|
On May 30 2011 18:53 sovetskysoyuz wrote:FOMOS position on TL+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman
This...
So interesting.
Is this what actually happened?
If so, I can't blame or get mad at FOMOS.
|
Why didn't Fomos attempt to hire some of the translators here on TL to translate on their website if they were so eager to form a partnership?
Way too much "none of this is our fault" for me to take position seriously.
|
On May 30 2011 18:53 sovetskysoyuz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS position on TL+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman The above is the verbatim from Fomos. Now it gets interesting. So let me get this straight. 1. Fomos tolerated TL from using/translating its contents because it thought TL was non-profit 2. Fomos found out TL is a business, but still oks the use of its contents but wants an agreement and a contract 3. April 2010, Fomos talks to TL, states its requests: "10 articles per month, and a formal contract" (later on this) 4. TL does agree fully, saying it has no control over the contributors 5. Fomos demands its right to its contents, and have the agreement in black ad white, but TL seems vague on it(?) This initial discussion end in the meantime, while TL still uses Fomos contents. 6. 2011, Fomos starts global page. Renegotiates with TL, asking for rights to its original English articles as well. TL rejects this, but would be ok for Fomos to use the translated articles that came from Fomos in the first place. 7. Fomos does not understand this, citing that it has little use for the translation if ITS own contents given it already has translators and there are more to be hired 8. Fomos demands TL to stop infringing its contents. So here we are now. So based on this, TL is the one who actually stone-walled? Is this correct? I wonder how the negotiations went, and why, if Fomos version is correct, TL refused use of its original content when Fomos is opening its contents to TL. Btw, does the "10-article" thing mean that Fomos wants TL to publish ONLY 10 of its articles in a month? I can see this as difficult for TL, since on a good month, as many as 30 interviews are made. Still, it is Fomos contents. All throughout their statement, Fomos seems to emphasize that they are they once actually reaching out and negotiating, which imo should be the other way around. If everyhthing Fomos said in there is true and is the whole picture of this story, I think TL was a little to hard and could have negotiated a mutually beneficial middle ground. Can TL please enlighten us on this one.
I believe Fomos wanted to get 10 articles a month from TL. TL can't agree to that, because:
1. The people who do it are volunteers. They can make a billion articles this month, and then none after that. TL would be violating the contract. As there is no saying to how many articles will be made in a month, it's not possible to put that black on white (unless you like gambling and losing).
2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not.
EDIT: [\spoiler] instead of [\s]
|
Let me do a pharaphrase of the Fomos statement based on the original here for the benefit of clarity and discussion: (LOL at that translation, Fomos could very well afford any college student with decent English yet it settles for this one). Anyway, here it is.
FOMOS on TL
FOMOS official statement on TL
May 30, 2011
- April 2010, FOMOS contacted TL on a possible partnership. FOMOS initially thought TL is a non-profit organization so it felt no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that TL has been using its contents without permission. It turns our that TL is for profit. Still, FOMOS is open to it if TL were willing to sign a contract regarding the use of FOMOS contents.
- FOMOS requested a formal contract (as stated above) granting FOMOS a minimun of 10 articles per month.
- TL initially agreed to this, but it later declined respectfully saying that their (TL) writers are volunteers and they have no control over what they write or post on the site. They however state that they have influence over their writers.
- FOMOS is an incorporated company, and it is imperative to have all its deals be written on paper, in a proper contract. FOMOS does not understand how it can deal with anyone without knowing how much of its contents (pages) is used and translated. FOMOS is baffled by this initial decline by TL, but would still want a formal contract. Nearly a year has passed and TL still uses FOMOS contents without a contract. FOMOS is not happy about this.
- 2011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
This arrangement makes no sense to FOMOS since it already has translators and plans to expand on it in the future. FOMOS does not need the English translation of its articles from TL since FOMOS has the staff to do it (translate its articles to English). FOMOS reiterates its request to share its articles in exchange for the original English ones from TL.
TL refuses the deal. FOMOS notifies TL to stop using its contents.
If FOMOS gets only translations of its own works, then it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to have a partnership with TL. In fact, when TL translates what FOMOS plans to translate for its own site, it is a detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS simply wants TL to stop using FOMOS contents, as it has the right to do so.
