• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 14:35
CEST 20:35
KST 03:35
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall9HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL55Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?13FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event19Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster16Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1
StarCraft 2
General
Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form? PiG Sty Festival #5: Playoffs Preview + Groups Recap The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series Korean Starcraft League Week 77 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Semi Finals & Finals
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady
Brood War
General
Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL Replays question BW General Discussion Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET Small VOD Thread 2.0 [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Trading/Investing Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 568 users

China, US and the environment - Page 3

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 11 12 13 Next All
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 16:05:44
August 27 2019 15:56 GMT
#41
On August 28 2019 00:48 JimmiC wrote:
Oh I get it that I said China is the worst and the US is in the top 5 of worst and it all depends on how you look it offended you?? What you want it to be US is the worst and China is number 2? That really matters? Or does it matter that they are both horrible?


There's significance/value in dismantling the hegemonic myth you started with that China was the worst. I wouldn't have bothered if it was just personally offensive (as most of your posting is) to me.

I told you several times/ways they can both be "horrible" and that any country can accurately be described as "horrible" on the environment, as none of them are sustainable.

I mean the tribes in the Amazon were/are living sustainable lives same with the Amish/some indigenous peoples in the US and elsewhere (might be a stretch because they use a lot of US/national infrastructure/secondary materials) but they don't exactly count as countries, I just don't want anyone to think I'm saying sustainable communities are impossible.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 16:07:36
August 27 2019 16:06 GMT
#42
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-27 17:02:39
August 27 2019 16:16 GMT
#43
On August 28 2019 01:06 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 28 2019 00:56 GreenHorizons wrote:
On August 28 2019 00:48 JimmiC wrote:
Oh I get it that I said China is the worst and the US is in the top 5 of worst and it all depends on how you look it offended you?? What you want it to be US is the worst and China is number 2? That really matters? Or does it matter that they are both horrible?


There's significance/value in dismantling the hegemonic myth you started with that China was the worst. I wouldn't have bothered if it was just personally offensive (as most of your posting is) to me.

I told you several times/ways they can both be "horrible" and that any country can accurately be described as "horrible" on the environment, as none of them are sustainable.

I mean the tribes in the Amazon were/are living sustainable lives same with the Amish but they don't exactly count as countries, I just don't want anyone to think I'm saying sustainable communities are impossible.


It is not a myth. It is factual depending on your criteria. If you notice you can often pull out positives of what China has done and horrible things the US does from my sources. That is because both are true, but it is also very true that China is horrendous for the environment. All of that can be and is true.

I can only conclude that you skim the stuff I post looking for why its wrong instead of actually reading it. I find it frustrating that you trust and use the parts of the sources you agree with but do not trust it all. It is very strange.


Bless your heart.

It's a myth.

No, I read them. Sometimes I'm not sure why I bother anymore, I don't think anyone takes them seriously at this point? Occasionally you mention something like "China is the worst" and I think it's important to dispel that widely accepted myth. Point out it's based on an extremely reductive perspective, that as others were gracious enough to point out, has racist overtones. Then ideally move on. Hard to ignore the nonsense that invariably follows (pervades the whole discussion) though. Some days I do better than others at that part.


EDIT: Yeah, this has run its course, gl Broet
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Broetchenholer
Profile Joined March 2011
Germany1907 Posts
August 27 2019 16:28 GMT
#44
You guys are moving in circles because you are mixing arguments about climate change with poilitical systems. I have zero idea what the dictatorship of china has to do with anything in regards to the contribution of climate change. Here are some completely unpolitical facts, as far as i believe in them. So not really facts. But i doubt they are untrue.

The US of A are the biggest polluter on the planet per capita and are currently in a process of making it way easier for companies to pollute even more.
While the government of the US of A is not interested at all in solving climate change, there is a more or less slow change in the efficiency of energy production within the States due to the market realising wind energy and to some extent solar is cheaper and wanted by the population.

China is one of the biggest polluters on the planet but quite low in terms of pollution per capita, while the government is heavily invested in allowing an increased carbon footprint of it's population.
Chinas government is at the same time trying to profit from pushing solutions for regenerative energies and becoming a market leader in green energy.
As a result, their carbon footprint per capita and in general is going to go up in the next decades but will probably stay below that of the US if there is not a radical change of direction in climate change policy.

