to deliver, especially in the midst of this EPIC altcoin rally. |
|
|
|
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds  Nobody said they didnt want you around. They simply thought that although you talked up a good amount of interest and were a good frontman that you had no chance of talking on such a beast as boolberry and developing the code. There are probably only a handful of devs that could take BBR and make the improvements we all want. So no shame in that. I think people just realised only CZ was going to be able to really inspire techwise investors back. I think you kind of shocked everyone with your announcement that didn't only say that you were dropping bbr that you were going to shift you investment and time to other projects that could be seen as direct competition. That was not a cool annoucement to the community here who were just as upset at the delisting as yourself. CZ is worrying to me because although an obviously genius level developer he is not like for example evan duff who although has way less talent is a smart guy in that he knows you can make more than a few BTC in donations it you hoard supply of your own token and then work to make your project very very valuable. Of course the hoarding should be done in a fair way. CZ seems to think about getting a few btc now and not jumping on our suggestion to create a dev fund much larger than the one he has now if he will bring back a lot of his development skills to this project. I would have liked to prove people wrong about my own personal development prowess, the opportunity cost in Boolberry unfortunately is too high, especially without being able to effectively manage a position. Boolberry would benefit from a different client written in a different programming language (or even more cleanly in C++) that conformed to the existing Boolberry protocol. Several additional devs spent a lot of time working on the code and getting stuck on the same issues. The last 8 months spent on Boolberry did prove to be at the expense of a larger altcoin rally. I typically avoid talking about other cryptocurrencies here, but I view these as separate viable assets, and there is no room for maximalism in this approach. Cryptonote as a concept is still an underdog both in terms of recognition and in development progress, they all inherit a convoluted codebase, and the communities should work together. There were several unexpected setbacks, such as the seed node issue, and cross platform compatibility. But the LMDB necessity eclipses all of those, and if it really needs to be addressed. The communities' desire for legitimacy from CZ stunted collaboration. So now they get CZ exclusively. |
|
|
|
If instead of all the hyping and talking, BDC would have actually done some development Polo might have not delisted it.
(I am explicitly not referring to Clintar here)
Personally I think the decision to bail on the project now, shows perfectly that BDC talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Not even one step.
BDC, you suck. (No, Clintar, not you, you're allright by me.)
Sorry, already told everyone that we got stuck on cross platform stability. Stuff that worked on Windows didn't work on Linux/OSX and sometimes vice versa Don't think the progress we would have made would have helped with Poloniex listing A lot of people didn't want me on the project after CZ came back, the entire time, now they get what they want: Boolberry at the exact price before I even released a paper because apparently nobody has faith in the direction of the project with just him around. Make up your minds |
|
|
|
Lokks like some controversy is afoot  I just don't understand, 98% of the coins out there aren't listed on polo, i even know coins that were in development for years and were on shitty exchange with mostly no volume at all. And they were still working on it. At some point i can understand that he needs to dump coins on the market to pay for his expanse somehow. But telling us that he can't continue to work on the coin since he can't buy alot of it anymore to take us for stupids... So are you talking about buying or dumping? you seem to be using those terms interchangeably but they are different things |
|
|
|
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted. At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post: As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us. We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen. the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement. I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying. A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market. Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are. So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin. No, you're grasping at straws with that comment Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates? The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed? Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate Then why do you need a BBR/XBB market at all in order to develop the coin? I added more ^ |
|
|
|
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted. At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post: As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us. We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen. the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement. I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying. A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market. Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are. So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin. No, you're grasping at straws with that comment Then can you elaborate why you need a liquid exchange to operates? The majority of the donations came in the form of bitcoin and monero. So those weren't dumped on the Boolberry market to do business. Does that answer the question or was there another connotation I missed? Any Boolberry positions I controlled weren't used to cover costs, so they wouldn't be dumped to help my business operate Many people outside the crypto community were watching the Boolberry markets, and since now you can't even buy $5,000 worth without moving the market on bittrex 300%, its too illiquid for my constituents to consider it. |
|
|
|
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted. At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post: As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us. We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen. the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement. I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying. A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market. Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are. So basicaly you're saying that you were dumping coins on the exchange to be able to do business with it... I still think that its the first time i see this in a coin. No, you're grasping at straws with that comment |
|
|
|
I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end.
