Bitcoin Forum
April 10, 2021, 11:38:10 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What happens first?
$50K - 28 (20.4%)
$60K - 109 (79.6%)
Total Voters: 137

Pages: « 1 ... 17225 17226 17227 17228 17229 17230 17231 17232 17233 17234 17235 17236 17237 17238 17239 17240 17241 17242 17243 17244 17245 17246 17247 17248 17249 17250 17251 17252 17253 17254 17255 17256 17257 17258 17259 17260 17261 17262 17263 17264 17265 17266 17267 17268 17269 17270 17271 17272 17273 17274 [17275] 17276 17277 17278 17279 17280 17281 17282 17283 17284 17285 17286 17287 17288 17289 17290 17291 17292 17293 17294 17295 17296 17297 17298 17299 17300 17301 17302 17303 17304 17305 17306 17307 17308 17309 17310 17311 17312 17313 17314 17315 17316 17317 17318 17319 17320 17321 17322 17323 17324 17325 ... 28577 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 25250681 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (157 posts by 13 users deleted.)
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 03:13:44 AM

Cryptocurrency is not fungible by definition because it can be changed via power vacuum, while gold and silver are fungible because elements on the periodic table are immune to things like democracy or authoritarianism.

you dont have to work to hard, when your argument is right eh.

well markets will stay irrational longer then you can stay solvent.
will you cry when bitcoin breaks above 4000$

I'm entirely aware bitcoin can be pump and dumped to a larger number (or maybe it dies first) while having no fundamentals whatsoever in comparison to gold and silver as "money", and it's fundamentals as even a "currency" instead of money are also bad because you would have to get rid of the blockchain entirely in order to scale and convert to some emunie-like system with no state recovery at all, hence being even more unsound and fragile as a monetary instrument.

All I really care about is picking the asymmetric trade in the long run, and since bitcoin's fundamentals are poor as both money and currency, this definitely disqualifies it in the asymmetric trade aspect.  People here like to pretend it's inevitable bitcoin goes to some absurd number like John McAfee, and what I'm saying is, no, there are no fundamentals backing that viewpoint at all.  The only place I can find fundamentals like that are in gold and silver (mostly silver).
1618054690
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618054690

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618054690
Reply with quote  #2

1618054690
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1618054690
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618054690

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618054690
Reply with quote  #2

1618054690
Report to moderator
1618054690
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1618054690

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1618054690
Reply with quote  #2

1618054690
Report to moderator
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3388
Merit: 2126


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2017, 03:16:52 AM

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?


https://lightning.network/
Quote
Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1515


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 03:24:41 AM

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?


https://lightning.network/
Quote
Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

And the point of blowing way past any conceivable takeup is ... ... ... what, exactly?

The security tradeoffs are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

Oh - and you didn't answer my question, did you?
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3388
Merit: 2126


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2017, 03:27:57 AM

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?


https://lightning.network/
Quote
Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

And the point of blowing way past any conceivable takeup is ... ... ... what, exactly?

The security tradeoffs are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

Oh - and you didn't answer my question, did you?

Lightning Network...this ones goes to a billion.

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3831


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 03:47:10 AM

[edited out]


maybe it's an inevitable consequence of core fixing that which is not broken?

segwit2x has >90% support from miners dose it not? it also had many exchanges sign up to it no? do you appose the 2mb HF which is supported by all these people?

Dearest Adam...  Cheesy Cheesy  I think that you are considerably deluded if you believe that currently (as I type) there is anywhere near 90% support for a 2mb HF any time in the near future (within the next few months)... and if we go further into the future, then we have to consider the facts and the circumstances before we can conclude whether such consensus levels will exits or not..    Accordingly, we don't know whether a 2mb hardfork will be justifiable based on facts that may change several months down the road.    

