F.king

M, L, B, S are doing something for themselves
0 Q9 s( w- Z- c  SM is for his pride) ?# z5 }( R& q2 t: B
L is for visiting her lover
) @( @. ?* G' {B is for money6 b* ^5 e' k. Q* u
S is for sex$ o1 {! {) l# c  q5 M+ z
except F, he can't get anything, p' U' u. [1 y! i  e5 [
but he just did something wrong for friends
. f) q- Y& D0 ltherefore, I wound like to support F0 m- s# \% T8 v7 i8 J
Actually, in the world, there is so many this kind of friends surround us and I think we should not lose them. they always do something for us without gain anything0 @' X4 k+ K5 {) r

6 j  c$ \5 r. Z3 J# ]; i" bfrom good to bad
4 p, e0 ^7 m5 X. i3 S" }: WF >L> B> S>M

F.king

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-26 12:00 AM:, y) P& E9 n% B, S6 D) N0 {7 E: {
準時12:00
. u9 J* Y( u6 D) @. j( m
1 h- a6 |6 E- G5 ^0 G/ c! \[colo ...

Well, the analysis is quite suit to me0 C6 f& ?: v( @3 k# n5 {* O+ d& s
I had posted my answer before, and I am in this case/ V% w. O- m  u& S# J. E+ r, X
* t+ P4 V. ^* o) C
2) 把友情跟愛情排在附近的朋友, 你們又認為此兩者可以共存嗎?: c6 m- t# z" w9 A$ m/ a4 o$ W: `+ S2 ^; ?4 R

! o8 ]# q0 y' }, O  Y9 w3 \& h) QI believe this is very hard to be together
/ N! P0 \5 i) p7 W% }but I still trust that both of them can be together