If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted. At the end of the day, I welcome these posts because they expose who people truly are. In this case, we learned that this person was not legitimate; a legitimate project must prove itself before it should be listed on a major exchange. This individual shows reverse thinking and possibly due to trading on the side. One point I mentioned in our post: As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens – I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader – which is unfortunate). But many people realize that if the project “dies” again, they could do what I just described. Also, they’re realizing they could do this with other cryptosphere projects too. And ultimately, this may lead to less crypto-spam, which benefits all of us. We all learned that blockologist wasn't the real deal - we can now ignore people associated with him and his future efforts. That's been a worthy lesson. As for XBB or BBR (whatever it is now), it's probably dead even with solid technical and economic fundamentals. Only a visionary leader who will see this through can resurrect this, but I highly doubt that will happen. the only thing that would prevent delisting at this point was the database improvement. the volume and growth was already apparent, a product of my involvement. I did some development, inspired some other contributors and paid some developers. I usually stayed silent so as not to influence the market and stuck with the bi-weekly updates for any material news, which occurred on a known frequency. I think that negates most of what you're saying. A more accurate description is saying Boolberry got delisted from Blockchain Development Company just like it got delisted from Poloniex: because it doesn't make business sense anymore. For Poloniex, the line in the sand was the RAM requirements, for my company its the lack of liquid market. Take the baton and run with it, because thats what I did. Some things worked and some things didn't. Business and revenues are up from this public project, its a pretty good story, from a perspective you're not considering. There is plenty of opportunity to make your boolberry holdings way more valuable than they are. |
|
|
|
cross posted from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1611499.msg18781170#msg18781170Boolberry Network Address April 27th 2017
BOOLBERRY DELISTED FROM POLONIEX, BLOCKCHAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY NO LONGER INVOLVED
A liquid market for Boolberry is a prerequisite for my firm’s involvement, so with the delisting from Poloniex my firm won’t be involved until a liquid market forms elsewhere, currently this would be available on Bittrex and simply requires market participants to post liquidity there.
Changelly, Circle, and other OTC markets were candidates for a liquid secondary market on my firm’s amended roadmap, but the sunk cost risks and lack of liquidity is too great without an existing liquid market to properly align economic incentives.
Boolberry’s resource requirements continue to grow, and currently only Clintar2 is working on the lmdb implementation, alone - which would alleviate the resource requirements - but has repeatedly expressed the lack of available time to work on it due to life obligations.
Fluffypony made myself and Crypto_Zoidberg aware of a double spend vulnerability which affects all cryptonote coins. They have patched it on Monero a long time ago and plan to disclose it mid May.
Between these problems, the lack of support and consensus from the community, and lack of liquid market: good luck with Zoidberg!
Blockchain Development Company’s public project has propelled its partnerships in key areas of the finance and blockchain sector, providing premier research to incumbents and funds seeking exposure to public blockchains, and has established relationships with representatives of Silicon Valley Bank, CME Group, Deloitte and various liquidity providers.
I’d personally like to thank trollbox for the inaccurate, humorous and free advertisements, there will be more projects the crypto community can get involved in.
The roadmap for Boolberry is clear, and you can carry the baton to complete it, as well.
