beware PKR.com

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fatshaft:
Erm, no. Why would I? What difference does the regulator make? maybe it has a bearing for you, it does not come into even 0.001% of my decision whether to play on a site


That statement pretty much says it all.

Genuine players want a safe environment in which to play, if there is a dispute it is important that there is an independent authority with genuine powers that can act as arbitrator/regulator.

Maybe you are happy with Kanhawake's response to the ultimate poker scam, maybe you are happy if a site you play at is regulated by a defunct fax machine rusting in a corner in a Panama flat but most of us want to know the games we play are fair because they are well regulated and if we have an issue it will be addressed.

It is also very noticeable that you keep using the word "conspiracy" in an effort to devalue other peoples comments so it is in fact you who sees conspiracy in everything, perhaps you should put that tin hat of yours that you keep talking about back on.
 
I thought you shills were through with this thread?

It looks a like a couple shills trying to 'push down' the negative comments by adding a lot of non-related crap to the thread.

If you've found it difficult to understand so far, allow me to explain; I don't, and have never, worked for PKR, nor do I (to my knowledge) know, or had contact with anyone who does.

So give it a rest, eh? I could quite easily drone on about how must work for one of their rivals, seeing as you seem so determined to do them down - but I wouldn't bother, as it really would be a bit pathetic. I did intend to leave this thread alone, but seeing as you keep coming out with this 'shill' nonsense, I'd have done myself a disservice by doing so.
 
Last edited:
Fatshaft:
Erm, no. Why would I? What difference does the regulator make? maybe it has a bearing for you, it does not come into even 0.001% of my decision whether to play on a site


That statement pretty much says it all.

Genuine players want a safe environment in which to play, if there is a dispute it is important that there is an independent authority with genuine powers that can act as arbitrator/regulator.

.
Genuine players? So now you're deciding what is and isn't the criteria for a genuine player? I would say that anyone who puts their money into an online site is a genuine player wouldn't you? :confused:

Look at the Isle of Man casinos, every single one of them closed down (or moved to other jurisdictions). Why was that again? Oh yes, becasue they were too strictly regulated, so players had too many hurdles to jump through in order to play, so they simply went elsewhere to find more easily accessible sites. THAT'S how much 'genuine' players care about a regulator's credentials.


.
 
I would say that anyone who puts their money into an online site is a genuine player wouldn't you? :confused:

Unless there name happens to be POTRIPPER

And who knows how many other POTRIPPERS are out there, what you have to realise is that "TRUST" is key to someone like me playing for real money, a typical player will read that mis-statement from PKR website and immediately trust them. Which is wrong, and exactly why PKR have made it that way, this is to mislead UK people into thinking that PKR games are fair and that the UKGC will make sure that it is kept that way

End of discussion, PKR are very very sly indeed
 
Unless there name happens to be POTRIPPER

And who knows how many other POTRIPPERS are out there, what you have to realise is that "TRUST" is key to someone like me playing for real money, a typical player will read that mis-statement from PKR website and immediately trust them. Which is wrong, and exactly why PKR have made it that way,....
Yet more disinformation. Potripper didn't put any money into a poker site, he owned the poker site.

I understand Lotso having a go here, as he has a history of getting involved in controversial anti-site posting, but why have you signed up just to have a go? And how did you know about this thread? It's clear that this is the only reason you're here, so you'll excuse me if I think you are either a spoof account, or have an agenda.

As 'trust' is such a big deal for you, can you let us know which sites you do play at for comparison?


.... and exactly why PKR have made it that way, this is to mislead UK people into thinking that PKR games are fair and that the UKGC will make sure that it is kept that way
It may be to give the impression that they are regulated by the UKGC rather than the AGCC, but that doesn't mean that the games are not fair. I would like you to provide proof of that accusation, as Rusty is unable to with his similar claims.


End of discussion, PKR are very very sly indeed
Not the end of discussion, we've yet to hear any proof of these fixed games allegations, nor anything other than supposition that PKR poker is somehow disreputable.

The casino has pulled a stunt for sure, but I'm not sure how that extrapolates into an unfair RNG for poker.
 
