Do not give this project any more money.

bartoni33 · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:

bartoni33 said:

MaxBacon said:

bartoni33 said:
I'm sure he will have no issues in stating they all were lying.

Maybe they actually were? Hell I can't tell anymore. CR has been proven to be such a big blowhard you can't blame anyone for not knowing his true intentions.

Maybe they weren't... Maybe they were given one aggressive deadline to rush towards, and then it has shown itself not possible.

And what shocker would that be? 2.6 itself was meant months before it released, and even when it released they are still today, 3 months after, doing the 2.6.2 to implement features that couldn't be implemented on the main release.

Maybe.

At this point all I can say for sure is that CR needs to step away from the lead role and keep his gob shut.

Careful. I said that a long time ago, when I was only slightly perturbed, and even then the usual suspects appeared and flamed my posts into inanity. I cited the fact CR never came CLOSE to finishing Freelancer, it was bought-out and he was "re-assigned" to an "advisory role" (lol), and Microsoft finally "finished" it 2years later, (without CR as lead anything or even "programmer" credited) if you can call it finished. Oh, then all hell broke loose. "HOW DARE YOU INSULT GREAT COMMANDANT ROBERTS! HE IS SAVIOR!".

Maybe you'll get away with saying such things. You're not me.

I'm not speculating on his past performances. I'm talking about his horrible track record with SC. That can't be disputed. Well I guess it can but you would be wrong!

MaxBacon · March 2017

rpmcmurphy said:
LOL. Yes of course, he thought they could do stuff (which remains in its intial stages 7 months later) in just 3 months, as well as testing it all before rolling it out to backers. Oh man.... most of us were not born yesterday.

Implying that the entire team of developers was NOT working with the end of the year deadline for the milestones part of 3.0, is implying quite a conspiracy that they were all pretending they were working towards the end of the year, while knowing they weren't.

rpmcmurphy said:
About as much chance of seeing the above as we have of getting a real date from Chris Roberts....

So if I'm wrong, means that what you defend, that they all knew they were lying... is the proven truth? So where was this truth proven again?

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

rpmcmurphy said:

"Hey, you were right and I am sorry I said you were wrong. I should have asked and waited for evidence before jumping to conclusions. I will try to avoid doing that in the future!"

About as much chance of seeing the above as we have of getting a real date from Chris Roberts....

I want a TICKLE DATE with... oh nevermind. If I say it, panties will just get in a bunch.

Now ^ THIS ^ is a shit post. Recognize.

TyranusPrime · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:

For those not familiar, I am a conscientious objector to the company on the basis or principle.

I'm not trying to tell you how to spend your money. I'm warning, from my educated understanding of the project, this is a fleecing of the gaming community, and your money is better spent elsewhere.

Many long-term contributors to the project have become wise to the nefarious practices and are seeking refunds.

Many long-term contributors who are not yet seeking refunds are in a process of open rebellion on the official forum.

The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year". This was said as an intentional falsehood to garner additional funding from instilling false hope. The real timeline is closer to late 2017. There's zero way this was not fully known when the statement was made.

The most recent lackluster release of a proof-of-concept was the fps shooter module "Star Marine", two years later than promised, easily exploitable for client-side code, simplistic and unfun, lacking a majority of promised features.

If you're new to this project, you deserve to be warned of the developers' collective ineptitude and tall tales before you make a monetary commitment.

If you're not new to the project, you owe it to yourself a second consideration of the gaslighting, the historical revisionist culture in which you've found yourself immersed.

CIG has enough money, now well over twice what they said they needed, to do what they said they were going to do.

It's time they deliver, no more advertising, no more empty words, no more nonsense.

Tell CIG today you want a finished product before you give them another cent. This is only to your benefit.

Thanks for listening.

Here is my problem.. Being that I am an educated gentleman, I am unable to take anything from your posting as credible.. I am not a backer of the game, nor a defender, nor an attacker.. I have taken the "watch and wait" approach to seeing if this game can become something similar to the old Earth and Beyond I enjoyed back in the day..

