FTalk

Welcome guest! Please Log in or Register.

Post reply

ARCHIVES
» GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

Pages: 1 1 2 345 6 7 8 9..9

GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#61 2008-04-11 09:46:57

uLe mUtz: » n00b; 89; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

its good because manage our photo,,,

Like |
Dislike

#62 2008-04-11 11:39:18

mjd1224: » FTalkWhiz; 2919; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

well, it's good for people that likes to seperate pics from different events.. like me.. but, it suckz!!! YOU CAN ONLY HAVE 10 ALBUMS!! hmp.. just a waste of time.. haha.. and yeah totally.. their copying albums like in multiply..

Like |
Dislike

#63 2008-04-11 11:43:10

~ Tara ~: » FTalker; 112; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

GOOD JUST LIKE MYSPACE

Like |
Dislike

#64 2008-04-12 07:47:27

bR0keN_sciss0Rs: » FTalker; 298; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[b][align=center]i think its gud couz it helps organize photos[/align][/b]

Like |
Dislike

#65 2008-04-12 13:24:42

obsessed95: » FTalkAgent; 2092; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[b]its good , because my pics are well organized .

[/b]

Like |
Dislike

#66 2008-04-13 23:38:41

youandmearemeanttobe: » n00b; 14; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[i]it suck.hate it[/i]

Like |
Dislike

#67 2008-04-14 00:53:41

pria_kesepian: » FTalkGeek; 1156; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[quote=obsessed95][b]its good , because my pics are well organized .

[/b][/quote] yeh..i agree... but its not compitable with my layout

Like |
Dislike

#68 2008-04-15 04:21:01

ChristineKho♥: » n00b; 58; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[align=center][b]i used to hate it. but now. i like it. it makes my pictures more organized.[/b][/align]

Last edited by ChristineKho♥ (2008-04-15 04:22:17)

Like |
Dislike

#69 2008-04-21 12:10:16

samanthaangelie008: » n00b; 46; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[align=center]`as for me..it`s grEat cuz wit it i can organize my pictures, so that i would not have a hard time lookin` for sum pictures![/align]

Like |
Dislike

#70 2008-04-21 19:27:41

jon11: » n00b; 77; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

its okay ... well for me ... i suppose ...

Like |
Dislike

#71 2008-04-21 20:04:30

novylicious: » FTalker; 178; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

it's ok with me, so that i can organize my photos...

Like |
Dislike

#72 2008-04-25 03:19:30

HunkeeDoree: » FTalkElite; 7055; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[b][color=#ff6699]I think it's good. no prob.[/b][/color]

Like |
Dislike

#73 2008-05-01 06:47:29

misscuppycake: » FTalkManiac; 621; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

good .. to keep ur fotos organized.

Like |
Dislike

#74 2008-05-01 22:22:54

losher29: » FTalkElite; 5917; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

its pretty goood for those who get plenty pictures... and you can see the pic you looking for easily..its like myspace though..(>_<)

Like |
Dislike

#75 2008-05-06 16:22:04

Watcher: » FTalker; 108; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

i think that the photo albums are good additions to friendster..

it keeps my photos well-organized..

Like |
Dislike

#76 2008-05-09 15:15:45

zabr: » n00b; 17; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

it's good. but i guess you can make up to 10 albums only? i had to delete some of my albums so i can make a new one

Like |
Dislike

#77 2008-05-10 04:19:32

jieduck: » SuperFTalker; 8862; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

it's good, we can organize our photos very well...

Like |
Dislike

#78 2008-05-14 07:12:15

chatta191996: » n00b; 19; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[align=center]for me. it's better to have foto albums. so that, ur pics cud be organized. and u cud find a particular picture easily. Lovelotxx, chatta19191996;)[/align]

Like |
Dislike

#79 2008-05-14 07:13:35

chatta191996: » n00b; 19; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

[align=center]CONTINUATION.. oh sorry! i forgot to say some things. foto album will be effective as long as u shud not exceed ur albums in 5 albums.[/align]

Like |
Dislike

#80 2008-05-14 08:02:31

yEnyiE: » FTalkWhiz; 2696; 0; 1969-12-31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

good.. its not that bad either.

Like |
Dislike

FTalk

GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#61 2008-04-11 09:46:57

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#62 2008-04-11 11:39:18

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#63 2008-04-11 11:43:10

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#64 2008-04-12 07:47:27

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#65 2008-04-12 13:24:42

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#66 2008-04-13 23:38:41

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#67 2008-04-14 00:53:41

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#68 2008-04-15 04:21:01

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#69 2008-04-21 12:10:16

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#70 2008-04-21 19:27:41

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#71 2008-04-21 20:04:30

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#72 2008-04-25 03:19:30

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#73 2008-05-01 06:47:29

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#74 2008-05-01 22:22:54

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#75 2008-05-06 16:22:04

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#76 2008-05-09 15:15:45

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#77 2008-05-10 04:19:32

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#78 2008-05-14 07:12:15

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#79 2008-05-14 07:13:35

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

#80 2008-05-14 08:02:31

Re: GOOD or SUCKS? ---------------------- I WOULD SAY it doesnt look good for profiles, its better if it would be restored by the way it is.

Board footer