Worst Musical artist of all time
Your comment on the chart
Comments on this chart
  • TheJargonKing
    TheJargonKing
    2 mar 10
    Rather strange ranking: in your view, Aerosmith, Yes, and even the Beatles would be worse than Pupo, Minghi, Celine Dion, Black Eyed Peas, and Lady Gaga, to name just a few. Quite peculiar, to say the least.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    3 mar 10
    ..no, watch out Jargon!..read the title of the ranking carefully..we are still talking about "musical artists"..frankly, I don't think I can consider such items as pupo, amedeo minchia, celine dindon, black eyed peas, and lady caga..I define them differently: crap
     
  • Lottalovejump
    Lottalovejump
    14 mar 10
    Come on, with everything that's out there, you think Queen, Elvis, The Beatles, Ramones, and Genesis are among the 20 worst artists?
     
  • cappio al pollo
    cappio al pollo
    9 apr 10
    Actually, he has already answered, and impeccably so :D However, now I believe it is Scaruffi.
     
  • keke
    keke
    1 may 10
    I'm good with everything, we can discuss all the names. But not Elvis.
     
  • Rage
    Rage
    12 may 10
    hey but Eros is not an artist...
    then neither is Pupo!!!
     
  • grancistone
    grancistone
    4 jun 10
    beautiful!
     
  • gae
    gae
    4 jun 10
    Genesis? Nirvana? Beatles? David Bowie?..whatever makes you happy.
     
  • Emerson
    Emerson
    19 jun 10
    Yes, alright. Santana gets on your nerves. We got it!
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    2 jul 10
    I saw that you are a big fan of the Stones, so it's NORMAL that the Beatles are in this ranking... these should be rankings, let's say objective, even if there’s very little objectivity in musical tastes, but here it borders on the ridiculous; it seems like a ranking of: the artists I hate the most just because they are more famous than the ones I adore. Ridiculous ranking.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    8 jul 10
    ..Peppe Weapon, I like dirty, ragged, loud, violent, erotic, drunken, lazy, and damned blues, so I’m not fond of progressive rock artists (with a few rare exceptions: King Crimson and Robert Wyatt) nor of the clean and polished pop artists (the Beatles above all, except for a few songs, like Helter Skelter or Yer Blues). Finally, I don’t think my musical tastes are ridiculous since my greatest passion is classical music (Beethoven above all). My favorites are the Stones, Tom Waits, Jimi Hendrix (see ranking).. I don’t think they can be considered ridiculous.
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    14 jul 10
    hahahahahaha
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    14 jul 10
    So, first of all, I’d like to clarify one thing: TELL ME, HIGHLIGHT IT, AND PRINT IT IN THE SKY WHERE I WROTE THAT YOU HAVE RIDICULOUS MUSICAL TASTES? I wrote that THE RANKING is ridiculous, which is QUITE DIFFERENT... it wouldn’t be fair to say that someone’s musical tastes are horrible just because they hate a famous band, but here you have the Queen in the top spots, who, as usual, are being ridiculed for a reason that is still unclear to me...
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    14 jul 10
    They’re not the best, but putting them ABOVE people like Vasco Rossi and Michael Jackson, with all due respect, seems to me like the classic mindset of someone who hates a band, throwing objectivity out the window... since it's a ranking based on who you hate the most, and not on the worst artist of all time, to me it’s a ridiculous list; there has to be at least some objectivity. So now I’ll create a ranking where I put U2 and Phil Collins in first place, you should expect someone to tell you it’s a ridiculous list, but that’s quite different from saying that your musical tastes are ridiculous.
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    14 jul 10
    I apologize for being lengthy, but I wanted to emphasize the fact that I absolutely do not find your tastes ridiculous; you simply let your dislike take over in this ranking, that's all :D
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    15 jul 10
    ..the queens are, in my opinion, the most flamboyant, pompous, kitschy, vulgar, crude, and blatantly commercial group I've ever listened to and seen.. and then, it's true, I hate them to death..
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    15 jul 10
    Then I saw that you put Yes and Genesis... I mean, I believe they don't deserve to be on that list just because they sold well in the '80s; their incredible debuts can't be erased by a bland '80s era. Of course, there are always the Queen on these lists, who I must say I don't like as much as I used to. I find them rather gaudy now, and in the '80s, definitely commercial, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Freddie Mercury was one of the most charismatic figures ever, that Brian May is a very good guitarist, and that John Deacon is an average bassist... Roger Taylor is a hack, but at least he's a decent songwriter.
     
