Xbox Leaks (Microsoft aims to buy Nintendo & Valve, Game Pass needs 100 million by 2027/30 or Microsoft will exit Gaming, Seemingly came close to buying Sega)

[Dreakon13]

17 minutes ago, Ashande said:

 

You are free to believe as you like, including that reading/responding to “essays” is a waste of time, that some folks are “excited” to “see the world burn,” or that commenting on a public forum constitutes “butting in.” Others are likewise free to disagree with you. Throwing shade and being passive aggressive isn’t going to make you any friends or convince them of your point of view.

 

I mean, I explained myself.  I noticed no one acknowledged that but whatever.  I'm not going to apologize but yeah, multiple responses were a bit too long winded for me to give an earnest retort to... especially since I disagree with them fundamentally.  My response could've used some fine tuning.

 

And I believe what I'm going to believe.  I don't mind people disagreeing with me.  I'm not a huge fan of whatever this was... (it got a lot of upvotes though)

 

1 hour ago, Zephrese said:

 

"I'm not even going to bother to try intelligently responding to posts that appropriately called me out on my BS, so let me instead try and twist people's words and legitimate concerns pertaining to a multi-billion dollar, corrupt corporation by spinning it into some reverse psychology, mental gymnastics garbage to make it look like I have a point when I never had one to begin with and was just playing devil's advocate for literally no fucking reason, again, for a multi-billion dollar corporation that's still to this day doing shit they've been caught doing and gotten into trouble for in the past".

 

That about sum it up for you, eh?

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[Rozalia1]

15 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

I mean, I guess the only way to end this is to just walk away but I'm usually too stubborn.  Really I took kinda the lazy route, instead of taking two separate essays and piecing out what I agree and disagree with, which probably would've led to two additional essays in response to the essay I would've had to write, which would've led to more essays... it would've just taken a very long time... I tried to summarize my exasperation perhaps a bit too obtusely.  Would you like me to apologize?  I can't guarantee it won't happen again... but I guess you've exposed me, which seems like some sort of public service.  If too many people write essays in response to me, I may respond in a less than desirable way.  Keep that in mind folks.

 

My point was basically that while people may not feel Microsoft is definitely going to buy Nintendo (my passive aggressive sarcasm in previous posts aside), they are indeed saying that it could happen.  They've said that many times.  Even looking past the fact I disagree with that idea on a personal level... their evidence is apparently a long standing personal grudge against Microsoft and a single leaked email where someone suggested it.  As far as proof of anything indicating that it could happen, it still seems farfetched at best.  I've just been expressing my thoughts on that in a number of ways.

 

You're admonishing people for making posts that are short (as you read them), that you feel aren't backed up. If someone posts a longer post that back things up, then you'll ignore it so you'll not have to engage with the reasons why you were wrong. By the way, as@Zephrese said, why are you so concerned about Microsoft being treated so 'unfairly'?

 

I'm going to quote myself for that second paragraph.

 

4 hours ago, Rozalia1 said:

Quote

But our BoD has seen the full writeup on Nintendo (and Valve) and they are fully supportive on either if the opportunity arises as am I.

 

So no. This isn't some idea floated towards Spencer and he just said it'd be great, but it was just a fantasy. Spencer's team has already put forward buying Nintendo/Valve to the Board and already has their approval to buyout the companies the moment they become willing to sell.

[Dreakon13]

26 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

 

You're admonishing people for making posts that are short (as you read them), that you feel aren't backed up. If someone posts a longer post that back things up, then you'll ignore it so you'll not have to engage with the reasons why you were wrong. By the way, as@Zephrese said, why are you so concerned about Microsoft being treated so 'unfairly'?

 

 

It's been a long day, came home, went onto PSNProfiles and saw several notifications leading to multiple essays.  I didn't read them thoroughly and I left a poorly thought out response.  Got attacked by one overzealous onlooker and here we are.  I'm not going to apologize because it doesn't warrant it and I really don't care what you people think of me, though I am frustrated I have the whole fucking cavalry on my back now.

 

I don't care about Microsoft being treated unfairly, but I do think there's a certain amount of dishonesty when people try this hard with table scraps to prove something could happen that we all know is incredibly unlikely.

