|
|
samfrost
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 787
๐๐ป 530
June 2014
|
do or don't, by samfrost on Mar 1, 2015 14:08:47 GMT 1, Destroying natural wonders in a National Park should be prosecuted. It is one thing to tag a wall...another to tag landscapes created over millions of years. A step too far in my opinion.
Destroying natural wonders in a National Park should be prosecuted. It is one thing to tag a wall...another to tag landscapes created over millions of years. A step too far in my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
do or don't, by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 14:20:07 GMT 1, Thanks for that. Big DON'T for me. Then all of the lying about it just makes it worse.
Thanks for that. Big DON'T for me. Then all of the lying about it just makes it worse.
|
|
SW20
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 172
๐๐ป 131
December 2014
|
do or don't, by SW20 on Mar 1, 2015 16:15:09 GMT 1, Real shame when artists do this. Fully understand the right to paint wherever but really do think that nature is the exception to that rule unless the work is specifically benefitting the environment it is placed in. There's a reason it's called street art and that because it belongs in the cities
Real shame when artists do this. Fully understand the right to paint wherever but really do think that nature is the exception to that rule unless the work is specifically benefitting the environment it is placed in. There's a reason it's called street art and that because it belongs in the cities
|
|
WILLYBKLN
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 973
๐๐ป 670
October 2013
|
do or don't, by WILLYBKLN on Mar 1, 2015 17:46:18 GMT 1, Shame on him..
Shame on him..
|
|
astrobboy
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 399
๐๐ป 239
September 2008
|
do or don't, by astrobboy on Mar 1, 2015 23:47:15 GMT 1, lame
lame
|
|
Deleted
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป
January 1970
|
do or don't, by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 9:51:15 GMT 1, who is Mr Andre?
who is Mr Andre?
|
|
supercockle
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 544
๐๐ป 288
November 2010
|
do or don't, by supercockle on Mar 2, 2015 11:46:30 GMT 1, Looks a lot like sensationalist junior-school journalism to me.
"After waiting more than two hours" for a reply. Two hours? He might have been having his nails done. He'd already said it was on private land. What else did he need to reply to?
Looks a lot like sensationalist junior-school journalism to me.
"After waiting more than two hours" for a reply. Two hours? He might have been having his nails done. He'd already said it was on private land. What else did he need to reply to?
|
|
