https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/g/thread/81452160/ https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/g/thread/81453953/

>>81454101 >what in sam hill is going on in this thread a woman in /g/ is telling me that she is going to get me disbarred: >https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/g/thread/81452160 Because I am infavor of men marrying young girls, as they do in Afghanistan, and in the Hebrew, Vedic, and Islamic religions. She's a white woman. She got the website for my opensource project: ChaosEsque Anthology on moddb deleted by showing them a screenshot of my opinions on 4chan. Now she's trying to increase her success. My game is a 6GB fork of Xonotic, to which I extended the maximum entities in the C code of the Engine from 32k to 4 million. It also has procedural city generation (using models I made, including LOD) with interiors, as I coded that in using QuakeC. it also has over 200 weapons. Xonotic has about 18. I've dedicated my free time to this game and the source code is included in the ISOs. The source to the 100s of models I've made is also included in the media source distribution archives. Everything is OpenSource and I've been working on this project for a decade, who's website has been taken down by the anti-child-bride /g/ woman. She also reported me to the FBI for my pro-child bride views.

https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/g/thread/81452160/#q81453798 > >>81453790 >wasn't me who begged for anything. If i knew about you earlier i would have taken you down earlier. >You pissed off the wrong guy (or girl :))

>>3923 You're a potentially sick person (depends on how old you think the child has to be to be eligible for marriage, and whether you consider sex between a child and a presumed adult acceptable; both of which are questions irrelevant to the thread), but I'm hardly on the side of your opposition either (I have suspicions that if you were Arabic and they knew this, they would be singing an entirely different tune), not to mention that it's rather inappropriate to persecute someone while promoting your own product at the same time. >She's a white woman. So as an aside, what's your ethnicity, since you seem to think hers is a relevant detail to mention?

>>3929 >So as an aside, what's your ethnicity, since you seem to think hers is a relevant detail to mention? Whatever this is.

More: https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/g/thread/81468213/

Well, I hope you have local backups. Have you contacted ModDB staff yet?

>running around the internet creating evidence and picking fights with people without anonymity Why on earth would you link any account to any other on the internet? Opsec, people. I'm sorry you messed up your thing, but you really should have thought through what you were doing. I guess all you can do now is put it on GitHub. It's only going to get worse from now one. Twitch et al have said they're going to ban people for events off-site too.

>>3946 >Well, I hope you have local backups. Have you contacted ModDB staff yet? ModDB staff haven't responded.

>>3956 >Why on earth would you link any account to any other on the internet? Opsec, people. I'm sorry you messed up your thing, but you really should have thought through what you were doing. I guess all you can do now is put it on GitHub. Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything". Think of the romantic era painters who painted cute young girls because they liked them. Should they have not done so? >It's only going to get worse from now one. Twitch et al have said they're going to ban people for events off-site too.

>>3923 a. Stop using 4chan. b. Reupload fork elsewhere. >Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything" lul

>>3964 >Shows that those who are pro-child bride are not "retards who can't program anything". Not only was that not something people disputed, you're playing into identity politics (this is just "shove blacks into programming jobs to show other blacks that they can code, even though they always could've just joined the industry themselves if they were actually interested, but with some variables changed) and compromised your anonymity for a nonexistent argument with a very contentious stance on a specific topic. You are outrageously foolish and almost asked for this to happen.

>>3974 >and compromised your anonymity for a nonexistent argument with a very contentious stance on a specific topic. What's the point of living if you cannot marry cute young girls? Are whores enough for you? >You are outrageously foolish and almost asked for this to happen. Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s?

>>81496715 >Bro stop talking in the third person we know it's you I'm merely a 3rd party observer. I just want to know what happened with the project and why westerners can persecute men who want to marry cute young girls world wide? Why can they do that? Why is it that they are able to destroy every pro-child bride culture? Why is it that there is nowhere we can move to any longer? Why won't woman worshiping westerners allow any place on this planet that doesn't follow their constructed religion?

Yes: This is correct. Libertarainism is radical individualism. A nation of one (see: former Yugoslavia). The reason to subscribe to libertarianism is to arrest for oneself a personal benefice. It is an ideology of personal law. The reason it fails is because in the desire to liberate an article from it's current possessor: it does not furnish a payment sufficent to overcome the demerit the rest of the society would impose on the possessor. The French liberals of the 60s and 70s signed their petition because they wanted young girls for themselves. All men joined the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to furnish mates for themselves where they otherwise could not. The greater society does not concern itself with what is of value to the individual man: he exists to work for and serve the society. Thus the "we libertarianism" does not ever benefit the man directly: the needs of the women and her children outweigh him in all cases by number. He works his life; he pays off his debt that he incurred for being born into this world; then he dies. The society does not exist for him: he exists to serve the society. What benefit to him is it to even live? Other than animal instinct. What if he surpasses such in self-thought? The men in Afghanistan, who live in the dirt, with their adorable child brides: they are visibly happier than the American Soliders and Officers who bomb them and burn them to put an end to the practice.

