GE
New Member
🗨️ 176
👍🏻 96
September 2017
|
|
|
|
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Laugh Now 10 on Apr 4, 2018 19:09:13 GMT 1,
Yes, this was previously shared but a great read and reminder nonetheless. Cheers.
Yes, this was previously shared but a great read and reminder nonetheless. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 17:08:58 GMT 1, You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore.
Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone.
This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained.
Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply.
Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes:
“However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.”
A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out.
It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists.
You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore.
Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone.
This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained.
Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply.
Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes:
“However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.”
A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out.
It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 17:34:47 GMT 1, You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore. Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone. This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained. Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply. Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes: “However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.” A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out. It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists.
Bollocks to that, then everyone will have one, and i won't be special
You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore. Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone. This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained. Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply. Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes: “However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.” A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out. It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists. Bollocks to that, then everyone will have one, and i won't be special |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 17:37:00 GMT 1, Yes, there is that problem. Sell it to an art gallery now and buy it back later.You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore. Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone. This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained. Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply. Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes: “However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.” A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out. It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists. Bollocks to that, then everyone will have one, and i won't be special
Yes, there is that problem. Sell it to an art gallery now and buy it back later. You should be a fan of street art. It is angry, raw, direct, and comes from the citizenry. Contemporary art, with all its sophisms and pre-packaged concepts, for the most part, sucks. And it is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore. Most of street art is also highly political, which really means engaged and concerned with, you know, humanity. It is designed to reach the man and woman in the street and make them question why their voice is muted or what molds their preferences and choices. Street art aspires to freedom. In a world of increasing income and wealth inequality, of cement walls and boats packed with refugees left adrift, these are powerful messages. Messages that need to reach everyone. This means that the supply of street art should not be constrained. Some artists, at a very instinctual level, understand this and keep churning variations in their messages at high volumes. Shepard Fairey is a great example. His prints are everywhere and I think at personal economic cost. But he is a master of oversupply. Constraining supply or price fixing is instead the wrong approach. There is evidence of this. Consider what the now defunct Pictures on Walls website writes: “However, inevitably disaster struck - and many of our artists became successful. Street Art was welcomed into mainstream culture with a benign shrug and the art we produced became another tradeable commodity. Despite attempts at price fixing regrettably some POW prints have become worth tens of thousands of pounds. Either unable or unwilling to become part of the art market we once so self-righteously denounced - we called it quits.” A signed print by Banksy is $80,000 because there are so few of them and the artist has decided to limit supply. You keep art at low prices and accessible not by price fixing, but by supply being larger than demand. You, at POW, really want to screw with the Art Market? Print or reprint that s**t out like there is no tomorrow. Especially now that most of these artists have probably reached financial security, get that message out. It is called seigniorage. It is typically the privilege of monopolists or central banks. About time it is used by artists. Bollocks to that, then everyone will have one, and i won't be special |
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 6:53:47 GMT 1, An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it.
In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners.
Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents.
Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost.
At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small.
Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk.
Sorry for the rambling.
An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it.
In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners.
Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents.
Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost.
At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small.
Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk.
Sorry for the rambling.
|
|
iamzero
Full Member
🗨️ 9,190
👍🏻 8,545
May 2011
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by iamzero on Sept 26, 2018 7:14:51 GMT 1, Your idea would surely achieve the exact opposite of what you’d want to happen.
Your idea would surely achieve the exact opposite of what you’d want to happen.
|
|
Pysgod
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,677
👍🏻 1,347
December 2016
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Pysgod on Sept 26, 2018 8:19:30 GMT 1, Dafteddie
Dafteddie
|
|
k2
New Member
🗨️ 528
👍🏻 972
November 2016
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by k2 on Sept 26, 2018 8:38:40 GMT 1, An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it. In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners. Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents. Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost. At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small. Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk. Sorry for the rambling.