Genuine players? So now you're deciding what is and isn't the criteria for a genuine player? I would say that anyone who puts their money into an online site is a genuine player wouldn't you? :confused:

Look at the Isle of Man casinos, every single one of them closed down (or moved to other jurisdictions). Why was that again? Oh yes, becasue they were too strictly regulated, so players had too many hurdles to jump through in order to play, so they simply went elsewhere to find more easily accessible sites. THAT'S how much 'genuine' players care about a regulator's credentials.


.

What?
Why are you confused?
You do not accept that there are bots and collaboration and money laundering etc? Knowing you probably not.

You seem to make Two conflicting arguments here;

You say that the Isle of man Casinos moved because they were too strictly (I could just as easily substitute the word well here) regulated and then go on to give an alternative explanation and say it was the players that were the cause as they left to find more accessible sites.

Your first explanation is the more credible but just proves my point that Casinos want to appear to be properly regulated but in reality want as little regulation as possible.
Your other explanation sounds extremely unlikely.
Can you give an example of why these players left in their droves?
What do you mean by more accessible?
*Note here how I do not try to ridicule your argument but ask pertinent questions.

As an update on the licensing issue I received a further reply from the UKGC Licensing administrator in which he states.

"I can confirm that I have escalated your concerns to the commission’s compliance department for them to investigate and to see if further action is required."

He also confirmed there were no rules in place as of this time preventing a site from displaying an irrelevant license.

"Although there is no requirement for them to display their licensed status with the commission there is also nothing to state that they can not display it"

Since there is no requirement for them to display this license then I find it very hard to see how someone can still argue it is not there solely for the purpose to mislead.
Edit:
I see you now accept that this is at least a "stunt" FatShaft, it took 6 pages but the main thing is you understand when you are wrong.
Your argument that this does not prove the software is rogue is a valid one and I can not prove it is rigged just as you can not prove it is not the only way to truely settle that argument were if the site were regulated by the UKGC ;)
 
Unfortuantely such tactics have been a favourite marketing ploy for many numbers of businesses.

By using the link they were not lying as they do in fact have a license of sorts, but they have allowed the player to form their own judgements by using that information on their site.

As I say, a tactic used by many marketing campaigns (food labelling can be very misleading) but it is not criminal and should not reflect on their integrity with regards to their software.

Just thought I would chip in at the end now that the fireworks seem to have finished :D
 
Yet more disinformation. Potripper didn't put any money into a poker site, he owned the poker site...
More misinformation ... POTRIPPER has never been positively identified, other than as an "a high-ranking trusted consultant employed by AP" by Joe Norton the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises.
Fatshaft...wrong again... :)

Since your questioning motives Fatshaft... Why are you so convinced these guys at PKR are not cheating?

We all know that without a massive amount of raw data provided directly from the poker room in question it is near impossible to determine if a poker room is cheating.

So again, I ask just why are you so sure this poker room is not cheating?

Where is your hard evidence (or even soft evidence) that no cheating is taking place at PKR.com?

Where is your data? I'd love to see it and so would everyone else...
You seem so positive that nothing is out of order at PKR.com where is your proof to support this belief of yours?

I have a LOT of reason to believe PKR.com is crooked, most of them outlined in this thread and the other PKR.com thread here at CM...

So Fatshaft, where are all of your reasons for supporting PKR.com, after they seize players funds, close players accounts for nothing more than wining, don't follow their own written Policy and engage very shady marketing practices?

Come on Fatshaft, I would LOVE to hear your reasons for supporting the crooks at PKR.com...
 
very interesting thread i must say!!!!
i was the same as u rusty be a regular winner on various poker sites then wham badbeats galore rediculous outdraws no matter what stakes i play....so i gave up!!!
personally dont think any poker site is 100% FAIR

out of interest has anyone thought of e-mailing or ringing PKR about this misleading link?
be interesting to see what they would have to say about it!!
 
More misinformation ... POTRIPPER has never been positively identified, other than as an "a high-ranking trusted consultant employed by AP" by Joe Norton the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises.
Fatshaft...wrong again... :)
Wrong again then Lots0. Potripper was traced back to the owners of AP, Scott Thom's house was where play was coming from, I guess you're not as up to date or as informed as you would like everyone to believe eh?

Since your questioning motives Fatshaft... Why are you so convinced these guys at PKR are not cheating?
Because there hasn't been a single reason to believe that they are.