FOMOS is an incorporated company with 10 staff member who work hard around the clock. FOMOS writers and photographers strongly express their wishes to others to stop using their original contents.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman
|
On May 30 2011 19:17 Vipsanius wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 18:53 sovetskysoyuz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS position on TL+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman The above is the verbatim from Fomos. Now it gets interesting. So let me get this straight. 1. Fomos tolerated TL from using/translating its contents because it thought TL was non-profit 2. Fomos found out TL is a business, but still oks the use of its contents but wants an agreement and a contract 3. April 2010, Fomos talks to TL, states its requests: "10 articles per month, and a formal contract" (later on this) 4. TL does agree fully, saying it has no control over the contributors 5. Fomos demands its right to its contents, and have the agreement in black ad white, but TL seems vague on it(?) This initial discussion end in the meantime, while TL still uses Fomos contents. 6. 2011, Fomos starts global page. Renegotiates with TL, asking for rights to its original English articles as well. TL rejects this, but would be ok for Fomos to use the translated articles that came from Fomos in the first place. 7. Fomos does not understand this, citing that it has little use for the translation if ITS own contents given it already has translators and there are more to be hired 8. Fomos demands TL to stop infringing its contents. So here we are now. So based on this, TL is the one who actually stone-walled? Is this correct? I wonder how the negotiations went, and why, if Fomos version is correct, TL refused use of its original content when Fomos is opening its contents to TL. Btw, does the "10-article" thing mean that Fomos wants TL to publish ONLY 10 of its articles in a month? I can see this as difficult for TL, since on a good month, as many as 30 interviews are made. Still, it is Fomos contents. All throughout their statement, Fomos seems to emphasize that they are they once actually reaching out and negotiating, which imo should be the other way around. If everyhthing Fomos said in there is true and is the whole picture of this story, I think TL was a little to hard and could have negotiated a mutually beneficial middle ground. Can TL please enlighten us on this one. I believe Fomos wanted to get 10 articles a month from TL. TL can't agree to that, because: 1. The people who do it are volunteers. They can make a billion articles this month, and then none after that. TL would be violating the contract. As there is no saying to how many articles will be made in a month, it's not possible to put that black on white (unless you like gambling and losing). 2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not. EDIT: [\spoiler] instead of [\s]
The fact that the TL translators are volunteers doesn't change the most important fact that TL profits from Fomos' work without authorization. If TL wants to be a legitimate business instead of internet pirates then yeah Fomos' content won't be free.
Now I really love Super Daniel Man and he is gentleman and a scholar but Fomos needs to hire a real translator or strike a deal with TL. Fomos global would really benefit and TL would be doing the right thing. Make SDM do original content please.
But if Fomos wants a deal on black and white, maybe you could offer them the rights to any translated content from them + link back. Or a fee based on the average of articles over the year.
|
On May 30 2011 20:03 Fyodor wrote:
The fact that the TL translators are volunteers doesn't change the most important fact that TL profits from Fomos' work without authorization. If TL wants to be a legitimate business instead of internet pirates then yeah Fomos' content won't be free.
I think it creates a new issue. TL profits from the volunteers work, which take the orginal untranslated articles from the Fomos.
The line at the bottom of the page.
"The opinions expressed by our users do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff."
So the users = means US, not admins or moderators (since they are part of staff) could still translate the interviews.
|
konadora
Singapore66357 Posts
when we translators were first contacted, we decided not to go with it since meeting a quota set by a company did not fit in our image of "voluntary community work". it would become a "we have to do this" instead of "we want to do this."
this is MY view from here, not TeamLiquid's staffs' or other translators' views
anyway, this is fomos' loss, their translators suck and we don't need their recycled interviews that much anyway. there are other sources for that.
|
Based on FOMOS, it was TL who refused to negotiate on equal grounds.
If I may ask, why did TL refuse the exchange of articles?
It seems only fair, especially if you consider that it has been copying materials from FOMOS for years now. If what FOMOS says is true, it is indeed baffling that TL would only offer the translation of the article that is got from FOMOS, in exchange. It seems that there was a way to settle it, TL just did not want to open up.
If anyone from the TL negotiators could confirm and clarify this.
|
I want clarification as well.
|
On May 30 2011 20:15 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 20:03 Fyodor wrote:
The fact that the TL translators are volunteers doesn't change the most important fact that TL profits from Fomos' work without authorization. If TL wants to be a legitimate business instead of internet pirates then yeah Fomos' content won't be free.
I think it creates a new issue. TL profits from the volunteers work, which take the orginal untranslated articles from the Fomos. The line at the bottom of the page. "The opinions expressed by our users do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff." So the users = means US, not admins or moderators (since they are part of staff) could still translate the interviews.
No. This is a wrong interpretation of the law.
Simply, FOMOS does not allow (anymore) use/copying of its contents by TL, no matter who does it or how it is obtained. Which means that any content from FOMOS that finds its way in TL is an infringement of FOMOS' copyright.
konadora is correct though, there are other sources.
The pity here, especially for foreigners, is that FOMOS is a good source of SC content which can be used/translated here in TL. Also, another implication that konadora did not mention concerns all the past contents.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
On May 30 2011 20:16 konadora wrote:
when we translators were first contacted, we decided not to go with it since meeting a quota set by a company did not fit in our image of "voluntary community work". it would become a "we have to do this" instead of "we want to do this."
this is MY view from here, not TeamLiquid's staffs' or other translators' views
anyway, this is fomos' loss, their translators suck and we don't need their recycled interviews that much anyway. there are other sources for that.
What he said makes sense. We all know TL isn't non-profit anymore; however, R1CH and Hot_Bid are the only full-time employees on staff. All the writers and translators volunteer their time to giving us content on their own accord. They aren't getting paid hence konadora's mindset.
The translators would have to be getting paid and anytime you put a quota on something it negates the desire of their volunteer work.
