Vaporizing dust during chip manufacturing ?

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:43:17 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
<IntoTheFuture@hotmail.com> wrote:

According to my physics class in high school a perfect vacuum cannot be
created and there will always be some air left over...
Click to expand...

None that would keep a dust particle lofted though you ZERO
common sense dumbfucktard!
 
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:43:17 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
<IntoTheFuture@hotmail.com> wrote:

"MitchAlsup" <MitchAlsup@aol.com> wrote in message
news:92e653e6-ce86-4b47-983b-608354c68df9@z8g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 4:48 am, "Skybuck Flying" <IntoTheFut...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Would it be possible to "vaporize" any dust particles during the chip
manufacturing ?

"
It is easier to place most of the manufactuing process in a vacuum and
eliminate the dust particles. {Hint: dust cannot float in a vacuum to
land on the wafers, but drops like a rock to the floor.}
"

According to my physics class in high school a perfect vacuum cannot be
created and there will always be some air left over...

Concerning issue's with damage to chips by vaporization:

1. First create a vacuum.

2. Then convert any floating(?)/remaining dust particles to energy.

3. Then place wafers inside it and start vacuuming.

Alternatively plan:

Slowly turn dust into energy to prevent nuclear explosion ;) :)

Another crazy idea would be to use water and produce the chip in water...

Somehow purifieing water and maybe water better than air ? But I doubt it ;)

I just had another idea:

1. First create a vacuum as good as possible.

2. Then highly charge the surroundings of the vacuum with static
electricity.

Hopefully this will attract all remaining floating dust particles.

3. Perhaps keep it like that... and start producing the chip.

4. Otherwise if the static charge is to be disabled, first vaporize the dust
particles on the side or wipe them off ?!?

Bye,
Skybuck.
Click to expand...
Sure, dumbfuck. There are folks in all the clean rooms around the world
wandering around with rags, wiping things free of their accumulated dust.

Jeez, dude. Do the world a favor. Spend the next week locating a gun,
and then release the world from your utter stupidity by using it on
yourself.
 
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:54:49 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu>
wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> writes:

MitchAlsup wrote:

On Jun 18, 4:48 am, "Skybuck Flying" <IntoTheFut...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Would it be possible to "vaporize" any dust particles during the chip
manufacturing ?

It is easier to place most of the manufactuing process in a vacuum and
eliminate the dust particles. {Hint: dust cannot float in a vacuum to
land on the wafers, but drops like a rock to the floor.}


Just like Skyduck's ignorant trolling.

And if people would just quit answering him, I wouldn't see anything
from him at all...
Click to expand...

That should tell you something, you retarded ditz!

We do not filter your news for you. Nor do we cater to your stupid
requests that we follow your posting criteria.

YOU need to LEARN how to filter your own news, cretin.
 
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> writes:

MitchAlsup wrote:

On Jun 18, 4:48 am, "Skybuck Flying" <IntoTheFut...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Would it be possible to "vaporize" any dust particles during the chip
manufacturing ?

It is easier to place most of the manufactuing process in a vacuum and
eliminate the dust particles. {Hint: dust cannot float in a vacuum to
land on the wafers, but drops like a rock to the floor.}


Just like Skyduck's ignorant trolling.

And if people would just quit answering him, I wouldn't see anything
from him at all...
Click to expand...

I've had Skyduck plonked for a long time.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
 
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too. Google "PET scan".

George

Ah... molecular level stuff. Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

Still quite implausible.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I missed something. What's implausible?

George
 
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry
<pomerado@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Jun 18, 8:25 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:02 -0400, EricP

ThatWouldBeTell...@thevillage.com> wrote:
dlzc wrote:

A megaton nuclear weapon "converts" a few nanograms of mass to
energy (the rest is there just for chance).

1 megaton TNT = 4.184e15 joules
E=MC^2 = 9.0e16 J/Kg

1 megaton = 46.49 grams.

Eric

  Grams?  Grams of WHAT?  I am sure that 46.49 grams of water would yield
less than 46.49 grams of highly enriched Uranium.

  Also, a nuke does not "convert a few nanograms".  For one thing, it
does not get "converted", it gets "released".

  The first ones REQUIRED 100lbs of material to go critical.

  Modern devices "need" less, but the designs are hardly set up where
they include more than they need.  To claim so is just stupid.

  Also, ALL of it goes fissile, so the "just there for chance" remark is
: stupid as well.

  Your brain must only weigh a few nanograms.  There cannot be any more
than that after stupid statements like the one you made here.

Wikipedia say:

In nuclear reactions, typically only a small fraction of the total
mass–energy is converted into heat, light, radiation and motion, into
a form which can be used. When an atom fissions, it loses only about
0.1% of its mass, and in a bomb or reactor not all the atoms can
fission. In a fission based atomic bomb, the efficiency is only 40%,
so only 40% of the fissionable atoms actually fission, and only 0.04%
of the total mass appears as energy in the end.
Click to expand...