Your advice seems to be aimed at helping the community.. at first.. But, what clues me in to your potential underlying motives is your choice of wording.. You immediately define yourself as a conscientious objector (which, by its nature, implies a degree of neutrality) and then go on to utilize hostile/leading words such as "nefarious", "bold faced lie", "ineptitude", and "gaslighting"..

If your intent is to help, then perhaps a better choice of wording and more neutral writing stance could better get your point across.. If your intent is not, however, then you are already well aware of the impact of your wording.. If you have a problem with this game, then fine.. It will either be produced (proving you incorrect) or it will be a scam (which you may then loudly proclaim yourself vindicated to all who care)..

MaxBacon · March 2017

bartoni33 said:
But as the leader he obviously feels the need to keep talking/digging holes. The leader is usually the most vocal aspect of a team. His perceived cult of personality is causing him to make all these big presentations just so he can get up in front of people and hear himself talk because he thinks his fans/whales want to hear him. He is a bad leader. He is waaaaaaaaaay too full of himself.

Who says they don't? After all you backed him, his dream game. Presentations, hypes, and literal fans of HIM were there since the day 1 this project was pitched.

The rest is up to each person opinions of him, what I backed is the game I want to play, there are others that are fans of him, I am not.

The project would possibly be better with more control of him, that is more the guy who designs and envisions the entire thing, for sure. But by now it wouldn't change anything when it comes to the time it's taking to deliver it.

Erillion · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:

MaxBacon said:

Adjuvant1 said:
I voted you an "insightful" for catching on! Great job!

So your argument is that the CIG higher ups and employees were all lying?

Your argument is that they were not working towards a late-year release of 3.0 and knew that when it was announced?

I don't honestly believe 3.0 was anything other than a statement "there will be a 3.0" when it was discussed last fall. There's no possible way it could have been.

You didn't even like how I caught out Erillion's argument on page 1 about reneging on "limited availability spaceship.jpgs". It's like you're being lied to so much, all over, you're not even seeing it fly by your eyes.

>>>

You didn't even like how I caught out Erillion's argument on page 1 about reneging on "limited availability spaceship.jpgs".

>>>

I stated the reason why CIG did make limited ships available again ... to crash the grey/black market that was getting out of hand ... and in my opinion it was an excellent decision and worked very well.

CIG also stated officially why they decided to again offer limited edition ships .... there are literally hundredthousands of new backers that never had the chance to get such ships because they did not know about Star Citizen back then. Seems like quite a few asked CIG for a chance to obtain these ships too.

Have fun

Hatefull · March 2017

Erillion said:

>>>
Many long-term contributors to the project have become wise to the nefarious practices and are seeking refunds.
>>>

First of all ... the OP has no numbers to support his statement of "many" .... and "many" becomes relative if you compare it with hundredthousands of paying crowdfunding backers or around 1.8 Million Star Citizen accounts on the SC website. The only known official number is years old ... it was a 0.2 % refund rate back then.

The OP presented his personal opinion as a fact.

Is should also be noted that a significant number of these "long-term contributors" he mentions were grey market gamblers that bought limited-issue pledge packages and resold them for profit at highly inflated prices to other backers. When CIG broke the back of the grey (and black) market by re-offering these limited edition ships (so backers that wanted one did not have to buy them at triple the price), some of those gamblers tried to recoup their losses by trying to get refunds.

I suggest ...
if you want to check it out, do it for free during one of the Free Fly Events. If you like it and/or want to support the development of a crowdfunding space-sim project ... go for it.
if you are not sure if this is the game for you, wait until it is finished and decide at that point.

Have fun

Funny, here we are years down the road and nothing you present as fact has come to fruition, no release of a game in a complete state, still free trials of an Alpha. Yet...all the naysayers or people that argue against you are still being proven right, day after day.

Have fun indeed.

CrazKanuk · March 2017

rpmcmurphy said:

3.0 is meant to be containing a host of gameplay and yet Brian Chambers is saying they are just starting to put together a gameplay team (Feb 27) 17mins 5secs

3.0 is meant to have the cargo system in place, yet Will Maiden (who is in charge of the cargo system) is saying they are still designing and prototyping it -
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/5wpgmv/more_dev_comments_from_spectrum_general_chat/

The room system is an essential part of 3.0 but it is still under development by the LA team - "This will likely have a dependency on the 'room system' being developed in LA...." https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/7516129/#Comment_7516129

If this stuff is nowhere near completion now how could Roberts realistically claim that it was going to be ready for last December.