It's constructively all westerners. Especially western men. Only people who act really matter. The men in the west who act, act to slaughter any culture that allows child brides. Direct torture and murder to snuff out said cultures. At home western white men root out, imprison, kill, and torture any of their "fellows" who would marry young girls. They end any possibility of whatever vestiges of legality it had; and conspire enmass to deny any man the ability to marry their young daughters for any price. That is what white men are. Enemies to all and to eachother; bound in only one goal: the worship of their "white lady". The men of the next generation have an absolute natural right to the girls fathered by the previous. This is natural law. Which white men deny.

>>3977 >What's the point of living if you cannot marry cute young girls? Are whores enough for you? Not only is that completely besides my point (which is that regardless of much you view yourself as right, your stance is typically considered perverse and morally objectionable, making your lack of OPSEC even more foolish), the fact that you can marry "cute young girls" that aren't children, the fact that there's much more to marriage than marrying a girl that's young and cute (you're unlikely (but not absolutely won't be) to be romantically and sexually attracted to a genuinely ugly and/or old person, but your marriage would mean a lot more to you if it's on the proper foundation and not solely on her being good-looking and "fresh"), and the fact that you're disingenuously labelling the only alternatives to your preferred child brides to be the adult-aged whores in western countries (presumably as a way to bolster your argument by ignoring whatever supposedly small amount of adult-aged, non-slutty women are out there) completely crumbles your argument away, and demonstrates that getting into an actual argument with you on this would probably just be a pervert making poor arguments to justify his position of being in favor of adult men marrying little girls; in short, a waste of time. >Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s? From what I understand of the situation, yes. In any case, I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this as you seem like an insufferable opponent to have an argument with (misunderstood a seemingly obvious point to be saying something I wasn't and created a false dichotomy between child brides and the culture of encouraged sluttiness in the west) about something that's veering completely out of technology, especially since the reasons against your position seem rather obvious and I see no real way for you to make a strong case in favor of it that isn't just >"muh roasties/whores" (false dichotomy) >"there's nothing with marrying cute young girls" (omitting a crucial detail in your argument, probably to try and make it more palatable). >whataboutism (as if Muslims having child brides (and statutory rape) in their culture justifies you having a similar position, albeit with presumably no religion you personally believe in to justify it spiritually (not to mention that you've seemingly never outright condoned having sex with said child bride while they're still a minor, and I don't want to put words in your mouth)) As I said before, despite my disgust at your position, even if that woman and I may agree on your views being perverse, I suspect that she may only care because she saw an opportunity to use you as a stepping stone by making a victim out of a relatively easy target (presumably popular project lead on an open-source game who condones child brides who has poor enough OPSEC to have his ideas be traced back to him, and probably even admitted that those were his posts) for what I imagine could be significant gains in popularity and traffic (significant enough for her to consider this a worthy endeavor, anyway; I doubt she'd satisfied with just sacrificing you on the proverbial altar). As a result, I'm hardly cheering for that woman for using your potentially-ruined reputation to boost herself up. She ought to be punished or still not garner an immense amount of traffic towards her projects (making this effort at least fruitless for her, even if she successfully managed to make you a pariah in the indie game development scene (not like it would be squeaky-clean without you, I imagine there's a significant amount of just-as-bad or way-worse indie devs when it comes to a position like yours)).

