Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

Teacher

Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

I been with ATT for over 10 years and every year I see more and more anticonsumer behavior from you... I was planning on purchasing new Galaxy S4 and now I come to find out that it and the other high-end phone, HTC One, both have locked bootloaders!

 

Why are you crippling devices ATT? This is a slap in the face to any loyal customer and high-tech driven people. These phones were meant to be used with maximum cusomization in mind, Sprint and T-Mobile both released theirs totally unmolested.

 

Why are you driving your customers away?

Message 1 of 73 (23,538 Views)
Guru

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


jii wrote:

Zombiehunter wrote:
With regard to your statement of buying the phone outright. Who will still have full control of the device, the carrier? The manufacturer? Nope. You are buying it full price from the manufacturer, it will be unlocked. That's how they are constructed. The carriers require the phones to be locked thru their ordering instructions to the manufacturer.

 


That is only if you specifically buy a carrier unlocked device without going through a carrier. Anyone can go to an AT&T store and pay full price for any phone they wish to walk away with, but that device will come with a locked bootloader (as well as the SIM lock).


Thank you!

Message 31 of 73 (14,597 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

No, I don't expect ATT to come repossess your phone, and that was not part of the discussion.
And to counter your claim that it doesn't say anywhere that you don't own your phone, it also doesn't say that you own your phone.
If you're making monthly payments on your car, the price does not decrease. Neither will the installments of your ATT contract decrease. The car pymts are calculated as part of the contract. I the phone pymts are also calculated thru the life of the contract.
In ur first paragraph you question that per my thinking if we don't own the phone shouldn't the pymts decrease. Do you have the ability to enter into a pymt contract and have the monthly cost decreased during the age of the contract? I think that would happen only if it was stated and part of the contract documentation.

Your move.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zombie Hunter Mission Statement