Otherwise, things are looking really wonderful to have segwit right around the corner... bullish as fuck... !!!!!!!
i said miners, 90% support from miners, i'm basing this on the NYA signaling:
https://coin.dance/blocks
hmm....
it was above 90% signaling NYA before.
now its dropped to ~86%
maybe its all true, maybe many miners will backstab the NYA agreement.

well we do agree on one thing.

segwit, around the corner is bullish as fuck.

I understand that when you asserted 90% support for 2x and hardfork you were referring to miners, but even you should realize that is a compound question because it is coupled with segwit.  Of course, if you couple the question with segwit then you are going to get high levels of support for the matter.  If you ask the question in isolation, which would be 2mb and hardfork, then your level of support drops dramatically.  Maybe it is not as low as my below 30% proclamation, but certainly such support is no where near 90%, even amongst miners... and it is likely going to become even less once segwit is actually activated.
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 03:50:41 AM

The security tradeoffs (segwit/lightning network) are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

The fact there's been somewhat of a conspiracy to pretend lightning network can function in a decentralized manner will put bitcoin in it's grave once people figure out it's not possible.  You would need to put all transactions in the same common que to prevent attacks and other problems, then you're right back to square one of on-chain bitcoin scaling.  But the fundamentals of on-chain scaling are also bad.  

You would need around 8 MB blocks for bitcoin to have market penetration into the upper middle class of the world, and even with blocks that big, only enormous transactions of something like $5-10k would be economical on-chain. People would hold, say $100k in savings in an address they control and transfer $10k at a time onto a 3rd party bitcoin debit card.

The problem with this solution is that bitcoin would be functioning solely as a settlement layer and it cannot compete with gold and silver as one.  People would be far better served transferring $10k worth of metals at a time onto a 3rd party debit card instead.  Metals are far superior as a store of value and bitcoin also has built in middle men (transaction validators) and doesn't remove counter party risk.  Bitcoin's fundamentals as a settlement layer are essentially zero due to better options that already exist.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3831


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 04:01:51 AM

Your premise about bigblockers being tricked through the segwit2x in terms of the 2x not being intended is ridiculous.

You can try to characterize this as big blockers getting 'tricked'. You're still not getting it.

It is an ongoing theme of big blockers asserting that they have been tricked - not that there is much of any basis in reality to such claims.



BCC renders any such shenanigans impotent.

Yeah more  pie in the sky threats that are going to turn into a flop... time will tell, no?



Quote
Well maybe I am exaggerating a little bit to make a point about your seemingly ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities,

Exaggerating. Indeed. But what "ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities" is this of which you speak?


Does not really matter too much.  I am just making an observation about an existing phenomenon... which is either ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities and/or anger and/or some other combination of other quasi-irrelevant contributory factors.



Quote
or maybe your mistaken belief that there is a large level consensus out there for bigblocks than the reality of the matter?

No. The only belief that I have about some 'large level of consensus for bigblocks' is that it is larger than one would assume if one never ventured out of the BCT.org walled garden.


you referring me to reddit r/btc?  hahahahaha  That's surely going to be helpful.

I also participated in bitco.in... and there is a high number of big blockers there too, tending to spew out nonsense that is based on erroneous facts erroneous logic and too much emotional baggage and irrational hatred of core personalities.



But here's the deal. I fight for what I believe to be good for Bitcoin. I'm not trying to win some popularity contest, nor be a happy lemming. I'm just energized that after years of inaction, or non-solutions being argued as the way forward, there appears on the horizon the potential of a Bitcoin drawn in the principles that I believe satoshi outlined.

You are likely in fantasy again.. sure you could join some alt coin, but it seems that the bitcoin with segwit is going to be the wave of the future, even though you have been proclaiming without really much basis in fact or logic that such a segwit bitcoin is outside of satoshi's view of bitcoin.. blah blah blah.



Quote
You certainly don't come off as a dumb person - but you just seem to be engaged in ongoing nonsense of pushing your various conclusions about the supposed preferability of big blocks - and likely you remain deluded based on getting caught up in politics and a lack of willingness to accept the core process as legit and fair.

