Running Order Delayed Until Friday

eurovision sweden 2016Eurovision 2016 – For those expecting the running order of the semi-finals to be announced today, Swedish broadcaster SVT decided yesterday that it would be delaying the announcement until Friday. No explanation has been given as to why.

96 comments on “Running Order Delayed Until Friday

  1. The current running order rules a ticking bomb. Let’s hope no one gets hurst when it explodes.

  2. See the problem? They’re supposed to do it for “the best show outcome”, then with the songs being known for weeks now, what could be taken them so long? Really asking here, I’m GENUINELY wondering WHY it would need three more days… unless… unless you dont only have best show in mind, maybe trying to create a draw that’s more than show or maybe some broadcasters hinted of what they’re interested in, or just trying not to create more tensions based on who should send next to… oh what the hell, this can be solved in ONE solution: make it a RANDOM draw and tomorrow it could have been done…

  3. No comment … except BOOOO!
    This was a hateful idea from the very start. And now those so very full of themselves people (yes, we are so important that we are allowed to play fortune … YUCK!) behave as if coming up with a running order was nuclear physics or romantic epistemology, taking weeks … LOL ROFL
    Toffee-nosed pigs!

  4. SVT desperately trying to work out a way there favourites will have the advantages in the running order.

  5. This is so weird, why svt(Björkman)!!?? I actually agree with everyone despite my understanding of making-the-contest-better-approach. #BringBackTheRandomDraws!

  6. Perhaps some of the singers have to get back early to relieve babysitters or can’t get away from work early enough to make the start of the show. It must be an administrative nightmare!

  7. That’s it!No more wait.I decided to make my own random draw :P :

    • Me too.. :P

    • I didn’t know that you were cute and furry. :)

    • SF1: 1Gre 2Cro 3Arm 4 Fin 5Rus 6Hun 7Ned 8Mdv 9Smr 10Est 11BiH 12Cze 13Isl 14Aze 15Mlt 16Aut 17Mne 18Cyp

      SF2: 1Lat 2Ser 3Mkd 4Pol 5Irl 6Isr 7Swi 8Aus 9Blr 10Ukr 11Geo 12Bul 13Nor 14Slo 15Alb 16Rom 17Den 18Bel

      F: 1Ita 9Swe 11Ger 13Fra 19UK 25Esp

      • I don’t like it! :P
        To begin with Greece is too gloomy to open the semi.I’d like Finland or Armenia to open the show.
        Semi 2: I believe Lithuania should open the show with “I’ve been Waiting for this night”.
        On the final: I wouldn’t like Italy to open the show.I’d put the UK in the death slot #2 since it’s already dead anyway.

        • But the Greek song is uptempo too! Lithuania was my second option as an opener for sf2 ;)

  8. Some food for thoughts regarding how juries “worked” last year (source Oikotimes) :

    In Denmark, where the Italian song had an average of 7th place from the 4 jury members and was 5th at the televoting, but one jury member, Søren Poppe, voted the Italian song at only 21st place, influencing the overall outcome of the Danish vote.
    In Finland, where the Italian song was 3rd in televoting, the jury members ranked it 19th with one jury member giving the entry the 23rd place (!!) In the same country the Russian entry was 4th in televoting and was ranked 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th from the jury members. One jury member ranked the song at the 19th place which also negatively influenced the result.
    In Georgia, the situation was even worse. The Italian entry was 4th in the televoting and was ranked 2nd, 4th, 5th and 5th from jury members but one jury member decided to rank the song 25th!! The Russian song was 2nd in the televoting but one jury member, Zaza Shengelia, decided to rank it last (26th place)!!!
    In Germany and Hungary the Italian song won the televoting but jury members ranked the song 18th and 20th (!!!) contradicting the outcome of thousands of televoters!!!
    In Iceland, the Italian song won the televoting and had a top 5 position with 3 out of the 5 jury members, but two jury members ranked the song 20th and 25th which also had a negative influence on the overall result.
    In Latvia, the Russian entry won the televoting, had an average of 4th place from 4 jury members but one jury member, Ralfs Eilands, ranked the song last (!!!) at 26th place.
    In Lithuania, televoters ranked the Russian entry 3rd but jury members ranked the song 20th. As a result Russia didn’t receive any points from Lithuania.
    We would also add to the arguments the case of the Australian jury member who clearly breached the rules last year: Shortly after Måns Zelmerlöw’s victory, juror Jake Stone appeared on Australia’s Today program and revealed that he is good friends with Katrina Noorbergen, one of the songwriters of “A Million Voices”. “We have an Australian writer on that song, and she’s actually friend of mine, Katrina Noorbergen,” he said. “She sang [backing vocals] as well, so we should be really proud.”