Exterminate the living dead and keep our fellow citizens alive and safe. We will be connecting with our fellow businesses, the police department, funeral home, and weapon manufacturers to help map out, and exterminate the pesky living dead from our community.

~~~Seth Mendenhall
Message 32 of 73 (14,595 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


kgbkny wrote:

Zombiehunter wrote:
From AT&T's legal terms. Ok so it doesn't say directly that you don't own the phone. However, if you obtained the phone at a subsidized price for agreeing to a 2 yr contract and youstop paying or want out of the contract, you must pay an ETF which covers what is stilled owed to them. So I take that as I don't own the phone until the contract has been completed. Read Fulfillment os Service Commitment.

 

Your second statement is true and I failed to include that the phone purchased from its manufacture is unlocked. So, if I was going to buy a phone out right it would not be from any carrier. I would have to make sure that it was either a CDMA or a GSM design depending on the carrier I wanted to use.



This is the way I understand it - in exchange for committing to being their customer for two years, AT&T sells you a deeply discounted device. Despite what they say in the terms of contract, the ETF is indeed a penaly that is levied for ending your contract early. In fact, there are various services, not necessarily wireless, where the provider charges the customer an ETF for ending the contract early, even if no subsidized equipment is provided (certain cable/satellite TV services, for instance). Even the FCC refers to the ETF as a penalty, specifically in reference to wireless service:

 

http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/early-termination-fees

 

Once you buy a subsidized device, you OWN it. You're not leasing or financing it - the device is yours from day one. Even if you don't take advantage of a subsidized device while subscribing to one of the postpaid plans for the first time, you will still be under contract and liable the same ETF as you would be if you did.

 

With regards to buying a phone outright, it makes very little sense to buy from the carrier. They will still have full control of the device. In my personal opinion, the Google Editions are worth every penny. Stock Android, prompt updates, no bloatware, LTE compatibility and no carrier meddling.


The ETF is a penalty for ending the contract early, but the money collected is for offsetting the loss on the phone that was sold at a subsidized price. This is the same reason the cost of service doesn't go up or down depending on how you got the phone. I understand what you say about ownership, but just because you give some money and take possession of something doesn't mean you have full ownership. You can put $5000 down to buy a $200,000 and turn around and say you own the home, but do you really own that home at that point? Yes, you own it, but it is not full ownership. Not even close. I'm not sure about other states, but here in Texas, when you finance a vehicle, they don't send you a title of ownership until you pay the vehicle off. The subsidizing of a phone is a form of financing the phone even though it isn't stated as such. AT&T would have legal avenues of repossessing a phone, but they won't because that would not be cost effective, hence they incorporate a fee to cover the money lost on subsidizing the phone.

Message 33 of 73 (14,588 Views)
Voyager

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

WARNING about Baseband version MF3:

 


The work around for the locked bootloader in the xda developer forum for the Samsung SGH-I337 will ruin your phone, and there is no fix.

 

I was fortunate enough and early enough to beat this tyranny, used motochopper to get root and titanium backup to freeze the AT&T Software update in my handset back in June and dodged the OTA MF3 Update. That allowed me to stay at Baseband version I337UCUAMDL. From there I was able to install a custom recovery called TWRP. Made a backup. Flashed a ROM. No more Samsung or AT&T bloatware. Now my handset is fast and flawless. No bugs in the GoldenEye ROM which is basically the international firmware based on TouchWiz.

 

The bad news is, I'm seeing more and more folks making posts crying for help, in the Q & A help and troubleshooting section about our device because their Baseband version ends in MF3.

 

There is no recovery if your baseband version ends in MF3.

 

Yes there is a method to get your handset rooted but at this time it's a one way trip. No return. And no flashing once you get root. I can understand the necessity for root, and if I was stuck with MF3, I'd still root it, just so apps like Root Explorer and others that I use, that require your device to be rooted to work.

 

What seems to be happening is folks aren't investing the time required to read up or learn the details. One guy with MF3 baseband actually tried using Casual to get root. His phone is borked, unable to do a factory reset. Several others, with some experience flashing previous devices figure out how to get root, then against all warnings install GooManager to flash a custom recovery like CWM or TWRP and ended up with bricks.

 

So heads up to any of you out there who want to try a work around the locked bootloader. MF3 closed the exploit discovered by DRJBliss. Not even AdamOutler has been able find another way yet, and may not. It's possible that the many folks that bricked their phones won't get any help unless the creeps in charge of AT&T finally decide to unlock the bootloader.

 

Locking a device to a carrier is one thing. Locking the bootloader is pure, loathesome, unadulterated tyranny. I don't care how large the majority of Zombiehunting subjects tolerate it. It's wrong to prevent us from having complete control of the devices that we either pay for all at once or by recurring monthly charges over a contract period.

 

If I were to embellish the automobile analogy of not allowing roof racks or tinted windows, I'd like to point out how ticked off you'd be if you decided to pay extra for a V8 only to find it delivered with the smaller engine, and they told you "so sorry" about the extra you paid, too bad, we're keeping that, because we decided the V8 is just too much for you.

Message 34 of 73 (14,528 Views)
Highlighted
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

[ Edited ]

Thanks awesomebiker, and great explanation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zombie Hunter Mission Statement

Exterminate the living dead and keep our fellow citizens alive and safe. We will be connecting with our fellow businesses, the police department, funeral home, and weapon manufacturers to help map out, and exterminate the pesky living dead from our community.

~~~Seth Mendenhall
Message 35 of 73 (14,521 Views)
Guru

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


Zombiehunter wrote:
No, I don't expect ATT to come repossess your phone, and that was not part of the discussion.
And to counter your claim that it doesn't say anywhere that you don't own your phone, it also doesn't say that you own your phone.
If you're making monthly payments on your car, the price does not decrease. Neither will the installments of your ATT contract decrease. The car pymts are calculated as part of the contract. I the phone pymts are also calculated thru the life of the contract.
In ur first paragraph you question that per my thinking if we don't own the phone shouldn't the pymts decrease. Do you have the ability to enter into a pymt contract and have the monthly cost decreased during the age of the contract? I think that would happen only if it was stated and part of the contract documentation.

Your move.

Uh...seriously??? You PAY for the phone when you purchase it! In consideration for the money received from the customer, AT&T provides said customer with a phone. Simple business law.