So, political systems and human rights aside, China is acting way better then the US on a goverment level to combat climate change. They are still a worse place to live in freely, but that does not have anything to do with any of your arguments.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 16:44 GMT
#45
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 27 2019 16:47 GMT
#46
--- Nuked ---
BerserkSword
Profile Joined December 2018
United States2123 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-28 02:21:59
August 28 2019 02:17 GMT
#47
According to world resources institute, America is "only" 14th worst in carbon emissions per capita, with countries like Canada and Australia beating us out.

http://cait2.wri.org/

Also, I have no problem with China, India, Brazil harming the environment to increase its people's quality of life.

They are not obligated to lag behind developed countries, many of which have become developed at the expense of today's developing countries.

They can get their chance too. As someone who's visited India and Pakistan multiple times, I can tell you that few people there care about the climate - they are more concerned with increasing their quality of life. Being in NYC and living in one of its Chinatowns for years, and talking to Chinese immigrants, I am under the impression that most in China don't care about climate either. This is obviously anecdotal but I can relate, and the proof is in the pudding when you look at those two countries.

If developed countries have a huge problem with the climate situation they can start by cutting their consumption, decreasing their quality of life, and instead start planting trees or whatever lol.

As an American myself, I don't plan on cutting my consumption unless someone gives me a good reason to. I know a lot of Americans who are the same (in fact i'd wager that if it ever really comes down to it, most Americans will not be willing to significantly cut their standard of living for the sake of climate change)

For those that strongly believe in fighting climate change through Green New Deal - like polices, good luck. I suspect you'll really need it.
TL+ Member
Velr
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Switzerland10686 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-08-28 10:09:20
August 28 2019 07:29 GMT
#48
Chia is doing lots of things to "safe" the Climate but for other, more immediate, reasons aside from Climate change. Two examples:
General pollution? Smog in cities makes them sometimes near uninhabitable and the chinese goverment has vowed to stop this problem asap.
Reforestation? The Desserts are growing and treathen to swallow cities, planting trees is the best answer to that.

Calling China "green" for these reasons is still wrong, they are basically forced to do certain things because else many parts of it will be uninhabitable very soon and even China isn't interested in resettling the whole of Bejing .


I'm staggered that some of you think "per Capita" doesn't matter, that basically means that as a Swiss i can do whatever the fuck I want for the plain reason that there are not that many of us? How does that make sense. FFS: If you don't look at per capita numbers, better don't look at all.

I highly doubt that people are willing to drastically change their lifestyles, but goverments can and should enforce certain changes.
In Switzerland we banned "free" (plastic) bags in all shops, to get one you have to ask for it and pay 0.05$ (I can't think of another item, that is that cheap in any swiss shop ). The result? People use them drastically less and reusing shopping bags has become much more common in a very short amount of time. If you need one, you still can get one for basically nothing. We can do tons of small stuff like this that either doesn't bother people or even improves their life while being better for the climate than the status quo.
fsguzi
Profile Joined August 2019
1 Post
August 28 2019 10:34 GMT
#49
Complementary plastic bags are also rare these days in China(or at least in Shenzhen where I live). I'm pretty sure all the supermarkets and those branded convenient stores(7eleven and other local equivalent) charge around 50 cents ea, although some noname corner stores don't seem to care. Which is why those fabric grocery bags are common freebies at all sorts of promotional events, I guess umbrellas are just too precious!
That being said, based on my years of living in the country especially post-2005 when pollution started to attract major attention domestically, the worsening air quality is what most people focus on and really care about. I think when it comes to environmental issues most regular folks here(and I dare to say basically everywhere else) care more about how it affects their daily life rather than the planet in the long term, say global warming. Major reason why China is so polluted is the presumed 'world factory' role that has been so for years, manufacturing brings pollution, and that's the bigger picture here. The only way to make drastic improvement is to shut down factories and coal stations and cars, and that's just not gonna happen, nor would any country who buys from China want it to happen. (although you might argue on terms of the recent trade war, but that's a completely different story) I don't believe anything else would be game changer.
The Chinese government is putting in tons of effort to tighten environmental-related industrial regulations, mostly in power and steel businesses, plus nonstop promotion of environmental awareness to everybody who reads news and watches tv. And the way it looks there's a lot more coming. But then you might need some ability to read Chinese and willfulness to trust Chinese news to believe those statement, as I don't think that was ever reported on CNN or whatever.
Broetchenholer
Profile Joined March 2011
Germany1907 Posts
August 28 2019 12:09 GMT
#50
On August 28 2019 11:17 BerserkSword wrote:
According to world resources institute, America is "only" 14th worst in carbon emissions per capita, with countries like Canada and Australia beating us out.

http://cait2.wri.org/

Also, I have no problem with China, India, Brazil harming the environment to increase its people's quality of life.

