Chronicles of Elyria Lawsuit Finds Lawyer

System · July 2020

Chronicles of Elyria Lawsuit Finds Lawyer

It looks like the saga of the lawsuit stemming from Chronicles of Elyria has finally found a lawyer.

xion12121 · July 2020

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

BrotherMaynard · July 2020

The least SBS could have done before shutting down was to provide concept art for pitchforks, to better go with all future news articles...

Vrika · July 2020

xion12121 said:

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

Apparently Xsolla has terms of use that promise refund if the product is not delivered, and they aren't honoring those terms.

Wellspring · July 2020

xion12121 said:

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

Xsolla has a refund policy which states they will refund for:

"Pre-orders where no content has been delivered yet"

https://xsolla.com/refundpolicy/en-us

As far as I know, this makes them different from other 3rd party payment processors, which do not make any guarantees on the delivery of video game pre-orders.

Wizardry · July 2020

LMAO i wonder if someone did the math behind that?
The lawyer is going to add on money on top of that set price.They ALWAYS find a way and legally.So this will be a cost considered outside the lawsuit.
So as the case gets longer,more drawn out there will be a push to spend even more to get it done.I would be absolutely shocked if it ends up ONLY 35%.

This is a win win for the lawyer,he gets paid no matter what.often a legit lawyer will simply feel by pressuring the defendant they will force some money out but i very highly doubt this works here.

I have never looked at the TOS of this operation but i bet there was no guarantee of any kind,no risk involved whatsoever.I also doubt there is one single law they can point to ,so this will have to aim for something outside the box.

This also would simply be a LLC,you are not going to get a single dime from the Walsh.I am sure most all the money was accounted for somewhere outside the business,wages,expenses,salaries etc etc.So what are they going to do sue a dead business?or a business that has no money in the coffers?

OK you win,here take .....nothing.

Wellspring · July 2020

Wizardry said:

LMAO i wonder if someone did the math behind that?
The lawyer is going to add on money on top of that set price.They ALWAYS find a way and legally.So this will be a cost considered outside the lawsuit.

So as the case gets longer,more drawn out there will be a push to spend even more to get it done.I would be absolutely shocked if it ends up ONLY 35%.

This is a win win for the lawyer,he gets paid no matter what.often a legit lawyer will simply feel by pressuring the defendant they will force some money out but i very highly doubt this works here.

I have never looked at the TOS of this operation but i bet there was no guarantee of any kind,no risk involved whatsoever.I also doubt there is one single law they can point to ,so this will have to aim for something outside the box.

This also would simply be a LLC,you are not going to get a single dime from the Walsh.I am sure most all the money was accounted for somewhere outside the business,wages,expenses,salaries etc etc.So what are they going to do sue a dead business?or a business that has no money in the coffers?

OK you win,here take .....nothing.

I don't follow. How is the lawyer going to get paid no matter what? All I see is the part about him getting 35% of all potential winnings.

A win with no nothing, is still WAY better than losing with nothing. At least you are recognized by the court for being in the right, and Caspian in the wrong. Sometimes it's the principle of the thing and not the actual money that matters most.

alkarionlog · July 2020

Wellspring said:

Wizardry said:

LMAO i wonder if someone did the math behind that?
The lawyer is going to add on money on top of that set price.They ALWAYS find a way and legally.So this will be a cost considered outside the lawsuit.

So as the case gets longer,more drawn out there will be a push to spend even more to get it done.I would be absolutely shocked if it ends up ONLY 35%.

This is a win win for the lawyer,he gets paid no matter what.often a legit lawyer will simply feel by pressuring the defendant they will force some money out but i very highly doubt this works here.

I have never looked at the TOS of this operation but i bet there was no guarantee of any kind,no risk involved whatsoever.I also doubt there is one single law they can point to ,so this will have to aim for something outside the box.

This also would simply be a LLC,you are not going to get a single dime from the Walsh.I am sure most all the money was accounted for somewhere outside the business,wages,expenses,salaries etc etc.So what are they going to do sue a dead business?or a business that has no money in the coffers?

OK you win,here take .....nothing.