This theory seems to come up every now and then on this forum. Seems like it’s normally raised by those who have gone ‘all in’ on prints they can’t really afford in the hope of making a few quid, and now find themselves lying awake at night with worry. Morons indeed.
Not saying that’s the case with you, but you’re not the first person to have asked this.
An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it. In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners. Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents. Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost. At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small. Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk. Sorry for the rambling. This theory seems to come up every now and then on this forum. Seems like it’s normally raised by those who have gone ‘all in’ on prints they can’t really afford in the hope of making a few quid, and now find themselves lying awake at night with worry. Morons indeed. Not saying that’s the case with you, but you’re not the first person to have asked this. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 13:20:33 GMT 1, Your idea would surely achieve the exact opposite of what you’d want to happen.
Your idea would surely achieve the exact opposite of what you’d want to happen. If the goal is to have as many people as possible partake in street art and increase welfare, that is what it would achieve. Not, if the goal is to keep prices high or to maintain visibility (maybe that's what they mean by "successful" in the POW quote). But it's basic logic. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 13:34:29 GMT 1, An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it. In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners. Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents. Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost. At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small. Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk. Sorry for the rambling. This theory seems to come up every now and then on this forum. Seems like it’s normally raised by those who have gone ‘all in’ on prints they can’t really afford in the hope of making a few quid, and now find themselves lying awake at night with worry. Morons indeed. Not saying that’s the case with you, but you’re not the first person to have asked this.
You would agree that it seems a risk that mainstream and less subversive artists would not carry.
I hope Banksy carries that risk. No, I do not wish ill on current owners, but if art becomes your speculative asset of choice, then I think the artist has all the right to refuse that or even make a statement with that. Plus, governments renege their debts all the time and two years later are back at it. I don't see why he could not do it.
An alternative perspective is that street artists like Banksy understand perfectly the basic economics of it. In fact, even the almost exact ownership profile of each edition is known and probably, at this point, the wealth of the owners. Once a sufficient number of those "morons" (using his word) has bought in on £60,000 prints, why then not flood the market with exact equivalents. Think of the perverse genius of it. A bit scary for a collector on this forum, but the most anti art market thing possible. Sell at marginal cost. At least the welfare gains for all those who'd like to own a real print would not be small. Is anybody wondering about this or am I taking the subversive message in some of this art too literally? I am assuming nobody is pricing in this risk. Sorry for the rambling. This theory seems to come up every now and then on this forum. Seems like it’s normally raised by those who have gone ‘all in’ on prints they can’t really afford in the hope of making a few quid, and now find themselves lying awake at night with worry. Morons indeed. Not saying that’s the case with you, but you’re not the first person to have asked this. Not my case. You would agree that it seems a risk that mainstream and less subversive artists would not carry. I hope Banksy carries that risk. No, I do not wish ill on current owners, but if art becomes your speculative asset of choice, then I think the artist has all the right to refuse that or even make a statement with that. Plus, governments renege their debts all the time and two years later are back at it. I don't see why he could not do it. |
|
|
|
hellfo
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,033
👍🏻 908
December 2017
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by hellfo on Nov 14, 2018 21:08:49 GMT 1, Thx Eric.
Thx Eric.
|
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Nov 14, 2018 21:09:53 GMT 1, Its only running for a day?
Good though
Nice one printer people dudes
Its only running for a day?
Good though
Nice one printer people dudes
|
|
cnrdvln
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,404
👍🏻 1,489
February 2017
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by cnrdvln on Nov 14, 2018 21:35:24 GMT 1, this is like a UAA competition from looking at my instagram feed... 
this is like a UAA competition from looking at my instagram feed... |
|
kwatis
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,002
👍🏻 699
April 2007
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by kwatis on Nov 14, 2018 22:54:05 GMT 1, Its only running for a day? Good though Nice one printer people dudes
Looks more like 48 hours give or take a couple hours.