Ok, so this is a bit silly. Just because they are just starting a gameplay team doesn't mean that they haven't focused on gameplay up until now. I've worked at my current company for over 10 years now, and we just established a UX Design team like 3 or 4 years ago. That doesn't mean that prior to that we didn't have any interested in user experience design. What it DOES mean is that there will be a team dedicated to gameplay going forward.

Honestly, what I think is harmful about this post is that there are a couple claiming to be objective, educated people attempting to educate others because of their conscience, but they are using really shady and underhanded tactics in order to attempt to fool people. That's what is most sad. Wasn't it just last week that you were claiming to be objective @rpmcmurphy? Wasn't it just last week that you made ME feel guilty for calling you a doomsayer? Interesting......

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

TyranusPrime said:

Adjuvant1 said:

For those not familiar, I am a conscientious objector to the company on the basis or principle.

I'm not trying to tell you how to spend your money. I'm warning, from my educated understanding of the project, this is a fleecing of the gaming community, and your money is better spent elsewhere.

Many long-term contributors to the project have become wise to the nefarious practices and are seeking refunds.
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/

Many long-term contributors who are not yet seeking refunds are in a process of open rebellion on the official forum.
https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/374420/lets-talk-about-3-0-status/p6

The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year". This was said as an intentional falsehood to garner additional funding from instilling false hope. The real timeline is closer to late 2017. There's zero way this was not fully known when the statement was made.

The most recent lackluster release of a proof-of-concept was the fps shooter module "Star Marine", two years later than promised, easily exploitable for client-side code, simplistic and unfun, lacking a majority of promised features.

If you're new to this project, you deserve to be warned of the developers' collective ineptitude and tall tales before you make a monetary commitment.

If you're not new to the project, you owe it to yourself a second consideration of the gaslighting, the historical revisionist culture in which you've found yourself immersed.

CIG has enough money, now well over twice what they said they needed, to do what they said they were going to do.

It's time they deliver, no more advertising, no more empty words, no more nonsense.

Tell CIG today you want a finished product before you give them another cent. This is only to your benefit.

Thanks for listening.

Here is my problem.. Being that I am an educated gentleman, I am unable to take anything from your posting as credible.. I am not a backer of the game, nor a defender, nor an attacker.. I have taken the "watch and wait" approach to seeing if this game can become something similar to the old Earth and Beyond I enjoyed back in the day..

Your advice seems to be aimed at helping the community.. at first.. But, what clues me in to your potential underlying motives is your choice of wording.. You immediately define yourself as a conscientious objector (which, by its nature, implies a degree of neutrality) and then go on to utilize hostile/leading words such as "nefarious", "bold faced lie", "ineptitude", and "gaslighting"..

If your intent is to help, then perhaps a better choice of wording and more neutral writing stance could better get your point across.. If your intent is not, however, then you are already well aware of impact of your wording.. If you have a problem with this game, then fine.. It will either be produced (proving you incorrect) or it will be a scam (which you may then loudly proclaim yourself vindicated to all who care)..

Truth is truth. It comes out the way it comes out. I didn't just write a Dickens classic. I made a truthful public service announcement.

No more money to CIG. Tell them to finish with what they have.

bartoni33 · March 2017

MaxBacon said:

bartoni33 said:
But as the leader he obviously feels the need to keep talking/digging holes. The leader is usually the most vocal aspect of a team. His perceived cult of personality is causing him to make all these big presentations just so he can get up in front of people and hear himself talk because he thinks his fans/whales want to hear him. He is a bad leader. He is waaaaaaaaaay too full of himself.

Who says they don't? After all you backed him, his dream game. Presentations, hypes, and literal fans of HIM were there since the day 1 this project was pitched.

The rest is up to each person opinions of him, what I backed is the game I want to play, there are others that are fans of him, I am not.

The project would possibly be better with more control of him, that is more the guy who designs and envisions things for sure, but that's what we got.

As I've stated before the game I backed is not the game he wants to release now. I wanted the KS game. But I'm along for the ride (read: forced) now.