They are not obligated to lag behind developed countries, many of which have become developed at the expense of today's developing countries.

They can get their chance too. As someone who's visited India and Pakistan multiple times, I can tell you that few people there care about the climate - they are more concerned with increasing their quality of life. Being in NYC and living in one of its Chinatowns for years, and talking to Chinese immigrants, I am under the impression that most in China don't care about climate either. This is obviously anecdotal but I can relate, and the proof is in the pudding when you look at those two countries.

If developed countries have a huge problem with the climate situation they can start by cutting their consumption, decreasing their quality of life, and instead start planting trees or whatever lol.

As an American myself, I don't plan on cutting my consumption unless someone gives me a good reason to. I know a lot of Americans who are the same (in fact i'd wager that if it ever really comes down to it, most Americans will not be willing to significantly cut their standard of living for the sake of climate change)

For those that strongly believe in fighting climate change through Green New Deal - like polices, good luck. I suspect you'll really need it.


After checking your source, the countries that "beat" the States in 2014 are:

Kuwait
Brunei
Qatar
Belize
Guyana
Paraquay
Oman
Bahrain
Zambia
Palau
Canada
United Arab Emirates
Equatorial Guinea
Australia
Mongolia
Turkmenistan
Libya
Estonia

Most of the numbers for those countries seem to be quite constant, even though i have no idea why Libya, Turkmenistan, Mongolia and Zambia are that high on that list. Australia and Canada make some sense due to the weather which also explains the States numbers to some extent, which is 20t. Canadas 27 million people have a high carbon footprint of 24t and this should be solved, the next big nation on the list would be Russia with 14t and then we come to the 10t mark where most of the other g20 nations sit at or under. So yeah, America is not the worst polluter per capita, just one of the worst.

And regarding your last point of needing a good reason to cut back on consumption, don't you think the reason why it is necessary has already been given, you are just not willing to act on it? I mean, don't get me wrong, i am not currfently doing much to reduce my footprint as well but i would be willing to do it if society would start working in that direction. Nobody wants to live less luxurious as already experienced but people can be persuaded to do so if alternatives are available.

I would be the first person to sell my car and only use carsharing services if they would be well implemented and public transport would be less shitty. I would not care one bit if flights would become 3-4 times as expensive, especially the short ones. I would cry tears but i would be willing to eat less meat if it were rarer. These are the things that need to happen at some point, and who opposes them needs to explain why his right for luxury is more important then being able to habitat this planet longer then 100 years.

JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 28 2019 13:32 GMT
#51
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
August 29 2019 17:45 GMT
#52
The EPA/US is going backwards. The EPA says they are rolling back restrictions on methane leaks.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in its proposed rule, aims to eliminate federal requirements that oil and gas companies install technology to detect and fix methane leaks from wells, pipelines and storage facilities. It will also reopen the question of whether the E.P.A. even has the legal authority to regulate methane as a pollutant.

Erik Milito, a vice president at the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group representing the oil and gas industry, praised the new rule, saying, “We think it’s a smarter way of targeting methane emissions.”


www.nytimes.com
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
September 05 2019 00:14 GMT
#53
The US continues to actively and intentionally go backwards environmentally with more rollbacks of common sense environmental reforms. This time it's energy efficient light bulbs.

The Trump administration is rolling back requirements for new, energy-efficient lightbulbs. The Energy Department announced the move on Wednesday, withdrawing standards that were to be put in place to make commonly used bulbs more efficient.


www.npr.org
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Liquid`Drone
Profile Joined September 2002
Norway28637 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-08 10:52:17
September 08 2019 10:51 GMT
#54
Per capita is the only relevant measurement when comparing countries.
Moderator
greenturtle23
Profile Joined August 2019
86 Posts
September 08 2019 13:29 GMT
#55
I disagree that per capita is the only relevant measure. Think of country A that keeps emissions per capita constant but doubles in population vs country B that keeps emissions per capita constant but reduces their population by 50%.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
September 08 2019 13:36 GMT
#56
On September 08 2019 22:29 greenturtle23 wrote:
I disagree that per capita is the only relevant measure. Think of country A that keeps emissions per capita constant but doubles in population vs country B that keeps emissions per capita constant but reduces their population by 50%.


