Bitcoin Forum
April 28, 2024, 10:58:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
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 ... 80 »
  Print  
Author Topic: SCAM: Bitcoin SV (BSV) - fake team member and plagiarized white paper  (Read 25230 times)
alevlaslo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 593


View Profile
August 27, 2019, 05:47:46 PM
 #521

So btc will now pay a high price. Most for heir tax

Presumably you're a performance artist. Let me know when your project launches. I'll look forward to wine and nibblies.

Fun to read the BSV justifications this morning. One of the main ones is because it's now 'legal' that Craig is unquestionably Satoshi the Kleimans will get half a million coins that don't exist and destroy everything.

It seems to slip their mind he'll also get half a million non existent BSVs and since most BSVs haven't been claimed that's going to annihilate it in a non existent matter.

This reminds me of when r/btc latched on to the idea of Tether's takedown 'destroying' BTC and obsessed over it for months while stroking their genitals. They were too fucking dim or lazy to realise that just might have an effect on their Bcashes too.

Ira will not get the keys for the bitcoins, he will only receive the bitcoins, so all BSV and BCH will remain whis Craig

Sale the first NFT of the first foto
1714301903
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714301903

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714301903
Reply with quote  #2

1714301903
Report to moderator
1714301903
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714301903

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714301903
Reply with quote  #2

1714301903
Report to moderator
1714301903
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714301903

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714301903
Reply with quote  #2

1714301903
Report to moderator
You get merit points when someone likes your post enough to give you some. And for every 2 merit points you receive, you can send 1 merit point to someone else!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714301903
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714301903

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714301903
Reply with quote  #2

1714301903
Report to moderator
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
August 27, 2019, 06:29:17 PM
 #522

This thread sums it up nicely: https://twitter.com/billsmith4lyfe/status/1166207069629775872
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
August 27, 2019, 06:59:49 PM
 #523


Doesn't one have to prove something exists and the person who wins the settlement has been deprived of it to be able to award something? I know costs will be which may well be substantial enough.

I haven't given much thought to the motivation for bringing the case. Perhaps it's all been purely speculative and he was hoping that Wright would actually turn out to have something to cough up. I can't believe anyone ever believed he did though.
cryptodevil
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1240


Thread-puller extraordinaire


View Profile
August 27, 2019, 07:48:11 PM
Merited by suchmoon (4), vapourminer (1), TheNewAnon135246 (1), xtraelv (1)
 #524

Ok, I've a question for anybody in this thread who might have come across a suitable answer on the topic during this court process. I'm not claiming to be the first person to spot this (I think that kudos goes to this Redditor from 3 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4htw3t/how_to_steal_54_millions_of_dollar_from_the/ )

Dave Kleiman is listed in the UK's Companies House database as having been an officer of one of CSW's UK companes, namely, C01N LTD, (Originally called 'Design By Human Ltd' at incorporation in 2012, then changed to 'Moving Forward In Business Ltd in October 2013, before finally being renamed again, as 'C01N LTD' on January 2014)



We can see he is listed as having been appointed shortly after it's incorporation (when it was called 'Design By Human Ltd') and resigned as at the date of his death in April 2013



But, here's the thing, Dave Kleiman was appointed, and subsequently resigned, long after his death using back-dated dates of appointment and resignation documents filed in April 2014








Now, while filing back-dated appointment/resignation forms isn't that out of the ordinary, it is particularly questionable if it involves the deceased. Without there being supporting legal documentation proving that the deceased had previously accepted their appointment as an officer of a company, it runs the risk of looking like a fraudulent filing.

The issue here is:



Is there evidence that Dave Kleiman actually consented to act as director of this company back when it was still called 'Design By Human Ltd'? Evidence outside of the usual sloppy forgeries Faketoshi furnishes courtrooms with, of course.