  • berlinboy85
    berlinboy85
    15 jul 10
    I don't understand why people have to be so annoying about other people's rankings... does it hurt you so much to see your musical idol placed among the worst? Whatever! P.S.: I completely agree with J&R's comment about Queen.
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    15 jul 10
    And I don't understand why people who have nothing to do with it should break the balls about other people's comments on others' rankings... it really seems like a thing with constructiveness=0 and a desire to be a pain in the ass=1000. And it's not just about "little idols," but about a lot of groups that have been placed in dislike, I'm not just talking about Queen. And then, comments are enabled for a reason, to express an opinion, so those who criticize others' comments should also criticize themselves, because they've put themselves on the same line.
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    15 jul 10
    This is the motivation. 1) You say that Pupo, Minghi... are not artists. Well, you should then provide a definition of an artist, that is, say what the minimum common denominator is for anyone who can aspire to be called such. Otherwise, it doesn’t make sense. For me, even Vasco Rossi is not an artist. 2) People like Queen, Santana, Beatles, Nirvana, Genesis, Aerosmith, Bowie, Presley (I detest all of these) and Yes (I don’t detest them) I believe cannot be defined as bad musical artists. Moreover, at the level of Jackson, Madonna, Oasis, Vasco and other useless pseudomusicians. 3) I’m not saying that this ranking is poorly done, but only that rankings of the "worst" are even more unimaginable than those of the "best" for the simple reason that the former are many more (I believe they are at least 1000 times more numerous quantitatively). 4) Everyone has their tastes and it’s good to make these rankings. 5) Everyone has their tastes and it’s good to freely comment on these rankings.
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    7 aug 10
    Queen, Beatles, Yes, and Genesis could easily take the top four spots in the best of all time, and you even put them among the worst??? What a ridiculous ranking, or rather, ridiculously ridiculous! XD
     
  • sfascia carrozze
    sfascia carrozze
    7 aug 10
    Alas, my beloved Lady Gaga is missing! But then again, one cannot have it all from this wretched life.
     
  • cappio al pollo
    cappio al pollo
    7 aug 10
    Macc(h)ome? Your beloved among the worst?
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    11 aug 10
    At this point, I would also add the U2 ;)
     
  • fuggitivo
    fuggitivo
    23 nov 10
    Poor Genesis! Well, I know they're overrated, but they're definitely not among the worst.
     
  • JohannesUlver
    JohannesUlver
    23 nov 10
    ..the Queen are, in my opinion, the most gaudy, pompous, kitschy, vulgar, coarse, blatantly commercial band I've ever listened to and seen.. and yes, it's true, I love them to death..
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    23 nov 10
    I quote you in all places, in all lakes, in all the world, Johannes!!! :D
     
  • Felo
    Felo
    24 nov 10
    It's always a pleasure to see the Beatles :D
     
  • Rock70
    Rock70
    16 jan 11
    you make me feel incredibly sorry j&r! so... I mean... I wanted to say that... this makes me realize that you don't know anything about the bands or artists you've mentioned! aside from vasco rossi and ligabue! moreover, you definitely don't know santana if you consider him the fifth worst music artist of all time!
     
  • Rock70
    Rock70
    16 jan 11
    By the way: it's completely wrong to compare artists like Frank Zappa with artists like Beethoven! They are from before t7.
     
  • Rock70
    Rock70
    16 jan 11
    *All sorts of different genres, and then you can’t judge an artist by comparing them to another... no one is better than anyone else. For example, for you Beethoven is the greatest of all, and for others the greatest might be Mozart... for me, for example, the greatest of the 900s is the great Frank Zappa, who I definitely don’t compare to Beethoven, but I know that in terms of genius they are both monstrous geniuses... in fact, I would be more inclined to consider Frank Zappa to be more of a genius than Beethoven (let me be clear that I’m not judging the artists in terms of composition or performance...). I hope you don’t get angry at my comment; it’s just my opinion... p.s. listen to some great Santana: Lotus, Abraxas, Santana, Santana 3, Caravanserai, Welcome, and Amigos. You’ll change your opinion about them.
     
  • Felo
    Felo
    16 jan 11
    Comparing Mozart and Beethoven is nonsense, for example. Beethoven is superior to the nth degree.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    21 jan 11
    Beethoven is THE GENIUS, not just a genius... Frank Zappa is a genius... anyway, I chose these artists based on the money I've wasted buying their CDs... let me explain... I bought them, I listened to them, I listened to them multiple times because I bought them, and then I asked myself... damn, why did I buy these??!!!!!!.. this music sucks!!!!!.. Santana is terrible, atrocious to my ears... especially Abraxas and the album with the lion... it gives me chills of disgust...
     
  • Rock70
    Rock70
    4 feb 11
    be...probably only for your ears...abraxas is among the gems of all rock music and beyond, and there are those who hate santana but admit that abraxas is something that comes and will never return...one of those beautiful things that happen only once...anyway, the album is by the not-yet-grown santana with rather poor gear (poor things, they were quite poor...). listen to caravanserai, lotus, and welcome at least...I'm sure you'll change your mind! (in welcome there's also a reprise of a piece by bach...). LET ME KNOW!!!
     
  • bathenay
    bathenay
    4 feb 11
    @Rock70: let him listen to that dead dog Bob Dylan, what do you care if he can't appreciate Santana?
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    4 feb 11
    I too, J&r, have had my fill of Queen, but I would never dream of labeling them, even as a joke, as the worst artist of all time... even for an emotional connection, although they no longer move me one way or the other... let's just say your comment was a kind of "revenge" :)
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    5 feb 11
    ..no it's not about revenge..also because I have never been attached to Queen's music..since I was a kid I couldn't stand them..in my opinion, there is some intrinsic bad taste in Queen's music..an innate bad taste
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    5 feb 11
    Leave it like that j&r, it's almost perfect.
     
  • Rock70
    Rock70
    11 feb 11
    Santana is three to four times better than Bob Dylan! Anyway, let me know about the albums I mentioned!
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    11 feb 11
    Certo! Inviami il testo che desideri tradurre e procederò con la traduzione.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    13 feb 11
    ..well, everyone can say whatever they want.. even that Morricone is better than Beethoven and that Faletti is better than Dostoevsky and that Hitler as a painter is better than Max Ernst and that marda is better than lasagna.. de gustibus... and anyway, I don't know when I'll listen to those Santana records.. first I have to listen to a hundred classical records parked in the attic..
     
  • geezer_butler
    geezer_butler
    22 apr 11
    A classic ranking from a user who loves "niche" music that tears down major "mainstream" artists just to seem different... (e.g. Zeppelin, Beatles, Nirvana, Genesis, Pink Floyd)
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    22 apr 11
    You're really mistaken with "ranking ranking"... I don't want to appear different at all, and I don't love niche music at all... I like Beethoven, who even the stones know... I like Bruce Springsteen, can you believe it... I express my ideas with conviction...
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    22 apr 11
    point
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    22 apr 11
    Classic idiot comment.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    23 apr 11
    Explain yourself, idiot, for what reason?? The user told me that I listen to niche music, and I explained that it's not true... Bob Dylan, Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, Jimi Hendrix don't seem to be niche to me... Anyway, you insult me for no reason, so you're a stupid jerk, you dumbass... bye.
     