Population reduction isn't a sustainable strategy and it's probably horrific.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-08 13:48:45
September 08 2019 13:43 GMT
#57
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23167 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-08 14:02:43
September 08 2019 13:53 GMT
#58
On September 08 2019 22:43 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2019 19:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Per capita is the only relevant measurement when comparing countries.

Wow. No it is not. You have too look at many factors including but not exclusively gdp, gdp per capita and so on.

Also you cant only look at carbon.

Then you have to look past the number and say "what is this country doing, and is it there things they are doing we can learn from". If the answer is something like China and having nearing a billion people living at or below the poverty line and a few super wealthy. Than that country would not be doing well environmentally.


China's wealth distribution is comparable to or better than the US though. China also lifted ~half a billion people out of extreme poverty in a couple decades.

As of the end of 2018 the number of people in poverty living below the national poverty line of ¥2300 (2010PPP) per year is around 16.6 million, about 1.7% of the population[7] with hopes of totally eradicating poverty by 2020.

Between 1990 and 2005, China's progress accounted for more than three-quarters of global poverty reduction and a big factor in why the world reached the UN millennium development of dividing extreme poverty by two.


en.wikipedia.org
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
ShoCkeyy
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
7815 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-08 14:07:33
September 08 2019 14:02 GMT
#59
On September 08 2019 22:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2019 22:43 JimmiC wrote:
On September 08 2019 19:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Per capita is the only relevant measurement when comparing countries.

Wow. No it is not. You have too look at many factors including but not exclusively gdp, gdp per capita and so on.

Also you cant only look at carbon.

Then you have to look past the number and say "what is this country doing, and is it there things they are doing we can learn from". If the answer is something like China and having nearing a billion people living at or below the poverty line and a few super wealthy. Than that country would not be doing well environmentally.


China's wealth distribution is comparable to or better than the US though.


Can you back this claim up, or would you like to have a word with the forced laborers?

Since you made the edit, Wikipedia states ¥2300 is the poverty line, after quick research the cost of living on average is about ¥5000 something doesn’t add up.
Life?
greenturtle23
Profile Joined August 2019
86 Posts
September 08 2019 14:06 GMT
#60
On September 08 2019 22:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 08 2019 22:29 greenturtle23 wrote:
I disagree that per capita is the only relevant measure. Think of country A that keeps emissions per capita constant but doubles in population vs country B that keeps emissions per capita constant but reduces their population by 50%.


Population reduction isn't a sustainable strategy and it's probably horrific.


First, population growth isn't a sustainable strategy. It leads to a horrific environmental catastrophe. Population reduction can be achieved by educating women which in turn lowers birthrates below replacement level.

Regardless it doesn't matter to the example. I was simply arguing that per capita isn't the only relevant measure.
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 11 12 13 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
FEL
16:00
Cracov 2025: Qualifier #1
RotterdaM844
IndyStarCraft 283
CranKy Ducklings210
Liquipedia
PSISTORM Gaming Misc
15:55
FSL team league: ASP vs PTB
Freeedom7
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 870
IndyStarCraft 257
JuggernautJason80
ProTech58
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 4922
firebathero 287
BRAT_OK 74
Rock 34
Stormgate
Nathanias6
Dota 2
monkeys_forever159
League of Legends
Grubby1541
Dendi1210
Counter-Strike
fl0m1705
Super Smash Bros
Westballz37
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor376
Liquid`Hasu92
Other Games
Gorgc3548
FrodaN1832
Mlord641
KnowMe136
Trikslyr46
Organizations
Other Games
EGCTV1156
StarCraft 2
angryscii 10
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 23 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• printf 50
• tFFMrPink 17
• iHatsuTV 3
• OhrlRock 1
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki20
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 3245
• WagamamaTV672
• masondota2532
• Ler106
League of Legends
• Jankos1506
Counter-Strike
• Nemesis4162
Other Games
• imaqtpie865
• Shiphtur409
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
15h 25m
Clem vs Classic
SHIN vs Cure
FEL
17h 25m
WardiTV European League
17h 25m
BSL: ProLeague
23h 25m
Dewalt vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
WardiTV European League
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
FEL
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
FEL
6 days
FEL
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL 2v2 Season 3
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.