Bitcoin Forum
October 19, 2017, 01:23:54 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 [47] 48 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 ... 778 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning  (Read 1584797 times)
FreeTrade
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:31:31 PM
 #921

Lets put the fundraiser in simple terms that everyone can understand.  Everyone should agree agree that all investments should have a proper risk/reward ratio. This project itself has a lot of risk and potentially a lot of reward, so neither can outweigh the other.  Now lets look at this objectively from that perspective.

Ethereum project;
Risk = Very High
Reward = Very High

Founders;
Risk = 0%
Reward=100%

Early adopters;
Risk = 100%
Reward = ?

Put that on a graph.  Does that seem like a fair transaction to you?  

Hmmm - I'm reminded a little of Dragon's Den - The entrepreneur asks for a big investment. The dragons ask what it will be used for. The entrepreneur says 'to pay myself a big salary'. The dragon says 'I'm out'.

I want to see the devs with skin in the game - if their project fails, they shouldn't be sitting on a big BTC cushion.



HODLCoin ANN - 5% Interest. No Staking Req. Term Deposits 10%. Solo Mining.http://hodlcoin.com/
1508419434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508419434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508419434
Reply with quote  #2

1508419434
Report to moderator
1508419434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508419434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508419434
Reply with quote  #2

1508419434
Report to moderator
1508419434
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508419434

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508419434
Reply with quote  #2

1508419434
Report to moderator
I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES I HA(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ TABLES I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:37:24 PM
 #922

Thanks for the answer! Smiley
But how about the other one: When will this coin be released (not the Test stuff)?
That's going to take sometime judging by the timelines we have seen already. Previously it was a 2 months IPO (between 1st Feb and March end) after which mining could be done and coins could be exchanged etc. Now that the IPO has been delayed we will have the see the new terms of the IPO when it is announced.
lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:41:21 PM
 #923

The sentence you are quoting from me refers to the status quo before Charles' recent statement here on this forum about no GS-connection. I will probably invest in ETH, but not before asking hard questions and not letting been shut up before I get satisfactory answers to them.  Smiley

Indeed, that is your prerogative Smiley
gutshot5820
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:46:03 PM
 #924

They need to offer more ETH per bitcoin, lower the MAX to an acceptable level and therefore the pre-mine.  And lower their shares of the coin to a level that doesn't reflect a persona of greed. If they are right and follow through, they can still be multi-millionaires by changing the structure in a way that it is not overly diluted and fair and equitable to early investors.  The way is is structured now, they are punishing you for being an early adopter and instantly becoming wealthy without any risk at all.

Lets put the fundraiser in simple terms that everyone can understand.  Everyone should agree agree that all investments should have a proper risk/reward ratio. This project itself has a lot of risk and potentially a lot of reward, so neither can outweigh the other.  Now lets look at this objectively from that perspective.

Ethereum project;
Risk = Very High
Reward = Very High

Founders;
Risk = 0%
Reward=100%

Early adopters;
Risk = 100%
Reward = ?

Put that on a graph.  Does that seem like a fair transaction to you? 

I like you a lot more when you don't tell me to kill myself. Cheesy I'm quoting you because this is the essence of what you've been getting at in all your ramblings, and I think these are fair concerns.

Well I am glad you have some concerns and will at least weigh pros and cons before investing.  Just look at the risk/reward ratio and it is way out of line, bordering on insanity.  If you were the world's greatest cook and asked a venture capitalist or businessman to fund your new restaurant,  Guess who makes the most money?  Whoever takes the most risk.  That's the guy who is paying for the risk out of his own pocket.  It's been that way since the beginning of time.  Granted, if you have risked a lot of your time and mental energy, you deserve payment for assuming that risk of your time and potential energy as sweat equity.

This is the only project that I have ever heard of that the founders have no sweat equity, no equity in capital and want all the rewards before the business even opens and then will ask the investment community to fund the entire project before it even starts and assume all of the risk.

I have been appalled at that concept from day one, it is borderline insane and downright thievery of the bitcoin community in my opinion.
Taborresen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 183



View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:46:37 PM
 #925

I don't know how you can NOT understand "up to 30,000 bitcoin" and "50% pre-mine" its staring right at everyone's face.  We can all do the math and surmise the repercussions from this deal.  You can't sweep it under the rug or divert our attention from it with tech talk.  100 questions wont answer that one.  If you can't figure out what everyone's main concern/disgust is and you have to gather a list of questions to ferret it out....I don't know how to respond to that.