    • So glad that AWFUL “ranking down specific entries” privillege of juries is diminished this year.
      Only top 10 pls ! ;)

    • Yes,it’s clear that the ranking-all-songs system was fundamentally flawed and shady.One jury member was able to negate the results of everyone else(including televoting).And there’s no need for any conspiracy theory here.It only takes a juror who really doesn’t want a song to win to vote it down thus limiting its’ chances.

      • It suspicious already that the “voting down” technique just “happened” only for Italy and Russia (Sweden’s rivals last year…)

        • Yes,it is but we can’t really prove anything atm.I suppose they had to go back to the old system after the uproar.
          Happy Easter by the Transformers by the way: http://thecurlysue.com/2016/04/06/jumbo-diafimisi-angela-dimitriou/

          • Watched at my own risk!

          • Did they go back to the old system though? I think the full ranking by every juror still stands this year, they will not just vote for their top-10. They can’t mark down televoting results any more, but every single juror still has the possibility to mark down the jury’s aggregate result. Correct me if I’m wrong.

            • No.juries will only be voting for their top-10.The ranking-all-songs system was utterly flawed and unfair.

            • Ι hope this is true but the video you posted here shows no such thing. It says the jury will come up with an aggregate top-10 that will be announced live for each country. Not how this aggregate top-10 will be calculated from the individual jury votes.

        • It suspicious already with ”Heroes” taking landslide victory. Amateurs!

        • But how were the juries supposed to know the support for Italy? I mean, the song was directly qualified for the final and hadn’t even been tried with televoters when they set their votes.

          • Please dont try to make any sense out of those rumblings..

          • If you want to secure a winner the only way to do it is to knock down any possible contender. I really can’t see how anyone could have ranked Italy or Russia last out of 27 entries when there are entries like Albania, UK, Poland, Serbia (to name a few) competing. The whole voting down formula was suspiciously used only against Italy (and to a lesser extent Russia).
            On the other hand, none of the expert juries voted down a copy paste song like Sweden’s last year? Isn’t it strange?
            I mean on of the voting criteria implemented by EBU is song’s originality… I don’t think Sweden was bad. I just find it suspicious it was ranked top 7 by every single jury out of 40. It’s not that a good song!

            • I liked Serbia last year. :)

            • I was about to explain but you covered me completely. My main objection is how they treated a song – not the country – like ”Hero”.

            • Well, we can always question how the juries vote. Imo, they have been voting strange more or less as long as Eurovision has existed. “Heroes” is an ok song for me and I don’t really get how it could be such a runaway winner with the juries. The same could be said though about Alexander Rybak’s “Fairytale” imo. To me, it clearly doesn’t deserve to be the most runaway winner ever, especially in a year with Patricia Kaas.

              We’ll never know about how the juries were reasoning. Ok a few. Ralfs Eilands, f.e., has admitted that he voted Russia last simply because of their politics. Which of course is wrong since the juries are supposed to vote for songs and not countries. Personally, I can definitely see one or two jurors truly dislike both the Russian and Italian entries. Russia, because of its glassy peace theme, and Italy because it sounds like Il Divo, and almost all music journalists here in Sweden f.e. DESPISE Il Divo.

              I think a big overall jury winner is simply a song that manages to be a decent pop song that will work quite well on the charts all over Europe, and can hold a balance between the various aspects a song could have. And if we’re talking about originality, I don’t think any in the Jury Top 10 could be considered that, except for Latvia perhaps. We could of course want the jury to go more “artsy” like they did in the 90’s, but that’s apparently not how the jurors work today.

          • Ts ts. Wasn’t Italy popular already???

          • Millions of views already, with comments coming around Europe speaks volumes. The fact it won the televoting with easy makes perfect sense and it was smth to be expected. I don’t understand why you are questioning Italy’s popularity. It was a contender.

            • So? In 2013, “L’essenziale” was the most watched video before ESC, and in 2008 it was “Baila el Chiki Chiki”… Viewers on YouTube is no guarantee for success in ESC. Plus that Festival di Sanremo has always high viewing rates for its videos. The same goes for last year’s runner-up Nek who had more views than most ESC songs.