Message 36 of 73 (14,422 Views)
Guru

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


sitnsidewayz wrote:
 

The ETF is a penalty for ending the contract early, but the money collected is for offsetting the loss on the phone that was sold at a subsidized price. This is the same reason the cost of service doesn't go up or down depending on how you got the phone. I understand what you say about ownership, but just because you give some money and take possession of something doesn't mean you have full ownership. You can put $5000 down to buy a $200,000 and turn around and say you own the home, but do you really own that home at that point? Yes, you own it, but it is not full ownership. Not even close. I'm not sure about other states, but here in Texas, when you finance a vehicle, they don't send you a title of ownership until you pay the vehicle off. The subsidizing of a phone is a form of financing the phone even though it isn't stated as such. AT&T would have legal avenues of repossessing a phone, but they won't because that would not be cost effective, hence they incorporate a fee to cover the money lost on subsidizing the phone.


As a test of this theory, walk into an AT&T store with an unlocked phone and try to sign up for a postpaid account without purchasing a subsidized phone. You will still be liable for a $325 ETF. As such, the ETF is a penalty for early termination, plain and simple. A few months ago, prior to the current reorganization, T-Mobile had a postpaid plan that didn't include a subsidized device. This plan still had a 2-year contract requirement, complete with an ETF.

With regards to vehicle ownership, here in NYS the title is issued to the owner shortly after purchasing the financed vehicle. Once the loan has been paid off, the bank sends the owner a lien release form.

 

Message 37 of 73 (14,422 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


kgbkny wrote:

Zombiehunter wrote:
No, I don't expect ATT to come repossess your phone, and that was not part of the discussion.
And to counter your claim that it doesn't say anywhere that you don't own your phone, it also doesn't say that you own your phone.
If you're making monthly payments on your car, the price does not decrease. Neither will the installments of your ATT contract decrease. The car pymts are calculated as part of the contract. I the phone pymts are also calculated thru the life of the contract.
In ur first paragraph you question that per my thinking if we don't own the phone shouldn't the pymts decrease. Do you have the ability to enter into a pymt contract and have the monthly cost decreased during the age of the contract? I think that would happen only if it was stated and part of the contract documentation.

Your move.

Uh...seriously??? You PAY for the phone when you purchase it! In consideration for the money received from the customer, AT&T provides said customer with a phone. Simple business law.

 

A phone at a discounted price for entering into a contract for services.

 

As a test of this theory, walk into an AT&T store with an unlocked phone and try to sign up for a postpaid account without purchasing a subsidized phone. You will still be liable for a $325 ETF. As such, the ETF is a penalty for early termination, plain and simple. A few months ago, prior to the current reorganization, T-Mobile had a postpaid plan that didn't include a subsidized device. This plan still had a 2-year contract requirement, complete with an ETF.

 

I will ask this question the next time I am near the corporate store.

 

With regards to vehicle ownership, here in NYS the title is issued to the owner shortly after purchasing the financed vehicle. Once the loan has been paid off, the bank sends the owner a lien release form.

 

Yeah, but it is a down pymt for the car. You are paying the full price by being in the contract.

 

OK, here is how I see this topic. I may be wrong or I may be right, I really don't care.

For entering into a 2 yr contract with AT&T, they provide a phone of your choice at a reduced price and pay that price at the beginning of the contract. Now you have monthly pymts that give you access to a data plan. If you decide to end that contract prior to its completion, you must pay an ETF that is *an alternative means for you to perform your obligations under the Agreement that partially compensates us for the fact that the Service Commitment on which your rate plan is based was not completed.* I see this as recoping the total price of the device plus unused data plan.

It is not a penalty, as you state. If it is a penalty, then why is it still allowable wording in a binding contract?  *you can terminate your Agreement prior to the end of your Service Commitment and pay an Early Termination Fee (“ETF”). The Early Termination Fee is not a penalty*...

So, I see the contract has a pymt program for the discounted phone price as well as providing a usable data access program. I see the ETF as recouping the remaining monies owed on the phone. Is it a penalty for not completing the contract? If it is, then AT&T is stating a falsehood in a legally binding contract and should be held accountable. And if it is a known issue, then why hasn't AT&T been held to answer for printing that false statement?