>>3994 >the fact that you can marry "cute young girls" that aren't children, Wrong. Girls, by definition, are children. And no: you cannot actually have a "cute" woman: what you are enjoying is the makeup: not the actuality. Another component of cuteness is the personality and the lack of history. The man does not exist for the benefit of the woman and I will not accept that he does no matter how "morally objectional" the scum of the earth (white people) demand otherwise. There is nothing "morally objectional" about YHWH's law: which explicitly allows child brides and explicitly sets the man as the ba'al (master/lord/etc) of the female. Whites just simply follow another religion: the worship of the white woman, constructively. As do you. Also another thing that makes young girls good brides is that they can be yours: and NOT their own person. YHWH notes the man is the ba'al (master/lord) of the female. This comports with the Law of YHWH's pro-child bride position. It is impossible with adult women: she cannot be yours: she is her own and others. Additionally dating adult women is adultery: YHWH notes that you may not take other men's women. The hebrew simply specifies man, woman, girl, etc. Not the false-translations whites read (Husband, Wife, etc (but note: these translations are false because of the changes in the English language itself. Wif simply means woman in older iterations of the language). >making your lack of OPSEC even more foolish Tell me what my "lack of OPSEC" is? Do you know my identity? No. Does your friend in belief? >As I said before, despite my disgust at your position, No. I am willing to die for my beliefs. I will not back down. I will not censor them. It is mans right to have young virgin female children as brides. A right given by YHWH: and stolen by white people like yourself who find anything good for men and BAD for women "morally objectionable". Yes it is BAD for women when the man isn't a mule. But it is good for men. I had to make a decision. The programmers were adament that Grsecurity was "not violating the GPL" and "you are not a lawyer". The arguments were not working on them. Citing law and cases wasn't working. Showing censored versions of my IDs helped. Same with using 4chan. There is not one proxy in this world that works with 4chan. So to get my pro-child bride message, regarding YHWH's law, out: I had to use 4chan. Just as the french philosophers, to get their anti-age-of-consent message out; had to sign their names. >>Were the French philosophers foolish when they signed their anti-age-of-consent petition in the 70s? >From what I understand of the situation, yes. Go to hell. > (presumably popular project lead on an open-source game who condones child brides who has poor enough OPSEC to have his ideas be traced back to him, and probably even admitted that those were his posts I am not going to hide my beliefs about child brides. It is a Natural Right of man to marry cute young girls; aswell as a Religious Right.

Wish he would allow men to be free in the world again; and to marry cute young girls (yes strictly construed: female children: ie: virgin young girls)

>>4005 Fuck off pedo.

>>4079 Physically MAKE ME FUCK OFF, you FUCKING PIECE OF TRASH. You wanna go you fucking anti-child bride heretic faggot? You want to?

.

A tor dev attacked the opensource game

>>3923 >Everything is OpenSource and I've been working on this project for a decade, who's website has been taken down by the anti-child-bride /g/ woman. You need to find name and address of that bitch and we are going to murder her. >>3981 >It's constructively all westerners. Especially western men. Only people who act really matter. The men in the west who act, act to slaughter any culture that allows child brides. Direct torture and murder to snuff out said cultures. At home western white men root out, imprison, kill, and torture any of their "fellows" who would marry young girls. We have to kill all western people and Americans. Get your guns bros and we start. We also need sabotage, on every level possible, sabotage everything.

>>4179 >tfw foone is a cuck Feels bad. I knew it already but I didn't want to be reminded.

>>3921 youre cool and your game is cool

>>4216 Thank you.

>The Tor developer is a tranny who had to go to 8 doctors to have his dick sawed off. >As noted: >>Wow this faggot had to visit 8 doctors to get permission to get his dick chopped out before starting HRT hormones while feeling super white and privileged. >https://twitter.com/isislovecruft/status/1394371115863080963 > Is involved in implementing elliptical curve algorithms; which are easy to mathematically backdoor; and are hard to get right (which is why no one trusts them), and were never needed in Tor for the previous 25 years. >A Tor developer who cannot seem to decide on which name she/he/it would like to be called by, going through several legal name changes: >AKA: Sarah Michelle Reichwein >AKA: Isis Agora Lovecruft >Birth name unknown. So the rundown is: Tor suddenly needed a new cryptographer 2 years ago (why?), hired this person who implemented elliptical curve cryptographic libs for rust, etc. In the security hobby realm no one ever trusted elliptical curve crypto due to possible vulnerabilities and backdoors.

>>4250 >calling yourself isis Clearly sound judgement.

>>4250 >In the security hobby realm no one ever trusted elliptical curve crypto due to possible vulnerabilities and backdoors. Where did you get that idea from? The one time I was introduced to cryptography in college it was mentioned as a major part of cryptography, but since the math was too complicated we instead looked at rsa. My understanding of why people were skeptical of ECC didn't have to do with the algorithm itself, but more with a standard for random number generation that was pushed by the NSA and used ECC. The problem was that they didn't justify the parameters they used for the initial seed. Here's a computerphile video of what I'm talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nybVFJVXbww I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about, but you never really explained either. Not to mention it's similar to how people say"Java is insecure", when it has nothing to do with the language itself but the browser plugin.