What makes you think they are cheating? Why are they cheating? And how are they doing it? It is absolutely astonishing that for no reason whatsoever (other than showing a perfectly valid license for the UKGC) you seem to have them down as AP/UB clones.

We all know that without a massive amount of raw data provided directly from the poker room in question it is near impossible to determine if a poker room is cheating.
That would be no proof then? So I repeat my question above, why are you suspicious?

So again, I ask just why are you so sure this poker room is not cheating?
...erm, the more you ask the question the more you hope people will believe it, is that the plan?

Where is your hard evidence (or even soft evidence) that no cheating is taking place at PKR.com?
Innocent until proven guilty I believe is the law and equitable morals of our society. We have bad loser Rusty claiming it is fixed, hardly evidence is it?

Where is your data? I'd love to see it and so would everyone else...
You seem so positive that nothing is out of order at PKR.com where is your proof to support this belief of yours?
The onus of proof is on accuser.

I have a LOT of reason to believe PKR.com is crooked, most of them outlined in this thread and the other PKR.com thread here at CM...
So, a (valid) license for the UKGC, and a CASINO bonus problem that is now being resolved. Well I gues that's pretty conclusive eh? :rolleyes:



Come on Fatshaft, I would LOVE to hear your reasons for supporting the crooks at PKR.com...
Strong words, I believe there have been cases taken to the courts based on written statements on internet forums. I would be looking for something more solid than you've posted here when you defend your defamation claim.
 
What?
Why are you confused?
You do not accept that there are bots and collaboration and money laundering etc? Knowing you probably not.
I have no idea what this has to do with the quote of mine you posted, you'll have to expand.

You seem to make Two conflicting arguments here;

You say that the Isle of man Casinos moved because they were too strictly (I could just as easily substitute the word well here) regulated and then go on to give an alternative explanation and say it was the players that were the cause as they left to find more accessible sites.

Your first explanation is the more credible but just proves my point that Casinos want to appear to be properly regulated but in reality want as little regulation as possible.
The casinos have tried strong regulation, the players wouldn't jump through the hoops necessary. Are you proposing that those same casinos should carry on as a loss making enterprise just to service the few players who did jump through the hoops?

Your other explanation sounds extremely unlikely.
Can you give an example of why these players left in their droves?
What do you mean by more accessible?
*Note here how I do not try to ridicule your argument but ask pertinent questions.
You seem confused. I never stated they left in their droves, they simply didn't sign up in the first place.

Your argument that this does not prove the software is rogue is a valid one and I can not prove it is rigged just as you can not prove it is not the only way to truely settle that argument were if the site were regulated by the UKGC ;)
I'd love to hear why you think they would be any better regulators of online gaming than existing white list jurisdictions, and why they would make a better job online than the shambles they make of B&M casino regulation ?


You say that the Isle of man Casinos moved because they were too strictly (I could just as easily substitute the word well here)
Just to go back to this point as it's important. If you knew anything about the IoMGC's attempts at regulation in the early 00's, one thing you wouldn't describe it as is 'well regulated'
 
Actually you are wrong again Fatshaft the burden of proof is on the Casinos to prove that their software is fair.
That is what regulation is all about or at least would be if the industry were properly regulated.
Any person who was interested in fair play would understand this should be the case.
You are trying to apply legal rights in criminal law and that is not relevant here.
You accuse me of being a sore loser but again this not the case.
The amount I deposited at PKR was insignificant and in no way shaped my judgment.
I am an honest person so you can disagree with my assesment but do not imply that my motives for posting are sour grapes.
It simply is not the case.
 
Last edited:
Genuine players? So now you're deciding what is and isn't the criteria for a genuine player? I would say that anyone who puts their money into an online site is a genuine player wouldn't you?

No for the reasons I have stated, hope this clears it up for you.

The casinos have tried strong regulation, the players wouldn't jump through the hoops necessary. Are you proposing that those same casinos should carry on as a loss making enterprise just to service the few players who did jump through the hoops?

Are you saying the Casinos moved because they were too strictly regulated or not?
Again please give an example of the obsticles players faced that were apparently so insurmountable they prefered to play at less regulated sites.
What are these hoops they had to jump through and what evidence do you have that so many players gave up playing there that the Casinos were making a loss?
If as you say they never signed up in the first place how would you know about them?