So FORTY POUNDSm was in fission. So "the rest is just there for chance"
is total bullshit. It would not go critical without it, and the part
that gets converted could never do so unless the atoms that ARE releasing
the energy were not completely surrounded by similar material.

There must be enough media there for the collisions to get going.
 
On Jun 18, 8:25 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:02 -0400, EricP

ThatWouldBeTell...@thevillage.com> wrote:
dlzc wrote:

A megaton nuclear weapon "converts" a few nanograms of mass to
energy (the rest is there just for chance).

1 megaton TNT = 4.184e15 joules
E=MC^2 = 9.0e16 J/Kg

1 megaton = 46.49 grams.

Eric

  Grams?  Grams of WHAT?  I am sure that 46.49 grams of water would yield
less than 46.49 grams of highly enriched Uranium.

  Also, a nuke does not "convert a few nanograms".  For one thing, it
does not get "converted", it gets "released".

  The first ones REQUIRED 100lbs of material to go critical.

  Modern devices "need" less, but the designs are hardly set up where
they include more than they need.  To claim so is just stupid.

  Also, ALL of it goes fissile, so the "just there for chance" remark is
: stupid as well.

  Your brain must only weigh a few nanograms.  There cannot be any more
than that after stupid statements like the one you made here.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia say:

In nuclear reactions, typically only a small fraction of the total
mass–energy is converted into heat, light, radiation and motion, into
a form which can be used. When an atom fissions, it loses only about
0.1% of its mass, and in a bomb or reactor not all the atoms can
fission. In a fission based atomic bomb, the efficiency is only 40%,
so only 40% of the fissionable atoms actually fission, and only 0.04%
of the total mass appears as energy in the end.
 
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:29:22 -0700 (PDT), dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> wrote:

Dear George Neuner:

On Jun 19, 7:06 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too.  Google "PET scan".

George

 Ah... molecular level stuff.  Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

 Still quite implausible.

Sorry, I missed something.  What's implausible?

Using antimatter to destroy dust particles in situ in semiconductor
manufacture.

David A. Smith
Click to expand...

Amazing world full of TV educated, (not the learning channels) sci fi
idiots, eh?
 
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 13:32:36 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry
<pomerado@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Jun 19, 9:10 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry



pomer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 18, 8:25 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:02 -0400, EricP

ThatWouldBeTell...@thevillage.com> wrote:
dlzc wrote:

A megaton nuclear weapon "converts" a few nanograms of mass to
energy (the rest is there just for chance).

1 megaton TNT = 4.184e15 joules
E=MC^2 = 9.0e16 J/Kg

1 megaton = 46.49 grams.

Eric

Grams? Grams of WHAT? I am sure that 46.49 grams of water would yield
less than 46.49 grams of highly enriched Uranium.

Also, a nuke does not "convert a few nanograms". For one thing, it
does not get "converted", it gets "released".

The first ones REQUIRED 100lbs of material to go critical.

Modern devices "need" less, but the designs are hardly set up where
they include more than they need. To claim so is just stupid.

Also, ALL of it goes fissile, so the "just there for chance" remark is
:   stupid as well.

Your brain must only weigh a few nanograms. There cannot be any more
than that after stupid statements like the one you made here.

Wikipedia say:

In nuclear reactions, typically only a small fraction of the total
mass energy is converted into heat, light, radiation and motion, into
a form which can be used. When an atom fissions, it loses only about
0.1% of its mass, and in a bomb or reactor not all the atoms can
fission. In a fission based atomic bomb, the efficiency is only 40%,
so only 40% of the fissionable atoms actually fission, and only 0.04%
of the total mass appears as energy in the end.

 So FORTY POUNDSm was in fission.  So "the rest is just there for chance"
is total bullshit.  It would not go critical without it, and the part
that gets converted could never do so unless the atoms that ARE releasing
the energy were not completely surrounded by similar material.

  There must be enough media there for the collisions to get going.

Do you know what "goes critical" means? The total mass, shape and
density of the fissile material, convolved with the material's neutron
cross section and the presence of neutron moderating and reflecting
materials, affect the "chance" of an efficient fission occurring.
Click to expand...

The idiot said that only a few nanogra,s get converted, and that the
rest was "just there".

He ain't real bright. He epitomizes the lay view.
 
Dear George Neuner:

On Jun 19, 7:06 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too.  Google "PET scan".

George

 Ah... molecular level stuff.  Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

 Still quite implausible.

Sorry, I missed something.  What's implausible?
Click to expand...
Using antimatter to destroy dust particles in situ in semiconductor
manufacture.

