Offtopic

05 Jan 2021, 10:00am
Sakashiro
This certainly appears to be the reason for the attorney's decision. And that is exactly why it looks politically motivated. A smear campaign using Nazi symbols doesn't magically turn into art just because it targets the "right" person. Think what you will of Gauland; he was a member of Merkel's conservative party for 40 years. In fact he joined the party at a time when Merkel was still busy propagating Marxism in East Germany's FDJ. If he's indeed a Nazi and/or antisemite, one has to wonder how he managed to remain undetected in that party for four decades.


Any point about Angela Merkel herself is completely irrelevant in this context, she's not the subject of this discussion. Any attempt to shift the discussion towards her is either just you shifting goal posts or whataboutism.

I do get the feeling that for you this is more about Angela Merkel than about censorship though.


However, if the attorney was actually concerned about an outdated court precedent as he claimed, the proper thing to do would have been to pass the case on and give the court an opportunity to overturn that precedent. Rejecting the case achieved the opposite: the outdated decision remains in effect; legal certainty ("Rechtssicherheit") has not been established.


To have a trial and overturn a precedent you need to have a criminal case, but there was no criminal case in the first place because even if video games aren't classified as art according to the pre-investigation the state attorney did, the game meets the criterias for an exception under StGB §86a since it is intended to be a work of art. Even if they had actually tried to force a trial, the court would've declined because there is no criminal case to be made. Implying that this decision was made because of political reasons is baseless and it is irrelevant how you feel about it.

https://vdvc.de/blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Verfahren.pdf

On site 2, the last sentence:

Alleine die gewählte Form der Satire erlaubt hier nach hiesiger Auffassung keine andere Form der Bewertung.


"Alone the chosen form as satire does not allow any other assessment in our understanding."

It's not true either that legal certainty hasn't been achieved, the OLJB and the USK amended their guidelines and rating practices following the rejection of the case. As I said, the legal framework is more than just codified law and precedence.


Sakashiro
Unlike Gauland, who fled to West Germany after his graduation from high school, Merkel arranged herself with the socialist regime. At least that is what people claim who were around her at the time.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/new-book-suggests-angela-merkel-was-closer-to-communism-than-thought-a-899768.html


Irrelevant. Not the subject of the discussion.


And frankly, your idea that displaying someone with a swastika or the Nazi salute is anything other than a smear campaign is preposterous. Depicting opposition members or foreign leaders with a swastika doesn't take courage. Depicting Merkel with a hammer and sickle does. Good satire punches up, not down.


That's just your opinion and thus irrelevant.


As far as I can tell, Gauland's views haven't changed. On the contrary, they seem forever stuck in the CDU's past. If you look at the party's slogans from the 1990s and earlier about topics such as immigration, you'll find they are almost identical to AfD's. Gauland hasn't moved to the right, but his former party has moved to the left. Even the Social Democrats of the 1970s were further right than today's CDU.


The social democrats of the 1970s were MUCH further left than they are today, similiar to how the CDU back then was much further right than it is today. Something like the Agenda 2010 would've never passed through the SPD from the 70s. They would've been taken apart by their own members.
05 Jan 2021, 11:02am
Rebecca Hail
Sakashiro
Rebecca HailYou can go to a random german AfD facebook group and will find hundreds of pictures that depict Angela Merkel as Hitler within an hour.



Sure, but how many of these have been mistaken for art by a state attorney?



There is no bias for Merkel and you presenting 3 cases out of 100000+ within the last ten years doesn't prove that. The political censorship in Germany does not have the intent of supporting the government and the government has no influence on these trials. It has the intent of hindering undemocratic far-right and far-left ideologies like communism and nazism.

You say there's no bias, no legal double standard at play here. Gauland with a swastika and Trump with a Nazi salute got a pass because the law provides exceptions for artistic and/or satirical expression, you say.

Prove it.

Show me an example where Merkel with a swastika or a Nazi salute was recognized by German courts or state attorneys as art or satire.

Just one will do. Feel free to cherry-pick.

If you can do that, I will concede that I was wrong, that there's indeed no double standard and no politically motivated censorship in Germany. Deal?
05 Jan 2021, 1:08pm
Sakashiro
Rebecca Hail
Sakashiro


Sure, but how many of these have been mistaken for art by a state attorney?