I don't follow. How is the lawyer going to get paid no matter what? All I see is the part about him getting 35% of all potential winnings.

A win with no nothing, is still WAY better than losing with nothing. At least you are recognized by the court for being in the right, and Caspian in the wrong. Sometimes it's the principle of the thing and not the actual money that matters most.

also remember in lawsuits, normally is added a fine, somewhere like you break your word and made me waste time and money to make this right, so lets say you spend 100 on the game, you get that 100 back plus a fine, so in the end you would win something extra, for your time. or in worse case, with is also nice, you make the fucking idiot suffer and lose even more money

Copperfield · July 2020

hmmm you cant pick feathers from a naked chicken..

1-4 years of expensive lawyers writing letters back and forth for each letter costing 1k each?

i feel sorry for the guys who supported this game..

but the current gaming market just allows these kinda "scams"

personally i learned my lesson aswell with kickstarter games.

i dont let my addiction or excitement overruling my money trowing

currently only buying games that are launching or finished and/or have product

Kyleran · July 2020

Wellspring said:

xion12121 said:

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

Xsolla has a refund policy which states they will refund for:

"Pre-orders where no content has been delivered yet"

https://xsolla.com/refundpolicy/en-us

As far as I know, this makes them different from other 3rd party payment processors, which do not make any guarantees on the delivery of video game pre-orders.

Except that.... These purchases were not pre-orders, they were clearly stated on the SBS website as being non refundable donations to the cause. (After the initial 2 weeks period or what have you)

Just another misguided attempt to collect money from the person with the deepest pockets....or one without holes in them at least.

Slapshot1188 · July 2020

Kyleran said:

Wellspring said:

xion12121 said:

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

Xsolla has a refund policy which states they will refund for:

"Pre-orders where no content has been delivered yet"

https://xsolla.com/refundpolicy/en-us

As far as I know, this makes them different from other 3rd party payment processors, which do not make any guarantees on the delivery of video game pre-orders.

Except that.... These purchases were not pre-orders, they were clearly stated on the SBS website as being non refundable donations to the cause. (After the initial 2 weeks period or what have you)

Just another misguided attempt to collect money from the person with the deepest pockets....or one without holes in them at least.

I have to call that out as incorrect as you have said it a few times. Folks have published receipts that clearly state they were purchasing SPECIFIC items (ie. in game ships, etc...). And the receipts state it was a purchase NOT a donation. Also, there are apparently very strict requirements for an LLC and donations which from what I read, Mr. Walsh may not have followed.

Someone had posted individual confirmations with the language but I can't quickly find them.

The 2 law firms (from what I understand they have 2 working together) apparently feel they have a case. And do not forget that Xsolla initially refunded some claims but only reversed their stance once they realized the scope of what was occurring.

We shall see the result.

Edit with more info from their TOS:

7. Purchases and Refunds

You acknowledge and accept that all purchases of the Services, as well as any purchase of any Goods, Perks, and Attributes, are FINAL. You acknowledge and agree that any applicable fees and other charges, including those paid for licenses to the Services or any Goods, Perks, and Attributes, including any virtual in game currency, are not refundable, in whole or in part. You acknowledge you will not be refunded, receive money, or otherwise be compensated or credited for unused virtual currency or other Goods, Perks, and Attributes, or of any unused Services, when an account is closed, whether such closure is voluntary or involuntary.

8. Third Party Services

For certain transactions or aspects of game play, Soulbound Studios may transmit your information to certain third-party services or vendors, or require You to utilize such third-party services to facilitate certain aspects of the Services or purchases of the Services or Goods, Perks, and Attributes. Soulbound Studios makes no warranties or representations as to any such third-party services, and Soulbound Studios will in no way be responsible or in any way liable for Your use of such third-party services. Such use of third party services shall be governed by the terms of service of the particular service, which may or may not differ from these Terms of Service.

So this is interesting in that it:

A) Shows that SbS considered these Purchases of goods

B ) States their No-Refund Policy

C) Goes on to say that use of 3rd party Services (Xsolla) are governed by that 3rd parties TOS... which in the case of Xsolla said they could refund before delivery.