Fun fact: I had zero idea who CR was before the KS. I had never heard of Wing Commander and had played Freelancer but didn't know or cared who's idea it was. So maybe that's why I see CR as a useless blowhard.

I'm not doom and gloom like most but FFS SOMEONE has sure screwed the pooch here. CIG needs to find the pooch-screwers and can them. Even if the fucker is the Idea Man himself.

rpmcmurphy · March 2017

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:
LOL. Yes of course, he thought they could do stuff (which remains in its intial stages 7 months later) in just 3 months, as well as testing it all before rolling it out to backers. Oh man.... most of us were not born yesterday.

Implying that the entire team of developers was NOT working with the end of the year deadline for the milestones part of 3.0, is implying quite a conspiracy that they were all pretending they were working towards the end of the year, while knowing they weren't.

No. You don't get to change the terms of the discussion. Nobody was saying CIG were not working on it.

People were saying that Roberts gave an ETA purely to bring in more cash, when he knew full well that ETA could not be achieved. There was no implication that the team of developers were not working on the game.

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:
About as much chance of seeing the above as we have of getting a real date from Chris Roberts....

So if I'm wrong, means that what you defend, that they all knew they were lying... is the proven truth? So where was this truth proven again?

This just shows your character, even when I offer you an easy way to apologise via a joke, you decide to take the hard way and imply that other people are lying and that proof still needs to be found for something never even part of the discussion.

Erillion · March 2017

@Hatefull

>>>

no release of a game in a complete state

>>>

Personally I expect nothing in a completed state before the end of 2017 ... and have stated so since I started to post about Star Citizen here on MMORPG.com

My 5 year estimate still stands

(and I expect SQ42 to be the first thing CIG will deliver in a completed state).

Have fun

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

Erillion said:

Adjuvant1 said:

MaxBacon said:

Adjuvant1 said:
I voted you an "insightful" for catching on! Great job!

So your argument is that the CIG higher ups and employees were all lying?

Your argument is that they were not working towards a late-year release of 3.0 and knew that when it was announced?

I don't honestly believe 3.0 was anything other than a statement "there will be a 3.0" when it was discussed last fall. There's no possible way it could have been.

You didn't even like how I caught out Erillion's argument on page 1 about reneging on "limited availability spaceship.jpgs". It's like you're being lied to so much, all over, you're not even seeing it fly by your eyes.

>>>
You didn't even like how I caught out Erillion's argument on page 1 about reneging on "limited availability spaceship.jpgs".
>>>

I stated the reason why CIG did make limited ships available again ... to crash the grey/black market that was getting out of hand ... and in my opinion it was an excellent decision and worked very well.

CIG also stated officially why they decided to again offer limited edition ships .... there are literally hundredthousands of new backers that never had the chance to get such ships because they did not know about Star Citizen back then. Seems like quite a few asked CIG for a chance to obtain these ships too.

Have fun

And this all makes perfect sense to you?

You're ok with false advertisement? "Buy this! It will never be available again!" (people rush to buy it on impulse on the prospect of availability) "OHP! because reasons it's available again!"

You don't think that's lying? I've said this before at times I think you remember, too. This might be the very basis on how and why we disagree on this project. I actually HAVE a moral compass.

MaxBacon · March 2017

bartoni33 said:
As I've stated before the game I backed is not the game he wants to release now. I wanted the KS game. But I'm along for the ride (read: forced) now.

Fun fact: I had zero idea who CR was before the KS. I had never heard of Wing Commander and had played Freelancer but didn't know or cared who's idea it was. So maybe that's why I see CR as a useless blowhard.

I didn't want the KS game, that's why I backed it after

I also didn't know who he was, but I saw a clear fan-driven approach to him and his name. There was also some level of this with Elite Dangerous, because both CR and Braben had a name within the genre.

mgilbrtsn · March 2017

francis_baud said:

"The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year"."

Any evidence that it was a lie (aka they knew at that time that they were saying something false)?

not only that, but they say 'hoped.' That's hardly the declarative statement of the century.

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

mgilbrtsn said:

francis_baud said:

"The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year"."