  • magnum p.i.
    magnum p.i.
    27 apr 11
    Ok, on this there’s nothing to say. The query bulsara are the most ridiculous thing that's ever happened in rock music. Come on Johnny, let’s make peace. If it weren't for the fact that classical music drives me nuts, we have almost the exact same ideas.
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    27 apr 11
    J&r, it’s you who offends for no reason. The classic idiot comment was in reference to geezer_butler's comment... You beat me by a few seconds and it appeared under yours instead of his. Hello, dizzy idiot, cock face.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    27 apr 11
    ok, Stefano90.. I messed up.. I apologize..
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    Even today, 40 years later, Queen remain misunderstood by certain people who are unable to grasp their sardonic grandeur... but whatever. @j&r: however, Vasco, Liga, Madonna seem a bit too much to me, I mean, are they even artists? :D
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    27 apr 11
    "remain misunderstood"… but why is there nothing to understand… a band whose musical content consists of a pile of more or less random clichés… an abominable mess, pompous and clumsy, seasoned with a theatricality and stage presence that is always exaggerated, exasperated, inflated… in short, something unwatchable and inaudible…
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    It wasn’t necessary for you to write me yet another copy-and-paste scroll; I already assume you belong to those “certain” people I mentioned earlier… rather, getting back to the ranking, I was struck by the presence of several non-artists, like Oasis, Duran Duran,... I mean, Santana or Genesis are another thing altogether. Bye.
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    27 apr 11
    ..well, I tried to avoid including people like Dari, Finley, Tokio Hotel, Avril Lavigne, Nelly Furtado, Al Bano, Lady Gaga, Pupo, Minghi, Celine Dion, Black Eyed Peas, Gigi D'Alessio, Renato Zero, Biagio Antonacci, Bob Sinclar, David Guetta, Rihanna, Spears, Take That, Robbie Williams, Fabri Fibra, Articolo 31, Jovanotti, Marco Carta, Scanu, Amoroso, Emma, all the coatti rappers from MTV and so much more of that kind... these are certainly not artists... Oasis, Vasco, Liga, Madonna, Duran, these are all people who have made a truly powerful impact in the music world and are considered by many ordinary people as well as numerous experts and music critics to be artists of the highest caliber...
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    oh, ok, I got you... ;)
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    27 apr 11
    J&r, are you a fan of Scaruffi? You use his same words XD Anyway, aside from tastes, they certainly weren't an exceptional band; technically they weren't monsters (aside from May, who was an above-average guitarist), and from "A Day at The Races" onwards, they really became a pile of more or less random clichés, as our Scaruffi would say, the source of inspiration for our j&r. However, in their early years, they definitely had something extra. Seeing Yes, Bocelli, Sting, and Santana all in the same chart is quite a shock xD
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    Is he an above-average guitarist? It doesn't seem that way to me; technically, he was nothing special (skillful and with a fairly personal style, that’s true). Said by a QUEEN fan.
     
