I guess that we will just say that this was a misinterpretation of what my post read. Let us take a look at the post/question involved. This is my post in its entirety:
"Has anyone on this thread ever posted some different positioned, Hi-Def photos of the pair on the library floor? I will admit that I have not read this entire thread to check but the photos that I did find in the thread were not as clear or as graphic as the ones that I am talking about. If someone that has been following this thread from the beginning, would certainly remember these photos as they are extremely graphic, and if they are posted already, I won't bother to post the ones that I have. Carrera."
"Has anyone on this thread ever posted some different positioned, Hi-Def photos of the pair on the library floor?"
Fairly simple question.
I was asking to check to see if anyone had already posted the "HD" photos in this thread. I also posted this:
"If someone that has been following this thread from the beginning, would certainly remember these photos as they are extremely graphic, and if they are posted already, I won't bother to post the ones that I have. Carrera."
Seems pretty clear of what I had asked.
It appears to me that I was very clear of just what I was asking, and not being "implicative" of what I was asking. I was not asking if anyone has seen the "HD" photos, I was just asking if the "HD" photos had already been posted on the thread, and if they had already been posted, I was not going to bother, to even post the photos that I have had for many years. I really don't see the reason for the ensuing multiple comments
I will just chalk it all up to a misinterpretation of my original post. Take care, Carrera.![]()



Reply With Quote