              Secondly, a majority of people following ESC haven’t heard the songs before the show. The group of people, like us here, who eagerly follow the NF’s and the songs on YT months before the actual show are still a minority. That’s why we always have at least one FFF every year. Slovenia for example was a big buzz on both YouTube and Itunes, and the day before the final, it was even ahead of Italy in the Itunes chart, if we add them together (Slovenia 7th, Italy 8th).

              And thirdly, even IF the YouTube views were telling the actual results; is it really likely that all the jurors would even be aware of the viewing rates for each song (if we now presume that everything was some kind of conspiracy trying to prevent Italy from winning)?

              My main concern about Italy was that it was a popera song, and popera songs rarely do well in ESC (lex France 2011, which was also a big contender before the final, people said). I expected a Top 10 results, but not a win.

            • Dear Niclas. I am not of those conspiracy theorists. I replied to you only to support my view that Italy has been already a contender and it was bounding to win the televoting big time – it answers your commenting regarding Italy being a contender or not. My main objection is how on earth jurors across the whole of Europe massively supported a meh song. This is going to happen again in this year with juries supporting a similar song – Russia. I am not convinced jurors are doing their job properly when they are assessing some entries. And of course televoters are not perfect either.

            • Well Italy won big time the televoting, while France didn’t. I don’t see the comparison here. Although I liked both songs I must Italy ”Grande Amore” was performed far better.

          • And now for the simple truth : juries as demanded featured a diverse group of people. Out if those groups it is very natural that a song like the italian one would find fans but also people who like other more contemporary sounds who would find it very pompous thus ranking it low. Its only natural for example an artist like Ralfs from Latvia would rank Italy low for anyone who has the slightest clue on his work.
            Sweden winninf universal recognition among such diverse groups of people simply emboldens its case of being indeed a very good, universally liked song that had universally recognized qualities. The lower placing of Italy and the success of Sweden (fortunes that were reversed in 2011 for example) showcase exactly why the jury systen is perfectly functional.

            The rest is just conspiracy theories. Under an objective, non biased eye everything falls into perspective finely.

            Televoting on the other hand.. Lets say that last year it was scandalous. Diaspora vote was at an a time high. Ireland and Italy especially should have their televotibg results ar the very least investigated.

      • Or countries? The Lithuanian and the Georgian jurors obviously have issues with Russia – anything than musical I would say…

    • The original article Oikotimes is reffering to was published in a greek website (there is an english translation beneath the greek text)


      They raise two very interesting points:

      – In all sporting competitions where a jury is used, the highest and lowest points are automatically eliminated. Why didn’t they introduce the same formula at Eurovision?
      -The juries were not only given the possibility to mark down televoting choices, but the full ranking system also gave individual jurors the possibility to mark down their colleagues’ results (and this is still true under the new system). That means you don’t need a whole conspiracy, only one rotten juror to influence a whole country’s result. Very few people need to know about it.

      Let me add that it is obviously no coincidence that the overturning of the popular result only happened for the first time the same year that the jurors’ names were published well in advance. Instead of more transparency, more opportunities for corruption?

      I find it unbelievable that while international bodies like the IOC and FIFA are well-known nests of corruption, there are people who pretend the EBU is somehow intrinsically pure and doesn’t need to answer any questions.

      • The EBU has to answer questions concerning the unregulated nature of televoting. Juries are already scrutinized way too much and are now at a huge disadvantage with the new system as they will be exposed to more criticism as televote will be protected under the shield of collective presentation.

        Televoting needs to be regulated and scrutinized, it is a party of corruption and bias. DQ criteria for televoting results full of diaspora and neighbour votes – prohibition of voting for countries that your country has issued a certain high average amount of points – measures to deal with multiple SIM voting frauds.

        These are measures needed to make voting better in esc. Juries are already scrutinized insanely and need to be left alone finally to do their job.

        P.S. Do you call the 2011 result the “overturning of the proffesional vote result” or such tense choice of vocabulary is only used when televoting does not get its way ?

        Juries are transparent and scrutinized. Time to focus on the other half of the vote.

        • So,do you believe that Italy’s landslide victory in televoting was the result of bias and diaspora voting?

          • It has to do with other weak tendencies of televoting imo but its totally unrelated to voting patterns imo (mediterrenean support etc – and please don’t bring Iceland as an example – it doesn’t say much imo).