David A. Smith
 
On Jun 19, 9:10 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry



pomer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 18, 8:25 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:02 -0400, EricP

ThatWouldBeTell...@thevillage.com> wrote:
dlzc wrote:

A megaton nuclear weapon "converts" a few nanograms of mass to
energy (the rest is there just for chance).

1 megaton TNT = 4.184e15 joules
E=MC^2 = 9.0e16 J/Kg

1 megaton = 46.49 grams.

Eric

Grams? Grams of WHAT? I am sure that 46.49 grams of water would yield
less than 46.49 grams of highly enriched Uranium.

Also, a nuke does not "convert a few nanograms". For one thing, it
does not get "converted", it gets "released".

The first ones REQUIRED 100lbs of material to go critical.

Modern devices "need" less, but the designs are hardly set up where
they include more than they need. To claim so is just stupid.

Also, ALL of it goes fissile, so the "just there for chance" remark is
:   stupid as well.

Your brain must only weigh a few nanograms. There cannot be any more
than that after stupid statements like the one you made here.

Wikipedia say:

In nuclear reactions, typically only a small fraction of the total
mass energy is converted into heat, light, radiation and motion, into
a form which can be used. When an atom fissions, it loses only about
0.1% of its mass, and in a bomb or reactor not all the atoms can
fission. In a fission based atomic bomb, the efficiency is only 40%,
so only 40% of the fissionable atoms actually fission, and only 0.04%
of the total mass appears as energy in the end.

 So FORTY POUNDSm was in fission.  So "the rest is just there for chance"
is total bullshit.  It would not go critical without it, and the part
that gets converted could never do so unless the atoms that ARE releasing
the energy were not completely surrounded by similar material.

  There must be enough media there for the collisions to get going.
Click to expand...
Do you know what "goes critical" means? The total mass, shape and
density of the fissile material, convolved with the material's neutron
cross section and the presence of neutron moderating and reflecting
materials, affect the "chance" of an efficient fission occurring.
 
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 07:48:27 -0700 (PDT), Proteus IIV
<proteusiiv@gmail.com> wrote:

On Jun 19, 3:34 pm, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:29:22 -0700 (PDT), dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
Dear George Neuner:

On Jun 19, 7:06 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too. Google "PET scan".

George

Ah... molecular level stuff. Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

Still quite implausible.

Sorry, I missed something. What's implausible?

Using antimatter to destroy dust particles in situ in semiconductor
manufacture.

David A. Smith

  Amazing world full of TV educated, (not the learning channels) sci fi
idiots, eh?

YOU COXNET FREAK
Click to expand...
Are you having a bad day, troll boy?

KEEP TROLLING AND HARRASING MSN CUSTOMERS
Click to expand...
Neither the person I responded to, nor the person he was referring to
are MSN customers, you bent brained, deluded dumbfucktard.

YOU WILL HAVE TO EAT YOUR CABLE BOX AND MODEM
Click to expand...
In a right world, you would have to eat a nice big .50 cal hunk of my
favorite breakfast food for trolls... LEAD.
 
On Jun 19, 3:34 pm, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:29:22 -0700 (PDT), dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
Dear George Neuner:

On Jun 19, 7:06 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too. Google "PET scan".

George

Ah... molecular level stuff. Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

Still quite implausible.

Sorry, I missed something. What's implausible?

Using antimatter to destroy dust particles in situ in semiconductor
manufacture.

David A. Smith

  Amazing world full of TV educated, (not the learning channels) sci fi
idiots, eh?
Click to expand...
YOU COXNET FREAK
KEEP TROLLING AND HARRASING MSN CUSTOMERS
YOU WILL HAVE TO EAT YOUR CABLE BOX AND MODEM

I AM PROTEUS
 
On Jun 19, 12:10 pm, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry





pomer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 18, 8:25 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:57:02 -0400, EricP

ThatWouldBeTell...@thevillage.com> wrote:
dlzc wrote:

A megaton nuclear weapon "converts" a few nanograms of mass to
energy (the rest is there just for chance).

1 megaton TNT = 4.184e15 joules
E=MC^2 = 9.0e16 J/Kg

1 megaton = 46.49 grams.

Eric

Grams? Grams of WHAT? I am sure that 46.49 grams of water would yield
less than 46.49 grams of highly enriched Uranium.

Also, a nuke does not "convert a few nanograms". For one thing, it
does not get "converted", it gets "released".

The first ones REQUIRED 100lbs of material to go critical.

Modern devices "need" less, but the designs are hardly set up where
they include more than they need. To claim so is just stupid.

Also, ALL of it goes fissile, so the "just there for chance" remark is
:   stupid as well.

Your brain must only weigh a few nanograms. There cannot be any more
than that after stupid statements like the one you made here.