I'd love to hear why you think they would be any better regulators of online gaming than existing white list jurisdictions, and why they would make a better job online than the shambles they make of B&M casino regulation ?

Many reasons.
Firstly they are an independent body that has far reaching powers.
They operate under UK law and are overseen by the UK Government.
The 2005 gambling act would be fully enforced.
They have the resourses to properly regulate the Casinos they license.

I can not be sure but I think if it were put to a vote most players would prefer to have UKGC regulate than say Alderney or Kahnawake.
You are free to disagree but unfortunately players do not have the luxury of making a choice.

Just to go back to this point as it's important. If you knew anything about the IoMGC's attempts at regulation in the early 00's, one thing you wouldn't describe it as is 'well regulated'

Then please provide some information and state why you would not describe it as well regulated.

Casinomeister seems to have a different view to you, here is an excerpt from Online casino licensing infrormation from this site.

Each of these jurisdictions provide varying levels of regulation, but this is an important element for a player as good regulation can prevent a casino from, how best to put it... shirking their responsibilities! Of the above, both Gibraltar and the Isle Of Man (off the UK coast) have a strong reputation for ensuring operations are run smoothly and totally above board. If I see either of these touted on a casino's website, I feel like I'm in the right place!

He is stating the complete opposite.
 
Actually you are wrong again Fatshaft the burden of proof is on the Casinos to prove that their software is fair.
That is what regulation is all about or at least would be if the industry were properly regulated.
They have proved that their software is fair to the AGCC. That is their regulator, one that btw, is on the approved white list of jurisdictions - approved by the UKGC btw, the same UKGC who you wish to be the body that would regulate your gaming.

So as PKR have done their bit, I guess the ball's in your court now to prove your allegations eh?

As you didn't answer, why do you feel that they would be so much better as regulators than the existing white list authorities?



You are trying to apply legal rights in criminal law and that is not relevant here.
I see, so fair and equitable are not words at the top of your vocabulary?

You are making an accusation, it is the norm in our society that the accuser would actually provide evidence to back up their claim, this is what the law of the land is based upon; just because this has nothing to do with criminality, doesnt mean that anyone should be subject to wholly unsubstantiated claims, and expected to defend themselves against said accusations.
 
They have proved that their software is fair to the AGCC. That is their regulator, one that btw, is on the approved white list of jurisdictions - approved by the UKGC btw, the same UKGC who you wish to be the body that would regulate your gaming.

Sorry, wrong again.
It is the DCMS that deals with the whitelist.


As for putting my faith in Alderney, no thanks they have recently shown by upholding PKR's stance with topoor (something even you agree was wrong) that they are a waste of time.

So as PKR have done their bit, I guess the ball's in your court now to prove your allegations eh?

As you didn't answer, why do you feel that they would be so much better as regulators than the existing white list authorities?

I did answer but you have not answered any of my questions as usual.



I see, so fair and equitable are not words at the top of your vocabulary?

You are making an accusation, it is the norm in our society that the accuser would actually provide evidence to back up their claim, this is what the law of the land is based upon; just because this has nothing to do with criminality, doesnt mean that anyone should be subject to wholly unsubstantiated claims, and expected to defend themselves against said accusations.

If only you practiced what you preach.
 
Rusty, first of all, please start quoting, this italicising bollocks makes folowing who said what bloody impossible. I asked politely before, I just won't bother replying the next time you do it, as I can't be bothered wading through your posts to find your own text, and then you'll have nobody to react to your trolling.

Genuine players? So now you're deciding what is and isn't the criteria for a genuine player? I would say that anyone who puts their money into an online site is a genuine player wouldn't you?

No for the reasons I have stated, hope this clears it up for you.
POTRIPPER? Well I've already said why that was a ridiculous point to make.

The casinos have tried strong regulation, the players wouldn't jump through the hoops necessary. Are you proposing that those same casinos should carry on as a loss making enterprise just to service the few players who did jump through the hoops?

Are you saying the Casinos moved because they were too strictly regulated or not?
Of course I am.The regulations put in place made acquiring players extremely difficult for the operators. Without players the casinos couldn;t make any money, so they had to leave.

If as you say they never signed up in the first place how would you know about them?
They signed up and never deposited, pretty clear to track that percentage, of course this was from jurisdictions where gaming was allowed, many were not and these players were of course also easy to track. You'll note that these restrictions were dropped totally to allow Stars to relocate there a couple of years ago.


