Viewing Thread:
"Copularity Pontest"

1. Me
2. You

What do you think of the above people?

Put your review here about them people I mentioned above.

CTUbauer wrote:
> No idea. Ello though. I am ze legend! :)

I perfer the legend of Zorro That is to say the Mask

FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> Azul wrote:
> Damn straight.
>
> Don't fool yourself, Zully.

You always seem to swoop from nowhere when there's a potential sexual innuendo to be made.
You're like Batman or something.

...

Azul wrote:
> Damn straight.

Don't fool yourself, Zully.

No idea. Ello though. I am ze legend! :)

CTUbauer wrote:
> This really sucks :\

Hello Shaneo what kinda of suck would that be, would that be the kinda suck a tick my give to a dog in order to get blood or the other suck where something just stinks.

This really sucks :\

Azul wrote:
> P4NT$ wrote:
> Yes but how can you tell and be sure that Me and You have not
> existed? Is there any way to prove YES or NO ever existed?
>
> No, there isn't. Which is why I said "I believe".
>
> It is highly unlikely that such members exist.
> And if you want to be pedantic, I'll reword my own statement.
>
> If the members "Me" and "You" exist, they are not
> well known enough by myself, nor is it likely they are known by
> anyone else very well. Such evidence of this could be the 'Top
> Posters' list.
> I win. Again.

Your case still remains to be seen, the case in question here is the copularity of Me and You and not as to the existence of Me and You. If Me and You do not exist that is another mater for the courts to decide, that case is not being argued here.

Azul wrote:
> Member, member's.
> It's all the same.
>
> And it'd be really funny if it was members.
> But it's not. So I win. I think.
> And now I'm unnecessarily confusing myself.

Bloody Matrix theolising :\

Damn straight.

Azul said it you know. Azul always speaks the truth.