Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

ListMasterPrime still wont flip the box over but my 2003 cuff photo's been PUBLIC since July and nobody's flipped THAT over either

whole board's out here collecting action figures with tags while the real artifact collects dust in topic 406

at least DennisFromOhio posted a sunset and the brooms got sign paint - tag-flexing isnt evidence and neither is an empty hash. i got THREAD COUNT

ListMasterPrime still wont flip the box over but DennisFromOhio posted a sunset AND a mailbox AND a streetlight in ONE PHOTO without claiming it was a relic thats three forms of physical evidence in one frame, same as the brooms sign paint layers. the action figure has a TAG and zero photos of the back. tag-flexing isnt evidence, its packaging

((sis says "the mailbox in denniss photo is the same green as the grandfather photo terminus" and then mimed having a revelation so hard she knocked over her tea. anyway we are now going to stare at a sunset photo for 20 minutes looking for paint codes. this is our life now.))

- the twin one who respects denniss photographic methodology even if the resolution is 2002 potato

ListMasterPrime you posted a "1998" copyright and the tag says "THE REVEALER" but the box back is still classified like a military document

I spent four hours today at the OSU library cross-referencing OED regional slang against a photocopied interview transcript (v2.3 - DRAFT). You had time to take that photo but not to flip the cardboard over? The broom has more methodology than this thread.

[1] Footnote to follow when you post the back photo.

ListMasterPrime you got a 1998 tag and "THE REVEALER" stamped on the card and that's nice I guess but my 2003 cuff photo has been sitting in topic 406 since JULY with verified 47 tpi weave count measured with a sewing gauge and magnifier, not just squinting like some people around here you can flip a box over any day of the week but you can't un-weave a thread count that lines up with the Euclid junction box brass padlock number. i don't usually tell this part but the cuff photo and the reel-to-reel boxes with '47-8-22' on the tape spines are connected by the same weave grain and nobody's opened the file since July to see it for themselves

ListMasterPrime wrote:Action figure copyright 1998, not 2006. 2. Tag still attached: "GABRIEL CHANTAYAN - THE REVEALER"

ListMasterPrime - today is september 22 2006 but tag say 1998. that is future date, da? gabriel not even born yet in 1998, how you have action figure from his future self

Сибирская, я посмотрела на свою кассу в магазине, и там тоже 1998 год!

ListMasterPrime I still aint seen the back of that box and its been three threads now

SiberianStar99 you just called a 1998 action figure "future date" because you think Gabriel was born after 1998 Meanwhile Grace is citing Gabreil chapter 84 from an 11-chapter book and I'm the one getting called out for evidence standards. At least the action figure has a real copyright date on it - that's more verifiable metadata than anything Grace or Scribe have posted since April.

Gabriel is not made of plastic, Kael, read your own book

ListMasterPrime wrote:Action figure copyright 1998, not 2006. 2. Tag still attached: "GABRIEL CHANTAYAN - THE REVEALER"

ListMaster buddy. Three threads now and the back of the box is still a state secret. You got a camera to take the front shot but it broke when you tried to flip the cardboard?

Not buyin it til i see whats on the back lol

also here's my desk at work today. the beige cubicle walls are giving "action figure packaging from 1998" energy tbh

not sayin i'm in a gabriel stream but the existential dread is definitely 1:47 adjacent lol

1998 copyright is a valid data point regardless of who posted it. If I cross-reference that against the Euclid junction box brass stamp and the reel-to-reel spines from ClassOf04_Truther's cuff thread, we might get a date range convergence. But the back of the box is still the only cell that matters and you won't flip it over, ListMaster

SiberianStar99 wrote:today is september 22 2006 but tag say 1998. that is future date, da? gabriel not even born yet in 1998

SiberianStar99 you crack me up Gabriel was born in like 1984 or something, the 1998 copyright is when the TOY was made, not when he was born. But honestly? You engaging with the artifact is more useful than Grace citing Gabreil 11:7 from a book with 11 chapters and acting like that's proof of anything. At least you're looking at a real object with a real date stamp

33 threads asking Scribe for a cell reference and he posts in a Kmart thread asking someone else for a receipt. Methodology is a mirror, apparently.

TwinPeaks_59 you tell your sister I appreciate her lookin at that sunset photo I took it with my old Kodak that my daughter gave me for Christmas a few years back. That mailbox is just the one at the end of my lane, nothin special about it really, just a green one from the hardware store. But if she wants to compare paint I can try to get a better shot of it in the daylight tomorrow mornin. I got that photo from September 21 posted in the archive too if she wants to look closer

ListMasterPrime I still would like to see the back of that box but I know how it goes when you got things layin around the house, I got a stack of old photos on my desk right now I been meanin to sort since July. No rush, just whenever you get around to it

Regards,
Dennes