I'd love to hear why you think they would be any better regulators of online gaming than existing white list jurisdictions, and why they would make a better job online than the shambles they make of B&M casino regulation ?

Many reasons.
Firstly they are an independent body that has far reaching powers.
What expertise in regulating online gaming do they have that would give you confidence that they could exercise these far reaching powers.

They operate under UK law and are overseen by the UK Government.
And that's a positive?

The 2005 gambling act would be fully enforced
Really? And how do you come to that conclusion. They didn't enforce the '69 with any great consistency, but changing the year and their name will make them better how exactly?

They have the resourses to properly regulate the Casinos they license.
Based on what other than wishful thinking? How well funded is the UKGC as you seem to have these figures to hand?

I can not be sure but I think if it were put to a vote most players would prefer to have UKGC regulate than say Alderney or Kahnawake.
You are free to disagree but unfortunately players do not have the luxury of making a choice
I agre with you, but history shows that when 'strong' regulation was introduced, it was a flop, and the IoM had to seriously review how they did business in order to attract licensees back to the island.

Just to go back to this point as it's important. If you knew anything about the IoMGC's attempts at regulation in the early 00's, one thing you wouldn't describe it as is 'well regulated'

Then please provide some information and state why you would not describe it as well regulated.
I could start with the draft regulations being leaked to the banking industry, who then drove through changes that made online gaming comparable to banking. Then the progressive introduction of more and more regulations even after licensees had signed up on the back of the original licencing terms. Or the change that meant that while originally a license was for a corporate body to run as many casinos as they wished, and had made business plans on that basis, these were subsequently reneged upon, and licensees were expected to pay for every single re-skin they wished to launch, blowing said business plans out of the water. Or the fact that despite being an online industry, every single email or live chat contact with a player had also to be kept, printed off and the hard copy filed for posterity. Or the fact the every licensee had different directives to follow.
Or players being restricted to 5k per month in withdrawals in total, no exceptions ever, regardless of how much was deposited by the player - ironically (and idiotically) there was no such restriction on depositing as long as KYC was satisfied I must admit that trawling back 6+ years for any great specifics is a bit difficult, hopefully some more specifics will come back to me.


Casinomeister seems to think it is ok here is an excerpt from Online casino licensing infrormation from this site.

Each of these jurisdictions provide varying levels of regulation, but this is an important element for a player as good regulation can prevent a casino from, how best to put it... shirking their responsibilities! Of the above, both Gibraltar and the Isle Of Man (off the UK coast) have a strong reputation for ensuring operations are run smoothly and totally above board. If I see either of these touted on a casino's website, I feel like I'm in the right place!

He is stating the complete opposite.
Of course he is, you realise that casino licensing IoM of the early 00's is a completely different proposition from the current incarnation of the IOMGC? (rhetorical question)

They learned their lesson, set about understanding the industry, what was needed to make businesses work, while simultaneously protecting the player. I would go much further, and state that the IoM is now the safest jurisdiction in the world for online gaming, certainly much more so than Gib.

Sadly back in 2001, the post of Online Commisioner went unfilled, so the job fell into the hands of the existing gaming inspectors, most of whom could barely switch on a PC, far less have any understanding of what was then still a relatively fledgling industry, and thought they could apply their knowledge of the solitary casino and handful of betting shops, and simply transfer that to the online world. Within 18 months of the first casino opening, all six had left or closed down.
 
Wrong again then Lots0. Potripper was traced back to the owners of AP, Scott Thom's house was where play was coming from, I guess you're not as up to date or as informed as you would like everyone to believe eh?
Prove it.
A lot of people would like to see that proof.
Just show us the proof... If you want I'll give a link to Joe Nortons statement, but most folks here already are aware of it.

I don't think you can show anything to back up what your saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lots0 View Post
Since your questioning motives Fatshaft... Why are you so convinced these guys at PKR are not cheating?
Because there hasn't been a single reason to believe that they are.
Not a single reason... LOL. No what you mean is you chose not to see any of the problems that PKR.com has. There are many reasons to believe they are cheaters and you have not disproved a single one.

Do honest poker rooms ignore their own written policies?
Do honest Poker rooms close player accounts and seize their money for nothing more than winning?

