Uniform Stealing Board

This is a message to Esercito. I have been noticing you manipulate by posts on my sub-forum for my recent story Nikki vs the Mafia pt 1, without my consent. My I ask why? You know as well as I do that whoever posts next that will overwrite the previous post, that's the nature of the board. So it doesn't matter if it's my name up there or Tirepanteds or whoever. All you've done is messed up my system, putting in location shots with outfits which will only confuse my readers.


I have no idea why you feel this is an issue. Since I feel it's quite disrespectful, not just to myself but to Arc as well. So on behalf of myself and Arc I would like an apology.

I think I know the reason.

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm, a comment was made (by tirepanted) on Sims Shorts E2.

tirepanted3 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm Glad to see you writing more (and incorporating real-world detail as well).

Is there more to the story? Shame we don't even see the real belly dancers...

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm, 6 minutes later, you updated Chapter 40 with a one-link post.

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm The black outfit worn by 10th Street Hoods Enforcer Sinead O'Reilly, minus her Beretta 93R machine pistol.

https://product-images-cdn.liketoknow.i ... &dpr=2.625

As a moderator, esercitto sconfitto specifically instructed that, to avoid any further misunderstanding, all new links should be added by editing one single post, not by creating new replies. Something to which you agreed.

esercito sconfitto wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:11 am By virtue of the powers accorded me in order to ensure friendship and brotherhood among all the members of this honorable board,

Stormy ,

as of now you will EDIT previously created posts to add new links to pictures , don't create new replies

The case is dismissed

God bless you all

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:16 am

esercito sconfitto wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:11 am By virtue of the powers accorded me in order to ensure friendship and brotherhood among all the members of this honorable board,

Stormy ,

as of now you will EDIT previously created posts to add new links to pictures , don't create new replies

The case is dismissed

God bless you all

Hi ES

That works for me. I had already worked a compromise with rufus, which I fully intend to honour. Which is post links to my pictures in a single reply like I would an epilogue.

Again I wish to apologise for any offence that this may have caused. It was unintentional.

In general, I appreciate the efforts you're making to post grouped links, but I noticed you're still not abiding by the letter of the agreement - since these new links are still uploaded with several new replies - not a single reply like you would an epilogue. Call me a rule lawyer or lawful neutral, but I think rules exist for a reason.

PS, I confess I would have preferred to make my return on an other topic. However, since the issue was posted on a public post, I figured out I had to step in and clear the misunderstanding. Moderator is a tough job - especially on this Board. Because of that, esercitto sconfitto is at the same time a fellow fan AND an arbiter and judge (therefore, with a higher hierarchical status). I know by experience escercito sconfitto hates conflict, but at the same time as a moderator he gave an explicit instruction (= all new links must be added to one single post that's edited bit by bit). And a moderator's job is to make sure his instructions are being followed. I don't think the intent was to be disrespectful to you or Arc's colossal work. And it certainly wasn't to favor one writer to the detriment of an other.

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:10 am I think I know the reason.

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm, a comment was made (by tirepanted) on Sims Shorts E2.

tirepanted3 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm Glad to see you writing more (and incorporating real-world detail as well).

Is there more to the story? Shame we don't even see the real belly dancers...

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm, 6 minutes later, you updated Chapter 40 with a one-link post.

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm The black outfit worn by 10th Street Hoods Enforcer Sinead O'Reilly, minus her Beretta 93R machine pistol.

https://product-images-cdn.liketoknow.i ... &dpr=2.625

As a moderator, esercitto sconfitto specifically instructed that, to avoid any further misunderstanding, all new links should be added by editing one single post, not by creating new replies. Something to which you agreed.

esercito sconfitto wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:11 am By virtue of the powers accorded me in order to ensure friendship and brotherhood among all the members of this honorable board,

Stormy ,

as of now you will EDIT previously created posts to add new links to pictures , don't create new replies

The case is dismissed

God bless you all

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:16 am

esercito sconfitto wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:11 am By virtue of the powers accorded me in order to ensure friendship and brotherhood among all the members of this honorable board,

Stormy ,

as of now you will EDIT previously created posts to add new links to pictures , don't create new replies

The case is dismissed

God bless you all

Hi ES

That works for me. I had already worked a compromise with rufus, which I fully intend to honour. Which is post links to my pictures in a single reply like I would an epilogue.

Again I wish to apologise for any offence that this may have caused. It was unintentional.

In general, I appreciate the efforts you're making to post grouped links, but I noticed you're still not abiding by the letter of the agreement - since these new links are still uploaded with several new replies - not a single reply like you would an epilogue. Call me a rule lawyer or lawful neutral, but I think rules exist for a reason.