We should ask and let them answer. We should give them a chance to corrects these mistakes by changing(even cancelling) the IPO terms and the 50% premine (to 1%). Also we demand PoW before investing.

Give them a chance? Demand?

Then dont invest.
Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:51:53 PM
 #926

The Goldman Sachs issue is relevant in the stupid context of this overly greedy structured IPO, of leaving nothing on the table for investors. It's about those ex Goldman guys being behind this lame IPO structure. Doesn't matter if they work or don't work for Goldman Sachs anymore.

Funny how devs here are making 180 degree turn saying they won't allow Goldman Sachs to invest, yet they've bragged about their team members working for Goldman Sachs as being a good thing. This pretty much shows a duplicitous nature.


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 12:56:59 PM
 #927

We should ask and let them answer. We should give them a chance to corrects these mistakes by changing(even cancelling) the IPO terms and the 50% premine (to 1%). Also we demand PoW before investing.
If you read Vitalik's original post on Ethereum (I think on the unofficial thread) he talks about empowering all different categories of people involved in cryptocurrencies, the miners, investors and the development community. I think in terms of fairness it allows everyone to access piece of the pie. If IPO is too risky for instance you can either mine or participate in the project or simply buy once the IPO is over. I actually like this issuance model.

0.5X going to founders, early stakeholders and developers along with the BTC raised is a legitimate concern that I think is shared by a large number of people and I hope before or by the next announcement for the IPO this is revised and explained in greater detail.

I think for the sake of transparency if they open up and say how they plan to spend the minimum 500 BTC they want to raise it might put to rest some of the concerns. Does it automatically scale if the IPO raises 5000 BTC? Is there a reserve fund for excess money raised beyond what is required? Do the original stakeholders (i.e. the founders) also get remunerated?

I don't think some of the answers will be forthcoming immediately because it looks like these points are being debated behind the scene and are evolving. As long as I know these answers before the IPO I can make an informed decision.
zhao150
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:02:05 PM
 #928

why IPO cancel?
Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:05:46 PM
 #929

why IPO cancel?


Because it would have been a failure given this cold negative reception. Dev's statement says something else about mining algo or some BS like that but it's nonsense. That wasn't the real reason, just some announcement to save face.


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

_ingsoc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 449



View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 01:06:24 PM
 #930

If you read Vitalik's original post on Ethereum (I think on the unofficial thread) he talks about empowering all different categories of people involved in cryptocurrencies, the miners, investors and the development community. I think in terms of fairness it allows everyone to access piece of the pie. If IPO is too risky for instance you can either mine or participate in the project or simply buy once the IPO is over. I actually like this issuance model.

0.5X going to founders, early stakeholders and developers along with the BTC raised is a legitimate concern that I think is shared by a large number of people and I hope before or by the next announcement for the IPO this is revised and explained in greater detail.

There's no doubt this is what most of the community seem to think on here. I like the issuance model too. However, I do think gutshot5820 finally articulates important points on the idea of risk. It's great to empower everyone and allow all of us to get a piece of the pie, but people who contribute early are asked to carry significantly greater risk than those who get in on the project when it's been built and is ready.

I think the bigger issue is that people feel they don't get enough in return for the risk they have to carry, which is turning people off and is echoed throughout the thread, given that the perception is 1000-2000 Ether isn't that much per Bitcoin if coupled with dilution and very little risk for the creators. Whether this is an accurate perception, I don't know.

_ingsoc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 449



View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 01:07:59 PM
 #931

Because it would have been a failure given this cold negative reception. Dev's statement says something else about mining algo or some BS like that but it's nonsense. That wasn't the real reason, just some announcement to save face.

I think a more accurate statement is that they've been overwhelmed. They did not expect to receive this much attention prior to the fundraiser. They need to get proper infrastructure in place and get people to engage the community. That's my take. It's not an easy task.

Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:09:39 PM
 #932

If you read Vitalik's original post on Ethereum (I think on the unofficial thread) he talks about empowering all different categories of people involved in cryptocurrencies, the miners, investors and the development community. I think in terms of fairness it allows everyone to access piece of the pie. If IPO is too risky for instance you can either mine or participate in the project or simply buy once the IPO is over. I actually like this issuance model.

0.5X going to founders, early stakeholders and developers along with the BTC raised is a legitimate concern that I think is shared by a large number of people and I hope before or by the next announcement for the IPO this is revised and explained in greater detail.

There's no doubt this is what most of the community seem to think on here. I like the issuance model too. However, I do think gutshot5820 finally articulates important points on the idea of risk. It's great to empower everyone and allow all of us to get a piece of the pie, but people who contribute early are asked to carry significantly greater risk than those who get in on the project when it's been built and is ready.

I think the bigger issue is that people feel they don't get enough in return for the risk they have to carry, which is turning people off and is echoed throughout the thread, given that the perception is 1000-2000 Ether isn't that much per Bitcoin if coupled with dilution and very little risk for the creators. Whether this is an accurate perception, I don't know.

Yeah, they want to raise a fat chunk in initial IPO followed by crap dilution afterwards and inflation.

Mining = inflation

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market. Also, the fat % allocated to themselves is really shameful. Taking 0% of the risk while being this shamefully greedy is also lame.


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

_ingsoc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 449



View Profile WWW
January 30, 2014, 01:16:42 PM
 #933

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:18:22 PM
 #934

Quote
I think the bigger issue is that people feel they don't get enough in return for the risk they have to carry, which is turning people off and is echoed throughout the thread, given that the perception is 1000-2000 Ether isn't that much per Bitcoin if coupled with dilution and very little risk for the creators. Whether this is an accurate perception, I don't know.

Surely if we are raising X ether in IPO the starting mining difficulty will correspondingly have to be adjusted. Whatever the number of hashes your rig produce, if you can mine the basic minimum of 1000 ether faster than you can scrypt mine alt-coins worth 1 BTC this will be unfair to IPO investors. I don't think I have read anything about this but I also think that mining 1000-2000 ethers will not be that quick. If that happens than ether will fall below its starting price because of P&D tactics. The only logical conclusion the project developers will not be unfair to the IPO investors (with their 0.5X vested interest) ergo inflation created by mining will not have as large an impact as we think.
Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:18:29 PM
 #935

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

You mean if you buy something from someone in a voluntary exchange you're a slave? Really?


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:23:07 PM
 #936

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

You mean if you buy something from someone in a voluntary exchange you're a slave? Really?

He is talking about first mover advantage which is a valid concern. With mining ethers especially on the algo they are claiming a CPU miner will still be able to get something even if he is late in adopting the platform and currency. This gives it a true decentralized (non-concentrated) advantage something neither Mastercoin nor Nxt can claim. What better way for a platform/currency to succeed than to be truly distributed. It's a long term view which may not match the view of speculative investment.
Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:29:55 PM
 #937

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

You mean if you buy something from someone in a voluntary exchange you're a slave? Really?

He is talking about first mover advantage which is a valid concern. With mining ethers especially on the algo they are claiming a CPU miner will still be able to get something even if he is late in adopting the platform and currency. This gives it a true decentralized (non-concentrated) advantage something neither Mastercoin nor Nxt can claim. What better way for a platform/currency to succeed than to be truly distributed. It's a long term way which may not match the view of speculative investment.

Sorry but this is totally BS claim. Someone joining the network will mine hard for some currency he might buy cheaper from some exchange as he won't be able to compete with big corporate miners. The mining model means inflation and devaluation, which lowers potential profits for currency holders. It also creates unnecessary energy consumption which is also not required.


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:32:21 PM
 #938

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

You mean if you buy something from someone in a voluntary exchange you're a slave? Really?

He is talking about first mover advantage which is a valid concern. With mining ethers especially on the algo they are claiming a CPU miner will still be able to get something even if he is late in adopting the platform and currency. This gives it a true decentralized (non-concentrated) advantage something neither Mastercoin nor Nxt can claim. What better way for a platform/currency to succeed than to be truly distributed. It's a long term way which may not match the view of speculative investment.

Sorry but this is totally BS claim. Someone joining the network will mine hard for some currency he might buy cheaper from some exchange as he won't be able to compete with big corporate miners. The mining model means inflation and devaluation, which lowers potential profits for currency holders. It also creates unnecessary energy consumption which is also not required.

The fact that he might get it cheaper on the exchange than mining is actually pure speculation on your part. After having spent 1/1000 for an ether why would I want to sell it for lower.
Herp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 01:40:40 PM
 #939

There's no inflation or dilution in Mastercoin for example. They've released a fixed number and that's it. No more pumping into the market.

In that case, Mastercoin is an apt name because anyone who enters the market after someone else is a slave to the person before them. Inflation, if understood and used correctly, is important because it can serve new generations who don't want to be slaves.

You mean if you buy something from someone in a voluntary exchange you're a slave? Really?

He is talking about first mover advantage which is a valid concern. With mining ethers especially on the algo they are claiming a CPU miner will still be able to get something even if he is late in adopting the platform and currency. This gives it a true decentralized (non-concentrated) advantage something neither Mastercoin nor Nxt can claim. What better way for a platform/currency to succeed than to be truly distributed. It's a long term way which may not match the view of speculative investment.

Sorry but this is totally BS claim. Someone joining the network will mine hard for some currency he might buy cheaper from some exchange as he won't be able to compete with big corporate miners. The mining model means inflation and devaluation, which lowers potential profits for currency holders. It also creates unnecessary energy consumption which is also not required.

The fact that he might get it cheaper on the exchange than mining is actually pure speculation on your part. After having spent 1/1000 for an ether why would I want to sell it for lower.

Point is fresh currency keeps coming to the market by mining, devaluing the stake of existing holders and we're also talking pre-mine here, which excludes the community. So basically people buy into this IPO based on "proof of stake" and then devaluation comes with "proof of work". Cleverly designed model to rip off people.

People are also taking a huge chance of them delivering on some complicated Turing when coins like Mastercoin are already testing their distributed exchange, days away from launch. People are also taking the risk of giving up 1st mover advantage and we know what 1st mover advantage meant for Bitcoin. You don't see alt coin atms being installed everywhere in the world for example. Bitcoin is the superstar due to 1st mover advantage. Very often it's not a question of who has best tech but a question of adoption. This is why HD DVD lost the fight with Blueray, for eg, even though they've had better specs.


███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████▐████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████████████████
DECENT
FOUNDATION



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[D]ecentralized application
[E]liminated third parties
[C]ontent distribution



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██


[E]ncrypted & secure
[N]o borders
[T]imeless reputation



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██



██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██

██
██
██

lonsharim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
January 30, 2014, 02:09:46 PM
 #940

Quote
Point is fresh currency keeps coming to the market by mining, devaluing the stake of existing holders and we're also talking pre-mine here, which excludes the community. So basically people buy into this IPO based on "proof of stake" and then devaluation comes with "proof of work". Cleverly designed model to rip off people.

People are also taking a huge chance of them delivering on some complicated Turing when coins like Mastercoin are already testing their distributed exchange, days away from launch. People are also taking the risk of giving up 1st mover advantage and we know what 1st mover advantage meant for Bitcoin. You don't see alt coin atms being installed everywhere in the world for example. Bitcoin is the superstar due to 1st mover advantage. Very often it's not a question of who has best tech but a question of adoption. This is why HD DVD lost the fight with Blueray, for eg, even though they've had better specs.

You are mixing two different things here
 
Firstly with regards to dilution and speculation, its a valid concern but if you want to purely speculate then in the medium term you have time. Day 1 after the IPO only X is available, Day 2 is X + 0.4/365 * X (for the sake of simplicity) and a large portion of inflation happens on Day 366 when X + 0.4X + 30% of 0.5X is in circulation and available - assuming there are no hoarders and no long term view investors. You have at the very least months before you decide your exit strategy if you are in it only for speculation.

Secondly, no one ever said it is not a risk. I do not understand you plugging for Mastercoin at every given opportunity, its smacks of bias. Worse is to call this a model designed to rip off people. If you don't agree with the model that's perfectly fine, but to question the honesty of people associated with this project based on your dislike of issuance model without anything concrete is not cool.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 [47] 48 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 ... 778 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!