Look for car theft in Denver to increase dramatically

[Lipdrag]

On 10/15/2025 at 4:18 PM, fishbane said:

This issue doesn't have the normal two sides.  It isn't Democrat vs Republican or left vs right.  It's more about privacy which is something I think people anywhere on the political spectrum can appreciate.

I appreciate the further information and insight you posted.  I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.  Privacy and the 4th amendment need an update of interpretation or perhaps we need whole new amendment. 

• Patriot Act - abominable. 
• FISA - fishy at best. 
• "it's only metadata" - weasel words. 
• "I don't mind because I don't have anything to hide"  - Self deporting on the highway to hell! 

The principle of privacy FROM government (i.e. from temporarily delegated authority unless due process has been applied to intrude upon such privacy) must be updated and honored.  Granted that it makes criminal investigations more difficult.  I am willing to pay that price to curtail and leash the awesome power we delegate.  I hope a majority of my fellow citizens from all radians along the political horseshoe can agree.

My post was a bit snarky and more knee jerk reaction than deeply considered commentary.  Yours was better.

Edited October 16, 2025 by Lipdrag

[fishbane]

Denver went without Flock cameras in April 2026 due to a gap in the contract.  Car thefts were down 29% relative to April 2025.

https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/cars/news-blog/report-denver-shuts-down-flock-cameras-auto-theft-declines-45135526

[mspart]

Denver is better than Seattle then.   It would be fair game to steal cars here with no cameras widely announced.  

mspart

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, mspart said:

Denver is better than Seattle then.   It would be fair game to steal cars here with no cameras widely announced.  

mspart

It's probably more of a macro trend than anything to do with the cameras.  Car theft is down across the country. Flock argues that the cameras presence suppresses crime, but it doesn't always work.  Look at houses with security cameras.  Still tons of package theft and cameras can also be an enticement as houses with a lot of security features typically have things worth stealing in them.

[mspart]

15 hours ago, fishbane said:

Still tons of package theft and cameras can also be an enticement as houses with a lot of security features typically have things worth stealing in them.

I can agree with this.   Seattle Mayor turned on the cameras ahead of the world cup to stifle crime.   She's so pro crime it is unbelievable.   She would call that equity for the disadvantaged, but it is crime. 

mspart

[fishbane]

My motorcycle was stolen out of a storage unit I rent last week.  I asked the police officer who took the initial report if they ever recover stolen motorcycles.  He said cars sometimes motorcycles not really.  Maybe if they park it or it hits on one their ALPRs (Automated License Plate Readers), but they aren't allowed to chase them.  ALPR is the generic term of the Flock branded ones used in Denver.

Ultimately my motorcycle was recovered 3 days later using a Bluetooth tracker I had hidden in it.  ALPRs played no role in the recovery.  The thief did not bother to even remove my license plate they simply put a sticker on it to cover the plate number.  ALPRs are probably more useful for cars than motorbikes as a sticker on the license plate would be more likely to get you pulled over and the police would be more likely to pursue if the vehicle attempts to flee.  I still think they are minimally effective.  When the police recovered my motorbike they also recovered a stolen car which had avoided the ALPRs until my tracker sent them to these guys.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

On 6/27/2025 at 2:19 PM, mspart said:

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/06/27/ice-ice-baby-denver-city-council-ends-car-theft-tracking-system-to-protect-illegal-immigrants/#more-233209

I hope the whole city council gets their cars stolen.  I hope all the city cars and trucks get stolen.  This is eggregious.  The voting public will hopefully right this wrong headed decision. 

 

Again, you are wrong here.

"Flock" has been discontinued in cities all around the country.  For very good reasons.

Here's a link to an informative CNET article on the topic (not some whackjob article like mspart posted here.)

When Flock Surveillance Comes to Your Town: Everything to Know About These Cameras - CNET

The privacy of US citizens is incredibly important. Don't let morons like mspart pretend it's only about immigrants.

[ionel]

16 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Again, you are wrong here.

"Flock" has been discontinued in cities all around the country.  For very good reasons.

Here's a link to an informative CNET article on the topic (not some whackjob article like mspart posted here.)

When Flock Surveillance Comes to Your Town: Everything to Know About These Cameras - CNET

The privacy of US citizens is incredibly important. Don't let morons like mspart pretend it's only about immigrants.

We have no privacy.  Have you taken a commercial flight or bought beer lately?  