Negnarholf · July 2020

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Mendel · July 2020

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

I think the best approach against SbS would be to attack the LLC. If they can take that down, then all of the Walch's (all of them) assets *may* become fair game. An LLC cannot be used to protect assets, especially if there are criminal activities in play. Fraud comes to mind immediately.

Xsolla might be an easier target with more readily available cash.

It will be interesting to see how this case evolves and how the lawyers choose to pursue the legal action. But it may be a long, involved legal fight.

Negnarholf · July 2020

Mendel said:

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

I think the best approach against SbS would be to attack the LLC. If they can take that down, then all of the Walch's (all of them) assets *may* become fair game. An LLC cannot be used to protect assets, especially if there are criminal activities in play. Fraud comes to mind immediately.

Xsolla might be an easier target with more readily available cash.

It will be interesting to see how this case evolves and how the lawyers choose to pursue the legal action. But it may be a long, involved legal fight.

Unfortunately, no lawyer was willing to pursue the LLC individually in a Class Action suit due to the stated lack of funds. We went through over 30 different firms who all told us the exact same thing before we decided to switch angles. Believe me, I wanted nothing more than to go against Walsh directly, but we concluded a joint suit was our best chance of seeing any legal action taken. In addition, we also believe Xsolla with look to recoup losses from the LLC afterwards which is effectively a workaround.

And no worries, we're completely prepared to sit on this case for years. It'll be nice to see one of these wannabe-devs face consequences for fraud.

Kyleran · July 2020

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Honestly, I'm rooting for Xsolla to prevail as I see this as nothing more than lawyers and clients who knew better trying to take advantage of a loophole in the Xsolla TOS simply because they have deeper pockets.

There's legal and there's right, this lawsuit is mostly the former, but definitely not the latter.

Slapshot1188 · July 2020

Kyleran said:

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Honestly, I'm rooting for Xsolla to prevail as I see this as nothing more than lawyers and clients who knew better trying to take advantage of a loophole in the Xsolla TOS simply because they have deeper pockets.

There's legal and there's right, this lawsuit is mostly the former, but definitely not the latter.

That's pretty unfair. It's not like Xsolla made a mistake in advertising. It wasn't a typo and it's not a "loophole". They INTENTIONALLY added that in order to entice companies to use them and customers to feel comfortable with them. They gained a benefit from that policy so if someone calls them on it I do not feel sorry for them. They made a profit on each and every transaction they processed.

If they did NOT include that refund policy clear as day I would agree, but they did include it and it was an intentional act, not a mistake. It's actually really shitty for the company to try and weasel out of it (after paying out the initial claims).

Asm0deus · July 2020

Slapshot1188 said:

Kyleran said:

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Honestly, I'm rooting for Xsolla to prevail as I see this as nothing more than lawyers and clients who knew better trying to take advantage of a loophole in the Xsolla TOS simply because they have deeper pockets.

There's legal and there's right, this lawsuit is mostly the former, but definitely not the latter.

That's pretty unfair. It's not like Xsolla made a mistake in advertising. It wasn't a typo and it's not a "loophole". They INTENTIONALLY added that in order to entice companies to use them and customers to feel comfortable with them. They gained a benefit from that policy so if someone calls them on it I do not feel sorry for them. They made a profit on each and every transaction they processed.

If they did NOT include that refund policy clear as day I would agree, but they did include it and it was an intentional act, not a mistake. It's actually really shitty for the company to try and weasel out of it (after paying out the initial claims).

While I agree with slapshot on general principal I am with Kyleran on this one.

I would say the vast majority knew the risks, and new or had plenty warning that Walsh was full of shit yet they stuck their heads in the sand and basically white knighted and acted like rabid bullies to anyone that dared naysay their savoir Walsh...so I can't feel very sympathetic and kind of feel like it's just karma at work here.

Might seem harsh but consider I say this as someone with a couple hundred in ships and an original founder pack for Star Citizen and I expect not much in return and will be happy if we get the single player game. I got no expectations really for the rest and if it flops welp oh well... I knew what I was getting into when backing a game that was in KS etc.

People need to get it through their heads this is like flushing cash down the drain or at casino...once the money gone that's that...if you can't handle this concept you shouldn't be "backing" these kind of things.