Thanks for the lively conversation. Just know that I'm on this side of the idea and not going to cross over. 

OK, I'm done.


 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zombie Hunter Mission Statement

Exterminate the living dead and keep our fellow citizens alive and safe. We will be connecting with our fellow businesses, the police department, funeral home, and weapon manufacturers to help map out, and exterminate the pesky living dead from our community.

~~~Seth Mendenhall
Message 38 of 73 (14,400 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


kgbkny wrote:

sitnsidewayz wrote:
 

The ETF is a penalty for ending the contract early, but the money collected is for offsetting the loss on the phone that was sold at a subsidized price. This is the same reason the cost of service doesn't go up or down depending on how you got the phone. I understand what you say about ownership, but just because you give some money and take possession of something doesn't mean you have full ownership. You can put $5000 down to buy a $200,000 and turn around and say you own the home, but do you really own that home at that point? Yes, you own it, but it is not full ownership. Not even close. I'm not sure about other states, but here in Texas, when you finance a vehicle, they don't send you a title of ownership until you pay the vehicle off. The subsidizing of a phone is a form of financing the phone even though it isn't stated as such. AT&T would have legal avenues of repossessing a phone, but they won't because that would not be cost effective, hence they incorporate a fee to cover the money lost on subsidizing the phone.


As a test of this theory, walk into an AT&T store with an unlocked phone and try to sign up for a postpaid account without purchasing a subsidized phone. You will still be liable for a $325 ETF. As such, the ETF is a penalty for early termination, plain and simple. A few months ago, prior to the current reorganization, T-Mobile had a postpaid plan that didn't include a subsidized device. This plan still had a 2-year contract requirement, complete with an ETF.

With regards to vehicle ownership, here in NYS the title is issued to the owner shortly after purchasing the financed vehicle. Once the loan has been paid off, the bank sends the owner a lien release form.

 


There is a lot of confusion in this thread.  The bolded part above isn't true.  I walked into AT&T and started a new line of service on my existing family plan with a device that I already owned.  I canceled the line less than a year later.  There was never a contract on that line and no ETF owed for the service cancellation. 

Message 39 of 73 (14,362 Views)

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

[ Edited ]

sitnsidewayz wrote:

Closingracer wrote:
I don't disagree with it being insulting but while is a large community is still a small minority. I think I read about a year or 2 ago that Apple iPhone that are sold 79% are still sold on AT&T which means a lot more iPhone are on the network. Also there is plenty of people who have android phones who don't need a custom ROM and thus AT&T really won't do anything unless you guys make a ruckus publicly through a news outlet or some way proving if all you guys leave will hurt their bottomline

You guys? Us guys that go to xda and unlock the bootloader, root, mod, and install  custom roms don't need to go nowhere as long as AT&T allows us to still use our phone on the network. The majority of complaints are from users that got sucked in by the subsidization and then figured out that they don't fully own the phone. I don't think it would be off base to state that a majority of users that have these smartphones wouldn't have them if they had to pay full price for them. I don't gripe, I know where to go and what to do. If you don't want the carrier to control your phone, don't pay their price. Unfortunately, the temptation of the reduced price is the hook. True, for every user that frowns upon a locked bootloader, there are many more that don't care. But of those many that don't care, a majority of those don't even know how to fully use their phone and/or don't know the full capabilities of it. Then there are those capabilities that are disabled by the carrier that users like us guys seek to work around. The OP got it right by stating "DO NOT BUY", however AT&T knows that smartphones are the drug and reduced prices will net them a ton of junkies. Smartphone data plans are the money maker right now. And the new upgrade policy is no different, it puts a smartphones in user's hands today, even when they don't have the money or want to pay in full today. And since the phone is not paid in full, users are not likely to leave anytime soon, as if they are under contract.

really the OP is just *** and needs to get over it.... If he wants a unlocked bootloade he knows where to go and thus he should go there

 