[GreatWhiteNorth]

8 hours ago, ionel said:

We have no privacy.  Have you taken a commercial flight or bought beer lately?  

You can decline to have your driver's license scanned at a beer store. Firmly ask them to manually enter your DOB. I've gotten eye rolls but have never had anybody deny my request.

Privacy should be important to all of us. And that will mean making an effort. Even if it is uncomfortable.

Pursuing freedom can be uncomfortable. Even if a small thing. But it's a pursuit worth every moment spent.

Edited July 16 by GreatWhiteNorth

[fishbane]

8 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

You can decline to have your driver's license scanned at a beer store. Firmly ask them to manually enter your DOB. I've gotten eye rolls but have never had anybody deny my request.

If its a place I know that scans I will ask them not to scan it.  If I didn't know I used to keep the license in my hand and show it to them and then if they tried to take ask if they were fixing to scan it.  I have since put a piece of painters tape on the back of my license where the bar codes are.  Now I just hand it to the person without saying anything.  I have yet to be asked about the painters tape.  Usually when it doesn't scan they just enter it.  Less confrontation.  

On 7/15/2026 at 2:52 AM, GreatWhiteNorth said:

The privacy of US citizens is incredibly important. Don't let morons like mspart pretend it's only about immigrants.

I don't think people that didn't fully grasp mass surveillance capabilities of these cameras are morons.  They get marketed as finding stolen cars and essential law enforcement tools.  This thread also started over a year ago and attention on flock cameras has certainly increased since then.  There have been some high profile fumbles by flock since that and that superbowl add where Ring showed off their search party feature.  It's raised questions about mass surveillance and whether the government should have access to this information especially without a warrant.  Hopefully more people realize.

[ionel]

23 minutes ago, fishbane said:

If its a place I know that scans I will ask them not to scan it.  If I didn't know I used to keep the license in my hand and show it to them and then if they tried to take ask if they were fixing to scan it.  I have since put a piece of painters tape on the back of my license where the bar codes are.  Now I just hand it to the person without saying anything.  I have yet to be asked about the painters tape.  Usually when it doesn't scan they just enter it.  Less confrontation.  

But are they just entering DOB or your DL # or name & DOB?  

[GreatWhiteNorth]

13 hours ago, ionel said:

But are they just entering DOB or your DL # or name & DOB?  

13 hours ago, fishbane said:

If its a place I know that scans I will ask them not to scan it.  If I didn't know I used to keep the license in my hand and show it to them and then if they tried to take ask if they were fixing to scan it.  I have since put a piece of painters tape on the back of my license where the bar codes are.  Now I just hand it to the person without saying anything.  I have yet to be asked about the painters tape.  Usually when it doesn't scan they just enter it.  Less confrontation.  

Those little hand scanners may look like old school bar code scanners to some.

But they can capture a photo just like an iPhone... and use OCR to capture every single letter on the front of the license. And capture the picture portion, as well.

I do like blue painter's tape. Incredibly versatile stuff. But it will do nothing for you here.

[fishbane]

7 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Those little hand scanners may look like old school bar code scanners to some.

But they can capture a photo just like an iPhone... and use OCR to capture every single letter on the front of the license. And capture the picture portion, as well.

I do like blue painter's tape. Incredibly versatile stuff. But it will do nothing for you here.

Scanners have been taking images and processing them for over 20 years.   What you speak of isn't new technology.  

The gas stations, super markets, bars that I go to aren't taking photos or scanning the front and using OCR.  They scan the QR codes on the back.  Whether its a really old bar bode scanner or taking an image of a QR code if the code is covered by painters tape the scanner will not read it and the image will be of painters tape.  Its effective against either style of scanner.  You shouldn't underestimate the ability of something so simple to render a modern expensive high tech system useless.  The thief that stole my motorcycle was able to prevent detection by the ALPR camera system in my city with a sticker over my tag number.  Some painters tape would have bene equally effective.  If I notice establishments scanning the front of the license I might go back to either not  handing it over and/or asking them not to scan it when I do. 

Another effective method I have found to avoid scanning of your ID is to use your passport. There is a single barcode in the back of the passport book, but this is a regular barcode and not a QR code so it contains far less info than the back of your drivers license or state issued ID.  Also most POS systems are not even programed to read that so it will be manual entry nearly 100% of the time.  On the bottom of the page with your photo most of the info printed on it is contained in a short form code.  At the airport;? seen scanners capable of reading that, but I have never seen one in use outside of an airport.

