>>39368466Jesus christ how can you possibly be this dumb? For real.
A chart of the pokemon that didn't get cut and a chart for the pokemon they cut is the same you fucking retard, like the pic I posted proves you just erase the cut pokemon and leave the ones that weren't cut so you have a pic that shows
>A: The lack of all the pokemon that got cutAnd
>B: The only pokemon that stayNow that you understand how objectively stupid you are read the post again
>>39367857 If you make a pic erasing the non programmed pokemon and keeping the programmed ones then you obviously have to eliminate the megas... and all the others non programmed pokemon too (which your pic never did). It doesn't matter if you want your chart to mark the non programmed pokemon (like the one I posted) or simply not include the non programmed ones, in both cases you can't just arbitrarily ignore some pokemon, specially not while you claim you posted a "honest" one