Kyleran · July 2020

Slapshot1188 said:

Kyleran said:

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Honestly, I'm rooting for Xsolla to prevail as I see this as nothing more than lawyers and clients who knew better trying to take advantage of a loophole in the Xsolla TOS simply because they have deeper pockets.

There's legal and there's right, this lawsuit is mostly the former, but definitely not the latter.

That's pretty unfair. It's not like Xsolla made a mistake in advertising. It wasn't a typo and it's not a "loophole". They INTENTIONALLY added that in order to entice companies to use them and customers to feel comfortable with them. They gained a benefit from that policy so if someone calls them on it I do not feel sorry for them. They made a profit on each and every transaction they processed.

If they did NOT include that refund policy clear as day I would agree, but they did include it and it was an intentional act, not a mistake. It's actually really shitty for the company to try and weasel out of it (after paying out the initial claims).

Fairly certain the initial claims were paid out the funds they retained from SBS for a period of time in order to ensure they could cover normal refunds and charge backs.

I also believe people purchased this stuff knew SBS was the ultimate recipient and to use a term so often applied to devs, this effort is nothing but a cash grab by consumers who actually did know better, but now are trying to recover money from Xsolla for their own folly.

You certainly wouldn't want me on that jury....

Slapshot1188 · July 2020

Kyleran said:

Slapshot1188 said:

Kyleran said:

Negnarholf said:

Howdy, I'm the guy referred to as the Discord Admin in this news article. Slap covered it pretty well, so I'd refer to his post. The reason we can't directly target SbS in this class action is due their lack of funds. Xsolla, on the other hand, has acted in direct defiance of their own ToS and consumer protection laws, both in the USA and internationally. We fully believe, as do our lawyers, that there's a solid case to be had against both parties.

Honestly, I'm rooting for Xsolla to prevail as I see this as nothing more than lawyers and clients who knew better trying to take advantage of a loophole in the Xsolla TOS simply because they have deeper pockets.

There's legal and there's right, this lawsuit is mostly the former, but definitely not the latter.

That's pretty unfair. It's not like Xsolla made a mistake in advertising. It wasn't a typo and it's not a "loophole". They INTENTIONALLY added that in order to entice companies to use them and customers to feel comfortable with them. They gained a benefit from that policy so if someone calls them on it I do not feel sorry for them. They made a profit on each and every transaction they processed.

If they did NOT include that refund policy clear as day I would agree, but they did include it and it was an intentional act, not a mistake. It's actually really shitty for the company to try and weasel out of it (after paying out the initial claims).

Fairly certain the initial claims were paid out the funds they retained from SBS for a period of time in order to ensure they could cover normal refunds and charge backs.

I also believe people purchased this stuff knew SBS was the ultimate recipient and to use a term so often applied to devs, this effort is nothing but a cash grab by consumers who actually did know better, but now are trying to recover money from Xsolla for their own folly.

You certainly wouldn't want me on that jury....

Here is how I see it: This is a clause that Xsolla INTENTIONALLY added to their service in order to attract customers and make money.

This is a basic tenant that I really wonder why people struggle with. I expect companies to do what they say they will do. That goes for game developers and even for payment processing companies. I know... it's shocking in this day and age.

Personally... you know that I believe most of these people that spent money on CoE are foolish. I have been clear and consistent about that from day 1. What Walsh sold could never even come close to being delivered with even 4 times the money he claimed he needed. And many of these people said pretty crappy things about me and argued vociferously how wrong I was. I could sit back and watch them wallow in the realization of how wrong they were but I happen to believe they are RIGHT in this situation. Their own mistakes do not exclude other parties from their own responsibilities. Xsolla was happily sucking in money for this same doomed project for the last few years. Maybe THEY should have known better than to guarantee refunds for such a foolish endeavor. Why do you hold the customers to a higher standard than the people actually making a profit from this fiasco?

Kyleran · July 2020

Rhoklaw said:

Kyleran said:

Wellspring said:

xion12121 said:

It's good that they are going after SbS that makes sense they stole people's money and didn't deliver an end user product. However, Xsolla being a 3rd party provider I don't see how they are responsible? Xsolla would be like "paypal" a payment provider but not responsible for content. That's more like a middle man just doing 3rd party work. I think the lawsuit would have been better served going after SbS itself only.

