>>8744986>>8744989See? I already told you here
>>8744864 that you should stop responding since that's what you were gonna end up doing once you were sufficiently humiliated anyway. Why did you respond when you knew it was going to end up with me posting toys that you can't afford and you pathetically trying to gaslight people into believing you actually had some while further proving my point? Then when I've embarrassed you enough you were still just going to stop posting anyway?
>Remember when your original argument was to tell me that McFarlane Toys can't move forward, until i posted you were full of shit, which is why you're arguing something else entirely now?No? Since I already told you my first post was
>>8744187 (You)? More gaslighting? Ok.
Just a sidenote so you know it's me. I would NEVER argue about toys with you. There's no point. You're knowledge is too far below us. I simply know more than you considering you've probably never seen these toys in person. That plus your arguments coming from a place of jealousy instead of objectivity just makes talking about toys with you pointless.
Reposting since I forgot to post more toys that make you jealous.
