>>1618690Maybe he's trying to point out that the more recent one is of lower quality? Which is an understandable mistake, considering whoever posted it may not have looked at all of the 100 some other images in the thread that are fucking months old.
But then, since he didn't use any actual words, we're left to wonder what the fuck he meant, which is just like trying to browse /b/, except that this thread won't get pruned until approximately the summer solstice.