  • Peppe Weapon
    Peppe Weapon
    27 apr 11
    Well, if you compare him to Blackmore, Page, and similar, obviously he's not on their level, but certainly among many rock bands, May was above average both in style and technique. That he’s a complete sell-out is another story :)
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    Certainly, but I consider May one of the great guitarists of rock, so obviously I compare him with the other greats of the guitar (first Santana, Blackmore, Page, Hackett, etc.) ;)
    Anyway, a fantastic May (last 15 years excluded)
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    @hjhhjij: Brian May was one of the first guitarists to use and perfect the tapping technique, he invented the echo-delay effect, creating true "multi-harmonies" for guitar. Then in the studio, he created special effects with the guitar without using synthesizers, reproducing, for example, with his Red Special the sounds of the clarinet. In short, he’s not a newcomer... but if he were limited to just showing off a technique for its own sake with the usual showy solos, then that would be different...
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    In fact, he was really good with effects and particular sounds, and he was technically a good guitarist, just nothing exceptional ;)
    As for tapping... Genesis-Nursery Cryme-The Return of the giant hogweed-1971 STEVE HACKETT! XD
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    Yes, in fact Hackett started earlier, but even May was using tapping in the '73 live shows. ;) This is what Steve Vai says about Brian May: "He's probably one of the top identifiable guitar players, even more so than Beck, Page, and Clapton. They're all so identifiable, but Brian May has such a tone in his head and in his fingers. It speaks volumes. His contribution to orchestrated guitars is unprecedented. There was nothing like it before him." >>>> I think it's clear...
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    I understand ;) I wanted to clarify Hackett's leadership (for which I'll miss the concert on May 13 :( ) XD But I reaffirm that I consider Brian May an excellent guitarist ;)
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    Brian :D
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    In the album chart, there are things I absolutely agree with and others I definitely don’t (Genesis first and foremost :)
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    I get it, I'm aware of Hackett's decisive importance in the evolution of tapping. I just wanted to say that even Brian contributed his part, to the point that he was one of the study models for a certain Eddie Van Halen... then well, Eruption came along! :D
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    "then well Eruption arrived" and these dicks XD
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    Better Hackett and May a thousand times.
     
  • geb
    geb
    27 apr 11
    See? I told you that you didn't understand a damn thing. You like Queen and Vasco... what the hell are you doing with Debasio? Loser. Actually, sfigatto.
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    @hjhhjij: certainly. ;)
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    you'll understand, between Vasco and Ramones...
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    What do Vasco and the Ramones have in common?
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    27 apr 11
    What do Vasco and the Ramones have in common? >>> in the sense that they both suck, but I wasn't referring to you ;)
     
  • geb
    geb
    27 apr 11
    oops, I hadn't seen the term "worst artist"... maybe you're not that unlucky after all. But you still don't understand a damn thing :)
    STONECOLDCRAZY: if you compare Vasco to the Ramones, you also belong to the minchiones! Congratulations, a nice suppo-caramella for you too.
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    27 apr 11
    Enough with Queen, they are a crap band and there's nothing to understand.
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    27 apr 11
    @Stefano: I don't agree :) no hard feelings.
    Geb: I don't like Vasco or the Ramones at all, the difference lies in the historical significance: the latter have quite a bit, the former is NOTHING.
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    28 apr 11
    @Scaruffitallica90: I agree with you! XD By the way, I took a look at the ratings Scaruffi gave to Metallica's albums, now it all makes sense...
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    28 apr 11
    Why don't you check out the Scar page on Depeche Mode as well? Hey, idiot.
     
  • stonecoldcrazy
    stonecoldcrazy
    28 apr 11
    ...oh well, sometimes I actually agree with Scaruffi! Hi, idiot.
     
  • Stefano90
    Stefano90
    12 may 11
    Have you seen...
     
  • Wiserson
    Wiserson
    7 jul 11
    It seems to me a ranking of the most overrated.. in this case, I agree with some of the choices.
     
  • pirata
    pirata
    18 sep 11
    yes, queen, aerosmith, santana, beatles, elvis....= YOU DON’T KNOW SHIT ABOUT MUSIC
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    20 sep 11
    the pirate is an idiot... it doesn't matter... trust me, I know my music, buddy
     
  • j&r
    j&r
    20 sep 11
    and then queen, aerosmith, santana, beatles, elvis make you poop... maybe yes a little less
     
  • Karter4
    Karter4
    21 jan 12
    Really strange ranking! Nevertheless, aside from two or three names, I don't agree at all.
     
    • Karter4
      11 mar 13
      Excuse me, I meant to say "apart from two or three names, I AGREE."
  • GATTINATOR
    GATTINATOR
    2 feb 12
    I only agree with Vasco and Ligabue.
     