There is no bias for Merkel and you presenting 3 cases out of 100000+ within the last ten years doesn't prove that. The political censorship in Germany does not have the intent of supporting the government and the government has no influence on these trials. It has the intent of hindering undemocratic far-right and far-left ideologies like communism and nazism.


You say there's no bias, no legal double standard at play here. Gauland with a swastika and Trump with a Nazi salute got a pass because the law provides exceptions for artistic and/or satirical expression, you say.

Prove it.

Show me an example where Merkel with a swastika or a Nazi salute was recognized by German courts or state attorneys as art or satire.

Just one will do. Feel free to cherry-pick.

If you can do that, I will concede that I was wrong, that there's indeed no double standard and no politically motivated censorship in Germany. Deal?


I'm not going to look through hundreds of cases relating to §86a just to look for the one particular case you accept as evidence. You're showing the same stance as a flat earther here, flat out ignoring all arguments except the ones you want to hear and repeat a baseless claim over and over and over again.

Do you in all honesty think that I'm the one who needs to disprove your claim? That's not how a discussion works. And no, the three cherrypicked cases you provide are not proof or evidence. They're something you tried to twist to fit your narrative and since that doesn't work you try to shift the burden of proof now.

You are the one arguing against generally accepted facts, so you are the one that needs to proof it. Either provide backing for your claim that Germany has a politically motivated censorship that is biased for Angela Merkel in form of a study or a similiar analysis and stop cherry-picking points you respond to or admit that your claim is baseless.

This is exactly the kind of behaviour that Aleksander criticized. At this point I'm more inclined to believe that you don't want to change your opinion.
05 Jan 2021, 9:32pm
The onus of proof is always on the person making the claim. In this case, that's you, Saka. It's not up to Rebecca to disprove your argument - it's up to you to prove your claim.
05 Jan 2021, 10:44pm
Rebecca HailI'm not going to look through hundreds of cases relating to §86a just to look for the one particular case you accept as evidence. You're showing the same stance as a flat earther here, flat out ignoring all arguments except the ones you want to hear and repeat a baseless claim over and over and over again.

Do you in all honesty think that I'm the one who needs to disprove your claim? That's not how a discussion works. And no, the three cherrypicked cases you provide are not proof or evidence. They're something you tried to twist to fit your narrative and since that doesn't work you try to shift the burden of proof now.

You are the one arguing against generally accepted facts, so you are the one that needs to proof it. Either provide backing for your claim that Germany has a politically motivated censorship that is biased for Angela Merkel in form of a study or a similiar analysis and stop cherry-picking points you respond to or admit that your claim is baseless.

This is exactly the kind of behaviour that Aleksander criticized. At this point I'm more inclined to believe that you don't want to change your opinion.

When I provided four cases as evidence, you claimed I cherry-picked the ones that supported my argument and ignored all the others. Yet you can't bring up even one counter-example that proves me wrong? Whom do you think you're kidding?

The flat earther is you, Rebecca. Not only are you ignoring all accounts of people who sailed towards the edge and found that it doesn't exist, you also don't have the balls to put your own theory to the test. For example, you could produce a picture of Merkel draped in the German flag and doing the Nazi salute, as a parody of the Stern cover I showed you earlier, and post it online where other Germans can see it. Parody is a form of satire, so you should be fine. But of course you'll never do that, because you know full well police would kick your door at 5 o'clock in the morning and grab your computer to secure evidence.

Ironically the easiest way to prove that you're not living in an authoritarian regime is to compare your own leader to Hitler and get away with it. That is precisely what people in the U.S. have done. Call it the litmus test of authoritarianism if you will. Remember this the next time you see an oh so courageous German magazine comparing a U.S. president to Hitler.

You say the laws in Germany are the way they are to prevent another rise of extremism. I guess this is also why Germans aren't allowed to burn their flag in public as a symbol of protest (§ 90a StGB). Amata says Gauland deserves to be mocked because he's an antisemite, and Germany is committed to the fight against antisemitism for obvious historical reasons. Fair enough. So tell me, why is it that Germans can publicly burn the Star of David in the streets of Berlin without at least getting mocked a little? Oh well, another double standard. Hypocrisy seems to be all over the place in that little country of yours.

XeknosMost folks enjoy watching arrogant know-it-alls getting smacked down.