Fair? Fair is an alien concept in a permissionless environment. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


Well there is a consensus practice that is in place for submitting BIPs... of course, the concept of a BIP in itself signifies that any good idea should be attempting to get support (consensus) if wanting it to be added to bitcoin, the mother chain....  Cheesy Cheesy




(Incidentally, your labeling of it as the 'core process' (again, in a permissionless environment) belies the blinders upon your eyes)


It appears that you are attempting to get caught up in some technical weeds that strives to pervert my point(s)... .again...  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes  a past-time of ours, no?



They really give a ratt's ass about supposed actual technical deficiencies in bitcoin

"There you go again."
- R. Raygun

of course some themes will have a tendency to repeat, unless the circumstances have sufficiently changed.  Seems that I'm likely not wrong.

79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 663
Merit: 101


Colletrix - Bridging the Physical and Virtual Worl


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 04:30:48 AM

so how will those convinced of the virtues of SegWit trade the fork?
yonton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 262



View Profile
July 25, 2017, 04:45:45 AM

Who will mine BCC other than viabtc?
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 05:18:20 AM

millions of coins will be dumped all at once.
they all believe BCC is worthless
they all believe everyone will sell BCC ASAP
they will sell BCC in a hurry no matter how low or how far price has already tanked
and we know they are coming soooo...
price will crash really really hard, like nothing you've ever seen.

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3831


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 05:29:24 AM

[edited out]


if we strip away speculation and conspiracy theories(thanks todd!)... here are the facts.
segwit2x is meant to active segwit AND provide a 2mb hf later.


miner DID NOT need to to signal support for segwit2x to get segwit activated.

There seems to have been a kind of combination of these factors that brought segwit over the threshold, including BIP91, but since segwit2x is a compound question, there is ambiguity about what it causes - yet the combination of the various supports, including segwit2x seems to have provided a catalyst that would not have occurred otherwise (except for through BIP 148 - which also seems to have contributed to such combination of motivating factors).  Accordingly, I think that is factually inaccurate to imply that segwit would have been so easily locked in without the segwit2x support folded therein through BIP91 and largely segwit2x support got folded into BIP91.



the recent activation of segwit, and the signaling for segwit2x were two completely independent things.

I think that you are lacking factual and logical integrity to make such claims of non-connectedness. 



>90% of miners signaled for segwit2x last week, ~87% are signaling for segwit2x currently.


Probably you are going to continue to see this "signaling of intention" to continue to drop, and if it remains on the websites (such as coin.dance), then it will likely shrink a lot more after segwit is actually active in the end of August - I don't see what purpose it serves because there is no triggering mechanism through that "intention" signaling..   Maybe in the future there will be a need to remove the segwit portion from such intention signaling and then see what level of support remains if there were only the 2mb hardfork in the signaling of intention?



now for my speculations:
I believe the signaling for segwit2x is mostly (90%) genuine,

We hardly even know what the fuck it means... so it is genuine about what, exactly?


miner are willing to do this compromise.

Again what are they doing?  Is there software for them to run, yet?





and athlo core was quick to go back on Their agreement in the HKA the miners from NYA will not backstab the agreement so lightly,

Without getting into characterizations of core as if it were some kind of centralized entity, I would not speculate that the outcome in the NYA is going to come out much different.  There are likely to be a lot of defections because once segwit activates, there is likely little to no reason to continue to support segwit2x.. because the 2x hardfork portion is going to continue to be without factual or logical justification - beyond some amorphous claim that "you already agreed" and the "you already agreed" part remains quite ambiguous regarding about which aspects they had supposedly agreed.



because they have much more to gain by sticking to the plan then they do by breaking there agreement.

unlikely... they probably have more incentive to just support the status quo.. which is going to become segwit1x


BCC is the credible threat that will keep miners and nodes willing to compromise and actually do activate the 2mb hf part of segwit2x
should miners and the "community" fail to deliver the 2mb hf, BCC will gain more traction from miners and users alike


I question what is credible about the BCC threat..

