You guys joke until the carrot rots inside and starts smelling and mealworms form and after they eat the carrot fully the mealworms starts falling on your lap.
Interesting. I would love to work on that kind of data model, as there is an interesting thing to point out with the movement of the polar vortex:
It dips further south to follow along land mass.
I wonder if the wind currents have an easier time maintaining speed along flat surfaces or if the water being warmer causes pockets of higher pressure further north than usual pushing the vortex to be more unstable looking.
It feels like it makes sense that the current would be much more stable along a surface that is more consistent and thus loss of ice smoothing the surface would cause it to wobble but inertia still remains the same meaning it needs to push down elsewhere where there is less resistance.
So I would lean towards ice loss as a cause of changing polar vortex stability but I kinda gave up that ability to do anything about this or study such things a while ago.
That’s a bit like the investigation into whether lethal bear attacks are because of their teeth or their claws - probably really interesting, but not critical to the question of avoiding the bear.
I was led to believe it’s both. Global warming causes ice loss which contributes to global warming which causes more ice loss which contributes to global warming which causes more ice loss …
That’s assuming you’ll meet literally every person on earth
Let’s say you will have a meaningful interaction with 1000 people ever, 1% of that leaves you with 10
If you’re not bi make it 5 before you even start considering wether you also find those people attractive back, if they’re single and in the right age range
So get that confidence back down. Statistics are a bitch
People can walk across Brazil, up through Central America, through Mexico and cross the Rio Grande into the United States without any money. You’re just not trying hard enough.
I honestly believe that it only works because so few people are doing it. It is like taking food from naturally growing fruit trees. There’s few of them, and it only works, if only a few people do it. However, when you try to make mass tourism out of it, it doesn’t work anymore.
Yeah, its also not a binary “attractive/unattractive”. Out of those 10 people, they would be some who will find you neither attractive or unattractive, just kinda meh. And THEN add some who might find you attractive, but are either in a relationship themselves or like double or more your age.
I want that confidence back! Give it here, buddy, we dont deserve it!
It should be illegal to recommend shows with more than 1000 episodes.
If you like it fine, but I saw it and the pacing is straight up horrible even if the worldbuilding is neat.
There are battles that take literally more than 5 hours without counting the intros and recaps. Even my longest D&D battle was shorter, and those are freaking turn based.
Not for nothing, but the manga is paced much better and can be read legally, easily, and digitally for a $3/month subscription. Took me like a month and a half to read the whole thing.
You’ve made your opinions clear about long recommendations, so take it or leave it. You were interested once before, though, and it might be worth checking out.
This is my same thought with soap operas. Not that I want to but how would you even get into a show that had been running 5 times a week for 30+ years?
Thank you for posting this. I gave up on the show a week ago around episode 600. Marineford legitimately felt like they spit in my face and told me my time was worthless with how many cuts of “he’s almost there”. The show looks like it gets interesting again afterwards but Marineford legit just sucked the will out of me to continue watching. I was thinking of looking up a fan edit to just get the cliff notes and this is perfect!
I tried to watch the ocean cut of Naruto, which basically edits each arc down, cutting out unnecessary flashbacks and recaps, along with intros and intros, making it into basically a series of films.
It’s still 40 films worth of content and 3+ hours per film sometimes (I think, it’s been a while), and the pacing is still absolutely fucked which is a symptom of basically every episodic anime when binged.
The hype around One Piece saying “guys it’s really good trust me you should watch it.” That sentiment came from the Internet and one of my coworkers so I gave it a chance and watched around 40 episodes.
Conan is terrible for this. The author has said that he already has the ending planned out, but wont use it until the series loses enough popularity to be cancelled. Canonically, the story only takes place for one year, but has had multiple Christmas specials, gone from pagers to flip phones to smart phones and has had more murders than Japan’s official yearly average.
Lacey things, the wife is missing. Didn’t ask, for her permission I’m wearing her clothes, her silk panty hose. Walking around in women’s underwear.
In the store, there’s a teddy. With little straps, like spagetti. It holds me so tight, like handcuffs at night. Walking around in womens underwear
In the office there’s a guy named Melvin. He pretends that I am Murphy Brown. He’ll say “Are you ready?” I’ll say, “Woah man! Lets wait untill the wife is out of town.” Later on, if you wanna, We can dress, like Madonna. Put on some eye shade, and join the parade. Walking around in women’s underwear.
Lacey things, missing. Didn’t ask, permission. Wearing her clothes, silk panty hose. Walking around in women’s underwear.
Oh man. In my fucked up family, this is the Christmas album we would listen to every year. I’m sure some songs were very inappropriate for children, but I’d like to think I turned out ok ¯_(ツ)_/¯
You can totally sexualize "papi". It's hard not to, honestly. Pa, though? Well, check out the rest of these replies and tell me if they sound like flirty sexy times or like they're trying to warn me that we forgot to bring the sheep back in for the night.
Like, how much holy does a mist of water need to cause vampire damage?
Also pondering: what is the range of blessing water? Can a person bless a whole ocean? How much holy energy does a priest need to create true holy damage? Is “holy” in the mind of the beholder, like a business man seeing money as their God and uses a Benjamin as their holy symbol?
Is holiness dilutable? Like, if there’s insufficient holiness for a given body of water to be considered pure holy, does the holy dilute into a less holy form? Would it still be considered holy water if you have nothing but the diluted stuff? Is there a limit to how much holy a body of water can contain?
You joke but the Catholic canon says that to check if someone is saint you have to pray to him and if miracle happens it means that this person can talk to god because only god can do miracles. And since he can talk to god it means he’s in heaven so his a saint. They actually have a pretend ‘scientific method’ they use for beatifications.
Even completely ignoring all the history of the region and how the current State of Israel came to be and only focusing on the present in a vacuum, there is still is a glaring contradiction that I have never heard any sort of coherent answer from people who support Israel’s actions: If you truly believe that simply having a negative opinion of Israel’s actions against Palestinians is antisemitic (or simply being a Palestinian that’s still alive is antisemitic according to too many people), then surely it also holds that both Israel’s outright killing of Palestinians and their ongoing apartheid policies preventing Palestinians from existing in the same areas as Israelis is anti-Arab right? Is being anti-Arabic somehow preferable to being antisemitic? Are Arabs not human beings and do they not deserve the same rights and protection as Jews or literally any other human? What makes it okay for Israel to be anti-Arab then?
One of the half baked arguments I have heard is that Israel is “justified” in being anti-Arabic because “it’s in self defense against Palestinians that want to kill them,” but if you make that assertion, then what makes the other side different? Israel is certainly not just attacking the Hamas and there have been more Palestinian civilian victims than Israeli civilian victims so wouldn’t you saying that also automatically imply the inverse and equally justify the Hamas’ actions against Israel? You can’t attack someone while claiming self defense and then cry foul when they defend themselves against you.
Israel is committing a genocide. - At best, one would have to concede they’re killing thousands of children to get at a handful of Hamas members. If you call it antisemitic to point that out, you’re saying genocidal kid-killing is inherent to Israelis - which is about as antisemitic as it gets, and a damn good justification for wiping Israel off the map. It’s a moronic,monstrous line to push.
(Not disagreeing, but offering a bit more insight)
To be fair, what the IDF is doing is hard. Fighting irregular forces in dense urban environments is hard, especially with their opponents having hundreds of underground bunkers and using civilian shields. Even if they were operating under best practice, there would be a lot of civilian casualties.
However, they aren’t operating under best practices. I don’t know how the average IDF soldier feels, but the top brass at best doesn’t give a shit if they kill a hundred palestinian civilians per one Hamas member; At worst, they see this conflict as an excuse to actively target them.
Between the genocidal rhetoric of Israeli leadership, the fact that Israel propped up Hamas over the PLO, and the fact that the casualty stats are squarely in line with the broader civilian population, what makes you think any attempt is being made to avoid civilian casualties?
Hamas and combatatant-aged men aren’t over-represented in the casualty stats - this is just an indiscriminate genocide they’ve been clearly signalling they intend to commit.
Okay, so I have a few points: If some people say that disagreeing with Israel is anti-semitic, they are just wrong. I myself know a lot of Jews who disagree with the current Netanyahu’s government’s actions (so do I) and they are definitely not anti-semitic. It’s definitely valid to point out Israel’s mistakes in this conflict (e.g. occupation of the west bank, radical opinions of some politicians such as throwing a nuclear bomb onto gaza, etc.). No one can call you anti-semitic for that. However, if you support Hamas in their mission and call for the removal of the state of Israel, it can be considered anti-semitic because you practically ask for killing millions of Jews.
You have also mentioned that Israel is anti-Arab which is not true. Currently fifth of the population is Arab and they have exactly the same rights as Jews. Also I don’t understand how Israel is apartheid. The people who are supposed to be oppressed are literally under a different authority. That’s like saying France is apartheid because Germans do not have the same rights in France as French people have
I see they have that little Egypt strip there … I do take your point and it’s a good one but I still struggle with the Germany france comparison. Maybe like luxembourg and Germany or France… or Avignon with the double pope – How about that?
Or the Basques would be good if they ever had their own real country
laws? it’s internationally illegal, but that doesn’t matter, hence all the UN resolutions that Israel ignores.
incidents? sure, here’s an article from a few years ago of an incident that got somewhat prominent outside the region, it’s just that no one cares if the IDF blows a few brown fishermen out of the water (hell outside the English publication of a few prominent Hebrew papers people wouldn’t even know that Netanyahu was aiding Hamas to stay in power)
This is a complete nonsense. If Israel wanted, they could have starved Gaza far sooner and would not play with them for 80 years.
In addition, we can theoretically consider Israel the biggest Gaza supporters because they give them electricity and water for free. No Arab country does that.
it really isn’t, the only thing keeping them from going full on holocaust on the Palestinians is international pressure, because Israel exists at “the pleasure of the west” in general.
Ironically, the only reason Gaza doesn’t have their own Power and Water production is because Israel bombed it a long time ago and refuses to let it be fixed, because the bibi government uses it as a tool to influence Gaza, hilariously to support Hamas.
Regarding the power plant: it has 4 operational units but ran out of fuel as it was diesel powered. I have seen some information that Hamas has diesel as one of its resources but that was only reported by an Israeli media, hence it cannot be trusted.
It is debatable whether they would go “full holocaust” on Gaza without international pressure. However, I personally know some people who would support that and also certain right-wing parties want a complete siege of Palestine. I strongly disagree with this rhetoric. On the other hand, some political subjects support negotiations.
you do realize that the current ruling powers in Israel consist in part of literally anti-Muslim terrorists who have dedicated their lives, and publically call for the historic Jewish homeland (from the Euphrates to the Red Sea) to be cleansed of Muslims and retaken for the Jewish people, they literally mirror Nazi rhetoric, (and ironically call holocaust survivors that disagreed with them antisemites), and the other calling for a full on apartheid state and for territorial expansion via annexation.
As for the idea that the Gaza power plant would just be out of fuel, that contradicts any number of local reports from various NGOs and even the UN, and judging by the Israeli track record in the area i will believe the other sources over them.
Israel is a democratic country (check democracy index) and there is a freedom of religion. 18.7% of population are Muslim, so Israel is definitely not against Islam. The comparison to Nazis is literally funny because Arab people (usually Muslims) have exactly the same rights as Jews. In addition, Israel is not an apartheid state. Some argue they perform apartheid on the Palestinian people but those under a different administration. By this logic, every state can be considered apartheid because citizens of that state have in that state more rights than non-citizens. That’s standard.
Mind showing any sources about the power plant? Wikipedia was reporting that all 4 generators were fine.
Some argue they perform apartheid on the Palestinian people but those under a different administration. By this logic, every state can be considered apartheid because citizens of that state have in that state more rights than non-citizens. That’s standard.
most of the world isn’t the sovereign in control of the other countries, nor do Americans just annex towns in Canada every few weeks
Democracy index? which one? the economist? they don’t care much about things like civil rights, as long as the majority of the population can vote, the government can enact + Radicalize legislation, if you actually looked up the methodology of the ranking (remember other nations in the same ranking as Israel still have legislation making being LGBT+ illegal and other such things)
18.7% of the population? that’s less than the Armenians in Turkey.
and lastly, on the apartheid regime; if multiple Israeli human rights NGOs, the UN-HRC, Amnesty int., HRW, and even the Israeli supreme court have said it is an apartheid regime then maybe it is.
18.7% of the population is a considerable amount of people. In the country I live in, the biggest “minority” is less than 7%.
The apartheid is debatable though. I know that European commission stated that Israel is not an apartheid regime. Israeli judiciary also does not say that the country is apartheid.