            Anyway the problem imo does not have to do with Italy’s 3rd place last year. The problems with televoting are general and well ingrained in the contest’s history. It’s not only about a 3rd placed song in the 2015 contest.

        • I honestly fail to see how televoting can be corrupted unless a broadcaster commissions call centers in small countries f. e.
          People just vote for what they like, be it songs, looks, flags or whatever. That might be wrong and biased but it most certainly isn’t corruption. Yes, it is bad because if you are Russia, Greece or Sweden you’ll always start with a considerable advantage of (let’s say) 50 points ahead of countries like Portugal, Switzerland or Belgium.
          Every single juror of a certain country placing a certain other country’s song last every single year, that is an example of corruption. Or 2011 German jury president even admitting that she deliberately voted down the Greek song because she knew that it would be popular with the televote, that is corruption.

          • To me its the worst form of corruption – it’s inherit to the person who votes and is unable to vote based on songs but votes on flags and other factors. If not corrupt it is most certainly immoral and needs to be regulated. Sweden imo does not belong in that group. It has proved it can miss a final and do badly and nordics won’t support them as much. Anyway, moving on.

            Juries did come in to mitigate the effects of diaspora ! If they can’t even do that without being blamed for it what’s the point ?

            Anyway my point stands imo. Televoting needs to be regulated and scrutinized as hard as the juries. Right now its roaming free and that creates a great imbalance. Juries are at a huge disadvantage.

            • OMG
              If you even have your own very special definition of the word “corruption”, no discussion makes sense. And may I ask a question? You repeating that Rykka is a good vocalist when everyone can hear that she is not: Is that corruption by your definition then too?
              I rest my case for good now.

            • Rykka is a good vocalist that’s an opinion though. Voting not for the song but for the country in a song contest is diluting and corrupting the process of the contest itself.

              You can do whatever you want. I am sick and tired with all the attitude and disrespect here honestly !!! I can have my opinion as you can have yours and I can still think one voting system is more inherently corrupt than the other if I so want to and you cannot tell me what opinion to hold ! Clear enough ?!!!

            • But I totally respect your opinion. You love Rykka and her song, which is good news because love always is, and thus you don’t care much about the quality of Rykka’s vocals. I have just read PB’s coverage of the Riga event (the responsible blogger loves the Swiss entry) and they (like everyone else) lament that Rykka butchered every single high note there. Do you really believe that you are right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to Rykka’s live vocals?

            • What I am reading (and heard) is that Rykka was very good in Riga. Also many people in comments on youtube etc who were skeptical about her vocals say that she has “improved” and sounds very good now. I genuinely think Rykka’s vocals are good, I DONT IGNORE THEM BECAUSE I LOVE THE SONG. Why can’t you allow me to have a different point of view for god’s sake !!

            • It is such a lovely spring day here, and I’ll go for a walk now. :) I’ve never had any problem with any point of view you shared. I simply don’t always agree. :)

            • Then stop twisting my words and thoughts. You do not respect my viewpoints since you try to shape them to your own perspective (e.g.”no you don’t like think rykka’s vocals are good you just ignore them because you love the song”).

              To clear things out : a) To my ears Rykka is a very competent singer. If you can’t hear it not my problem, it’s your opinion you can keep it. I am not going to start your kind of patronizing “look you don’t like the song or rykka as a singer, it’s not that her vocals are bad” since it’s not who I am to treat people like that.
              b) In my opinion televoting is fundumentally more corrupt that jury vote because it has corruption deep rooted in the majority of the people who constitute it in the terms that they corrupt the voting process of a song contest. If you think that discovers a new definition of corruption good for you – this is my point of view and again I will stand by it.

              Have I made myself clear enough or do I need to continue explaining things that in the normal world out there would be self explanatory ?

            • And stop twisting my words for once !

              I have put up with your arrogance, bad manners, elitism, sick sense of humour and irony all this time and all I get back for being patient again and again and again is the same old attitude, not even a single step back, not even a single change in this snobbish, miserable, whiny nonsense !

              I am sick and tired !!! Enough is enough around here !!!

              Whoever does not like me and my opinions can go fuck yourselves I don’t give a damn anymore !

              I was sooo patient all this time but you made me reach my boiling point again !!

              And to quote you : No pasaran ! You will be all getting what you deserve from now on in terms of answers !