 

 

EDIT: When did I admonish people for making short posts... I like short posts.  Was it the part where I said I hadn't seen anything yet that convinced me Microsoft could buy Nintendo, because I felt something wasn't backed up?  That's a reach.  Short posts can prove things if there's something to prove.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[AJ_-_808]

2 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

 

EDIT: I still don't think Microsoft is going to buy Nintendo. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

... but I'm confident in my stance.  

 

 

Realistically, no, they should never be allowed to by Nintendo. 

 

Realistically, they should not have been allowed to buy Activision or probably Bethesda (not as big as ACTI, but still a large publisher)

 

They bought Bethesda without so much as a blip on the radar and are nearly done buying Acti.  

 

I was confident the laws and common sense would've prevailed, but obviously they didn't. 

 

Confidence only works until the unbelievable happens.  I'm hopeful a Nintendo buyout would be blocked (if not by regulators, then at least by the Japanese stock/ownership structure), but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens.

[Rozalia1]

15 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

It's been a long day, came home, went onto PSNProfiles and saw several notifications leading to multiple essays.  I didn't read them thoroughly and I left a poorly thought out response.  Got attacked by one overzealous onlooker and here we are.  I'm not going to apologize because it doesn't warrant it and I really don't care what you people think of me, though I am frustrated I have the whole fucking cavalry on my back now.

 

I don't care about Microsoft being treated unfairly, but I do think there's a certain amount of dishonesty when people try this hard with table scraps to prove something could happen that we all know is incredibly unlikely.

 

EDIT: When did I admonish people for making short posts... I like short posts.

 

You're playing defence for Microsoft and telling others they're wrong, dishonest, overzealous, and then outright dismiss a post that explained exactly why your post was wrong. People do tend to take a dim view of that sort of behaviour yes. Still, I didn't see anything outrageous sent your way, so this sympathy act isn't very effective sorry.

 

People are dishonest for trying to prove something could happen? Excuse me? People are pretty agreed on that Microsoft buying out Nintendo/Valve is unlikely, not because Microsoft can behave, but because Nintendo/Valve are unlikely to ever sell. That could certainly change of course and then we'd have to trust the regulators, which would be a fool's game. Microsoft's board certainly don't think they'll be a problem considering they already have the buyouts approved.

 

That was my understanding of what you were saying relating to others.

[Dreakon13]

20 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

People are dishonest for trying to prove something could happen? Excuse me?

 

Dishonest in their intent, the reason they're doing it.  Someone says "it's because we love gaming and we need to be vigilant and fearful of anything that could happen", I say "you seem to have a grudge against Microsoft and/or Xbox and maybe wanted something like this to happen to validate it".  I'm not totally oblivious to some of your post histories either lol.  That said it doesn't really matter what I think or why I think it, but it's not about defending Microsoft.  It's analyzing intent, it's a fun little thing I like to try.  I also don't really like needless fearmongering but I digress.

 

The "overzealous" was in regards to Zephrese, who contributed nothing to the actual conversation but got me pretty riled up.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[Ashande]

@Dreakon13 Tagging rather than quoting as I’m having some technical issues at the moment.

 

You speak of people having grudges rather than genuine concern, and bring up people’s posting histories as though that somehow proves it. You speak of enjoying analyzing intent. But you’re doing so while dismissing or speaking poorly of people who are analyzing the intent of Phil and Microsoft (who have previously leaked emails that clearly show a grudge and “burn it down so long as we win” mentality), who are referencing past history as reason for the analysis and the potential outcome.

 

Stating historical fact and precedent is not a grudge. Disliking people or organizations who continually skirt the line of legal or acceptable behavior while continuing to push the envelope and manipulate the system to keep the line just a half inch past their current behavior is not a grudge. Being frustrated with ostriches is not a grudge.

 

Now, if I was to say “fuk Microsoft, dey suck, hope they fucking burn, buncha 🤡s,” that’s grudge-like behavior. Saying “I’m displeased with Microsoft, they keep running the same play and people keep buying it, and it sure looks like they ain’t gonna change any time soon, here is my experience and evidence for that thought” is not, at least in my estimation. If you feel differently, that’s fine.