You're welcome.
05 Jan 2021, 11:09pm
I can only speak of the freedom of speech & expression - what we in the U.S. know as described in the First Amendment in our Constitution - & the classic question over whether such freedom of speech covers, say, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

IMO, such freedoms, liberties, come with a requirement to use them responsibly.

If said person would abuse that 1st Amendment by yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, for example, without good, valid, justifiable cause, they'd be arrested, charged with a number of crimes & tried in a court of law.

Our Constitution & Bill of Rights was born after a revolution & in response to what the Colonies suffered under the rule of the English crown.

I suppose, each countriy's constitution, those countries that have them, were born as a result of prior events.

AFAIK, the U.K. has no constitution... but the U.S. Constitution & much of the basic concepts of law & rights stemmed from the Magna Carta, which was written in England.

A bit ironic... & likely, neither here nor there.
05 Jan 2021, 11:40pm
Sakashiro
When I provided four cases as evidence, you claimed I cherry-picked the ones that supported my argument and ignored all the others. Yet you can't bring up even one counter-example that proves me wrong? Whom do you think you're kidding?


Those four cases are a) statistically insignificant when there are roughly 15000 cases per year over violations of that particular paragraph and b) they are cherry-picked. They can not proof the claim you make. How hard is it to get that?

I could probably produce a counter example, but I don't care enough to search for hours to produce a verdict that satisfies you. Go search for it yourself, I value my time too much to cater to your ridiculous attempts to shift the burden of proof. It helps a lot to speak German, so you should look into that as well if you actually want to try.


The flat earther is you, Rebecca. Not only are you ignoring all accounts of people who sailed towards the edge and found that it doesn't exist, you also don't have the balls to put your own theory to the test. For example, you could produce a picture of Merkel draped in the German flag and doing the Nazi salute, as a parody of the Stern cover I showed you earlier, and post it online where other Germans can see it. Parody is a form of satire, so you should be fine. But of course you'll never do that, because you know full well police would kick your door at 5 o'clock in the morning and grab your computer to secure evidence.


Lmao, it shows that you have absolutely no experience with the German Justice system or German law enforcement.

Just to entertain your little notion, here's multiple examples of newspapers having pictures of Angela Merkel doing the nazi salute and having a Hitler moustache.

https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article13532791/Italienische-Zeitung-zeigt-Merkel-mit-Hitler-Bart.html

https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/deutsch-tuerkische-beziehungen-tuerkische-zeitung-zeigt-merkel-in-hitler-pose/19499762.html?ticket=ST-23096117-35die5eDEYZ1cEV1pcge-ap3

https://www.svz.de/deutschland-welt/politik/merkel-als-frau-hitler-id16377531.html

According to your own logic, these depictions would all be illegal. In reality they're covered under the exception protecting the reporting of current and past events. But I can already see it coming, you're only going to yap around how these pictures don't fulfill your arbitrary criteria and are not real "counter examples".


Ironically the easiest way to prove that you're not living in an authoritarian regime is to compare your own leader to Hitler and get away with it. That is precisely what people in the U.S. have done. Call it the litmus test of authoritarianism if you will. Remember this the next time you see an oh so courageous German magazine comparing a U.S. president to Hitler.


Comparisons with Hitler aren't a criminal offense and you can very well compare Angela Merkel with Hitler without depicting unconstitutional symbols, so what exactly is your point here? Besides you proofing again that you have no clue about german laws.


You say the laws in Germany are the way they are to prevent another rise of extremism. I guess this is also why Germans aren't allowed to burn their flag in public as a symbol of protest (§ 90a StGB).


Yeah, no idea why that law exists. But it doesn't fall into the category of political censorship since it doesn't promote or hinder a specific political ideology, so why bring it up?


Amata says Gauland deserves to be mocked because he's an antisemite, and Germany is committed to the fight against antisemitism for obvious historical reasons. Fair enough. So tell me, why is it that Germans can publicly burn the Star of David in the streets of Berlin without at least getting mocked a little?


Another misrepresentation. Again, do you even read your sources or do you just hope that no one else reads them? You imply that Germans burned israeli symbols, but the article makes no mention of the nationality of those who did it.

And I have no idea what you want to say with "without at least getting mocked a little?" when the article literally starts with the sentence:

Germany's leading politicians have universally condemned the burning of Israeli flags and symbols in Berlin amidst recent demonstrations ...