Using passport as ID is great because the are universally accepted, but rarely anticipated.  Using a passport has the upside of not having your address information in it.  There is a section in it where the passport holder can write their address, but I don't do that and many people do not.  On the other hand a passport is bulky to carry, more difficult to replace, and has your place of birth on it though that is only the state of birth on mine.  I consider state of birth to be less sensitive than my current address.

[fishbane]

21 hours ago, ionel said:

But are they just entering DOB or your DL # or name & DOB?  

Probably, but all the information on the front except your photo in contained in the QR codes on the back.  If they manually enter that info then I am more certain only that info is being entered and potentially retained.

[Caveira]

Bars scan your IDs these days???

[GreatWhiteNorth]

15 hours ago, fishbane said:

Scanners have been taking images and processing them for over 20 years.   What you speak of isn't new technology.  

The gas stations, super markets, bars that I go to aren't taking photos or scanning the front and using OCR.  They scan the QR codes on the back.  Whether its a really old bar bode scanner or taking an image of a QR code if the code is covered by painters tape the scanner will not read it and the image will be of painters tape.  Its effective against either style of scanner.  You shouldn't underestimate the ability of something so simple to render a modern expensive high tech system useless.  The thief that stole my motorcycle was able to prevent detection by the ALPR camera system in my city with a sticker over my tag number.  Some painters tape would have bene equally effective.  If I notice establishments scanning the front of the license I might go back to either not  handing it over and/or asking them not to scan it when I do. 

Another effective method I have found to avoid scanning of your ID is to use your passport. There is a single barcode in the back of the passport book, but this is a regular barcode and not a QR code so it contains far less info than the back of your drivers license or state issued ID.  Also most POS systems are not even programed to read that so it will be manual entry nearly 100% of the time.  On the bottom of the page with your photo most of the info printed on it is contained in a short form code.  At the airport;? seen scanners capable of reading that, but I have never seen one in use outside of an airport.

Using passport as ID is great because the are universally accepted, but rarely anticipated.  Using a passport has the upside of not having your address information in it.  There is a section in it where the passport holder can write their address, but I don't do that and many people do not.  On the other hand a passport is bulky to carry, more difficult to replace, and has your place of birth on it though that is only the state of birth on mine.  I consider state of birth to be less sensitive than my current address.

Bar code scanners that take photos and process them with OCR for over 20 years? That's funny. You might want to get off your horse and drive a car - horsepower has been around for over 20 years, too.

What is being done now is the use of camera's that are located above as you check out. A clerk can hold up your ID to, presumably, look at it - all while the camera above and behind them is scanning it and performing OCR to harvest absolutely everything on the ID, photo and all. Oh - and also collecting a picture of your face to go along with it, and audio of your voice. If the clerk flips the ID, then the backside data is also harvested. All while audio is collected. (Next time you're in the beer store, check over the clerk's shoulder and you'll find a camera.)

Long story short... whatever you might think may be doing to protect your privacy just isn't working.

Retailers (and government, etc.) are way ahead of you. They are collecting massive amounts of data on all of us. Has been that way for years, now. GIGANTIC, massive, piles of data that are basically impossible to make useful.

Just to put a point on it - what do you think the rush to AI is really about? Most of what AI is currently doing has already been being done for years.

... wait for it... Yes, massive amounts of data have been collected at an exponential rate over the last decades. And, as valuable as it may be, we have no economically feasible way to make any sense of it... enter AI.

What is marketed and sold as "AI" really, truly isn't AI at all. Look up the definition of AI and you'll be surprised. What we are being sold as something that will help us is really a complicated way to try to reduce all of this massive amount of data that has been being collected into something that corporations and government can actually find useful. Think of it as a mountain or stuff being mined in a way that has never been possible before.

What's in it for consumers? NOTHING. Nothing at all. We're the sheep being sheered.

And we're also the sheep who they expect will be paying for the huge data centers and their huge power requirements as they try to pretend their "AI" product is something that will help consumers. When, in fact, it is the exact opposite.

[fishbane]

4 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Bar code scanners that take photos and process them with OCR for over 20 years? That's funny. You might want to get off your horse and drive a car - horsepower has been around for over 20 years, too.

What is being done now is the use of camera's that are located above as you check out. A clerk can hold up your ID to, presumably, look at it - all while the camera above and behind them is scanning it and performing OCR to harvest absolutely everything on the ID, photo and all. Oh - and also collecting a picture of your face to go along with it, and audio of your voice. If the clerk flips the ID, then the backside data is also harvested. All while audio is collected. (Next time you're in the beer store, check over the clerk's shoulder and you'll find a camera.)

Long story short... whatever you might think may be doing to protect your privacy just isn't working.

Retailers (and government, etc.) are way ahead of you. They are collecting massive amounts of data on all of us. Has been that way for years, now. GIGANTIC, massive, piles of data that are basically impossible to make useful.

Just to put a point on it - what do you think the rush to AI is really about? Most of what AI is currently doing has already been being done for years.

... wait for it... Yes, massive amounts of data have been collected at an exponential rate over the last decades. And, as valuable as it may be, we have no economically feasible way to make any sense of it... enter AI.

What is marketed and sold as "AI" really, truly isn't AI at all. Look up the definition of AI and you'll be surprised. What we are being sold as something that will help us is really a complicated way to try to reduce all of this massive amount of data that has been being collected into something that corporations and government can actually find useful. Think of it as a mountain or stuff being mined in a way that has never been possible before.

What's in it for consumers? NOTHING. Nothing at all. We're the sheep being sheered.

And we're also the sheep who they expect will be paying for the huge data centers and their huge power requirements as they try to pretend their "AI" product is something that will help consumers. When, in fact, it is the exact opposite.

Okay if you move the goalposts to AI powered cameras in the ceiling and all over the store using OCR the painters tape doesn’t protect against that, but neither does your strategy of firmly asking the clerk to manually enter your DOB.  You take out your license to hand it to the cashier and the cameras zoom in on what’s in your hand.  You firmly ask the clerk to manually enter your DOB and your voice is being recorded and analyzed by the AI.  You hand your drivers license to the cashier and the cameras zoom in on it in the clerks hand.  OCR could be used by the AI to pull your information from the front of the license and match it with a picture of your face from the video.

How does your strategy prevent this?  It doesn’t.  You still have to take your license out for the cashier to read the DOB from it and if it’s out for the clerk to read the AI powered cameras system could be reading it just the same.   Do you firmly asking the cameras to manually enter the DOB too?  What’s the strategy there?

My point wasn’t that the painters tape was a perfect solution or prevented scanning in all situations, but I find it superior to the strategy you presented and what I had been doing.  It avoids the conflict of either not handing the ID to the cashier or firmly asking anything followed by an eye roll. There is also nothing for me to remember to do.  I don’t have to remember that this store scans or to ask them not to do it.  I just hand it over.  I forget the painters tape is on there.  I handed my license to two different police officers when reporting/tracking down my stolen motorcycle and neither mentioned the painters tape.  I didn’t think of the painters tape being on there until well after doing it.

 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

19 hours ago, fishbane said:

Okay if you move the goalposts to AI powered cameras in the ceiling and all over the store using OCR the painters tape doesn’t protect against that, but neither does your strategy of firmly asking the clerk to manually enter your DOB.  You take out your license to hand it to the cashier and the cameras zoom in on what’s in your hand.  You firmly ask the clerk to manually enter your DOB and your voice is being recorded and analyzed by the AI.  You hand your drivers license to the cashier and the cameras zoom in on it in the clerks hand.  OCR could be used by the AI to pull your information from the front of the license and match it with a picture of your face from the video.

How does your strategy prevent this?  It doesn’t.  You still have to take your license out for the cashier to read the DOB from it and if it’s out for the clerk to read the AI powered cameras system could be reading it just the same.   Do you firmly asking the cameras to manually enter the DOB too?  What’s the strategy there?

My point wasn’t that the painters tape was a perfect solution or prevented scanning in all situations, but I find it superior to the strategy you presented and what I had been doing.  It avoids the conflict of either not handing the ID to the cashier or firmly asking anything followed by an eye roll. There is also nothing for me to remember to do.  I don’t have to remember that this store scans or to ask them not to do it.  I just hand it over.  I forget the painters tape is on there.  I handed my license to two different police officers when reporting/tracking down my stolen motorcycle and neither mentioned the painters tape.  I didn’t think of the painters tape being on there until well after doing it.

 

"move the goalposts" is dumb. Doesn't apply here. This is nothing more than a discussion. No "goalposts."

My "strategy" !? You've managed a weird take here... as I have previously explained, I don't give them my license.

You are one creepy dude. One minute, you're a most-basic-of-basic painter's tape solution guy. The next you are preaching at me about security. OK weirdo. That is my cue for me to stop giving you any further advice. 

What country are you from?

You present as being ignorant of surveillance, then all of the sudden pretend to be a pseudo-expert.

You are not to be trusted.

[fishbane]

4 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"move the goalposts" is dumb. Doesn't apply here. This is nothing more than a discussion. No "goalposts."

My "strategy" !? You've managed a weird take here... as I have previously explained, I don't give them my license.

You are one creepy dude. One minute, you're a most-basic-of-basic painter's tape solution guy. The next you are preaching at me about security. OK weirdo. That is my cue for me to stop giving you any further advice. 

What country are you from?

You present as being ignorant of surveillance, then all of the sudden pretend to be a pseudo-expert.

You are not to be trusted.

Is this how you normally have conversations?  Tell everyone they are wrong and insult them?  You employ unusual methods for more than just privacy.

You are the one that took this from the basic question of preventing a cashier from scanning your ID when buying beer to cameras in the ceiling using OCR and AI to harvest the data from the front of the license.  You then used the new threat to claim my painters tape isn’t doing anything when the strategy you described would do no better in that situation.  That was moving the goalposts.  Judging my painters tape against something your strategy would be equally ineffective against.

Now you say “I don't give them my license.”  This is not something you previously explained, this is new information.  What form of ID do you give? State ID, Passport, etc?  I had previously recommended using a passport because nearly 100% of the age verification systems I see in use are designed to scan the 2D barcode on the back of a license/state ID and cannot scan a passport.  No OCR.  

Or are you saying you use your drivers license for age verification but don’t hand it to the cashier?  This would also be new information you had not previously explained.  It also would not stop OCR from being used on the front of the license.  If the cashier’s handheld scanner was really using OCR like you described earlier they could just scan the front of it in your hand.  Asking firmly might prevent this, but it will not work for the shifted goalposts of AI powered cameras around the checkout area using OCR.  If the cashier can read the dob so can a nearby camera.  If this is your strategy it might be slightly more effective than my painters tape as you could limit the view angle of the camera,  but this depends on you identifying  cameras ahead of time and retaining control of your license.  The reason I moved away from not handing my license over was because I find it obnoxious to not hand the document to the cashier to examine and it creates unnecessary conflict.  The painters tape has yet to create conflict.  Given how you talk to people on the internet maybe you see being obnoxious and creating conflict as a benefit?

You are the one that took the conversation past purchasing beer to more serious questions of privacy like AI cameras in the ceiling and asked “what do you think the rush to AI is really about?”  I am not an expert just a person that values his privacy.  Going back to buying beer and drivers licenses.  I consider the most private piece of information on my license to be the address.  For this reason the address on my license is not my home address which I consider even more private still.  I don’t give my home address out to any businesses or anyone besides friends and family.  My employer doesn’t have it.  The government doesn’t have it.  No place I have ever purchased beer has if one has fully scanned the front and back of my drivers license.  Privacy is something you must think about long before you need it.  It takes time and money to acquire and that investment must be maintained.  It will always be easier and cheaper to give it up, but then in the future if you need it, you may find it impossible to obtain at any price. 

If your home address is on the ID you use to purchase beer I could understand you being more cautious than I am in this transaction.  If you want to maintain the highest level of privacy I’d recommend you find a place willing to sell you beer without age verification and pay with cash.  You probably look old enough that it won’t be too difficult to find a place to sell you beer without providing ID.  Alternatively you could make your own beer at home.  It isn’t that difficult and gives a sense of satisfaction that store bought beer cannot.  If privacy is not your goal feel free to continue being obnoxious to cashiers.

[GreatWhiteNorth]

17 hours ago, fishbane said:

Is this how you normally have conversations?  Tell everyone they are wrong and insult them?  You employ unusual methods for more than just privacy.

You are the one that took this from the basic question of preventing a cashier from scanning your ID when buying beer to cameras in the ceiling using OCR and AI to harvest the data from the front of the license.  You then used the new threat to claim my painters tape isn’t doing anything when the strategy you described would do no better in that situation.  That was moving the goalposts.  Judging my painters tape against something your strategy would be equally ineffective against.

