|
|
|
|
|
|
by gjm11
5113 days ago
|
|
|
No. The article is pointing out that Flame isn't lame in lots of different ways, and saying that the naysayers kept calling it lame until one single spectacular bit of non-lameness came to light. It's suggesting that they should have cottoned on sooner. At least, that's my reading of it. |
|
|