[Edited to comply with Guidelines]

Message 40 of 73 (14,345 Views)

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


awesomebiker wrote:

WARNING about Baseband version MF3:

 


The work around for the locked bootloader in the xda developer forum for the Samsung SGH-I337 will ruin your phone, and there is no fix.

 

I was fortunate enough and early enough to beat this tyranny, used motochopper to get root and titanium backup to freeze the AT&T Software update in my handset back in June and dodged the OTA MF3 Update. That allowed me to stay at Baseband version I337UCUAMDL. From there I was able to install a custom recovery called TWRP. Made a backup. Flashed a ROM. No more Samsung or AT&T bloatware. Now my handset is fast and flawless. No bugs in the GoldenEye ROM which is basically the international firmware based on TouchWiz.

 

The bad news is, I'm seeing more and more folks making posts crying for help, in the Q & A help and troubleshooting section about our device because their Baseband version ends in MF3.

 

There is no recovery if your baseband version ends in MF3.

 

Yes there is a method to get your handset rooted but at this time it's a one way trip. No return. And no flashing once you get root. I can understand the necessity for root, and if I was stuck with MF3, I'd still root it, just so apps like Root Explorer and others that I use, that require your device to be rooted to work.

 

What seems to be happening is folks aren't investing the time required to read up or learn the details. One guy with MF3 baseband actually tried using Casual to get root. His phone is borked, unable to do a factory reset. Several others, with some experience flashing previous devices figure out how to get root, then against all warnings install GooManager to flash a custom recovery like CWM or TWRP and ended up with bricks.

 

So heads up to any of you out there who want to try a work around the locked bootloader. MF3 closed the exploit discovered by DRJBliss. Not even AdamOutler has been able find another way yet, and may not. It's possible that the many folks that bricked their phones won't get any help unless the creeps in charge of AT&T finally decide to unlock the bootloader.

 

Locking a device to a carrier is one thing. Locking the bootloader is pure, loathesome, unadulterated tyranny. I don't care how large the majority of Zombiehunting subjects tolerate it. It's wrong to prevent us from having complete control of the devices that we either pay for all at once or by recurring monthly charges over a contract period.

 

If I were to embellish the automobile analogy of not allowing roof racks or tinted windows, I'd like to point out how ticked off you'd be if you decided to pay extra for a V8 only to find it delivered with the smaller engine, and they told you "so sorry" about the extra you paid, too bad, we're keeping that, because we decided the V8 is just too much for you.


You do realize this doesnt hurt their bottom line right? The only way you will get AT&T to listen is to literally leave in droves for them to notice and then maybe they will listen.. Then again didnt it take them 3 year or something to let you side load apps?

Message 41 of 73 (14,360 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


Closingracer wrote:

awesomebiker wrote:

WARNING about Baseband version MF3:

 


The work around for the locked bootloader in the xda developer forum for the Samsung SGH-I337 will ruin your phone, and there is no fix.

 

I was fortunate enough and early enough to beat this tyranny, used motochopper to get root and titanium backup to freeze the AT&T Software update in my handset back in June and dodged the OTA MF3 Update. That allowed me to stay at Baseband version I337UCUAMDL. From there I was able to install a custom recovery called TWRP. Made a backup. Flashed a ROM. No more Samsung or AT&T bloatware. Now my handset is fast and flawless. No bugs in the GoldenEye ROM which is basically the international firmware based on TouchWiz.

 

The bad news is, I'm seeing more and more folks making posts crying for help, in the Q & A help and troubleshooting section about our device because their Baseband version ends in MF3.

 

There is no recovery if your baseband version ends in MF3.

 

Yes there is a method to get your handset rooted but at this time it's a one way trip. No return. And no flashing once you get root. I can understand the necessity for root, and if I was stuck with MF3, I'd still root it, just so apps like Root Explorer and others that I use, that require your device to be rooted to work.

 

What seems to be happening is folks aren't investing the time required to read up or learn the details. One guy with MF3 baseband actually tried using Casual to get root. His phone is borked, unable to do a factory reset. Several others, with some experience flashing previous devices figure out how to get root, then against all warnings install GooManager to flash a custom recovery like CWM or TWRP and ended up with bricks.

 

