>>938968168
> We know this one, it was partaken in that one time and it was alright enough even though one didn't have much of a clue of how-work!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZKhoKX2VoY

>>936695180
Never been there myself, so I can't say for certain that their standards are up to the standards!
> Perhaps they've been slacking in their updoings and they managed to do some GOOFS that could have wide-ranging effects across society!

>>936043276
I don't quite know, he had something on the ideas there and it was stuck in his noggin waiting to be provided!