Anonymous ID: f6cae1 Sept. 19, 2020, 12:05 p.m. No.10710966   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>10710953

if anjel G were a woman I'd love him just as much and pray that he'd grow out of his bullshit name calling and slander-shaming of people who probably want him to be well.

Anonymous ID: f6cae1 Sept. 19, 2020, 12:12 p.m. No.10711024   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>10711011

PS: the same can be said of all ethnicities, nationalities, religious affiliations, and fraternities.

Men are often attractive: because they eat well, work out, get enough sun and exercise, and live happy social lives.!

Ditto the women.

>>10711018

Anonymous ID: f6cae1 Sept. 19, 2020, 12:15 p.m. No.10711051   🗄️.is 🔗kun

What is that story from Venezuelian television?

Ugly Anjel?

Ugly Fea! She's ugly because she's not able to afford the fancy this and that of all the finery until she gets a bit older and then, of course, she blooms.

 

everyone has such a blooming in their life!

we are all Betty la Buenita!

 

especially anjel G

Anonymous ID: f6cae1 Sept. 19, 2020, 12:18 p.m. No.10711089   🗄️.is 🔗kun

their is this weird phenomena I've noticed with expressive people. They are attractive and you love to watch them as they are interviewed, and they make you happy because they seem sincere.

but try to get a single frame, when they are in righteous rant mode, that would be good to use to show them favoribley in a meme. You must select a good picture of them.

and to be fair, too, for political rivals, you should do that too.

we aren't voting for handsome/beautiful except in the realm of personability and genuine concern for others.

but what seems true is that when peole are genuine and caring, they shine through as amazing and stunning to see, in any lighting and against any back drop.

a single frame could never do such a person justice to show them and all that they do and all their good works.

Anonymous ID: f6cae1 Sept. 19, 2020, 12:42 p.m. No.10711300   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>10711142

Anon are NOT a 'core set of threat actors'!

 

8 kun is like a message board.

you give a psychological evaluation to a kind of technology: chat rooms.

 

seriously you have to look at individuals, not the type of media that they use (a chat board) to perform their fully legal, moral, and ethical exchange of political, and non political, ideas, all within the law.

 

anon might ask: as this columbiadailherald columnist lost his capacity to review communications technology?

 

does he lump all the users of twitter into one catagory too?