  Currently, it seems incredible and may become more incredible with the additional passage of time and after the activation of segwit.

By the way, I have no doubt that BCC will be threatened and be a whining point, but beyond that, who knows?  maybe it could become some random and failing alt?



Core will do everything in there power to stop the 2mb hf, if they succeed... well lets just hope they fail...


You seem to be calculating the threat of a 2mb hardfork to be greater than it is... I doubt that core will have to do much of anything because they will continue to be within the status quo.. so when in doubt the status quo will continue to be the presumed system unless there is overwhelming facts and logic to the contrary (which I doubt will build anytime soon). 


[quote author=Killerpotleaf link=topic=178336.msg20363165#msg20363165 date=1500955960

now having said all that, i am convinced BCC will be a "thing" regardless, even if the 2mb hf dose go threw and the community is "untied once again", things will quickly go to shit again and BCC will be back on the menu.

[/quote]

You are probably right that BCC will remain a thing of whining - whether any trigger is pulled might be another story.. and depends upon whether the BCC supporters can get further support beyond the fringes.
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912
Merit: 1515


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 05:58:41 AM
Last edit: July 25, 2017, 06:09:35 AM by jbreher

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?


https://lightning.network/
Quote
Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

And the point of blowing way past any conceivable takeup is ... ... ... what, exactly?

The security tradeoffs are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

Oh - and you didn't answer my question, did you?

Lightning Network...this ones goes to a billion.



Much like Nigel's relabeling of '10' as '11', SegWit accomplishes its block size magic by mere dishonest accounting trickery. XD

Incidentally, the Fender Bassman model 5F6-A, upon which the first Marshall amps were based - went to '12'.
fluidjax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 749
Merit: 562



View Profile
July 25, 2017, 06:16:26 AM

Much like Nigel's relabeling of '10' as '11', SegWit accomplishes its block size magic by mere dishonest accounting trickery.


The only serious research I have seen into block size is Bitfury's
http://bitfury.com/content/5-white-papers-research/block-size-1.1.1.pdf


Look at the requirements for 32M blocks, 400GB daily, 128Gb ram.
At 32M, this excludes 95% of the current bitcoin nodes creating almost total miner centralisation.
Imagine what 6Gb blocks require.



I take these figures with due scepticism, but there is nothing else to compare it against.
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3388
Merit: 2126


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2017, 06:42:27 AM

we are going to have a second layer and we will allow bigger blocks.

stop worrying about irrelevant stats like node count, 10000 raspberry pies with poor connectivity isn't going to make your network more resilient than 1000 20K dollar machines.

bitcoin's security model is based on hash power. dont like that? make an Proof Of Nodes altcoin.

Bigger blocks on a second later will be pretty sweet.
Dakustaking76
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 527
Merit: 262


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 06:53:24 AM

Price is going lower again
What happend?
Small dropp i know But just asking Why aint we going forward
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 06:59:22 AM

Price is going lower again
What happend?

Because the sheklers at Goldman Sachs told people to buy bitcoin with both hands, which means it's probably going to 12 cents:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-24/goldman-nervous-bitcoin-traders-be-patient-next-surge-will-take-it-above-3600
micalith
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 894
Merit: 501



View Profile
July 25, 2017, 07:01:18 AM

Price is going lower again
What happend?

Because the sheklers at Goldman Sachs told people to buy bitcoin with both hands, which means it's probably going to 12 cents:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-24/goldman-nervous-bitcoin-traders-be-patient-next-surge-will-take-it-above-3600

yup, lots of good news, so final chance of selling manipulation for buying 'cheap coin'

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/ledgerx-gets-us-approval-for-derivatives-on-digital-currencies-20170724-01338
Olivious
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 100



View Profile
July 25, 2017, 07:06:54 AM

Price is going lower again
What happend?

