Thanks for your totally worthless biased opinion.
Or whatever the hell that was.
Actually I'd just like to follow up on this:
I am [subtly] contributing to the conversation with my remarks up there. These people keep throwing around remarks about Pandan's valid reasons which I have yet to see. The point of the remark is, "What valid reasons?"
Pandan has shown no reasons I consider valid and more or less no reasons at all. You should not cast off my comments as "worthless" or pointless because you do not understand them fully.
lol, I see you jumped in at about page 20.
lol, I see you still have no ability to provide
valid reasons.
Repeating the same thing over and over is not expanding upon it.