Oh well, another double standard. Hypocrisy seems to be all over the place in that little country of yours.


If you want to see double standards go look into a mirror. At this point I'm not even trying to convince you anymore, I just want to counter the pile of misinformation you dump into every post, because I don't think that someone who resorts to this behaviour in a discussion should get the last word.

To summarize:
You don't speak German, you have no experience with German law enforcement or the German justice system, yet somehow the people who actually live here and have those experiences are wrong and you are right. Or at least that's how it seems to work in your head.


Last edit: 05 Jan 2021, 11:45pm
06 Jan 2021, 1:15am
Synthya WylderI can only speak of the freedom of speech & expression - what we in the U.S. know as described in the First Amendment in our Constitution - & the classic question over whether such freedom of speech covers, say, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

IMO, such freedoms, liberties, come with a requirement to use them responsibly.

If said person would abuse that 1st Amendment by yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, for example, without good, valid, justifiable cause, they'd be arrested, charged with a number of crimes & tried in a court of law.

Our Constitution & Bill of Rights was born after a revolution & in response to what the Colonies suffered under the rule of the English crown.

I suppose, each countriy's constitution, those countries that have them, were born as a result of prior events.

AFAIK, the U.K. has no constitution... but the U.S. Constitution & much of the basic concepts of law & rights stemmed from the Magna Carta, which was written in England.

A bit ironic... & likely, neither here nor there.

Freedom of expression and censorship are topics I feel strongly about. My husband is from a country that has recovered from its own period of authoritarianism. Germany, while never getting tired of pointing fingers at others, keeps kowtowing to the Chinese communist regime by not recognizing Taiwan's independence, to a point that the German government didn't even have the courtesy to say "thank you" after Taiwan had donated millions of protective masks.

So I'm not exactly an avid fan of Germany and particularly Germans trying to lecture me about topics such as censorship. I do not enjoy these debates, in fact I regret even responding to Rebecca at all. I should have realized early what she was on about.

On a lighter note, I'd like to recommend a Taiwanese Netflix show that we enjoyed watching during the Christmas holidays. It's called "Detention" and is based on Red Candle's video game of the same name.



By the way, Red Candle's subsequent game "Devotion" has been removed from Steam and GOG due to Chinese pressure, because it contained a reference to Winnie the Pooh.
06 Jan 2021, 1:28am
Would you consider "Reporters Without Borders" as a credible source that there's little to no censorship in Germany?

Link

Germany is ranked #11 (and #1 within the so-called G7), while the US is only #45...

Oh, and about Taiwan:

1) There is an informal agreement between China and the rest of the world: As long as noone officially recognizes Taiwan China will not invade it. Or to put it in simpler terms: It's f'n complicated.

2) The German Government DID in fact thank Taiwan for the support by sending masks to Germany. Link



Dear Minister Chen Shizhong:

A few days ago, masks generously donated by Taiwan have arrived in Germany. For this, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to you for the very close and complete mutual trust cooperation over the past few weeks. German society also appreciates Taiwan’s assistance.
Taiwan's donation of masks is very welcome because Germany is one of the European countries affected by the new Corona virus. The masks delivered on April 9, 2020 have been quickly distributed to medical personnel in my country who urgently need masks.
Since a few weeks, our country has devoted all efforts to combat the rapid spread of the virus among the people. At present, epidemiologists have found that the epidemic in Germany is gradually slowing down, allowing us to plan carefully and gradually to return to a normal life, although there may still be some restrictions. In this regard, Taiwan’s experience in successfully fighting the epidemic has also benefited my country a lot.
I personally thank Taiwan again for its assistance and wish the people of Taiwan good health.
06 Jan 2021, 3:22am
Amata LireinThe German Government DID in fact thank Taiwan for the support by sending masks to Germany.

Der Grad an Verlogenheit, den du und Rebecca hier zeigt, ist beachtlich, aber nicht wirklich überraschend. Schau mal auf das Datum des Briefes. Du weißt ganz genau, dass dieser erst auf Druck von Teilen der Öffentlichkeit überhaupt zustande gekommen ist. Die Lieferung der Masken erfolgte bereits am 9. April 2020, eine publikumswirksame Übergabe wurde aus scheinheiligen Gründen abgesagt, wohingegen sie bei einer vergleichbaren Lieferung aus China problemlos stattfand. Hier ist das Video der denkwürdigen Pressekonferenz vom 15. April, in der Journalisten versuchten, dem schäbigen Verhalten der Bundesregierung auf den Grund zu gehen.



Möchtest du, dass ich den Inhalt ins Englische übersetze, damit die anderen hier eine Vorstellung davon bekommen, was bei euch in Deutschland so abgeht? Glaub mir, in Taiwan hat man dieses Duckmäusertum durchaus als solches zur Kenntnis genommen. Der spätere Brief zur Schadensbegrenzung hat da auch nicht mehr geholfen. Ihr schwafelt von Freiheit und Demokratie, vom Kampf gegen Extremismus, und prostituiert euch zugleich für ein menschenverachtendes totalitäres Regime, das Millionen von Menschen auf dem Gewissen hat und noch heute Konzentrationslager betreibt. Und nein, die Nichtanerkennung von Taiwan schützt nicht Taiwan, sondern eure Profite aus dem Handel mit China.

Kurz gesagt: Ihr seid durchschaut. Eure Scheinheiligkeit und Verlogenheit ist ekelerregend. Und wie du dir inzwischen vielleicht denken kannst, bin ich über die Vorgänge in Deutschland sehr gut informiert. Wir können also gerne noch weitere schmutzige Details über euer ach-so-vorbildliches Land besprechen, falls du und Rebecca darauf besteht.
06 Jan 2021, 3:28am
What was the question again?
06 Jan 2021, 5:29am
Effie Trinket
Aleksander Majjam

Saka: Judge, after seeing my evidence today, I will convince you that the moon is a crescent shape, and not round like most idiots believe.




That reminds me of the story of Happiness Stan, who wondered why the Moon hung sometimes full moon all scintillating dangly in the heavenly bode and other times only half.


Indeed!

Funny thing is that Stan listened to reason, thus becoming more knowledgeable in the end.

We should all strive to be like Stan.
06 Jan 2021, 9:19am
Sakashiro
Freedom of expression and censorship are topics I feel strongly about. My husband is from a country that has recovered from its own period of authoritarianism. Germany, while never getting tired of pointing fingers at others, keeps kowtowing to the Chinese communist regime by not recognizing Taiwan's independence, to a point that the German government didn't even have the courtesy to say "thank you" after Taiwan had donated millions of protective masks.


Yeah, that was a shitshow and widely criticized within Germany as is the whole relationship to China.


So I'm not exactly an avid fan of Germany and particularly Germans trying to lecture me about topics such as censorship. I do not enjoy these debates, in fact I regret even responding to Rebecca at all. I should have realized early what she was on about.


Germany is one of the countries that have extensive experience with censorship, not only due to the Third Reich, but also due to the existence of the GDR and disregarding these experiences just because it's Germany is silly.

But that's not what this discussion was on about. We didn't just talk about any censorship, nor did I lecture you about it. We talked about how political censorship is implemented in Germany and how it has changed during the past years. That you're so focused on the ban of displays of unconstitutional symbols is curious though, because any case you'd try to made for political censorship being biased in Germany would've been much more coherent had you included § 130 StGB Volksverhetzung. It came up a couple of times but was never really followed on by you.

I get that you feel strongly about freedom of expression, freedom of speech and censorship, that is understandable and good. But those are very complicated concepts and very subjective on top of that when it comes to their limitations, so I don't discuss them here.

I don't regret discussing with you, despite your way of doing so which I find annoying and dishonest. It's good to get my own viewpoints challenged. Originally I thought that this would be more of a discussion around videogames or digital content and a while later I thought that this'd develop more into a discussion about the legal intricacies of German law, but I don't intend to lead a purely political discussion, especially not about sensitive matters like Taiwan. This is simply not the right forum for such a political discussion.

Nonetheless, I still feel like you're trying to move the goalposts yet again. To make it absolutely clear again: Your claim that Germany has a political censorship that is biased in favour of the government is baseless. I personally am fine with stopping this discussion here. Even if I haven't convinced you, I'm reasonably sure that most people reading this will see your claims as what they are.

Sakashiro
Amata LireinThe German Government DID in fact thank Taiwan for the support by sending masks to Germany.