So heads up to any of you out there who want to try a work around the locked bootloader. MF3 closed the exploit discovered by DRJBliss. Not even AdamOutler has been able find another way yet, and may not. It's possible that the many folks that bricked their phones won't get any help unless the creeps in charge of AT&T finally decide to unlock the bootloader.

 

Locking a device to a carrier is one thing. Locking the bootloader is pure, loathesome, unadulterated tyranny. I don't care how large the majority of Zombiehunting subjects tolerate it. It's wrong to prevent us from having complete control of the devices that we either pay for all at once or by recurring monthly charges over a contract period.

 

If I were to embellish the automobile analogy of not allowing roof racks or tinted windows, I'd like to point out how ticked off you'd be if you decided to pay extra for a V8 only to find it delivered with the smaller engine, and they told you "so sorry" about the extra you paid, too bad, we're keeping that, because we decided the V8 is just too much for you.


You do realize this doesnt hurt their bottom line right? The only way you will get AT&T to listen is to literally leave in droves for them to notice and then maybe they will listen.. Then again didnt it take them 3 year or something to let you side load apps?


Yes, and I got my first Android phone from another carrier because of it.  I am willing to do this for the locked bootloader situation, as well.

Message 42 of 73 (14,307 Views)
Guru

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


Zombiehunter wrote:

 

So, I see the contract has a pymt program for the discounted phone price as well as providing a usable data access program. I see the ETF as recouping the remaining monies owed on the phone. Is it a penalty for not completing the contract? If it is, then AT&T is stating a falsehood in a legally binding contract and should be held accountable. And if it is a known issue, then why hasn't AT&T been held to answer for printing that false statement?

Thanks for the lively conversation. Just know that I'm on this side of the idea and not going to cross over. 

OK, I'm done.


 



If this was the case, shouldn't the monthly service charge decrease after "the monies owed on the phone" have been paid off?

 

With regards to phone ownership, perhaps an AT&T employee can chime in and clarify whether it's AT&T or the subscriber who owns subsidized phones?

Message 43 of 73 (14,288 Views)
Guru

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!


21stNow wrote:

kgbkny wrote:

As a test of this theory, walk into an AT&T store with an unlocked phone and try to sign up for a postpaid account without purchasing a subsidized phone. You will still be liable for a $325 ETF. As such, the ETF is a penalty for early termination, plain and simple. A few months ago, prior to the current reorganization, T-Mobile had a postpaid plan that didn't include a subsidized device. This plan still had a 2-year contract requirement, complete with an ETF.

With regards to vehicle ownership, here in NYS the title is issued to the owner shortly after purchasing the financed vehicle. Once the loan has been paid off, the bank sends the owner a lien release form.

 


There is a lot of confusion in this thread.  The bolded part above isn't true.  I walked into AT&T and started a new line of service on my existing family plan with a device that I already owned.  I canceled the line less than a year later.  There was never a contract on that line and no ETF owed for the service cancellation. 


You are absolutely correct. A quick search yielded an article in AT&T's FAQ section, stating that it's possible to get contract-free postpaid service if you bring your own device.

 

http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB417921&cv=820#fbid=Bnzq0r_M7qa

Message 44 of 73 (14,284 Views)
Professor

Re: Locked bootloader on Galaxy S4...DO NOT BUY IT!

If that were the case (lowering pymts) then why doesn't the same occur with any other loan, to use your example earlier of a car loan? Cuz the price of the item is factured into the length of the contract, like when buying a car.

And like I said, I really don't care if I'm right or wrong, this is the logical way I see AT&T's contract compliance.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zombie Hunter Mission Statement

Exterminate the living dead and keep our fellow citizens alive and safe. We will be connecting with our fellow businesses, the police department, funeral home, and weapon manufacturers to help map out, and exterminate the pesky living dead from our community.

~~~Seth Mendenhall
Message 45 of 73 (14,277 Views)
Share this topic
Announcements

Welcome to the AT&T Community Forums!!! Stop by the Community How-To section for tips on how to get started.