  • hjhhjij
    hjhhjij
    16 sep 12
    But did you take out the Genesis?
     
  • Giuseppinho
    Giuseppinho
    16 sep 12
    I hope you're joking?
     
    • j&r
      16 sep 12
      I've never been more fucking serious, damn it.
  • Radioactive Toy
    Radioactive Toy
    16 sep 12
    Having Queen in first place seems a bit exaggerated to me...
     
    • j&r
      16 sep 12
      "FOR ME" it’s not an exaggeration… I remind you that this is my ranking…
    • Karter4
      16 sep 12
      It's true, Toy, this is "his" ranking!
  • ZannaB
    ZannaB
    1 feb 13
    You think that apart from a couple of artists (which I won't name!) the others make me shit too!
     
  • Karter4
    Karter4
    1 feb 13
    Can you explain to me why Santana?
     
    • j&r
      1 feb 13
      I find it "music" in poor taste: "latin pop-jazz west-coast" is a trendy, superficial, danceable sound and thus lacks any depth. The danceable Latin American rhythm achieved through the use of percussions like congas and maracas is a clever, blatantly commercial musical trick, easy to grasp and effective. Jingo, for example, is a song that I find horrible. Atrocious.
    • hjhhjij
      1 feb 13
      No no no no and then no :D I know what you think, I know it very well, but no :)
    • Karter4
      1 feb 13
      So, I take it that for you, Latin American music doesn’t matter at all, right?
    • j&r
      1 feb 13
      No, don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say... there is "class" in doing any kind of art and music, even the wildest, rotten, crooked, and ragged... Santana doesn't have it... it's a matter of nature: he lacks the innate class and sensitivity essential for an artist... he uses elements of Latin American music in the most vulgar, obvious, banal, low, commercial way... Moreover, all Latin American music, given its intrinsic predisposition to danceable rhythm, is not to my taste... if it's poorly made, it becomes atrocious for me... however, there are excellent and pleasant Latin American music records...
    • ZannaB
      3 feb 13
      "All Latin American music, given its intrinsic tendency to be danceable, is not to my liking," or how to denigrate an entire genre like bossa nova, which to me seems anything but trendy, superficial, or danceable.
    • ZannaB
      3 feb 13
      "All Latin American music, given its intrinsic tendency to be danceable, is not to my liking," or how to denigrate an entire genre like bossa nova, which to me seems anything but trendy, superficial, or danceable.
  • pana
    pana
    1 feb 13
    I find J&R likable, I don't know what to say... even though it’s as obvious as it is objective that the Genesis shouldn’t be here.
     
    • j&r
      1 feb 13
      ...one day I'll explain to you the "real" reason why I don't like Genesis, if I feel like it ;)
    • pana
      1 feb 13
      But I mean... don’t you really think there are 20 artists worse than them? Admit there's some bias in your choice. Or do you perhaps consider Guns 'N Roses better than Gabriel and company?
  • j&r
    j&r
    1 feb 13
    Right, how could I forget the Guns...outrageousness and bad taste par excellence...well done, bro...
     
    • j&r
      1 feb 13
      immediately remedied, officially entered into the Top ten... :) ...(I removed Aerosmith to make room for them)
  • Karter4
    Karter4
    1 feb 13
    Well, at least the Guns are higher up than the Genesis :)
     
  • Rax
    Rax
    3 feb 13
    Guns and Roses are artists - for JR. Go back to Dallas.
     
Similar users
cece65

DeRank™: 1,58

Doctor J

DeRank™: 0,48

albi6

DeRank™: 0,00

Hybris

DeRank™: 0,97

mikornr

DeRank™: 0,06

pier_paolo_farina

DeRank™: 8,87

Saputello

DeRank™: 1,47

floyd

DeRank™: 0,00

Gen. Noriega

DeAge 6870

northernsky

DeRank™: 0,36