In other words, it's a gray area. -_-
|
ah that makes Fomos' stance much more understandable considering they have tried multiple times to initiate partnetship with TL.
I understand with not wanting to force TL writers to fulfill a quota but this
011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
feels like a reasonable deal to me. That the BW write-ups / Final Edits would be available on FOMOS as well seems acceptable in exchange for FOMOS articles.
Would love to hear TL's reasoning on this.
|
On May 30 2011 20:55 dtz wrote:ah that makes Fomos' stance much more understandable considering they have tried multiple times to initiate partnetship with TL. I understand with not wanting to force TL writers to fulfill a quote but this Show nested quote + 011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS. feels like a reasonable deal to me. That the BW write-ups / Final Edits would be available on FOMOS as well seems acceptable in exchange for FOMOS articles. Would love to hear TL's reasoning on this.
The problem is FOMOS demanded a quota of say 10 articles per month from TL. And since the writers aren't paid they wouldn't like such conditions. It was said above anyway.
I suppose that if FOMOS just demanded use of any english articles that wouldn't go in numbers above the articles used by TL in exchange, things could work out? I don't know the numbers of original and translated articles here on TL. But the point is not to put a quota on the writers, but rather to limit the number of translated articles depending on how many articles/translations FOMOS demands. That shouldn't affect the volunteers that much imo. It would just create a certain cap on the articles TL could translate. Something is better than nothing, IMO. It would be rather complicated though and since FOMOS wants a contract, not a deal...
|
So no more Fomos pictures on blog posts.  They take really nice photos. Articles not so but the photos are nice.
|
On May 30 2011 20:03 Fyodor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 19:17 Vipsanius wrote:On May 30 2011 18:53 sovetskysoyuz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS position on TL+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman The above is the verbatim from Fomos. Now it gets interesting. So let me get this straight. 1. Fomos tolerated TL from using/translating its contents because it thought TL was non-profit 2. Fomos found out TL is a business, but still oks the use of its contents but wants an agreement and a contract 3. April 2010, Fomos talks to TL, states its requests: "10 articles per month, and a formal contract" (later on this) 4. TL does agree fully, saying it has no control over the contributors 5. Fomos demands its right to its contents, and have the agreement in black ad white, but TL seems vague on it(?) This initial discussion end in the meantime, while TL still uses Fomos contents. 6. 2011, Fomos starts global page. Renegotiates with TL, asking for rights to its original English articles as well. TL rejects this, but would be ok for Fomos to use the translated articles that came from Fomos in the first place. 7. Fomos does not understand this, citing that it has little use for the translation if ITS own contents given it already has translators and there are more to be hired 8. Fomos demands TL to stop infringing its contents. So here we are now. So based on this, TL is the one who actually stone-walled? Is this correct? I wonder how the negotiations went, and why, if Fomos version is correct, TL refused use of its original content when Fomos is opening its contents to TL. Btw, does the "10-article" thing mean that Fomos wants TL to publish ONLY 10 of its articles in a month? I can see this as difficult for TL, since on a good month, as many as 30 interviews are made. Still, it is Fomos contents. All throughout their statement, Fomos seems to emphasize that they are they once actually reaching out and negotiating, which imo should be the other way around. If everyhthing Fomos said in there is true and is the whole picture of this story, I think TL was a little to hard and could have negotiated a mutually beneficial middle ground. Can TL please enlighten us on this one. I believe Fomos wanted to get 10 articles a month from TL. TL can't agree to that, because: 1. The people who do it are volunteers. They can make a billion articles this month, and then none after that. TL would be violating the contract. As there is no saying to how many articles will be made in a month, it's not possible to put that black on white (unless you like gambling and losing). 2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not. EDIT: [\spoiler] instead of [\s] The fact that the TL translators are volunteers doesn't change the most important fact that TL profits from Fomos' work without authorization. If TL wants to be a legitimate business instead of internet pirates then yeah Fomos' content won't be free. Now I really love Super Daniel Man and he is gentleman and a scholar but Fomos needs to hire a real translator or strike a deal with TL. Fomos global would really benefit and TL would be doing the right thing. Make SDM do original content please. But if Fomos wants a deal on black and white, maybe you could offer them the rights to any translated content from them + link back. Or a fee based on the average of articles over the year.
I was adressing why TL wouldn't want to have a contract with fomos, not debating if the actions of TL were legal.
|
After reading the FOMOS official statement on TL, I don't feel FOMOS has done anything morally wrong. At the moment, I just hope FOMOS would get someone who can translate properly. The current FOMOS translations don't compare even with the worst translations on TL. Of course, if the global section isn't updated at a pace similar to TL's translations then I'm going to accuse them of making the global SC community worse .
|
United States5090 Posts
I'm curious why TL doesn't wasn't Fomos to use some of their articles. Or maybe that's not the entire story.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
I'm sure Wax will comment when he is around, until then sit tight on a TL response to that. It's only right that he comment seeing as he was representing TL during the whole process.
|
United States5090 Posts
|
ou guys seem to miss the most important part of this.
TL will have to take out the FOMOS's photos from NaDa's Body thread?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