PS, I confess I would have preferred to make my return on an other topic. However, since the issue was posted on a public post, I figured out I had to step in and clear the misunderstanding. Moderator is a tough job - especially on this Board. Because of that, esercitto sconfitto is at the same time a fellow fan AND an arbiter and judge (therefore, with a higher hierarchical status). I know by experience escercito sconfitto hates conflict, but at the same time as a moderator he gave an explicit instruction (= all new links must be added to one single post that's edited bit by bit). And a moderator's job is to make sure his instructions are being followed. I don't think the intent was to be disrespectful to you or Arc's colossal work. And it certainly wasn't to favor one writer to the detriment of an other.

Hi Rufus

I wasn't suggesting anything like favouritism or anything of the sort. The issue I have is that this was done without my consent, this is an issue about trust. And I don't think ES' intent was disrespectful but this was how I felt at the time. I'am not seeking conflict over this as I think enough time has been wasted holding me to account. Not when I have many stories I want to post to the board.


I'am sure that you understand that having a system when you post behind the scenes material, which was why I posted them in separate replies to stop them getting mixed up. One stack for outfits, the other for locations . So when I saw ES had edited my post and lumped a shot of the Brooklyn Bridge in with the outfit collection, I saw red.


While I do respect that ES does have a difficult job as moderator and I respect that, I know what it means to avoid conflict this does make a disturbing precedent. I may accept ES' apology but in the future there could be others who aren't as understanding as I am.

First of all, thanks Rufus

( Merci bien non ami )

Stormy, enforcing the law ( or rules) doesn' t require the consent of the rule-breaker

And again many thanks for your gigantic saga which I invite all the members to read

esercito sconfitto wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:01 am First of all, thanks Rufus

( Merci bien non ami )

Stormy, enforcing the law ( or rules) doesn' t require the consent of the rule-breaker

And again many thanks for your gigantic saga which I invite all the members to read

I wasn't aware that I was breaking any rules and I think you'll find that in the UK our police do need the consent of the offender, especially when stop and search are implemented. But that's beside the point.


Your quite welcome, I appreciate the endorsement and accept the olive branch. There's certainly more to come from ECSH.

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:34 am

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:10 am I think I know the reason.

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm, a comment was made (by tirepanted) on Sims Shorts E2.

tirepanted3 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm Glad to see you writing more (and incorporating real-world detail as well).

Is there more to the story? Shame we don't even see the real belly dancers...

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm, 6 minutes later, you updated Chapter 40 with a one-link post.

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm The black outfit worn by 10th Street Hoods Enforcer Sinead O'Reilly, minus her Beretta 93R machine pistol.

https://product-images-cdn.liketoknow.i ... &dpr=2.625

As a moderator, esercitto sconfitto specifically instructed that, to avoid any further misunderstanding, all new links should be added by editing one single post, not by creating new replies. Something to which you agreed.

esercito sconfitto wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:11 am By virtue of the powers accorded me in order to ensure friendship and brotherhood among all the members of this honorable board,

Stormy ,

as of now you will EDIT previously created posts to add new links to pictures , don't create new replies

The case is dismissed

God bless you all

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Mon Jul 15, 2024 11:16 am

Hi ES

That works for me. I had already worked a compromise with rufus, which I fully intend to honour. Which is post links to my pictures in a single reply like I would an epilogue.

Again I wish to apologise for any offence that this may have caused. It was unintentional.

In general, I appreciate the efforts you're making to post grouped links, but I noticed you're still not abiding by the letter of the agreement - since these new links are still uploaded with several new replies - not a single reply like you would an epilogue. Call me a rule lawyer or lawful neutral, but I think rules exist for a reason.

PS, I confess I would have preferred to make my return on an other topic. However, since the issue was posted on a public post, I figured out I had to step in and clear the misunderstanding. Moderator is a tough job - especially on this Board. Because of that, esercitto sconfitto is at the same time a fellow fan AND an arbiter and judge (therefore, with a higher hierarchical status). I know by experience escercito sconfitto hates conflict, but at the same time as a moderator he gave an explicit instruction (= all new links must be added to one single post that's edited bit by bit). And a moderator's job is to make sure his instructions are being followed. I don't think the intent was to be disrespectful to you or Arc's colossal work. And it certainly wasn't to favor one writer to the detriment of an other.