Xsolla has a refund policy which states they will refund for:

"Pre-orders where no content has been delivered yet"

https://xsolla.com/refundpolicy/en-us

As far as I know, this makes them different from other 3rd party payment processors, which do not make any guarantees on the delivery of video game pre-orders.

Except that.... These purchases were not pre-orders, they were clearly stated on the SBS website as being non refundable donations to the cause. (After the initial 2 weeks period or what have you)

Just another misguided attempt to collect money from the person with the deepest pockets....or one without holes in them at least.

Despite what a company making a product calls their income. The legalities involved generally side with consumers. Whether you call them donations, investments or pre orders, it doesn't matter. A product was promised and not delivered, so requesting a refund is not unheard of, despite how it's worded.

I'll have to remember that when I file for a refund of my church tithes if I don't find myself standing in front of the pearly gates.

Slapshot1188 · July 2020

Again... this is not about Kickstarter and not about “donations”, these are about transactions that were made post-Kickstarter that all parties (customer, SBS and Xsolla) have described as purchases, sales of goods, etc...

We can discuss the whole Kickstarter “donation” stuff another time, but despite the intransigence of some... these transactions included in the lawsuit are indisputably sales of digital goods that were not delivered.

Kyleran · July 2020

Slapshot1188 said:

Again... this is not about Kickstarter and not about “donations”, these are about transactions that were made post-Kickstarter that all parties (customer, SBS and Xsolla) have described as purchases, sales of goods, etc...

We can discuss the whole Kickstarter “donation” stuff another time, but despite the intransigence of some... these transactions included in the lawsuit are indisputably sales of digital goods that were not delivered.

Lest you forget, these purchases had a no refund policy after a certain period of time, at least on the SBS website.

Buyer's clearly were aware of this, yet decided to go forward.

Now, in a case of buyer's remorse, they wish to alter the terms of the deal they originally agreed to.

And they hope to take it from Xsolla, which I can't support.

You reap what you sow, and these folks deserve what they got.

By the way, your final line about digital goods not being delivered, you meant not delivered yet, because Xsolla's lawyers are going to argue the game's still in progress, even it's creator says so.

Ungood · July 2020

Negnarholf said:
And no worries, we're completely prepared to sit on this case for years. It'll be nice to see one of these wannabe-devs face consequences for fraud.

All other things aside, I want to wish you good fortune in your endeavor with this. Hopefully this will be the exact kind of thing that will prevent others from attempting to pull of a similar heist to what SBS did.

DarkEvilHatred · July 2020

I seriously doubt anyone speculating in the comments is a lawyer, so stop speculating shit you don't know and have no idea about and let the lawsuit run its course. We don't need you to give us your all-knowing, virtuous bullshit of speculation.

I'm talking to everyone saying what they won't get, what they will get, blah blah blah. You have no frigging idea what's in their bank account and therefore have no real idea what will happen.

bcbully · July 2020

So SBS lives to do it again

Slapshot1188 · July 2020

Kyleran said:

Slapshot1188 said:

Again... this is not about Kickstarter and not about “donations”, these are about transactions that were made post-Kickstarter that all parties (customer, SBS and Xsolla) have described as purchases, sales of goods, etc...

We can discuss the whole Kickstarter “donation” stuff another time, but despite the intransigence of some... these transactions included in the lawsuit are indisputably sales of digital goods that were not delivered.

By the way, your final line about digital goods not being delivered, you meant not delivered yet, because Xsolla's lawyers are going to argue the game's still in progress, even it's creator says so.

But why would that matter? Xsolla’s stated policy was they could refund any time up until the goods were delivered. Saying it’s still in progress just strengthens the plaintiffs case that they can refund...

Howdy, Stranger!

Chronicles of Elyria Lawsuit Finds Lawyer

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

7. Purchases and Refunds

8. Third Party Services

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Chronicles of Elyria Lawsuit Finds Lawyer

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

7. Purchases and Refunds

8. Third Party Services

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV