Kidd_Wadsworth
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2022
- Messages
- 113
- Points
- 28
Yeah, I know. How many times am I going to change the cover, but well . . . here we go again.
The cover has the hot babe
What are you blanking out on me
Do you think what I meant by "hot babe" was a woman's face that looks so-so(in terms of beauty)? At least I wasn't talking about that, and I have a suspicion that no one who agreed with me wasn't as well.What are you blanking out on me
Tastes differ, man. K?Do you think what I meant by "hot babe" was a woman's face that looks so-so(in terms of beauty)? At least I wasn't talking about that, and I have a suspicion that no one who agreed with me wasn't as well.
It has nothing to do with taste.Tastes differ, man. K?
Hrggg, ok. You were blanking out while quoting ''The cover has a hot babe'' that I wrote. Please explain, your majesty. No matter what others were saying when complimenting the cover.It has nothing to do with taste.
Why I blanked out? Because there is no 'hot babe.' Maybe I'm lagging or something, or clicked on the wrong link, but I only see a face. Face =\= a hot babe. Face = part of a hot babe. Moreover, her face isn't even sexy or hot. Is it a cool picture? Yes. Is her face conventionally hot\sexy? No.Hrggg, ok. You were blanking out while quoting ''The cover has a hot babe'' that I wrote. Please explain, your majesty. No matter what others were saying when complimenting the cover.
And that's why I said ''Tastes differ, man. K?'' I'm sorry that I can imagine everything else without visual input needed in an aesthetical sense.Is her face conventionally hot\sexy? No.
Probably in a couple of days, once the OP understands that this cover doesn't attract clicks.Hedge your bets now. How long until the next thread?
How many cookies are you betting?Probably in a couple of days, once the OP understands that this cover doesn't attract clicks.