Hi Rufus

I wasn't suggesting anything like favouritism or anything of the sort. The issue I have is that this was done without my consent, this is an issue about trust. And I don't think ES' intent was disrespectful but this was how I felt at the time. I'am not seeking conflict over this as I think enough time has been wasted holding me to account. Not when I have many stories I want to post to the board.


I'am sure that you understand that having a system when you post behind the scenes material, which was why I posted them in separate replies to stop them getting mixed up. One stack for outfits, the other for locations . So when I saw ES had edited my post and lumped a shot of the Brooklyn Bridge in with the outfit collection, I saw red.


While I do respect that ES does have a difficult job as moderator and I respect that, I know what it means to avoid conflict this does make a disturbing precedent. I may accept ES' apology but in the future there could be others who aren't as understanding as I am.

I agree this kind of topic is best discussed in PM beforehand - and I now better see the logic behind the two separate replies.

However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links". Following this instruction is in my opinion the best way to avoid any misunderstanding.

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm. I think it would be best to never have this sort of situation happen again, to avoid any misunderstanding.

Maybe ES' method was clumsy, but the intent was justified. The rules were broken. Can one publicly ask a moderator to apologize because he's enforcing rules that were agreed on by all sides? It's his job to edit a post without the consent of its author the rules are broken. I won't pretend I hold absolute truth, but personally I think not. I'm not quite sure this topic needed to be brought to the general attention so quickly and bluntly. Now that it is, I wish to help settle it, but I can't help but think this didn't need to be for everyone to read.

I don't have much experience with other forums, but from the little I know, I can say that, as a moderator, ES is kind. There are moderators who are quick to delete and ban at the first misstep, and won't take any complaint to heart. Not saying ES is perfect as a moderator, or that dialogue isn't the best solution, but I had to step in his defense. Plus, ES has the handicap of not being an English native speaker - a pain which I share, and which makes getting my ideas across both a pain and a huge time consumer. Writing, editing, and sending messages dealing with serious topics takes a lot of time.

(And PS, I notice just now replies were uploaded while I was writing, but only after this post was uploaded, so this message was written without knowledge of the content of these two previous replies.)

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:12 am

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:34 am

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:10 am I think I know the reason.

On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:31 pm, a comment was made (by tirepanted) on Sims Shorts E2.



On Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm, 6 minutes later, you updated Chapter 40 with a one-link post.



As a moderator, esercitto sconfitto specifically instructed that, to avoid any further misunderstanding, all new links should be added by editing one single post, not by creating new replies. Something to which you agreed.





In general, I appreciate the efforts you're making to post grouped links, but I noticed you're still not abiding by the letter of the agreement - since these new links are still uploaded with several new replies - not a single reply like you would an epilogue. Call me a rule lawyer or lawful neutral, but I think rules exist for a reason.

PS, I confess I would have preferred to make my return on an other topic. However, since the issue was posted on a public post, I figured out I had to step in and clear the misunderstanding. Moderator is a tough job - especially on this Board. Because of that, esercitto sconfitto is at the same time a fellow fan AND an arbiter and judge (therefore, with a higher hierarchical status). I know by experience escercito sconfitto hates conflict, but at the same time as a moderator he gave an explicit instruction (= all new links must be added to one single post that's edited bit by bit). And a moderator's job is to make sure his instructions are being followed. I don't think the intent was to be disrespectful to you or Arc's colossal work. And it certainly wasn't to favor one writer to the detriment of an other.

Hi Rufus

I wasn't suggesting anything like favouritism or anything of the sort. The issue I have is that this was done without my consent, this is an issue about trust. And I don't think ES' intent was disrespectful but this was how I felt at the time. I'am not seeking conflict over this as I think enough time has been wasted holding me to account. Not when I have many stories I want to post to the board.


I'am sure that you understand that having a system when you post behind the scenes material, which was why I posted them in separate replies to stop them getting mixed up. One stack for outfits, the other for locations . So when I saw ES had edited my post and lumped a shot of the Brooklyn Bridge in with the outfit collection, I saw red.


While I do respect that ES does have a difficult job as moderator and I respect that, I know what it means to avoid conflict this does make a disturbing precedent. I may accept ES' apology but in the future there could be others who aren't as understanding as I am.

I agree this kind of topic is best discussed in PM beforehand - and I now better see the logic behind the two separate replies.

However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links".

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm.

Maybe ES' method was clumsy, but the intent was justified. The rules were broken. Can one publicly ask a moderator to apologize because he's enforcing rules that were agreed on by all sides? It's his job to edit a post without the consent of its author the rules are broken. I won't pretend I hold absolute truth, but personally I think not. I'm not quite sure this topic needed to be brought to the general attention so quickly and bluntly. Now that it is, I wish to help settle it, but I can't help but think this didn't need to be for everyone to read.

I don't have much experience with other forums, but from the little I know, I can say that, as a moderator, ES is kind. There are moderators who are quick to delete and ban at the first misstep, and won't take any complaint to heart. Not saying ES is perfect as a moderator, or that dialogue isn't the best solution, but I had to step in his defense. Plus, ES has the handicap of not being an English native speaker - a pain which I share, and which makes getting my ideas across both a pain and a huge time consumer. Writing, editing, and sending messages dealing with serious topics takes a lot of time.

(And PS, I

I will admit I'am quite logical when it comes to my replies even if that does sometimes appear to fly in the face of the established rules. It's just who I' am I used to be a stickler for rules but experience and age have weathered me. I'am sorry if this gives a poor impression.


I'am sorry for putting this issue out there is so blunt and quick a manner, it's just I felt angry and disrespecting at the time, not just for myself but for Arc as well.


I appreciate you coming to ES' defense, it wasn't my intent to challenge him in any way I just wanted an explanation on why he felt he did what he had to do. And know I have it the matter is settled. We are lucky to have him as a moderator and he does do a difficult job whole balancing his own life as well, so he will always have my respect.

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:28 am

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:12 am

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 7:34 am

Hi Rufus

I wasn't suggesting anything like favouritism or anything of the sort. The issue I have is that this was done without my consent, this is an issue about trust. And I don't think ES' intent was disrespectful but this was how I felt at the time. I'am not seeking conflict over this as I think enough time has been wasted holding me to account. Not when I have many stories I want to post to the board.


I'am sure that you understand that having a system when you post behind the scenes material, which was why I posted them in separate replies to stop them getting mixed up. One stack for outfits, the other for locations . So when I saw ES had edited my post and lumped a shot of the Brooklyn Bridge in with the outfit collection, I saw red.


While I do respect that ES does have a difficult job as moderator and I respect that, I know what it means to avoid conflict this does make a disturbing precedent. I may accept ES' apology but in the future there could be others who aren't as understanding as I am.

I agree this kind of topic is best discussed in PM beforehand - and I now better see the logic behind the two separate replies.

However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links".

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm.

Maybe ES' method was clumsy, but the intent was justified. The rules were broken. Can one publicly ask a moderator to apologize because he's enforcing rules that were agreed on by all sides? It's his job to edit a post without the consent of its author the rules are broken. I won't pretend I hold absolute truth, but personally I think not. I'm not quite sure this topic needed to be brought to the general attention so quickly and bluntly. Now that it is, I wish to help settle it, but I can't help but think this didn't need to be for everyone to read.

I don't have much experience with other forums, but from the little I know, I can say that, as a moderator, ES is kind. There are moderators who are quick to delete and ban at the first misstep, and won't take any complaint to heart. Not saying ES is perfect as a moderator, or that dialogue isn't the best solution, but I had to step in his defense. Plus, ES has the handicap of not being an English native speaker - a pain which I share, and which makes getting my ideas across both a pain and a huge time consumer. Writing, editing, and sending messages dealing with serious topics takes a lot of time.

(And PS, I

I will admit I'am quite logical when it comes to my replies even if that does sometimes appear to fly in the face of the established rules. It's just who I' am I used to be a stickler for rules but experience and age have weathered me. I'am sorry if this gives a poor impression.


I'am sorry for putting this issue out there is so blunt and quick a manner, it's just I felt angry and disrespecting at the time, not just for myself but for Arc as well.


I appreciate you coming to ES' defense, it wasn't my intent to challenge him in any way I just wanted an explanation on why he felt he did what he had to do. And know I have it the matter is settled. We are lucky to have him as a moderator and he does do a difficult job whole balancing his own life as well, so he will always have my respect.

You were so quick to answer, I realize you did it before I could even finish editing my previous comment... (Yes, I noticed just after uploading said previous comment that ES then you had already replied, so I attempted to edit small parts of it to take these replies in consideration, but by the time I finished my edit, you probably had already started to write your reply, so you didn't get the whole edited comment - luckily those were just a few sentenced added.)

So I'll re-write one brief part, because I think it's the key to avoid any further trouble - a shame I thought about it after I uploaded the whole comment... So please forgive the repetition, I took the liberty of putting in bold letters the two sentences I added while I was editing. I really regret not having thought of them immediately...

"However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links". Following this instruction is in my opinion the best way to avoid any misunderstanding.