Any evidence that it was a lie (aka they knew at that time that they were saying something false)?

not only that, but they say 'hoped.' That's hardly the declarative statement of the century.

There was zero hope. No matter how you arrange or portray it, it was a falsehood. It was impossible.

MaxBacon · March 2017

rpmcmurphy said:
No. You don't get to change the terms of the discussion. Nobody was saying CIG were not working on it.

This just shows your character, even when I offer you an easy way to apologise via a joke, you decide to take the hard way and imply that other people are lying and that proof still needs to be found for something never even part of the discussion.

1) I wasn't saying you or other said they weren't working on it, yet that they weren't working TOWARDS it's announced deadline internally and were purposely lying pretending they were.

2) I don't have to apologize to you. You said I was wrong when what I am claiming is that the claims that they were lying, are not proven the truth, yet one of the ways we can speculate what happened.

Simply that.

bartoni33 · March 2017

Erillion said:

>>>
no release of a game in a complete state
>>>

Personally I expect nothing in a completed state before the end of 2017 ... and have stated so since I started to post about Star Citizen here on MMORPG.com

My 5 year estimate still stands
(and I expect SQ42 to be the first thing CIG will deliver in a completed state).

Have fun

Well of course 42 will be completed first. That was always the plan. 42 then the PU. Wasn't it?

Quick question: If 42 is delayed until lets say late '18 to mid '19 will you still be all sunshine and puppy licks about SC? Is their a "line in the sand" where you will start to doubt? Just curious.

rpmcmurphy · March 2017

CrazKanuk said:
Ok, so this is a bit silly. Just because they are just starting a gameplay team doesn't mean that they haven't focused on gameplay up until now. I've worked at my current company for over 10 years now, and we just established a UX Design team like 3 or 4 years ago. That doesn't mean that prior to that we didn't have any interested in user experience design. What it DOES mean is that there will be a team dedicated to gameplay going forward.

Honestly, what I think is harmful about this post is that there are a couple claiming to be objective, educated people attempting to educate others because of their conscience, but they are using really shady and underhanded tactics in order to attempt to fool people. That's what is most sad. Wasn't it just last week that you were claiming to be objective @rpmcmurphy? Wasn't it just last week that you made ME feel guilty for calling you a doomsayer? Interesting......

Are you a backer that follows this gane, I can't remember?

A. You're taking anecdotal evidence from your experience and claiming it also fits for CIG's experience without any proof. If there are gameplay teams that have been referred to before then by all means show me. I am open to this.

B. It's also funny how you focus on a single piece excluding the other 2 relevant pieces in your attempt to claim some lack of objectivity on my part.

C. It is you that bangs on about objectivity, perhaps I mentioned it a month or two ago but it is you that seems to want to use it as a bludgeon against anything I post. What's up with that?

D. You did call me a doomsayer, and then only a few days later you were laughing about people who call others doomsayers.... interesting indeed.

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

bartoni33 said:

Erillion said:

>>>
no release of a game in a complete state
>>>

Personally I expect nothing in a completed state before the end of 2017 ... and have stated so since I started to post about Star Citizen here on MMORPG.com

My 5 year estimate still stands
(and I expect SQ42 to be the first thing CIG will deliver in a completed state).

Have fun

Well of course 42 will be completed first. That was always the plan. 42 then the PU. Wasn't it?

Quick question: If 42 is delayed until lets say late '18 to mid '19 will you still be all sunshine and puppy licks about SC? Is their a "line in the sand" where you will start to doubt? Just curious.

Can't wait for SQ42 simultaneous PC/console release like I said a long time ago, which was flamed into inanity. I should really look some of this up and make one big post "All the times Adjuvant1 was right".

Eh, forget it. It would just be subject somehow to historical revisionists or somehow spun into utter dismissiveness.

"But we ALWAYS KNEW it would be on console! You're an idiot shit-poster, Adjuvant1!"

fun times.

I was calling these things before DS was. I don't even get credit, the unsung hero.

LeSigh.

MaxBacon · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:
I was calling these things before DS was. I don't even get credit, the unsung hero.

Wait... Are you Tufao/Manzes?

