Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#5 - aesgard
Reply +161
(09/08/2013) [-]
#38 to #5 - walkerjam
Reply 0
(09/08/2013) [-]
I wouldn't call something posted in 2012 vintage in any way. Not even by internet standards.
That said, I do realize that it's a joke and all that, making my point rather irrelevant, I just wanted to point it out anyway.