Wikipedia say:

In nuclear reactions, typically only a small fraction of the total
mass energy is converted into heat, light, radiation and motion, into
a form which can be used. When an atom fissions, it loses only about
0.1% of its mass, and in a bomb or reactor not all the atoms can
fission. In a fission based atomic bomb, the efficiency is only 40%,
so only 40% of the fissionable atoms actually fission, and only 0.04%
of the total mass appears as energy in the end.

 So FORTY POUNDSm was in fission.  So "the rest is just there for chance"
is total bullshit.  It would not go critical without it, and the part
that gets converted could never do so unless the atoms that ARE releasing
the energy were not completely surrounded by similar material.

  There must be enough media there for the collisions to get going.
Click to expand...
GO ON FOOL

BLOW YOURSELF UP

I AM PROTEUS
 
On Jun 19, 3:34 pm, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 12:29:22 -0700 (PDT), dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
Dear George Neuner:

On Jun 19, 7:06 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:49:49 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:20:51 -0400, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:07:40 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

Are matter anti-matter annihilations being observed in uni labs on a
regular basis?

Yes ... and in (big) hospitals too. Google "PET scan".

George

Ah... molecular level stuff. Only about one ten millionth of what one
would need to take care of a dust particle.

Still quite implausible.

Sorry, I missed something. What's implausible?

Using antimatter to destroy dust particles in situ in semiconductor
manufacture.

David A. Smith

  Amazing world full of TV educated, (not the learning channels) sci fi
idiots, eh?
Click to expand...
YOU COXNET FREAK
KEEP TROLLING AND HARRASING MSN CUSTOMERS
YOU WILL HAVE TO EAT YOUR CABLE BOX AND MODEM

I AM PROTEUS
 
On Jun 19, 1:15 am, BlindBaby
<BlindMelonChit...@wellnevergetthatonethealbumcover.org> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:54:49 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeif...@cs.nmsu.edu
wrote:





"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> writes:

MitchAlsup wrote:

On Jun 18, 4:48 am, "Skybuck Flying" <IntoTheFut...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Would it be possible to "vaporize" any dust particles during the chip
manufacturing ?

It is easier to place most of the manufactuing process in a vacuum and
eliminate the dust particles. {Hint: dust cannot float in a vacuum to
land on the wafers, but drops like a rock to the floor.}

   Just like Skyduck's ignorant trolling.

And if people would just quit answering him, I wouldn't see anything
from him at all...

  That should tell you something, you retarded ditz!

  We do not filter your news for you.  Nor do we cater to your stupid
requests that we follow your posting criteria.

  YOU need to LEARN how to filter your own news, cretin.
Click to expand...
TALKING TO YOURSELF NOW
NICE TRICK FAGGOT
BUT IT IS OLD
LIKE YOUR TROLLING ANUS

I AM PROTEUS
 
On Jun 19, 1:10 am, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:43:17 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"

IntoTheFut...@hotmail.com> wrote:
According to my physics class in high school a perfect vacuum cannot be
created and there will always be some air left over...

  None that would keep a dust particle lofted though you ZERO
common sense dumbfucktard!
Click to expand...
YOU'RE PATHETIC
YOU SHOULD GO SEE A PROFESSIONAL ABOUT YOUR PERSONALITY DISORDER
RIGHT AFTER YOU LOSE YOUR CABLE CONNECTION
HOMO

I AM PROTEUS
 
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 23:22:31 +0100, EricP
<ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> wrote:

Unfortunately that Wikipedia value of 17.975e16 J/kg is wrong.

In SI units, a joule = newton*meter = (kg*m/s^2)*m = kg*m^2/s^2 =
kg*(m/s)^2

E = MC^2 ~= 1.0 kg *(3e8 m/s)^2 = 9e16 J
Click to expand...
But the WP figure is for 1kg matter plus 1kg antimatter, not half a kilo
of each. I think they are entitled to regard the latter as "the explosive
ingredient" and assume that unlimited amounts of the former are available
for free.

Oh, and by the the way...

"Well trolled, Skybuck! You've dragged them *all* out this time and no
mistake."
 
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:47:44 +0100, "Ken Hagan"
<K.Hagan@thermoteknix.com> wrote:

"Well trolled, Skybuck! You've dragged them *all* out this time and no
mistake."
Click to expand...
That's it, ya fuckin' retard, pat the fuckin' trolls on the back. You
are worse than the fucking troll is or ever could be.
 
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:23:15 -0700 Bart!
<B@rt_The_Sheriff_Is_A_Nig***!.org> wrote in Message id:
<upbu16hu3sd6heldt7j9jjc9c3uat17a6d@4ax.com>:

That's it, ya fuckin' retard, pat the fuckin' trolls on the back.
Click to expand...
*pat pat pat*

Settle down, AlwaysWrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top