Because the sheklers at Goldman Sachs told people to buy bitcoin with both hands, which means it's probably going to 12 cents:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-24/goldman-nervous-bitcoin-traders-be-patient-next-surge-will-take-it-above-3600

yup, lots of good news, so final chance of selling manipulation for buying 'cheap coin'

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/ledgerx-gets-us-approval-for-derivatives-on-digital-currencies-20170724-01338
I like how it falls $100 then people panics again and again and again. They should research why is it rising or falling.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3831


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 07:12:20 AM

the recent activation of segwit, and the signaling for segwit2x were two completely independent things.
I think that you are lacking factual and logical integrity to make such claims of non-connectedness.  
maybe so, but i'm still right.
the activation lock-in of segwit was done via version bits, while signaling for NYA was done coinbase string ( less formal ).
there was no version bits that meant segwit2x support
there was bit4 for bip91 and bit1 for bip141

miners could have simply set bit4 on and not signal NYA in there coinbase, wouldn't REALLY of made a dif. so the fact that almost all miner bothered to signal NYA in there coinbase ( needlessly ) was a sign of good faith to make good on the NYA nothing more nothing less.



Your above statement is internally contradictory.  I am not really disagreeing with you regarding the technical aspects of the signaling being a separate thing in each.. the signaling of Segwit2x being different from the signaling of BIP91 - however, you are suggesting that the Segwit2x did not mean anything in terms of contributing to the locking in of BIP91.. but yet at the same time, the signaling of segwit2x means that those folks signaling are serious about the 2x part. 

maybe it is like beating a dead horse if we were to continue to go over this, because I am saying that you cannot infer the level of 2x support from the segwit2x signaling and you are saying that segwit2x is a decent indicator of 2x support... we seem to be at a dead end (logger heads)



Probably you are going to continue to see this "signaling of intention" to continue to drop, and if it remains on the websites (such as coin.dance), then it will likely shrink a lot more after segwit is actually active in the end of August - I don't see what purpose it serves because there is no triggering mechanism through that "intention" signaling..   Maybe in the future there will be a need to remove the segwit portion from such intention signaling and then see what level of support remains if there were only the 2mb hardfork in the signaling of intention?
i would assume miners will continue to signal NYA so long as they intent to fallow threw with the agreement (in full)


Yeah, but if signaling NYA does not commit them to anything, then it should have very little value... We will have to see what happens here, because our predictions are quite opposite.

I don't think it is necessary to respond to the remainder of your points because it seems that we are just coming to opposite conclusions based on our speculation regarding whether when the rubber hits the road is the bigblocker support going to be there... I say no, and you say yes.  So, we disagree, even though I would not assert my position as an absolute because some matters could change, but as of now, based on what I see in terms of both facts and logic, I really doubt that the material and relevant miner support for 2x HF is as great as you are asserting that support to be.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3831


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
July 25, 2017, 07:14:34 AM


if you cannot will not spend a little bit of money to help this network,  you have no business in its faith, so PISS OFF!




Craig?   Craig?   Is that you?
Pages: « 1 ... 17225 17226 17227 17228 17229 17230 17231 17232 17233 17234 17235 17236 17237 17238 17239 17240 17241 17242 17243 17244 17245 17246 17247 17248 17249 17250 17251 17252 17253 17254 17255 17256 17257 17258 17259 17260 17261 17262 17263 17264 17265 17266 17267 17268 17269 17270 17271 17272 17273 17274 [17275] 17276 17277 17278 17279 17280 17281 17282 17283 17284 17285 17286 17287 17288 17289 17290 17291 17292 17293 17294 17295 17296 17297 17298 17299 17300 17301 17302 17303 17304 17305 17306 17307 17308 17309 17310 17311 17312 17313 17314 17315 17316 17317 17318 17319 17320 17321 17322 17323 17324 17325 ... 28577 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!