If so you're the guy I saw naysaying about SC before I ever knew what SC was. lol

CrazKanuk · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:

mgilbrtsn said:

francis_baud said:

"The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year"."

Any evidence that it was a lie (aka they knew at that time that they were saying something false)?

not only that, but they say 'hoped.' That's hardly the declarative statement of the century.

There was zero hope. No matter how you arrange or portray it, it was a falsehood. It was impossible.

You know, it doesn't matter how much you BELIEVE something is the truth, that doesn't just automatically make it the truth. Facts are undeniable. The simple FACT, yes fact, that there are people disputing your statement is proof that there isn't agreement, or facts to support you.

Furthermore, just to muddy the waters more, is the FACT that Frontier is now saying that Multi-crew is maybe NOT going to be in their next release, even though players can beta test it on the PTR. This is not all that dissimilar from this situation and goes to show how volatile even a single feature can be, nevermind the case with SC where we're talking about a 3.0 release which would, effectively, signify a beta, based on what people are saying. If quality was a concern, even if it had to go back under the knife for a couple of features, it's likely that it could take months to resolve and test before releasing. ED Multi-crew is another prime example of this, being that it's been in development for over a year and they are still uncertain whether it will be viable in the "wild"

Again, please stop try to pass yourself off as an expert, or an impartial, objective, conscientious observer. You've never been an observer and never will be. Anyone interested at all could take a look back at your post history and see you're anything but objective.

Erillion · March 2017

bartoni33 said:

Erillion said:

>>>
no release of a game in a complete state
>>>

Personally I expect nothing in a completed state before the end of 2017 ... and have stated so since I started to post about Star Citizen here on MMORPG.com

My 5 year estimate still stands
(and I expect SQ42 to be the first thing CIG will deliver in a completed state).

Have fun

Well of course 42 will be completed first. That was always the plan. 42 then the PU. Wasn't it?

Quick question: If 42 is delayed until lets say late '18 to mid '19 will you still be all sunshine and puppy licks about SC? Is their a "line in the sand" where you will start to doubt? Just curious.

If they take longer than the end of 2017, then I consider the project delayed.

Personally I have no line in the sand as long as i see that there is progress in development. And personally I do see progress.

As stated in older threads: i want a working, tested, (almost) bug-free, polished game full of content (i gave Witcher 3 as an example). I do not care when CIG finishes it. I currently still have some 200+ games to play on Steam and GOG until then.

Have fun

Adjuvant1 · March 2017

MaxBacon said:

Adjuvant1 said:
I was calling these things before DS was. I don't even get credit, the unsung hero.
Wait... Are you Tufao/Manzes?

If so you're the guy I saw naysaying about SC before I ever knew what SC was. lol

Nope. DS lost his guano on the project months before I did. In that era I was just mildly perturbed, like you are. Most of my seriously angry opinions started around October of '15, but even then I was typing stuff like "man, I really hope this pans out, if only for the fans' sake".

Then, over months, came all the prophetic stuff, but no one would take it as such in that time.

mgilbrtsn · March 2017

Adjuvant1 said:

mgilbrtsn said:

francis_baud said:

"The most recent bold-faced lie from the CIG hierarchy was from the fall, when it was stated they "hoped to have 3.0 alpha by the end of the year"."

Any evidence that it was a lie (aka they knew at that time that they were saying something false)?

not only that, but they say 'hoped.' That's hardly the declarative statement of the century.

There was zero hope. No matter how you arrange or portray it, it was a falsehood. It was impossible.

I'm not portraying it any way. I can 'hope' for peace on earth. In no situation is that a lie. It's a hope, even though I have a feeling it won't happen. It could be disingenuous, but words have meaning. Lie is a very specific meaning and has very specific consequences and shouldn't be thrown around without some sort of evidence.

Unfortunately, evidence isn't necessary on the interwebs which promotes people to use whatever accusations/language and otherwise say whatever they want without consequence. This just leads to foolishness in these arguments. For instance... You lied by saying 'it was impossible' They could very easily have put something out. Whether it was good or not doesn't enter into it. It is possible... you liar. (No, I don't think you're a liar, just making a point)

Howdy, Stranger!

Do not give this project any more money.

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Do not give this project any more money.

Comments