However, the Supreme court of Israel and UN decided that Israel illegally occupies land in the west bank, so there cannot be an excuse/counter argument for that.
may I ask what you mean by LGBTI+ rights? If I remember correctly, Israel is quite good in these terms (Not as good as some eňEuropean countries but far better than rest of middle east)
The point of the LGBT+ thing was pointing out that the definition of “democracy” the Economist uses, doesn’t include civil rights (tho if you want to start comparing the treatment of LGBTQ+ people Israel isn’t even the best in the M.east).
as for 18.7% being a considerable amount of people, thus can’t be apartheid state is a massive nothingburger seeing as we have seen genocides happen to larger groups.
and in context of the European commission, I recommend you read their actual answer, because the “Israel is not an apartheid state” bit is politics, read the rest, and it’s basically admitting that the Israeli state clearly disregards the civil rights of group/s
What other middle eastern country is better in terms of LGBTI rights than Israel? Lgbti rights are not ideal there but they allow registered partnerships and even recognize same sex marriages performed elsewhere. In addition, Tel Aviv is one of the most gay-friendly cities in the world with some additional rights for LGBTI people.
I agree that we have seen genocide happening to larger groups than 18.7% but those 18.7% in arabs are nowhere near genocide. Arabs with Israeli citizenship have the same rights as Jews living there. They are members of the supreme court, they have a political party, etc.
I have checked the article and I agree it points out some mistakes made by Israel towards Palestinians but those actions cannot be considered apartheid. Yes, they illegally build settlements in an undisputed land but that’s not apartheid.
You seem to misunderstand the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The West Bank is very much governed by the IDF and they treat Jews differently than non Jews. The IDF can legally detain Palestinians for up to 6 months without charges while being required to defend settlers who attack and harass Palestinians. They undermine the Palestinian Authority and override their supposed authority all the time. Gaza is more of an open air prison as people can’t leave. The reason Israel doesn’t occupy Gaza is because they did in the past and it was uneconomical.
There are a ton of people who basically paint all pro Palestinian groups and protests as antisemitic, from the ADL to Israeli lobbyists. These people are totally unreasonable and have a large amount of influence. “Opposing Israel’s actions = anti-Zionism = antisemitism,” isn’t the fringe narrative it should be. At the same time, there are braindead so called, “leftists,” who can’t comprehend that both Netanyahu’s government and Hamas are genocidal theocratic fascists. They’re also frustrating as fuck and cannot be tolerated. Far too many have lost their minds and morals over this conflict.
First of all you say that the West Bank is governed mostly by the IDF. To be more accurate, the West Bank is divided into 3 zones while some are under total Palestinian control, others under joint control and some and controlled solely by IDF. There are exactly zero Jews living in the areas which belong solely to Palestinian authorities. Israel respects that. What they do not respect is the status of undisputed territories where they continue to make settlements. These are, under the international law, considered illegal and the decisions were also supported by the Supreme Court of Israel. About the Palestinian authority: most of citizens in the West Bank support Hamas over the leadership of Mahmud Abbas. There is literally no authority to undermine.
I do not think Gaza is an open air prison formed by Israel. Israel is not even able to lock it completely out because of the sea and the border with Egypt. So I would rather call it a land with which no one wants to have anything in common. If “Gazans” were peace-loving people hated by Israel for no reason, they would at least have a normal relationship with Egypt, which, as we know, is not the case. In addition, the genocide by Israel somehow does not work because the population of Palestinians has been rising throughout the whole time of the conflict.
With the rest, I pretty much agree. Criticism of Israel is not anti-Zionism and definitely not anti-semitism. I would also like to see Netanyahu out. He tried to weaken the judiciary, he formed a government with radicals who are “proud homophobes” and who believe that “Israel should use a nuclear bomb in Gaza” and didn’t do much in order to resolve the land in the West Bank, but rather built illegal settlements. Apart from that, the intelligence failure was quite massive. Hamas, on the other hand, attacked Israel with one goal in mind: killing and torturing as many Jews as possible (simply because they are Jews) and radicalized the population so much that even Arab countries (such as Egypt) would rather sacrifice millions of lives for the sake of not accepting Palestinians as refugees.
The checkpoints and control of roads in the West Bank prevent Palestinians from moving freely. The PLO “controls,” The West Bank, but when an occupying nation controls many of the roads, preventing usage of certain roads by the citizens of your territory and only letting their own citizens travel on them, how can they be considered independent? They lack basic sovereignty, with their citizens not being able to move within their own country due to an occupying force. You claim there is no authority to undermine, but even if correct, the reason for a lack of authority is squarely on Israel.
The idea that Palestine’s population has grown for the entire conflict falls apart when you look at the late 1940s, where over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were expelled from their homes by Zionist militias. It was almost half of the Arab population. In just a few years, zealous Zionists used violence to flip the demographics of the region to favor Jews over non Jews. This wasn’t genocide, but was undeniably ethnic cleansing. It’s an important piece of context that Israeli fascists have tried to keep out of the conversation, focusing on population trends after their ethnic cleansing and assuming people won’t investigate.
I might describe Isreal’s practical intentions as genocidal because that’s the only way their strategy can make Israeli citizens safe like they claim to be working towards. Bombing Gaza does not make Israel safer unless they decimate the population enough to exert authoritarian control over the survivors. If they wanted Palestinians to live alongside Israel peacefully, they would ensure that there is a strong Palestinian state with little motivation to invade. If they got rid of settlements in the West Bank, funded a Palestinians state and reinvigorated their economy, and mutually agreed to harshly police hate crimes in both states, then they could coexist. The only ways to defeat Hamas in Gaza through force would be occupation of Gaza, or the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza.
The reason they don’t go all out on purging Gaza probably has to do with Arabs outside Palestine who might attack if it happens too quickly. Israel has nukes, but they still want to avoid all out war. The long term goal of this subset of Zionists, genocidal Zionists, is to take over all of Palestine eventually, something that would likely be genocidal. Some Zionists want two states, but the Zionists in charge want a single Jewish theocracy.
I want peace and safety for Jewish people and Palestinians, something that will not happen without a true two state solution, or a single secular state. The long term plan of the state of Israel is ethnic cleansing at best, and genocide at worst.
The situation with Egypt requires contextual knowledge of their history with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas is a breakaway from the MB, and still ally with them. Egypt’s more secular military overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood’s democratic government, and the current government doesn’t want them to rise again. Letting in Palestinians would let in Hamas members, who might create problems for the government. It’s not the peacefulness of Palestinians, but the politics of Egypt that prevent them from accepting refugees. If Hamas was exactly the same but would oppose MB forces in Egypt, Egypt would probably let in some refugees. However, it’s hard for a nation with Egypt’s problems, to deal with so many refugees by themselves anyways. Israel, the ones creating refugees out of Palestinians, can’t expect their neighbors to happily foot the bill of caring for people who’s property they stole and destroyed.
Can you elaborate on what genocide means here? I usually think that means to wipe out some race but in this case they aren’t targeting based on race but on who wants to displace or kill them.
Isn’t it the case that Palestine could have sovereignty if they made a deal with Israel to split up the territory? My understanding was that they refuse to make deal as they demand to have have all the land and to expel the Jews.
You mention that Israel is genocidal, maybe some of them are in secret, but mainly they are interested in taking control of the land and stopping their enemies.
You say that Israel displaced Arabs but I thought many of them just left because they oppose Israel not because the Israelis actually told them to leave? Many Arabs stayed in place and they were not kicked out if they were willing to live in peace is Israel.
Israel and many others send aid all the time to Palestine in the hopes of bringing peace but it’s not been effective in making them seek peace.
Palestinians in general still think they should hold out for getting the whole region back, and more or less support Hamas because they have been taught to think this way.
I find it interesting that there are few complaints about how a huge part of Palestine was turned into “the kingdom of Jordan” by the British yet Palestinians did not have a violent rebellion against that decision and Palestine is not demanding that land back today.
Palestine nationals did try to work towards a deal. Zionists did kick Arabs out of their homes, 80% of them in what shortly became Israel. Oh, but they’re not genocidal, they just want to kick the Arabs off their land and make them not exist as a collective people there. Why couldn’t I see that? Those pesky Palestinians need only accept being a minority in a Jewish theocracy, then they don’t have to leave their homes.
