
Gaygymmaxx
Gymmaxx Gang Leader
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2022
- Posts
- 53,449
- Reputation
- 81,348

If you'd like a similar photo, so you can use it for your profile picture
Reply with your current pfp image.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You've been well informed of them.free speech i know my rights
You kneel with daddy's home to suck our cocks abused dogI stand with Daddy's Home.
I thought you were chill man, permanently banning users for personal disputes is insaneI stand with Daddy's Home.
My manBased
BaseddddBased
Tell me, why would I suck your tiny cocks?You kneel with daddy's home to suck our cocks abused dog
Misinformation. That user was unbanned after the other staff members told Daddy's Home, the rest were banned for valid reasons.I thought you were chill man, permanently banning users for personal disputes is insane
This reminds of older forum users using this template jfl.View attachment 3904332
If you'd like a similar photo, so you can use it for your profile picture
Reply with your current pfp image.
Tell me, why would you support corruption andTell me, why would I suck your tiny cocks?![]()
After all the small cock advocacy I've seen from youTell me, why would I suck your tiny cocks?![]()
Tf? Nah, make the pic bigger, looks like Chop is eating the picture, not the guy being your dog himselfView attachment 3904332
If you'd like a similar photo, so you can use it for your profile picture
Reply with your current pfp image.
@Americacel
Would you like one? As an American I'm sure you support the movement.
View attachment 3904358
See? The one of Homelander is a good example
View attachment 3904332
If you'd like a similar photo, so you can use it for your profile picture
Reply with your current pfp image.
Cant wait till this thread gets "closed for further replies"
I don’t know man,from what I saw there are still users who haven’t done anything that got bannedMisinformation. That user was unbanned after the other staff members told Daddy's Home, the rest were banned for valid reasons.
You right tbhHope you accept this criticism![]()
I FOUND IT the 30 inches post I was on aboutView attachment 3904332
If you'd like a similar photo, so you can use it for your profile picture
Reply with your current pfp image.
I stand with Daddy's Home.
? Bro what do you mean by thisView attachment 3904382
- Do not Exist solely to troll or intentionally disrupt the forum
- While exaggerated personas may be tolerated, accounts whose primary or only intent is to antagonize others, incite conflict, or undermine the forum’s integrity will face permanent removal.
gonna see this in my emails soonView attachment 3904382
- Do not Exist solely to troll or intentionally disrupt the forum
- While exaggerated personas may be tolerated, accounts whose primary or only intent is to antagonize others, incite conflict, or undermine the forum’s integrity will face permanent removal.
I stand with IsraelI stand with Daddy's Home.
I'm just saying that what you guys are doing is actually very smart,? Bro what do you mean by this
Nah this is just an exaggerated persona, btw who says that guy's not a dog? Why is he not a dog? Any proof?View attachment 3904382
- Do not Exist solely to troll or intentionally disrupt the forum
- While exaggerated personas may be tolerated, accounts whose primary or only intent is to antagonize others, incite conflict, or undermine the forum’s integrity will face permanent removal.
Yeah, that's what OP is claiming. Then I looked into their cases, and 2 out of 3 who were banned, were banned for repfarming (valid), and the third one was banned due to the new-ish rule. One of them wasn't even banned, but yet OP claimed they were banned. Out of all four banned people, only one was wrongfully banned, but the staff members privately told Daddy's Home about him being in the wrong here. But that's the only case, the other three bans are totally justified since they were breaking rules one way or the other.I don’t know man,from what I saw there are still users who haven’t done anything that got banned
But because they’re smaller users they don’t have a voice
Repfarming, are we?
What new rule did the third break?Yeah, that's what OP is claiming. Then I looked into their cases, and 2 out of 3 who were banned, were banned for repfarming (valid), and the third one was banned due to the new-ish rule. One of them wasn't even banned, but yet OP claimed they were banned. Out of all four banned people, only one was wrongfully banned, but the staff members privately told Daddy's Home about him being in the wrong here. But that's the only case, the other three bans are totally justified since they were breaking rules one way or the other.
Nice try. The Israeli army wouldn't do that to any civilians, they're too good for that.I stand with Israel
rape those Palestini muzzles
What new rule did the third break?