              Mr. nice guy is gone !

            • Personal attacks once again. Zzzzzzzz

            • You get what you give. You managed to pop my safety valve after a very long time and now I will say things as they are. As long as you continue to patronize me and twist my words you will get raw honesty on your attitude back as an answer.

              The good days of compromise are over and you (not only you – in general a collection of people here) brought things here. Since my efforts to be nice and compromising were not appreciated I will serve raw honesty from now on and say what I think as everyone else does no matter how offensive it is.

        • What are you going on about? “Regulating” the televote? Do you forget that the EBU and national broadcasters charge good amounts of money for every vote? You can not dictate the criteria of how people are voting from home, either it is diaspora, cultural or other ties – not when they pay for it. The juries are the way to regulate the televote. Which is why they should do the job professionally. When particular songs that were well-known favourites before the contest get massively downmarked by particular jurors and this happens en masse in dozens of countries, this should be investigated.

          • The televoting results that would be disqualified would not be charged of course, forgot to mention it.

            Of course I can – same way EBU regulates jury vote so much to the point I doubt anyone would want to be a juror with all that pressure and scrutiny. It only takes a bold, just person to say : this set of televoting results represents neighbour and diaspora bias and is thus disqualified. It’s only moral and right when you can do the same thing with jury vote.

            For the voting restrictions on certain countries a message would be displayed similar to the one concerning their own country – that they can’t vote for that particular country and the commentator would warn them as he warns those voting for their own country that they would be charged. And nevertheless money does not give anyone the right to ruin a contest.

            Juries are already overegulated by many times insane rules – and still manage to do their job very proffesionally and certainly better than televoting. EBU should regulate televoting with one of the measures I proposed.

            When Lithuania keeps getting 12p from Irish televoting, Russia from neighbour televoting – this should be investigated and regulated. Azerbaijan should be banned from voting for Russia, same with Armenia, Belarus etc. And to be fait Denmark should be banned for voting for Sweden, Bosnia for Serbia etc. It’s common sense and takes only a person with enough will to do it. I would do it first time I would be supervisor.

            Jurors are already scrutinized and see their votes disqualified. Time for televoting to get a taste of that and be more responsible.

            • I think you’re losing touch with reality.How can EBU regulate televoting more than let’s say introduce 1 vote per tel. number?Cancel the Italian televoting because of big pts for Romania?Or go door to door and check the ID’s of televoters?

            • People who constantly try to find more ways to attack juries and regulate them further are losing touch with reality not me. As I said EBU can easily regulate televoting in the forms I suggested : Disqualification of televote results in the same way jury results can be disqualified on neighbour voting and diaspora voting criteria. Prohibition of voting for certain countries based on the average points your country has given to each country for a certain period of time. People who will cast their votes in those cases won’t be charged for their calls. It’s perfectly realistic and can be very easily implemented.

              Of course cancel the italian televoting for giving 10-12p to Romania each year, why not ? Why can the jury vote be cancelled if the jurors voted too similarly ? As much of a random chance the first case has to happen, there is an equally random chance for the 2nd.

              I am asking for the simple rational thing : Same criteria – same scrutiny for both voting methods. If that’s not realistic then I am afraid the anti-jury bias has gone too far here and it’s not me who is out of touch with reality.

    Why the hell was Sweden voted high (top 7 from every single jury) when rules say clearly that criteria of originality of the song should also be used…
    Didn’t “professional” “experts” notice the “inspiration” from “Lovers On The Sun”?…
    Tik tok tik tok tik tok…

  10. This thread was able in 28 comments to sum up everything wrong with this forum honestly…Hysteric end of the world scenarios over a simple delay in the running order and, almost a year after, more jury bashing from the lovers of corrupt televoting and more inability to accept the simple fact that Sweden won the 2015 contest fair and square from the usual suspects…Tiring,annoying,pointless.

    Wonder when some people are going to post the televoting scandals and comment on them btw…Let me start with a topic : Irish televoting last year. If that was not worthy of disqualification what was ? Food for thought.

    • P.S. Again, a year later, Italy did not win, sorry if that bothers some people. It got a respectable 3rd place and congrats. Time to grow up and move on.

    • “This thread was able in 28 comments to sum up everything wrong with this forum ”

      If you don’t like it you are welcome to leave, oh no wait you tried that already and no one cared :P

  11. +plus comments to make the article stink like a rubbish bin.