 

If you genuinely feel the things I have said, in this thread or any other, are indicative of excitement for armageddon, a mere “grudge” that does not have any basis in reality past or present, or are just me talking out the ass, do quote and share. But perhaps you can do it without vague allegations, snide commentary or insults.

 

(Image of post this is response to, since quoting’s not working right at the moment)

 

 

 

[Zephrese]

29 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

The "overzealous" was in regards to Zephrese, who contributed nothing to the actual conversation but got me pretty riled up.

 

 

Not liking that I pointed out your BS =/= not contributing anything to the overall conversation. It means quite the opposite, in fact. That said, I apologize that doing so has clearly had a very real impact on you seeing as how you keep repeatedly bringing me and what I did to you up even once I decided to waste no further time with you due to how little you were contributing in return. Keep your head up, though!

Edited September 21, 2023 by Zephrese

[Dreakon13]

24 minutes ago, Zephrese said:

seeing as how you keep bringing me up even once I decided to waste no further time with you

 

These fine folks were critiquing my recent behavior, I used the term 'overzealous' to describe the person who helped instigate it, they questioned my use of the term (along with "wrong" and "dishonest"), I explained it again along with dishonest... I don't think I specifically said wrong.  You did annoy me in a particularly weak moment, like I said, it's been a long day.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Ashande said:

@Dreakon13 Tagging rather than quoting as I’m having some technical issues at the moment.

 

You speak of people having grudges rather than genuine concern, and bring up people’s posting histories as though that somehow proves it. You speak of enjoying analyzing intent. But you’re doing so while dismissing or speaking poorly of people who are analyzing the intent of Phil and Microsoft (who have previously leaked emails that clearly show a grudge and “burn it down so long as we win” mentality), who are referencing past history as reason for the analysis and the potential outcome.

 

Stating historical fact and precedent is not a grudge. Disliking people or organizations who continually skirt the line of legal or acceptable behavior while continuing to push the envelope and manipulate the system to keep the line just a half inch past their current behavior is not a grudge. Being frustrated with ostriches is not a grudge.

 

Now, if I was to say “fuk Microsoft, dey suck, hope they fucking burn, buncha 🤡s,” that’s grudge-like behavior. Saying “I’m displeased with Microsoft, they keep running the same play and people keep buying it, and it sure looks like they ain’t gonna change any time soon, here is my experience and evidence for that thought” is not, at least in my estimation. If you feel differently, that’s fine.

 

If you genuinely feel the things I have said, in this thread or any other, are indicative of excitement for armageddon, a mere “grudge” that does not have any basis in reality past or present, or are just me talking out the ass, do quote and share. But perhaps you can do it without vague allegations, snide commentary or insults.

 

 

 

It's almost midnight and I have work in the morning.  I don't want to disregard long posts since that tends to get frowned upon apparently... but if you feel that was directed at you, I either apologize or feel vindicated depending on what a deep dive into your post history turns up.  I'm probably not actually going to do that, certainly not now.

 

I find most impassioned points made online these days are in bad faith.  Perhaps analyzing people in general isn't a good habit to be in.

 

It certainly doesn't seem to make friends.

 

 

EDIT: Sidenote, I'd probably say the same things to Phil if he were here.  As it stands, it's not very interesting to analyze the intent of this email.  An email can't defend itself.  So it kinda turns more into a one sided circle jerk.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[Rozalia1]

6 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

Dishonest in their intent, the reason they're doing it.  Someone says "it's because we love gaming and we need to be vigilant and fearful of anything that could happen", I say "you seem to have a grudge against Microsoft and/or Xbox and maybe wanted something like this to happen to validate it".  I'm not totally oblivious to some of your post histories either lol.  That said it doesn't really matter what I think or why I think it, but it's not about defending Microsoft.  It's analyzing intent, it's a fun little thing I like to try.  I also don't really like needless fearmongering but I digress.

 

The "overzealous" was in regards to Zephrese, who contributed nothing to the actual conversation but got me pretty riled up.

 

I've given you a chance to show otherwise, but I now have to refer to the OP.

 

On 9/19/2023 at 9:45 AM, Rozalia1 said:

I will also say now, as we sometimes get some tone policers who'll throw out 'console wars' or whatever. No. Microsoft is a blight not only on gaming, but technology as a whole. Focus more on what they're doing than what I or whoever else is calling them out.

 

Please stop focusing on whatever secret intent you think people have, and actually focusing on what Microsoft has been doing. Even if you were correct it would mean all of zero because it wouldn't change the fact that Microsoft did Game Pass in a loss leading strategy to destroy traditional gaming, that they bought out all those companies at a rapid pace, that they bought Bethesda, that they bought ABK, that they have the stated intention of buying out (already approved) Nintendo/Valve the moment they become willing to sell.

 

If you've paid any attention then you'd have noticed that after each of the above mentioned events the amount of people against Microsoft increased. The reason for that is because every move Microsoft makes towards their monopoly dream (and gaming nightmare), the more people realise what they're doing and the less effective the defences Microsoft's agents deploy are. As buying Nintendo & Valve is indefensible they do something you've done here, that being to state that this email means nothing and was just talk. Nothing to see here. Purposely ignoring the fact that within it we learn that Microsoft's board has already approved such buyouts (you have ignored this fact every time it has been presented to you). What other intention can you have if you approve buying out Nintendo & Valve? Monopoly.

[Dreakon13]

Ultimately, I'd fault the laws in place to prevent that sort of thing, before I fault a company for being interested in it.  Companies aren't charities, they exist to make money and there really isn't a better position to be in than a monopoly.  I can almost guarantee any company in Microsoft's position would be thinking the same thing.  In this case, simply discussing it internally, which is on the same level of "means nothing at the moment" as I'd put the board approving it.

 

For a little context, I also feel the same way about microtransactions.  The fact they might get added to a game doesn't really sour me on the game or the company.  I get why they'd do it, I don't get why anyone would buy them... which if people didn't, or in other words if "the plan to make money didn't work" or preferably backfired on them, they'd stop.

 

 

EDIT: Now that I guess sounds a bit more like I'm defending Microsoft.  Maybe I am.  I lean pretty anti-stupidity... if Nintendo/Valve are sitting on a gold mine and still somehow falls enough to be willing to sell, it's bad for the industry if they do, sure... but should I feel bad for them?  If people are stupid enough to spend their entire paycheck on digital FIFA goodies instead of their rent or groceries, should I feel bad for them?

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[AJ_-_808]

26 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

Ultimately, I'd fault the laws in place to prevent that sort of thing, before I fault a company for being interested in it.  Companies aren't charities, they exist to make money and there really isn't a better position to be in than a monopoly.  I can almost guarantee any company in Microsoft's position would be thinking the same thing.  In this case, simply discussing it internally, which is on the same level of "means nothing at the moment" as I'd put the board approving it.

 

 

Companies exist to make money, yes, but most usually don't try to completely obliterate their competition.  More importantly, most don't have the financial and political means to do so.  In MS' case, what would normally be considered internal musings should more probably be considered as step 1 in some future plan.

 

Companies are run by people, and people have morals.  Believe it or not, but there are good well-meaning companies out there too, so it's not a "if you could, you would too" situation 

[Dreakon13]

1 minute ago, AJ_-_808 said:

Companies are run by people, and people have morals.  Believe it or not, but there are good well-meaning companies out there too, so it's not a "if you could, you would too" situation 

 

I think that's a faulty mindset to get into.  You don't become some of the most powerful companies in technology and entertainment by having a strict moral code.

 

Don't assume companies are your friend, or that they care about you, or that they care about other companies.  Some are genuinely well-meaning, I guess, but really there are just companies who have or haven't had those morals tested enough yet.  Everyone wanted CD Projekt RED to have their babies for years after The Witcher 3, it was interesting watching the total disillusionment from people when they signed off on Cyberpunk's launch.

[VigilantCrow]

Microsoft can own everything for all I care. AAA games are lazy and repetitive. 

 

[JPtheNeurotic]

2 hours ago, AJ_-_808 said:

Companies exist to make money, yes, but most usually don't try to completely obliterate their competition

I don’t know if I’m misremembering but o thoght one of those internal memos or whatever and somekme saying they wanted to run Microsoft out of the game industry ?

[AJ_-_808]

2 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

I think that's a faulty mindset to get into.  You don't become some of the most powerful companies in technology and entertainment by having a strict moral code.

 

Don't assume companies are your friend, or that they care about you, or that they care about other companies.  Some are genuinely well-meaning, I guess, but really there are just companies who have or haven't had those morals tested enough yet

 

I'm not assuming anything. Simply stating that companies exist to make money isn't 100% accurate.  I meant in general, not specific to gaming or tech etc.  Most are lawful, some are well-intentioned. Microsoft is neither, so while their internal discussions/plans/what have you may sound outlandish, they have the means to pull it off and a history to support the possibility.  The sky isn't falling (yet), but this leaked email is probably more than nothing 

 

 

6 minutes ago, JPtheNeurotic said:

I don’t know if I’m misremembering but o thoght one of those internal memos or whatever and somekme saying they wanted to run Microsoft out of the game industry ?

Correct. Internal MS memo stated their plan was to outspend Sony out of the market

[Dreakon13]

1 hour ago, AJ_-_808 said:

 

I'm not assuming anything. Simply stating that companies exist to make money isn't 100% accurate.  I meant in general, not specific to gaming or tech etc.  Most are lawful, some are well-intentioned. Microsoft is neither, so while their internal discussions/plans/what have you may sound outlandish, they have the means to pull it off and a history to support the possibility.  The sky isn't falling (yet), but this leaked email is probably more than nothing 

 

 

Fair enough.  I can beat my "all big companies will say or do anything to make money" drum all I want, but at the end of the day we KNOW Microsoft wants to.  I guess that means something to people.

 

It really doesn't change my perspective.  I don't buy things to support the picture a company tries to paint for me, nor do I necessarily avoid a company because they failed to.  They'll all fail someday.  I think Sony, Nintendo and Valve are capable of making immoral or damaging decisions to try and save their company or brand, but I guess until they're in the same boat and/or their internal emails leak, that doesn't amount to a whole lot.  At this point Microsoft is simply the devil we know.

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[JPtheNeurotic]

28 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

Fair enough.  I can beat my "all big companies will say or do anything to make money" drum all I want, but at the end of the day we KNOW Microsoft wants to.  I guess that means something to people.

Honestly I’m kinda desensitized at this point to corporations throwing their big dick money around . Well maybe not desensitized but it be nice if the amount of scrutiny here against Microsoft got the same attention as other things in the industry . 

 

And I say this as someone who isn’t really happy with Microsoft these days but idk , as upset as I am with their acquisitions im equally upset with Jim Ryan trying to tell his studios not to talk about roe vs wade and woman’s bodily rights .

 

 

 

 

 

[AJ_-_808]

 

2 hours ago, JPtheNeurotic said:

 

im equally upset with Jim Ryan trying to tell his studios not to talk about roe vs wade and woman’s bodily rights .
 

 

You're mad at a company for telling employees to keep out of topics that are heavily polarized and, regardless of which side you're on, can backfire on the company or cause internal strife amongst employees?

 

If first party studios, being an official part of Sony, take side A, then side B gets mad, and vice versa.

 

Look what happened to Disney & Budweiser.  I'd prefer they just do their jobs instead of weigh in on politically charged topics.

 

 

Edit

Went off topic. People would be equally mad at Sony or Nintendo should same leak happen to them (if said internal discussions exist)

Edited September 21, 2023 by AJ_-_808

[JPtheNeurotic]

11 minutes ago, AJ_-_808 said:

You're mad at a company for telling employees to keep out of topics that are heavily polarized and, regardless of which side you're on, can backfire on the company or cause internal strife amongst employees?

If you tell your employees-many of which are woman - not express frustration and anger and then support of those in need over a major decision that takes woman rights backwards how many years , yeah you’re a shitty boss. 
 

 

[Mellenthin]

21 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

Eh, I'm not really going to try and dissect two essays in response to me.  That being said, you guys are almost so excited about Microsoft buying the landscape that I'm thinking you actually want it to happen.  Sort of a nervous excitement between your apparently decades old opinions of Microsoft might finally be validated and wanting to watch the world burn.

 

 

Well, by their own words they're playing the long game. What else of a response would you expect? Some people just see things as they are a mile away. Call it clairvoyance or whatever, but seeing things for what they are is not exactly hard unless you choose to keep your eyes shut.

 

As for wanting the world to burn, who wouldn't want to sweep all of the corruption away if they could?🙂

 

Everybody but the ones to benefit from the status quo.😉

 

20 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

I still believe people here are fascinated by Microsoft and embellishing these leaks in a way that indicates a certain unhealthy interest in it actually happening.

 

What's fascinating to me is how they got there and why. Since honesty has no place in the modern world of so-called progress and righteousness, it's not a coincidence that people get riled up.

 

18 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

I find most impassioned points made online these days are in bad faith.  Perhaps analyzing people in general isn't a good habit to be in.

 

It certainly doesn't seem to make friends.

 

 

EDIT: Sidenote, I'd probably say the same things to Phil if he were here.  As it stands, it's not very interesting to analyze the intent of this email.  An email can't defend itself.  So it kinda turns more into a one sided circle jerk.

 

At my point in life I'm extremely jaded and cynical - well, truthfully, I've always been. Only a complete idiot wouldn't believe that most things revolves around the acquisition of power or personal gain.

 

Analyzing things is perhaps my biggest hobby next to gaming, and no, it doesn't make you any friends if you decide to act upon your results - you can take my words for it.

 

If you're wondering why I quoted you only, know that I only really wanted to convey that I believe it's truly naive to think Microsoft has gotten to their current position without faul play, and will continue to do so unless they're stopped. I also think you're the type like me that says what you believe out loud, and I respect that.

 

You're more than welcome to send an FR if you like, by the way.😉

Edited September 21, 2023 by Mellenthin

[Dreakon13]

Well look at that, I did make a friend. 

 

My analyzing was less of Microsoft and more of the characters most active in this thread.  As much as they didn't like it, I feel by the end I conveyed my thoughts clearly enough anyways.  That's all I really ever aim to do.

 

The only thing I can glean from Microsoft's history and this leaked email is that they're willing to toe the line legally and morally to make money and/or be successful.  It's not nice or fair, but I feel like few even remotely successful companies can probably be called those words in earnest... especially if you started rifling through their private conversations.

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Dreakon13

[AJ_-_808]

2 hours ago, JPtheNeurotic said:

If you tell your employees-many of which are woman - not express frustration and anger and then support of those in need over a major decision that takes woman rights backwards how many years , yeah you’re a shitty boss. 
 

 

 

This?

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fortune.com/2022/05/13/jim-ryan-playstation-ceo-email-roe-v-wade-abortion-rights-turns-into-speech-about-cats/amp/

 

To me, sounds more like a poorly thought out "let's try to stay neutral and respect others' opinions so we don't piss off one side or the other" instead of "don't talk about such and such"... 

 

Maybe not the best idea, but not evil boss material either.

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't these days.

[Ashande]

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

Well look at that, I did make a friend. 

 

My analyzing was less of Microsoft and more of the characters most active in this thread.  As much as they didn't like it, I feel by the end I conveyed my thoughts clearly enough anyways.  That's all I really ever aim to do.

 

The only thing I can glean from Microsoft's history and this leaked email is that they're willing to toe the line legally and morally to make money and/or be successful.  It's not nice or fair, but I feel like few even remotely successful companies can probably be called those words in earnest... especially if you started rifling through their private conversations.

 

 

I’m not dropping an essay, but if you legitimately believe that Microsoft is willing to toe the line legally or morally, and come to that belief by looking at any aspect of their history, then you are blind.

 

Their relationships with Apple, Xerox and IBM, their business practices (particularly in relation to HR), the way things played out in the Browser Wars, the antitrust suits and their “E3” method are all well-documented… and none of them show any legal or moral integrity, or a willingness to even pretend.

[Dreakon13]

Just to be clear, I'm actually agreeing with you now about the lacking legal/moral integrity of Microsoft, and you still have a fucking problem with it?  I guess it's not good enough, not exactly the way you'd word it?  JFC.

 

Not that anyone will miss me but this is the last time I'm reading or posting in this thread.

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Dreakon13