Der Grad an Verlogenheit, den du und Rebecca hier zeigt, ist beachtlich, aber nicht wirklich überraschend. Schau mal auf das Datum des Briefes. Du weißt ganz genau, dass dieser erst auf Druck von Teilen der Öffentlichkeit überhaupt zustande gekommen ist. Die Lieferung der Masken erfolgte bereits am 9. April 2020, eine publikumswirksame Übergabe wurde aus scheinheiligen Gründen abgesagt, wohingegen sie bei einer vergleichbaren Lieferung aus China problemlos stattfand. Hier ist das Video der denkwürdigen Pressekonferenz vom 15. April, in der Journalisten versuchten, dem schäbigen Verhalten der Bundesregierung auf den Grund zu gehen.


Möchtest du, dass ich den Inhalt ins Englische übersetze, damit die anderen hier eine Vorstellung davon bekommen, was bei euch in Deutschland so abgeht? Glaub mir, in Taiwan hat man dieses Duckmäusertum durchaus als solches zur Kenntnis genommen. Der spätere Brief zur Schadensbegrenzung hat da auch nicht mehr geholfen. Ihr schwafelt von Freiheit und Demokratie, vom Kampf gegen Extremismus, und prostituiert euch zugleich für ein menschenverachtendes totalitäres Regime, das Millionen von Menschen auf dem Gewissen hat und noch heute Konzentrationslager betreibt. Und nein, die Nichtanerkennung von Taiwan schützt nicht Taiwan, sondern eure Profite aus dem Handel mit China.


I'm not convinced that you actually speak German. If you do, I'm wondering why this discussion wasn't over when I showed you the legal correspondence between the attorney and the person who filed the case against Bundesfighter 2 Turbo. The reasoning for the decision is explained in detail in there and I posted a link to the pdf multiple times.

In any case, I'm not going to have a discussion in German with you in an english forum. If we have a conversation here, everyone here should be able to understand it. If you want to translate the video into English, go ahead. A two minute clip of a foreign minister dancing around a particular word is hardly descriptive of German interior or foreign politics, even if you pretend otherwise.

I had a feeling the entire time that you have an axe to grind with the federal government (and Angela Merkel in particular) and no interest in the actual implementation and legal framework around it.

Kurz gesagt: Ihr seid durchschaut. Eure Scheinheiligkeit und Verlogenheit ist ekelerregend. Und wie du dir inzwischen vielleicht denken kannst, bin ich über die Vorgänge in Deutschland sehr gut informiert. Wir können also gerne noch weitere schmutzige Details über euer ach-so-vorbildliches Land besprechen, falls du und Rebecca darauf besteht.


You accusing Amata and me of mendacity and hypocrisy is not something I can take seriously, sorry.

And no, you're not well informed about events in Germany. You have a strong bias and some degree of information, but that's it.

I'm going to have to decline your offer to talk about all the "dirty details of our oh-so-exemplary country", since it's another poor attempt to shift the goalposts since you failed to respond to the majority of the arguments actually relevant to the discussion yet again. Judging from the amount of misinformation, half knowledge and the general bias in your posts I doubt that you're capable of actually having a discussion with an open mind to a conclusion about these topics.
06 Jan 2021, 9:26am
When you’re new to Inara and have no idea what’s happening.



(Not trying to belittle the issue, just surprised and curious)
06 Jan 2021, 9:39am
ColdSteel60When you’re new to Inara and have no idea what’s happening.

[img=640x480]https://frinkiac.com/meme/S08E08/802984.jpg?b64lines=SEVZLCBJJ1ZFIE9OTFkgQkVFTgogSEVSRSBBIEZFVyBNSU5VVEVTLgogV0hBVCdTIEdPSU5HIE9OPw==[/img]

(Not trying to belittle the issue, just surprised and curious)


The women of Inara are engaged in a knife fight.

For the first time in recorded history, the Federation (Becca) and the Empire (Ama), join forces against a ruthless Independent (Saka).

Interesting discussion for sure, and one best read while eating your favorite snacks as us peanut gallery folk watch, chime in periodically, and wait with bated for the next post.

Separate of the conversation, I'm secretly wondering how much it would cost me to get Becca to read me a lullaby in German in a sultry tone.


Last edit: 06 Jan 2021, 9:53am

Post a reply

You must be signed in to post here.
Anything not directly and indirectly related to Elite:Dangerous, Starfield, Inara, galaxy and so on. Just please no politics, religion and similar usually heated discussions, please. It never ends well despite the best efforts...