  12. Hmm..Interesting..The more certain bullies comment on this thread, the more we can smell their brain sewage..

  13. I think that I’ve really had enough of what has started to go on here in the last couple of days …
    Once again, you are not allowed to post your opinion without being personally insulted. :(

    • Are you surprised?

    • I am pretty fed up as well with certain things.

      • You are welcome to be fed up but that is no reason to get personal. :(

        • I express my opinion. I will continue doing so in the way I see fit. I do not appreciate your intention to censor me (yet again).

          P.S. the ones who get personal have shown themselves on this thread and its not me (or you up to your last comment for that matter).

          I am up to here with certain behaviours for quite some time now. I wont be silent anymore.


    • I ignore whatever doesn’t suit my taste.
      Simple and effevtive strategy ;)

      • I try to do that too but sometimes it is very difficult, in particular if we deal with generalizations and bashing everyone commenting here simply because someone has … issues. :(
        Good night Donnie and everyone else who is still around. :)

        • Has no manners..not just issues.

        • Indeed the people with issues here do consist a problem. I have to deal with them daily here and its not pleasant. At all.

          P.S. Unrelated to you but because I dont feel like dignifying certain people with direct answers : How ironic for people who bully other people on simple online contests to play higher than thou now instead of finally apologizing for their behaviour. Perhaps we should not expect much from people who have proven they are unable to respect others on any level. Issues here are several anyway. Add the FDLC bullies and it gets worse. I think I will be back in the next FDLC edition. Some people seem to take compromise as a sign they were right and that emboldens them to behave in a certain way here as well. Time to set things straight.

          • ” I think I will be back in the next FDLC edition.”

            Is that because you failed when you realised no one noticed or cared you had left?

            • I did care and I do care. I don’t want anyone to leave … but I want everyone to accept different opinions and not to get personal about trifles like NF formats, an artist’s vocal abilities or the quality of a song. We can discuss/argue/fight over songs as long as we want but we should never stoop to working with personal insults, insinuations etc.
              F. e. if you, hulluna and Hjallis like RUS16, I am happy for you and believe that there must be sth good about this entry, even if I personally fail to hear or see (… :) …) that. I am perfectly fine with disliking a song others love. In fact, I am both happy for Sergey and Sergey’s fans. This is not about join us or fight us, not at all. :)

            • Oh now I am hurt. Not. Try harder next time.

        • I am not the one who got personal nor did I bully the thug duo that keeps the same behaviour back in FDLC just fyi. This is not about nf formats, it has deeper roots and it was the reason I left FDLC in first place in hopes it would appease them. It seems to only embolden them thus I will be back to FDLC – I am not afraid of anyone and anything – especially a couple of bullies who not only lack the basic respect of other people’s decisions regarding an online contest but continue their disparaging offensive behaviour long after that.

  14. Being accused of having no manners from people who cannot write a single comment without offending someone is the highest form of flattery.

    Sorry guys I am not here to resolve all your issues, not my problem.

    Anyway, this has gone too far. See you at the next FDLC.

  15. Exactly someone – not everyone, and who cares for that someone after all.

  16. Good old story : the bullies never admit to being bullies. Should I expect anything else ? Hardly. I wonder do they feel so unimportant themselves that they constanty need to talk down others to feel better ? It does not even make me angry. Just incredibly sad for certain people and their unresolved issues. As I said I cant help, I am not a psychologist. But I am not going to be anybody’s punching bag either to take out their issues. End of story.

  17. This thread has been hijacked by a mad man!

    • Are you talking about yourself again ? Not healthy dude.

      • Nope, I’m not the one having 5 simultaneous arguments. :D

        • Nah you did not count them right – it’s more than that. And you haven’t seen anything yet as I said. As everyone around here says whatever they think and want this is the end of self censorship for me as well – I will say exactly what I think, as I think it. No more compromise, no more nice guy. I have a very high and durable breaking point for many years – the people who made me reach it and break it today will regret the day they forced me here. It’s going to be good.

          • I look forward to it! :D You keep promising a big show, but you’ve yet to deliver.

            • It’s not going to be a big show. My general stance will change from now on. Every offensive statement will get an answer and in general I will be speaking my mind – I hope honesty will be appreciated around here, since it seems niceness was not.

            • I’ll be holding you to that promise. :) Don’t let me down!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: