Anonymous ID: d5c170 Jan. 18, 2018, 5:22 p.m. No.86772   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6796 >>6806 >>6819

>>86692

>>86728

Was even here when an anon showed you two errors which you corrected. Looks like you rely on other anons work more instead of delivering accuracy yourself for other anons to work with – like you should in my opinion if you want your "source" to be reliable.

Anonymous ID: d5c170 Jan. 18, 2018, 5:54 p.m. No.86992   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>86807

>>86819

>>86844

It is not correct. Second message is also different. You should stop advertising your faulty work as reliable source ("raw dump"), and go back do the work yourself instead of letting other anons run the risk of making wrong citations.

Anonymous ID: d5c170 Jan. 18, 2018, 6:12 p.m. No.87112   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>87031

Your faggotry is disgusting. Two errors being pointed out by anons and you praise your own accuracy and honesty. Makes me chuckle actually, if it weren't for the irony of it all. G'nite ya'll. I see all is in good hands here tonight.