vWell apart from talking up some interest I don't see what your company actually did in terms of developing bbr anyway right? So apart from the part were xmr are planning to divulge how to double spend on these coins i see we are left just praying clintar and cz can do something to save us. The fact you mention your company will take up positions in other cryptonote projects and not hold bbr right now shows a complete lack disregard for the rest of the community here. Why mention that fact at all just do it without trying to rub it in. Block chain dev company or whatever it is called is probably not going to be a welcome site for any project from now on. They arrive talk up some action, do nothing of tangible use in terms of coding then weasel away first obstacle that comes along. I'm glad you tried but in the end you need designers and coders that can actually do something. Talking and dreaming is fun but then it's back to reality in the end. If there had of been some coding and real development that was evident to polo then perhaps it would not have been delisted. I'm not saying you are 100% to blame since only clintar tried to actually tried to do some real tangible work. For clarity, I reached out to clintar and others prior developers from the git repository information (emails are listed) to get them back into the development. Its been a rocky road and there have been contributors that have come and gone, aside from clintar. With development, the primary roadblock is getting code that worked on all three platforms. Some code changes worked on windows but not stable on linux/osx, so it couldn't be released as binaries. Activist investors don't act like founders. There's no expectation to get married to a network or pretend like its going to underpin all e-commerce, I've been very transparent about that from the beginning, hoping to inspire development on the network and bring more realistic maturity to this asset class. There is still greater and valuable utility available for Boolberry, without the maximalist e-commerce meme that most cryptocurrency founders try to perpetuate. What people (my actual constituents, not trollbox) like about what my company showed is the sustained liquidity improvements (daily volume), sustained network security improvements (new pools, hashrate increasing by thousands of percent), and associated exchange rate improvements, creating book value for all holders on the network. My constituents (incumbent financial institutions) don't get to touch public blockchains, and this project primarily showed them what is possible as there are a lot of undervalued assets. That worked, its very successful. Some things didn't work, its fine. Dollar valuation still 200% higher than when we started, but obviously in comparison to bitcoin and other growth assets in this sector, the sunk cost becomes apparent. I need a liquid market to continue, form one, fix the RAM issue, and we'll see. |
|
|
|
cross posted from here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1611499.msg18781170#msg18781170Boolberry Network Address April 27th 2017
BOOLBERRY DELISTED FROM POLONIEX, BLOCKCHAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY NO LONGER INVOLVED
A liquid market for Boolberry is a prerequisite for my firm’s involvement, so with the delisting from Poloniex my firm won’t be involved until a liquid market forms elsewhere, currently this would be available on Bittrex and simply requires market participants to post liquidity there.
Changelly, Circle, and other OTC markets were candidates for a liquid secondary market on my firm’s amended roadmap, but the sunk cost risks and lack of liquidity is too great without an existing liquid market to properly align economic incentives.
Boolberry’s resource requirements continue to grow, and currently only Clintar2 is working on the lmdb implementation, alone - which would alleviate the resource requirements - but has repeatedly expressed the lack of available time to work on it due to life obligations.
Fluffypony made myself and Crypto_Zoidberg aware of a double spend vulnerability which affects all cryptonote coins. They have patched it on Monero a long time ago and plan to disclose it mid May.
Between these problems, the lack of support and consensus from the community, and lack of liquid market: good luck with Zoidberg!
Blockchain Development Company’s public project has propelled its partnerships in key areas of the finance and blockchain sector, providing premier research to incumbents and funds seeking exposure to public blockchains, and has established relationships with representatives of Silicon Valley Bank, CME Group, Deloitte and various liquidity providers.
I’d personally like to thank trollbox for the inaccurate, humorous and free advertisements, there will be more projects the crypto community can get involved in.
The roadmap for Boolberry is clear, and you can carry the baton to complete it, as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Boolberry Network Address April 27th 2017
BOOLBERRY DELISTED FROM POLONIEX, BLOCKCHAIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY NO LONGER INVOLVED
A liquid market for Boolberry is a prerequisite for my firm’s involvement, so with the delisting from Poloniex my firm won’t be involved until a liquid market forms elsewhere, currently this would be available on Bittrex and simply requires market participants to post liquidity there.
Changelly, Circle, and other OTC markets were candidates for a liquid secondary market on my firm’s amended roadmap, but the sunk cost risks and lack of liquidity is too great without an existing liquid market to properly align economic incentives.
Boolberry’s resource requirements continue to grow, and currently only Clintar2 is working on the lmdb implementation, alone - which would alleviate the resource requirements - but has repeatedly expressed the lack of available time to work on it due to life obligations.
Fluffypony made myself and Crypto_Zoidberg aware of a double spend vulnerability which affects all cryptonote coins. They have patched it on Monero a long time ago and plan to disclose it mid May.
Between these problems, the lack of support and consensus from the community, and lack of liquid market: good luck with Zoidberg!
The firm's commitment to cryptonote is unwavering, the portfolio will maintain positions in more liquid variants of cryptonote networks.
Blockchain Development Company’s public project has propelled its partnerships in key areas of the finance and blockchain sector, providing premier research to incumbents and funds seeking exposure to public blockchains, and has established relationships with representatives of Silicon Valley Bank, CME Group, Deloitte and various liquidity providers.
I’d personally like to thank trollbox for the inaccurate, humorous and free advertisements, there will be more projects the crypto community can get involved in.
The roadmap for Boolberry is clear, and you can carry the baton to complete it, as well.
|
|
|
|
Oh my reply got deleted. Thank god my info regarding the bbr/xbb thing got deleted  there's never been moderation in either of the boolberry threads, are you sure you posted it? just post it again |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