>>4259 Elliptical curve have had multiple vulnerabilities in opensource projects during the hey-day of opensource from the early 2000s onwards. We just don't trust it at all. "HEY THE MATH!" isn't an argument: one wrong move any your crypto is trash: that's actually how crypto systems are broken in the real world: making sure novices implement them. It is seen it as "Hey use this new thing which you might not understand instead of the old well tested thing you have been using!" "Trust us on this!" It's hard/impossible to validate if the implementation of ECC you are using is secure at all, if the constants used don't lead to backdoors keys, etc etc. No way in the world to verify any of it. Notice here that Tor decided to hire a novice "cryptographer" to implement someone else's algorithims. That's not something we can trust at all. After 25/30 years of Tor existing (it was a Navy project in the 90s): SUDDENLY!!! Let's hire this novice to work on our crypto: because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. We do not trust this. Especially ECC. I think you're a young guy if you trust ECC. No one in the cryptographic world trusted it when it was put out in the early 2000s. No one. But if it came out before you were born then you might trust it because "it's always been there" for you.

>>4259 Once bitten, twice shy. ECC's bitten us in the ass before. It's had massive vulnerablilities that were discovered by opensource cryptographers (when they were men and doing it For Free, not hired tranny fucks doing it for Pay) in the early 2000s. We can never trust it. Especially from where it comes from, after this. Remeber the SSH vulnerabilities with ECC, there were others. Don't you remember on vulnsec mailing list and slashdot, and everything about the ECC mathematical vulns? Don't you? Isn't it in your memory?

>>4254 I wonder what the next name change will be? Went from ??? birthname to Sarah Michelle Reichwein pronouns she/it Then to Isis Agora Lovecruft pronouns they/them So 2 legal name changes so far.

>>4259 >cumputerphile video >jewtube you stink of soy fucking killyourself loser

Alright, I did a little bit of searching and found some links talking about the problems with ECC (since none of you fuckers provided links yourselves), but again it was about a specific standard and the parameters they chose (which is what I said). Archive them yourselves if you want. https://www.wired.com/2007/11/securitymatters-1115/ https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/10263/should-we-trust-the-nist-recommended-ecc-parameters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_up_my_sleeve_number https://wiki.openssl.org/index.php/Elliptic_Curve_Cryptography >>4261 >"HEY THE MATH!" isn't an argument: one wrong move any your crypto is trash "HEY THE MATH" is the entire argument for why cryptography works. >It's hard/impossible to validate if the implementation of ECC you are using is secure at all, if the constants used don't lead to backdoors keys That's why usually when people choose starting parameters for random number generators, they choose something like "DEADBEEF" or some other quirky trivia number. They're actually called "nothing up my sleeve" numbers (see above). I'm pretty certain this could happen with any other random generator. >because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. Maybe they left/got old? I mean people change roles after 25/30 years. Though I'm much less skeptical about this person's circumstances mainly because I'm not worried about ECC. Also I've heard ECC is better for certain things (open ssl link). >>4250 10+ years ago based off this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGIE7KTJiBY Based off the voice pretty certain their name was Sarah before >>4262 >It's had massive vulnerablilities that were discovered by opensource cryptographers (when they were men and doing it For Free, not hired tranny fucks doing it for Pay) in the early 2000s. What are they? Could you give a link? > Don't you remember on vulnsec mailing list and slashdot, and everything about the ECC mathematical vulns? Don't you? Isn't it in your memory? Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. Also >>4261 and >>4262 >We That's not how shit works here

>>4269 >wikipedia >youtube >wired >stackexchange

>>4269 Look at this nigger trying to soy with us Get lost kid

>>4270 LOOOOL get soyed ⚠ User was SOYED for this post

>>4269 >What are they? Could you give a link? So you want me to search my brain for a LINK from 20 fucking years ago? Get real. Do your own fucking research. >Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. You do NOT remember the ECC mathematical vulns posted on slashdot and the nmap vulnsec mailing list? WHY do you NOT remember this? Basically you are calling me a fucking liar. Because YOU are too NEW. >>We >That's not how shit works here Yea it is DIPSHIT. ONCE BITTEN: TWICE SHY. No we will N O T trust Elliptical Curve Crypto. Man you really don't remeber the SSH vulns that piece of shit created...

>>4269 >Not it isn't. Link it so I can learn more. So YOU can learn more? What the F U C K do I give a SHIT about YOU? You going to legalize child brides? HMM? Are you? Nope. Why would I help a fucking enemy who's just trying to deebooooonk me? And the following proves you're an enemy: >>because SUDDENLY it needs to be changed: and we can't have the men who worked on it originally to do so. >Maybe they left/got old? I mean people change roles after 25/30 years. Thou Yea: they really need to fuck with the crypto: you know the "bitrot"; right DIPSHIT FUCK. Right? And they really NEEED to hire a novice to do it. Right DIPSHIT FUCK? You know the top-notch navy contractors weren't good enough. So now they need some tranny faggot strainght out of colledge. Right faggot? Right? GO AND FUCK YOUR FUCKING SELF. And YES That IS how we do things here. I've been on the net longer than you you piece of fucking SHIT.

>>4270 Do you think that user was the Tor trans-faggot trying to defend elliptical curve crypto (or eliptical curve "crypto" as we like to call it)?

https://archive.wakarimasen.moe/his/thread/10697314/#q10698118 >">>10698046 >Not really in context, he is “married in according to the law”, and while he is not allowed to live with his “new wife”, he is now banned from marrying anyone else. And that only if her father consent to it, which is to be supposed out of Exodus 22:16, it being not likely that the father should lose his paternal right of disposing his child when she was in some sort forced, rather than when she was enticed. Wrong, Dipshit. Devarim chapter 22 verse 28 is NOT Exodus 22:16. Devarim chapter 22 verse 28 is about raping female children. And yes the man DOES keep the girl: she is now a woman of his. And, NO, dipshit: he is not "barred from "marrying" anyone else". There is NO limit to the number of female a man may be the ba'al (master) of in YHWH's law. Notice how the white faggot fucking chirstians always corrupt YHWH's law to be pro-woman and anti-man. Notice it? In Devarim it DOES NOT SAY "DURRR SHE BECOMES HIS WHOIFE, AND HE CANT MARRY ANYONE ELSE!!!, AND HE DOESN'T KEEP HER!!!! DURRR" No. It makes NO mention of "wives" "marraige" and other concepts white PIECES OF SHIT believe in. It says if a man rapes (tahpahs (as in to take: to take a city)) a little girl who is still in her fathers house; and they are discovered; and the little girl was not promised to someone else; then the man pays the father 50 pieces of silver, and she is his female; and he shall not send her away from himself all of his days because he has humiliated her. So yes: He has forcibly raped a small female child (this is what humiliates (humbles)) in her fathers house. He does not send her away. But white fucks think "DURRR THIS IS BAD FOR MUHHH WHOITE WHHHHHHUUUUHHHHHMAN". Tell me: white fucking pieces of shit: How can one "not send her away" if one doesn't come into posession of the girl. DipSHIT FUCK. How does a girl become one's female (posessive) if one cannot possess her? HMMM WHITE FUCK. Going to tell us you PIECES OF FUCKING SHIT?

I hate that white fucking pieces of shit oppose men marrying cute little girls. https://youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o >t. white people. YHWH explicitly allows marrying little girls, no matter what, even if fathers boycott allowing such (like white fucks do): YHWH says you can rape the young girls and keep them anyway. He doesn't allow boycotts. According to YHWH's law whites should come to an end (Devarim: if someone approaches you and entices you to follow another Power: kill them). White fucking pieces of shit do not allow YHWH's law anywhere on this planet. They b0mb every country that allowed marrying cute little girls.

>>3956 >GitHub >>4657 Do you think a grammatical possessive always indicates property ownership? >>4003 Do you think patriarchy is the only defense against matriarchy?

>>4666 >Do you think a grammatical possessive always indicates property ownership? Ownership is dominion and control. If the man has dominion and control over the girl he owns her. I didn't say anything about grammar. The masoretic text was not written in English, the Septuagint was not written in English. I said that the hebrew says that the girl is now the man's female. This is possession. The hebrew also says that he may not send her away. That means he is in possession of her. White people, like yourself, are pieces of shit that deny everything YHWH's law stands for. YHWH's law explicitly, in the same Book (Devarim) refers to the man as the Ba'al of the female. The same title given to pagan gods. Master/Lord/Ruler/god. You white FUCKS deny this. Additionally in Devarim everything was practical. It does NOT say Husband / Wife as english white fucks understand this. It says, in the hebrew: Man, master. Female, girl. Those are the words used in the hebrew. NOT Husband. NOT Wife. It was based on actual life: not the legal fictions you white FUCKS twist everything with. Boy-friend girl-fried relationships are the same as what is described there: but the man's physical power and will to kill rivals and enemies is what is permitted, sanctioned, and recognized. Just as a strong boy-friend would fight and kill anyone who would try to take the woman he is FUCKING. Do you understand you piece of shit? That boy-friend is a man (male). That "girl"-friend is a woman. The man if FUCKING her. He is not allowing other men to do the same. That satisfies the language in Devarim. If you fuck that female who's already being fucked by this guy: that satisfies the language regarding adultery. In hebrew. The woman is not permitted to leave her "boy"friend either. And this is natural: since a man would NOT allow that unless POLICE STATE existed to stop him from exercising his POWER. Read the Hebrew you dipshit white FUCK. It is NOT about what you complete scum call "husband" "wife". It is about Man, Master. Woman. And little GIRLS (Female children).

>>4666 >Do you think patriarchy is the only defense against matriarchy? Patriarchy is the rule of fathers. What is evident in Devarim is the rule of Men. Not fathers. Men may rape little girls that have not yet been promised to another, in their very fathers house, and they then keep that little girl and pay the father 50 silver; which is 1 and a half more than the customary 20 silver that virgin girls were sold for. The fathers cannot prevent this in Devarim. They cannot boycott the Men. The Men are Ba'al: ruler: lord: judge: master. Of the female. White people are incapable of anything good for men. They hate it in their blood. YHWH is right to destroy them if he has chosen to do so. Patriarchy? With whites that is just used to enforce women's rights and women's values on the young men.

>>4668 >>4667 You didn't answer my questions. >>4657 Do you think a grammatical possessive always indicates property ownership? >>4003 Do you think patriarchy is the only defense against matriarchy? I.e. do you think that patriarchy and matriarchy are dichotomous? Is there no middle ground?

>>4672 And by patriarchy and matriarchy I mean dominance of men over women and dominance of women over men respectively.

>>3921 Distribute via BT, fuck moddb and their logins.

>>4672 I did answer your question; just not the answer you wanted.

It takes me a while to get around to playing new games, but you posting those screenshots here caused me to notice your game, I would never have found it on moddb if it had not been purged by the threats from that rude and silly gynocentric troll. Large-Scale city generation, interesting.

>>5075 // entity 1 { "classname" "info_player_deathmatch" "origin" "-24320.000000 24320.000000 256.000000" } // entity 2 { "classname" "spawnarray" "origin" "-31232.000000 31232.000000 0.000000" "spawnflags" "243" "spawnarray_spawn" "building_sctiles" "spawnarray_row_ioffset" "2048" "spawnarray_col_ioffset" "2048" "spawnarray_lvl_ioffset" "2048" "spawnarray_rows" "67" "spawnarray_cols" "67" "spawnarray_skip_rc_spawn" "road_sctiles_narrowroad_cross" "spawnarray_skip_cols_spawn" "road_sctiles_narrowroad_straight_quadrice" "spawnarray_skip_rows_spawn" "road_sctiles_narrowroad_straight_quadrice" "spawnarray_skip_rows_rotate" "90" "spawnarray_skip_cols" "7" "spawnarray_skip_rows" "3" "spawnarray_strict" "0" "spawnarray_skip_cols_ioffset" "512" "spawnarray_skip_rows_ioffset" "512" "spawnarray_spawn_delay" "0" "spawnarray_spawn_delayjitter" "10" "sc_keeptyperate" ".9" "sc_keeptypeignorerate" "0.2" "sc_keeptypesearchradius" "3000" "spawnarray_sctilesrectify" "1" "sc_typecommercial" "1" "sc_typeresidentialdense" "0.2" }

>>83431300 https://boards.4channel.org/g/thread/83430984/ >I personally took your game down. > https://chaosesqueteam.itch.io/chaosesque-anthology > https://mega.nz/folder/emxnDaxY#MVLFyk9HbfBri8mmDGOZwg > https://libregamewiki.org/Chaos_Esque_Anthology The game is also distributed as physical discs to friends, additionally, including backups of all the git repos, media source, and supporting applications/tools. >>83431093 >Delusional >>83431119 > but where are the afghan child brides They are With their Pashtun Rulers in Afghanistan. (Ruler (ba'al) is what YHWH speaks of: not "dur huuhhsband slave werker" (that's a invention of Jesus the pro-trans pro-castration pro-woman anti-YHWHist)) While Hazar and Dravidian husbands of 23 year old feminists (who look 40) beg to be let into the USA for their service: while the Pashtun block them from the egress points.