Now you say “I don't give them my license.”  This is not something you previously explained, this is new information.  What form of ID do you give? State ID, Passport, etc?  I had previously recommended using a passport because nearly 100% of the age verification systems I see in use are designed to scan the 2D barcode on the back of a license/state ID and cannot scan a passport.  No OCR.  

Or are you saying you use your drivers license for age verification but don’t hand it to the cashier?  This would also be new information you had not previously explained.  It also would not stop OCR from being used on the front of the license.  If the cashier’s handheld scanner was really using OCR like you described earlier they could just scan the front of it in your hand.  Asking firmly might prevent this, but it will not work for the shifted goalposts of AI powered cameras around the checkout area using OCR.  If the cashier can read the dob so can a nearby camera.  If this is your strategy it might be slightly more effective than my painters tape as you could limit the view angle of the camera,  but this depends on you identifying  cameras ahead of time and retaining control of your license.  The reason I moved away from not handing my license over was because I find it obnoxious to not hand the document to the cashier to examine and it creates unnecessary conflict.  The painters tape has yet to create conflict.  Given how you talk to people on the internet maybe you see being obnoxious and creating conflict as a benefit?

You are the one that took the conversation past purchasing beer to more serious questions of privacy like AI cameras in the ceiling and asked “what do you think the rush to AI is really about?”  I am not an expert just a person that values his privacy.  Going back to buying beer and drivers licenses.  I consider the most private piece of information on my license to be the address.  For this reason the address on my license is not my home address which I consider even more private still.  I don’t give my home address out to any businesses or anyone besides friends and family.  My employer doesn’t have it.  The government doesn’t have it.  No place I have ever purchased beer has if one has fully scanned the front and back of my drivers license.  Privacy is something you must think about long before you need it.  It takes time and money to acquire and that investment must be maintained.  It will always be easier and cheaper to give it up, but then in the future if you need it, you may find it impossible to obtain at any price. 

If your home address is on the ID you use to purchase beer I could understand you being more cautious than I am in this transaction.  If you want to maintain the highest level of privacy I’d recommend you find a place willing to sell you beer without age verification and pay with cash.  You probably look old enough that it won’t be too difficult to find a place to sell you beer without providing ID.  Alternatively you could make your own beer at home.  It isn’t that difficult and gives a sense of satisfaction that store bought beer cannot.  If privacy is not your goal feel free to continue being obnoxious to cashiers.

This Fishbane dope is officially 'outed' as a fake poster from parts unknown... who's next?

(It's interesting to look back to see who gives positive feedback. Jross a few posts above. That checks out.)

[JimmySpeaks]

On 7/16/2026 at 2:22 AM, GreatWhiteNorth said:

You can decline to have your driver's license scanned at a beer store. Firmly ask them to manually enter your DOB. I've gotten eye rolls but have never had anybody deny my request.

Privacy should be important to all of us. And that will mean making an effort. Even if it is uncomfortable.

Pursuing freedom can be uncomfortable. Even if a small thing. But it's a pursuit worth every moment spent.

Says the guy supporting Democrat communists and …… you guesssed it, MORE government 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

17 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Says the guy supporting Democrat communists and …… you guesssed it, MORE government 

As always, you're nothing more than an idiot. And probably a lot less.

I favor neither the donkeys nor the elephants. You are only trying to stir up trouble. You suck at posting.

[JimmySpeaks]

6 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

As always, you're nothing more than an idiot. And probably a lot less.

I favor neither the donkeys nor the elephants. You are only trying to stir up trouble. You suck at posting.

Whats worse?  
A. Me sucking at posting.
B. Me sucking at posting and getting you to constantly reply to me?  
 

Hint: it’s not A

[GreatWhiteNorth]

17 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Whats worse?  
A. Me sucking at posting.
B. Me sucking at posting and getting you to constantly reply to me?  
 

Hint: it’s not A

That's an easy A.

You seriously suck at posting, all day, every day, and ever since I've seen your 1st post.

But I'm not an animal. I hope that doesn't hurt your feelings. 

[JimmySpeaks]

6 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

That's an easy A.

You seriously suck at posting, all day, every day, and ever since I've seen your 1st post.

But I'm not an animal. I hope that doesn't hurt your feelings. 

Hurt my feelings. Bahahahahhahahahahahahaha. That’s cute. 

Edited July 22 by JimmySpeaks