WARNING!!! Check your forum URLs carefully and avoid links to phishing sites like 'thebitcointalk' 'bitcointalk.to' and 'BitcointaLLk'
arewethereyet?
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 69
Merit: 11


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 06:43:54 AM
 #525

Ok, I've a question for anybody in this thread who might have come across a suitable answer on the topic during this court process. I'm not claiming to be the first person to spot this (I think that kudos goes to this Redditor from 3 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4htw3t/how_to_steal_54_millions_of_dollar_from_the/ )

Dave Kleiman is listed in the UK's Companies House database as having been an officer of one of CSW's UK companes, namely, C01N LTD, (Originally called 'Design By Human Ltd' at incorporation in 2012, then changed to 'Moving Forward In Business Ltd in October 2013, before finally being renamed again, as 'C01N LTD' on January 2014)



We can see he is listed as having been appointed shortly after it's incorporation (when it was called 'Design By Human Ltd') and resigned as at the date of his death in April 2013



But, here's the thing, Dave Kleiman was appointed, and subsequently resigned, long after his death using back-dated dates of appointment and resignation documents filed in April 2014








Now, while filing back-dated appointment/resignation forms isn't that out of the ordinary, it is particularly questionable if it involves the deceased. Without there being supporting legal documentation proving that the deceased had previously accepted their appointment as an officer of a company, it runs the risk of looking like a fraudulent filing.

The issue here is:



Is there evidence that Dave Kleiman actually consented to act as director of this company back when it was still called 'Design By Human Ltd'? Evidence outside of the usual sloppy forgeries Faketoshi furnishes courtrooms with, of course.




Sounds like an email to Companies Hse is needed, for an explanation.

Something technical happened for 24 hours on 14 Apr-15 Apr 2014 for an appointment and a termination to happen within that time......and impressive for a dead man!
Foxpup
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4340
Merit: 3042


Vile Vixen and Miss Bitcointalk 2021-2023


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 07:24:17 AM
 #526

Doesn't one have to prove something exists and the person who wins the settlement has been deprived of it to be able to award something?
Only if that fact is actually disputed by one side or the other. Protip: if you're being sued for vast sums of money you don't have, you should probably admit that you don't have the money at some point during the trial. Otherwise you may find yourself having to do so at the bankruptcy hearing which is no doubt in your future. Grin

Will pretend to do unspeakable things (while actually eating a taco) for bitcoins: 1K6d1EviQKX3SVKjPYmJGyWBb1avbmCFM4
I am not on the scammers' paradise known as Telegram! Do not believe anyone claiming to be me off-forum without a signed message from the above address! Accept no excuses and make no exceptions!
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 07:49:44 AM
Merited by Foxpup (2)
 #527

SNIP

I don't think this was mentioned during the trial and that might be on purpose. Ira Kleiman has no interest in debunking Dave's involvement with Craig since that might raise questions if Dave/Ira was/is entitled to 50% of Craig's BTC holdings.

Full transcript of the August 26th hearing: https://wizsec.jp/20190826_kleiman_wright.pdf
Great summary of the hearing: https://blog.wizsec.jp/2019/08/kleiman-v-wright-part-5.html
nutildah (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 7948



View Profile WWW
August 28, 2019, 11:50:25 AM
Merited by suchmoon (4), Foxpup (3)
 #528

Ira will not get the keys for the bitcoins, he will only receive the bitcoins, so all BSV and BCH will remain whis Craig

Not true. We've been over this already in 2 other threads. Kleinman estate gets all forks.



Here's a breakdown of the judge's findings released yesterday, I'm cross-posting this from the BSV thread:

Quote
For purposes of this proceeding, the Court accepts Dr. Wright’s representation that he controlled (directly or indirectly) some bitcoin on December 31, 2013, and that he continues to control some today.

"some bitcoin" =/ "Satoshi's bitcoin"

Quote
I completely reject Dr. Wright’s testimony about the alleged Tulip Trust, the alleged encrypted file, and his alleged inability to identify his bitcoin holdings.

So, let's break down what the court ruled is true vs. what is bullshit.

Craig and Dave had bitcoins: true.
Tulip Trust: bullshit.
Private keys in Shamir's scheme: bullshit.
Craig doesn't know what a public address is: bullshit.

Quote
Dr. Wright’s story not only was not supported by other evidence in the record, it defies common sense and real-life experience. Consider his claims. He designed Bitcoin to be an anonymous digital cash system with an evidentiary trail. He mined approximately 1,000,000 bitcoin, but there is no accessible evidentiary trail for the vast majority of them. He is a latter-day Dr. Frankenstein whose creation turned to evil when hijacked by drug dealers, human traffickers, and other criminals.