Its only running for a day? Good though Nice one printer people dudes Looks more like 48 hours give or take a couple hours. |
|
.dappy
Full Member
🗨️ 9,841
👍🏻 9,462
December 2010
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by .dappy on Nov 15, 2018 12:36:23 GMT 1, I have seen one of these ... and the green and red accents really do stand out ...
I have seen one of these ... and the green and red accents really do stand out ...
|
|
rjf76
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,494
👍🏻 2,662
January 2015
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by rjf76 on Nov 16, 2018 7:36:34 GMT 1, Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance!
bmw 125d 0 60
Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance! bmw 125d 0 60 |
|
lha
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,604
👍🏻 1,793
August 2009
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by lha on Nov 16, 2018 8:39:24 GMT 1, Much vitriol ⬆️
Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece.
Much vitriol ⬆️
Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 9:05:40 GMT 1, Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance! bmw 125d 0 60
Is inkslink Jonboy?
Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance! bmw 125d 0 60Is inkslink Jonboy? |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 9:14:05 GMT 1, Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance! bmw 125d 0 60Is inkslink Jonboy?
a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger.
Had a change of heart FЯ ?...🤔 Let someone who actually wants to keep it have a chance! bmw 125d 0 60Is inkslink Jonboy? a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger. |
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 9:23:25 GMT 1, a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger.
a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger. That's pretty embarrassing |
|
FЯ
Full Member
🗨️ 8,264
👍🏻 9,252
May 2013
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by FЯ on Nov 16, 2018 10:14:58 GMT 1, Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece.
Not on instagram and still a terrible print
Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece. Not on instagram and still a terrible print |
|
rjf76
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,494
👍🏻 2,662
January 2015
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by rjf76 on Nov 16, 2018 10:22:12 GMT 1, Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece. Not on instagram and still a terrible print
Just deleted your account eh?
Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece. Not on instagram and still a terrible print Just deleted your account eh? |
|
lha
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,604
👍🏻 1,793
August 2009
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by lha on Nov 16, 2018 10:27:58 GMT 1, Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece. Not on instagram and still a terrible print
You’re not on Instagram as you’ve deleted the account. You love ‘the classic’ 😘
Much vitriol ⬆️ Funny how it’s gone from a ‘rag’ to ‘the classic’ hey Freerange? I don’t think you’re in danger of winning either of your interpretations of the piece. Not on instagram and still a terrible print You’re not on Instagram as you’ve deleted the account. You love ‘the classic’ 😘 |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 10:40:28 GMT 1, a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger. That's pretty embarrassing
Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment.
a quick peruse of the IG posts would suggest so, either that or he has an art choice doppleganger. That's pretty embarrassing Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment. |
|
FЯ
Full Member
🗨️ 8,264
👍🏻 9,252
May 2013
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by FЯ on Nov 16, 2018 10:54:31 GMT 1, That's pretty embarrassing Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment.
That's pretty embarrassing Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment. What is the account |
|
.dappy
Full Member
🗨️ 9,841
👍🏻 9,462
December 2010
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by .dappy on Nov 16, 2018 11:01:24 GMT 1, Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment. What is the account
... stop digging the hole deeper
... the account name that is now private is on the above post ... so yes ... you are right ... you are (no longer) on IG (to the public)...
Take allot more than a wee IG faux pas to cause embarassment. What is the account ... stop digging the hole deeper ... the account name that is now private is on the above post ... so yes ... you are right ... you are (no longer) on IG (to the public)... |
|
FЯ
Full Member
🗨️ 8,264
👍🏻 9,252
May 2013
|
POW Pictures on Walls, by FЯ on Nov 16, 2018 11:03:44 GMT 1, ... stop digging the hole deeper ... the account name that is now deleted is on the above post ... so yes ... you are right ... you are (no longer) on IG ...
What is the name?? Lol. Honestly
... stop digging the hole deeper ... the account name that is now deleted is on the above post ... so yes ... you are right ... you are (no longer) on IG ... What is the name?? Lol. Honestly |
|