Jordan was not unilaterally turned into the kingdom of Jordan by the British, a Transjordan independence movement wanted to prevent immigration of Jews to Mandatory Palestine, but barely managed to unite the land in present day Jordan. Jordan wasn’t a fully independent nation at this time and Mandatory Palestine certainly wasn’t. They didn’t have a choice, and the king would have tried to unite Palestine with Jordan if the British didn’t have plans for it.
You seem to think that a common people with a shared culture will automatically unite as a nation, but organizing a state isn’t easy. Independent tribes need to be convinced of the usefulness of a larger collective in order to form a state. They give up autonomy in creating a nation, so the tradeoff must seem worthwhile. If not for the external threat of Europeans trying to carve up and control peoples in the Middle East for selfish interests, they would prefer to be tribal and borderless. This isn’t because they’re uncivilized or savages, but because regional autonomy is a cool vibe. It’s not true anarchy, but it’s a less centralized mode than what Europeans thought was normal and civilized.
This is why European empires carving up the Middle East and demanding they form nations is so fucked up. They made arbitrary borders, often intentionally drawn to perpetuate and create conflict, because they think centralized governments are just the norm. Centralized governments can be useful, but they’re not without drawbacks and aren’t always superior. They need to come about naturally out of shared interests and the desire to accomplish what can’t be done singularly. This is why the UK leaving the EU was so ironic and hypocritical: they wanted to be more than equal partners because they’re so used to dominating imperially. When you’re used privilege, equality feels like oppression.
Anyhow, your understanding is shallow and ignorant. I’m not in the mood to give you a college course in social science and history that you might not even listen to. The best I can do is advise you to ensure your arguments are supported by evidence. Try to use evidence to inform your opinion and not to cherrypick facts that support your preconceived worldview. It’s a struggle to do this and not as easy or convenient, but it is what people should try to do.
Fun fact; something like 60 percent of all Israelis are Mizrahi Jews from across the Middle East. Both in terms of their physical appearance and their material culture they have far more in common with Arabs than they do with white Europeans. Calling them “white” really doesn’t hold much water.
What about non-team sports, like running, cycling, surfing, skiing, etc. maybe there’s a defensive strategy but there’s no active defensive player. Are those also not sports?
Part of the definition of a sport is that it accomplishes absolutely nothing useful at all, other than entertainment, thought about it and perhaps fitness. Bathing a cat is not a sport because it actually has a useful goal, I.e. cleaning a cat.
I would say that getting healthier and fitter is absolutely useful, and so is entertainment.
But anyways, some sports can be useful for training purposes (Ever heard of the Firefighter Olympics? It’s really cool).
Also there’s also stuff like people jogging/biking to go places, and sailing maybe can also fall into this category though I don’t think it’s a thing anymore. (IIRC in the 1700s there was a sort of sport where ships would race each other across the Atlantic to deliver stuff as fast as possible. Not sure though, take with grain of salt.)
There’s still people who sail to get to a destination. It’s a bit of a rich person thing, though. Even without a motor, boats are holes in the water that you sink money into. More so if it has to be ocean-going.
Where do you draw the line between sports and games? Are sports competitive where games are fun? Is poker a sport? Are video games capable of being sports? What could be done to golf that would make it a sport? Are all sports games if not all games are sports?
But that’s a team sport though. If we compare that to tennis the oldest tournament winner is Rosewall in the 70s at 37 years old and more recently Federer in 2018 at 36 years old.
Sports that are more based on endurance than sprinting tend to have older people who do well. Mid-40s is pushing it for championship level, but you can still be competitive at that stage, and still participate well into old age if you don’t have any major health/injury issues.
I actually get exhausted playing golf - but that’s because I’m BAD at it. Apparently I put too much force into my swing. Every time I’ve tried to play I get told to relax and “let the club to the work”.
So they literally have these weighted sticks to reduce the amount of frickin effort required to hit the ball.
It’s not a sport. It’s an ANTI-sport. The less you try the better you’ll be.
Can you imagine if we had an Olympic running sport to see who the slowest runner was? That’s what golf is. Get the weakest, limpest, vitamin-defficient humans and see how accurately they can hit a tiny ball into a hole.
It was invented by the Scots as a joke against the English while they all go and compete in proper sports like caber tossing and hammer throwing.
Or to keep it short, know that John Daly is one of the greats of the sport. Look up a picture of John Daly dated any time in the last 30 years, and you’ll know how hilarious that is.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.