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm. I think it would be best to never have this sort of situation happen again, to avoid any misunderstanding."

I understand feeling constrained by rules, but at the same time I believe it's the only way to avoid any misunderstanding or misinterpretation of intents. I'm going to be the rules lawyer one last time, but moderators are the authority, their word is law, and during more than 6 years spent on this board, I never saw them be arbitrary or authoritarian - so I believe we should follow the few rules (or instructions) they do enforce.

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:58 am

Stormtrooper1990 wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:28 am

rufusluciusivan wrote: Wed Jul 24, 2024 8:12 am

I agree this kind of topic is best discussed in PM beforehand - and I now better see the logic behind the two separate replies.

However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links".

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm.

Maybe ES' method was clumsy, but the intent was justified. The rules were broken. Can one publicly ask a moderator to apologize because he's enforcing rules that were agreed on by all sides? It's his job to edit a post without the consent of its author the rules are broken. I won't pretend I hold absolute truth, but personally I think not. I'm not quite sure this topic needed to be brought to the general attention so quickly and bluntly. Now that it is, I wish to help settle it, but I can't help but think this didn't need to be for everyone to read.

I don't have much experience with other forums, but from the little I know, I can say that, as a moderator, ES is kind. There are moderators who are quick to delete and ban at the first misstep, and won't take any complaint to heart. Not saying ES is perfect as a moderator, or that dialogue isn't the best solution, but I had to step in his defense. Plus, ES has the handicap of not being an English native speaker - a pain which I share, and which makes getting my ideas across both a pain and a huge time consumer. Writing, editing, and sending messages dealing with serious topics takes a lot of time.

(And PS, I

I will admit I'am quite logical when it comes to my replies even if that does sometimes appear to fly in the face of the established rules. It's just who I' am I used to be a stickler for rules but experience and age have weathered me. I'am sorry if this gives a poor impression.


I'am sorry for putting this issue out there is so blunt and quick a manner, it's just I felt angry and disrespecting at the time, not just for myself but for Arc as well.


I appreciate you coming to ES' defense, it wasn't my intent to challenge him in any way I just wanted an explanation on why he felt he did what he had to do. And know I have it the matter is settled. We are lucky to have him as a moderator and he does do a difficult job whole balancing his own life as well, so he will always have my respect.

You were so quick to answer, I realize you did it before I could even finish editing my previous comment... (Yes, I noticed just after uploading said previous comment that ES then you had already replied, so I attempted to edit small parts of it to take these replies in consideration, but by the time I finished my edit, you probably had already started to write your reply, so you didn't get the whole edited comment - luckily those were just a few sentenced added.)

So I'll re-write one brief part, because I think it's the key to avoid any further trouble - a shame I thought about it after I uploaded the whole comment... So please forgive the repetition, I took the liberty of putting in bold letters the two sentences I added while I was editing. I really regret not having thought of them immediately...

"However, I still stand by my opinion: esercitto sconfitto was right to step in, since this logic does not abide by the instructions given - which were "one single reply for all links". Following this instruction is in my opinion the best way to avoid any misunderstanding.

And there's still the issue of this single link (the one uploaded on Tue Jul 23, 2024 9:37 pm) showing an outfit, but not added by editing the "outfit post" of Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:13 pm. I think it would be best to never have this sort of situation happen again, to avoid any misunderstanding."

I understand feeling constrained by rules, but at the same time I believe it's the only way to avoid any misunderstanding or misinterpretation of intents. I'm going to be the rules lawyer one last time, but moderators are the authority, their word is law, and during more than 6 years spent on this board, I never saw them be arbitrary or authoritarian - so I believe we should follow the few rules (or instructions) they do enforce.

Yeah, I'am sorry for not giving you the chance to edit your reply before posting my own.


I completely understand your point about the rules being in place to prevent these kinds of misunderstandings and misreadings from taking place. After all we are a small tight knit little community and we do need someone there, to the police the rest of us hence the role of the moderator. I will abide by these rules in the future, but as far as my writing is concerned I will always challenge the established norms of USB. ( with exciting new themes and settings, going to places no-one has ventured before) And balancing both my lethal and non-lethal content. After all, it's something I have built my reputation on here on the board.

Esercito

You are tampering with my sub forum again. You can't just keep doing this. Those behind the scenes pictures for chapter 41 are the only ones I will be posting for that chapter, but yet you still saw fit to tag them onto my last comment with meditions. I posted them in keeping with my agreement with Rufus.

Now thanks to your intervention the links don't work now anyway so thanks very much. I will have to repost them.