To save himself, he engaged David Kleiman to remove all traces of his involvement with Bitcoin from the public record. As part of his efforts to disassociate from Bitcoin and “so that I wouldn’t be in trouble,” he put all his bitcoin (and/or the keys to it – his story changed) into a computer file that is encrypted with a hierarchical Shamir encryption protocol. He then put the encrypted file into a “blind” trust (of which he is one of the trustees), gave away a controlling number of the key slices to now-deceased David Kleiman, and therefore cannot now decrypt the file that controls access to the bitcoin. His only hope is that a bonded courier arrives on an unknown dated in January 2020 with the decryption keys. If the courier does not appear, Dr. Wright has lost his ability to access billions of dollars worth of bitcoin, and he does not care. Inconceivable.

drug dealers and human traffickers using bitcoin in 2010: bullshit.
Craig doesn't know what bitcoin he mined: bullshit.
his whole story: bullshit.

Quote
During his testimony, Dr. Wright’s demeanor did not impress me as someone who was telling the truth. When it was favorable to him, Dr. Wright appeared to have an excellent memory and a scrupulous attention to detail. Otherwise, Dr. Wright was belligerent and evasive. He did not directly and clearly respond to questions. He quibbled about irrelevant technicalities. When confronted with evidence indicating that certain documents had been fabricated or altered, he became extremely defensive, tried to sidestep questioning, and ultimately made vague comments about his systems being hacked and others having access to his computers. None of these excuses were corroborated by other evidence.

Summary: Craig is a liar.

Quote
While it is true that there was no direct evidence that Dr. Wright was responsible for alterations or falsification of documents, there is no evidence before the Court that anyone else had a motive to falsify them. As such, there is a strong, and unrebutted, circumstantial inference that Dr. Wright willfully created the fraudulent documents.

Summary: The judge is basically calling Craig a fraud at this point. No wonder Peter McCormack is pretty happy about the outcome.

Quote
There was credible and conclusive evidence at the hearing that Dr. Wright did not control Tulip Trading Ltd. until 2014. Moreover, computer forensic analysis indicated that the Deed of Trust presented to the Court was backdated. The totality of the evidence in the record does not substantiate that the Tulip Trust exists. Combining these facts with my observations of Dr. Wright’s demeanor during his testimony, I find that Dr. Wright’s testimony that this Trust exists was intentionally false.

Summary: again, the Tulip Trust is utter bullshit. There are no coins. There is no trust.

Quote
The Shamir scheme divides a single encryption key into multiple key slices; some subset of the total key slices is needed to decrypt the file. Dr. Wright testified that 15 key slices existed for the outermost file, only eight key slices were needed to decrypt this file, but he only had access to seven key slices. DE 236 at 125-26; see also DE 236 at 114 (“The eight of 15 is the key that we’re talking about to regenerate all of the addresses”). After observing Dr. Wright’s demeanor and the lack of any other credible evidence in the record that this file exists, I find that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that no such file exists and that Dr. Wright’s testimony was intentionally false.

Summary: again, Shamir's scheme is utter bullshit. There is no encrypted file and no private keys.

Quote
Counsel has unfailingly been candid with this Court, even when Dr. Wright’s conduct and conflicting statements have created awkward situations for counsel. I find that counsel reasonably relied on Dr. Wright as a source of information. I find that Dr. Wright, alone, is fully responsible for any evasion, incomplete or false representations to the Court, or non-compliance with the Court’s orders.

Summary: Craig's lawyers did the best they could despite Craig insisting on fucking them and himself over.

Quote
I have found that Dr. Wright intentionally submitted fraudulent documents to the Court, obstructed a judicial proceeding, and gave perjurious testimony. No conduct is more antithetical to the administration of justice.

Summary: ouch.

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
cryptodevil
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1240


Thread-puller extraordinaire


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 05:19:34 PM
Merited by vapourminer (1), malevolent (1)
 #529

I don't think this was mentioned during the trial and that might be on purpose. Ira Kleiman has no interest in debunking Dave's involvement with Craig since that might raise questions if Dave/Ira was/is entitled to 50% of Craig's BTC holdings.

Of course. Let's not forget that it serves CSW's claim to be Satoshi in his wrangles with the ATO over the money they say he scammed from them which was entirely predicated on his supposed significant bitcoin holdings. As long as he is being accused of stiffing someone out of billions of dollars-worth of bitcoins then he can pretend like he had those coins at some point and so totally didn't defraud the ATO out of millions of dollars several years ago.

As an asides from the circus surrounding the million+ bitcoin which we know he doesn't have and, also, that there's no reason to believe he was even aware of bitcoin until a few years after its inception, has there been any evidence presented which would even support Dave Kleiman as being Satoshi?

It suited CSW to convince the world that he and Dave were 'Satoshi' because then he got to contrive the extraordinary tale of the 'Tulip Trust' holding the keys to over a million BTC and, hopefully, get the ATO off his back. But if you remove all the falsified 'evidence' what are you left with to even propose that Dave Kleiman may have been SN?


WARNING!!! Check your forum URLs carefully and avoid links to phishing sites like 'thebitcointalk' 'bitcointalk.to' and 'BitcointaLLk'
TheNewAnon135246
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989


฿uy ฿itcoin


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 05:45:24 PM
 #530

I don't think this was mentioned during the trial and that might be on purpose. Ira Kleiman has no interest in debunking Dave's involvement with Craig since that might raise questions if Dave/Ira was/is entitled to 50% of Craig's BTC holdings.

Of course. Let's not forget that it serves CSW's claim to be Satoshi in his wrangles with the ATO over the money they say he scammed from them which was entirely predicated on his supposed significant bitcoin holdings. As long as he is being accused of stiffing someone out of billions of dollars-worth of bitcoins then he can pretend like he had those coins at some point and so totally didn't defraud the ATO out of millions of dollars several years ago.

As an asides from the circus surrounding the million+ bitcoin which we know he doesn't have and, also, that there's no reason to believe he was even aware of bitcoin until a few years after its inception, has there been any evidence presented which would even support Dave Kleiman as being Satoshi?

It suited CSW to convince the world that he and Dave were 'Satoshi' because then he got to contrive the extraordinary tale of the 'Tulip Trust' holding the keys to over a million BTC and, hopefully, get the ATO off his back. But if you remove all the falsified 'evidence' what are you left with to even propose that Dave Kleiman may have been SN?


There is nothing pointing towards Dave Kleiman, besides Craig's forged documents. Craig brought him up in an interview with Gizmodo (in 2015).
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
August 28, 2019, 06:41:24 PM
 #531

There is nothing pointing towards Dave Kleiman, besides Craig's forged documents. Craig brought him up in an interview with Gizmodo (in 2015).

I'm intrigued as to where he dug him up from. Presumably he must have had some awareness of his conventional security work. His demise and background fit the narrative he wanted to push very neatly, at the start at least.
Phinnaeus Gage
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918
Merit: 1570


Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending


View Profile WWW
August 28, 2019, 09:11:50 PM
 #532

There is nothing pointing towards Dave Kleiman, besides Craig's forged documents. Craig brought him up in an interview with Gizmodo (in 2015).

I'm intrigued as to where he dug him up from. Presumably he must have had some awareness of his conventional security work. His demise and background fit the narrative he wanted to push very neatly, at the start at least.

Kleiman was a long-time member of the same Metzdowd Cryptography mailing list where Satoshi Nakamoto first announced Bitcoin on Oct. 31, 2008.
alevlaslo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 593


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 10:38:05 AM
 #533

Large blocks this is very important, Vitalik is already sounding the alarm, USDT consumes 90% of network resources, BSV will soon come to help

Sale the first NFT of the first foto
Iamtutut
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 131


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 10:49:45 AM
 #534

What large block ? Last BSV block size in Kb, 3blocks are larger than a floppy disk size Grin Grin

597657    52 minutes ago    Mempool    342.01
597656    1 hour ago    SVPool    1.20
597655    1 hour ago    SVPool    235.21
597654    1 hour ago    Mempool    269.72
597653    1 hour ago    Unknown    77.31
597652    1 hour ago    SVPool    12.70
597651    1 hour ago    Unknown    253.14
597650    1 hour ago    Unknown    483.44
597649    1 hour ago    Unknown    253.17
597648    1 hour ago    Unknown    1,308.37
597647    2 hours ago    Prohashing    9.26
597646    2 hours ago    Unknown    447.10
597645    2 hours ago    Coingeek    123.73
597644    2 hours ago    SVPool    2,278.85
597643    2 hours ago    SVPool    177.54
597642    2 hours ago    Unknown    46.75
597641    3 hours ago    Unknown    375.33
597640    3 hours ago    Coingeek    1,400.28
597639    3 hours ago    Poolin    499.19
597638    3 hours ago    Poolin    499.00
597637    4 hours ago    Coingeek    4.73
597636    4 hours ago    ViaBTC    32.91
597635    4 hours ago    Coingeek    237.61
597634    4 hours ago    ViaBTC    355.05
597633    4 hours ago    Coingeek    690.64
597632    4 hours ago    Coingeek    80.32
597631    4 hours ago    SVPool    361.90
597630    4 hours ago    Unknown    217.69
597629    5 hours ago    Coingeek    782.43
597628    5 hours ago    Coingeek    56.06
597627    5 hours ago    SVPool    199.89
597626    5 hours ago    Coingeek    433.17
597625    5 hours ago    Unknown    579.73
597624    6 hours ago    Coingeek    187.88
597623    6 hours ago    Mempool    455.33
597622    6 hours ago    Coingeek    1,461.31
597621    6 hours ago    Coingeek    462.94
597620    6 hours ago    Coingeek    380.84
597619    6 hours ago    Coingeek    389.08
597618    7 hours ago    Coingeek    1,492.46
597617    7 hours ago    Mempool    448.08
597616    7 hours ago    Coingeek    418.39
597615    8 hours ago    Coingeek    449.03
597614    8 hours ago    Mempool    371.81
597613    8 hours ago    Coingeek    255.99
597612    8 hours ago    SVPool    1,007.79
597611    8 hours ago    SVPool    192.21
597610    8 hours ago    Mempool    148.13
597609    8 hours ago    Coingeek    209.32

Nobody wants to fill the useless BSV gigameg blocks.
alevlaslo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 593


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 11:12:16 AM
 #535

USDT will want Smiley

Sale the first NFT of the first foto
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 12:01:39 PM
 #536

https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/08/27/1566922213000/He-s-not-Satoshi--he-s-a-very-naughty-boy/
alevlaslo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 593


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 12:23:34 PM
 #537

there are no bitcoins in the trust Smiley

https://blog.wizsec.jp/2018/02/kleiman-v-craig-wright-bitcoins.html?m=1

if they were, he would keep quiet about it because such owners are hunted by guys with soldering irons

Sale the first NFT of the first foto
nutildah (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 7948



View Profile WWW
August 29, 2019, 12:53:10 PM
 #538


You're linking a year and a half old article to tell us what we already know. Not only are there no bitcoins in the trust, there never was any trust to begin with. At least not while Kleiman was still alive. At least it appears you're finally accepting the reality of the situation, even if in your own weird and roundabout way.

if they were, he would keep quiet about it because such owners are hunted by guys with soldering irons

Oh, nevermind, you're not. Its all a conspiracy to avoid "guys with soldering irons" and you learned nothing. That makes more sense.

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
hv_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 1055

Clean Code and Scale


View Profile WWW
August 29, 2019, 01:53:59 PM
 #539

There is nothing pointing towards Dave Kleiman, besides Craig's forged documents. Craig brought him up in an interview with Gizmodo (in 2015).

I'm intrigued as to where he dug him up from. Presumably he must have had some awareness of his conventional security work. His demise and background fit the narrative he wanted to push very neatly, at the start at least.

Kleiman was a long-time member of the same Metzdowd Cryptography mailing list where Satoshi Nakamoto first announced Bitcoin on Oct. 31, 2008.

Yep - put some probability numbers behind CSW and DK , their skills, their interests and what only CSW is able to Report from the beginnings, and they are both quite likely Satoshi.
No other comes  close to that probability - trolls just getting pissed, cause CSW wanna destroy their anno sefgork tool - sorry

Carpe diem  -  understand the White Paper and mine honest.
Fix real world issues: Check out b-vote.com
The simple way is the genius way - Satoshi's Rules: humana veris _
cryptodevil
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2170
Merit: 1240


Thread-puller extraordinaire


View Profile
August 29, 2019, 01:58:40 PM
 #540

and what only CSW is able to Report from the beginnings

I've not seen any evidence that CSW was even aware of Bitcoin prior to 2013. Do you have any that wasn't supplied (or 'leaked') by CSW himself?


WARNING!!! Check your forum URLs carefully and avoid links to phishing sites like 'thebitcointalk' 'bitcointalk.to' and 'BitcointaLLk'
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 ... 80 »
  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!