Fatshaft... I'll say it again... your nothing but a shill for PKR.com

Only a shill for PKR.com would refuse to acknowledge that there are problems with this poker room like you have done.

I have a strong feeling that PKR is headed or CM's Rogue Pit...

It is already in my Casino Hall of Shame and very very soon whenever anyone searches for PKR.com they will see that there are serious questions about PKR.com being honest and serious questions about the way PKR treats players. That alone will stop hundreds maybe even thousands of people from signing up with PKR and getting ripped off... And that makes me feel very very GOOOOOOOOOOOOD! :D
 
you know too much for being just a gamber:rolleyes:
Fatshaft is not a just a player, he works in the business, it is very obvious.


"Rusty, first of all, please start quoting, this italicising bollocks makes folowing who said what bloody impossible. I asked politely before, I just won't bother replying the next time you do it, as I can't be bothered wading through your posts to find your own text, and then you'll have nobody to react to your trolling."
If this true, Im stopping the quoting right now ;)

BTW - Rusty is not the troll here... I think everyone reading this thread knows who the real troll/shill is.
 
I was involved with the beta testing with PKR.

It's software was crap then, its still crap.

I gave them 5 page list of reasons why I felt the site was unplayable as a player.


I reinstalled it last month, played for the day an uninstalled.

It's a good idea but a novelty site.

They invested heavily in it & came out just before the UIGEA with a policy of not accepting US players. Maybe they got wind of things to come and felt they would be safe.

Now other sites are competing more seriously for non US traffic. Other sites have caught up and surpassed their only appeal of the 3D site.

Do I think they are trying to cut their losses? Yes

Do I think they are dishonest? Yes (Reason is on their website).

Without any financial issues, I find it a site worth avoiding.

I dont rate the site highly and I suspect it wont be around longterm.

I started to read this thread and gave up. Got the gist of it. That is my opinion.
 
I won't bother explaining the difference between genuine players and others who might make deposits and play at sites again.
It was perfectly clear what I meant the first time and I explained with examples a second time.

I think what you mean to say about the original gaming laws in Isle of Man is that they were ill concieved and not too strict as you put it.

You stated:
You seem confused. I never stated they left in their droves, they simply didn't sign up in the first place.

and then when I naturaly ask;
If as you say they never signed up in the first place how would you know about them?

You reply:
They signed up and never deposited, pretty clear to track that percentage, of course this was from jurisdictions where gaming was allowed, many were not and these players were of course also easy to track. You'll note that these restrictions were dropped totally to allow Stars to relocate there a couple of years ago.

:eek2:

I did though find the information in the end of your post, as to why you considered Isle of Man botched there gaming laws, interesting.
If those are the facts then I agree it seems to have been rushed and poorly conceived but at least lessons have been learned.
I still do not see what this has to do with the UKGC though or why you think they are poor regulators or more oddly why you think players would rather play at loosely regulated sites.
I am not a representive of the UKGC so other than giving you the clear reasons I stated earlier as to why I would prefer Casinos to be regulated by them I suggest you do your own research rather than asking me for details.
If you find any reasons to suggest that people would be better off regulated by other duristictions rather than just making spurious remarks then I would be genuinely interested to hear them.
 
Prove it.
A lot of people would like to see that proof.
Just show us the proof... If you want I'll give a link to Joe Nortons statement, but most folks here already are aware of it.
LMAO. there are pages and pages of proof on 2+2, the very same proof that meant AP had to come out and admit to the potripper scandal.

But I have to LOL @ someone who is trying to hang draw and quarter a poker room for the heinous 'crime' of posting up their valid claim to be licensed by the UKGC; and yet at the same time deny documented evidence pointing to the actual person behind the AP cheating, and furthermore make reference to the statement made by the regulator who also happens to own AP as valid exoneration for the perpetrator.

if there's a shill here, it must be you. there isn't a poker player alive who has read anything about the AP scandal who could possibly come to the conclusion that you have, unless they have an agenda.

I am done, your latest statement shows your totally illogical reasoning and clear bias. Why the bias I have no idea, perhaps blacken every poker room so that your poker room can be seen to be just one of many rogues? Sadly for you, that won;t happen, unlike casinos, rogue poker rooms are very very rare by comparison, and AP won't be recovering from their stealing anytime soon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top