John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Locked
User avatar
bitchboy
Talker
Talker
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 3:30 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by bitchboy »

gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:
~ english is not my first language ~

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by PistolsFiring »

PistolsFiring wrote:
Jesters Trix wrote:
LeGarconBleu wrote:
Jesters Trix wrote:I kind of hope that nitwit is reading here because I would LOVE to see him actually put that hot mess he calls make up (none of which actually goes together in any kind of cohesive way so it must have been on dollar store clearance) on his own face and DO A LOOK.
I mean at least Jeffree S. can pull out his own cosmetics and whip up an amazing look. Granted not all of them are something I would do but the man has talent, sorry but he does.

So Johnny Boy let's see it. Stop subjecting that poor girl Francine to your ridiculousness (and she should have known better so she's a moron too imho) and slap some of that warpaint on your face and do an actual look. Oh wait, you can't can you? And why is it that when you smeared that shit all over that poor girls face (finger or sponge) it looked NOTHING like your "live swatches." The reason is because it's shit, and as someone pointed out, I could do the same with any dollar store brand and make it look good in an arm (or in your case thigh..ugh) swatch.

By the way, what day was it that he posted that 80% (read: all 4 sets) of the orders had shipped? I'm impatiently waiting for someone to actually get this crap and serve this kid up on a platter.
CandyBabe posted a pic of someone saying they got their shipping confirmation on 11/30

And I saw that 80% SC about the middle of last week. Looking because I think I made a comment about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmmm and no buzz about it on Twitter. You know if it was great someone would have spoken up by now, especially the Crookian Cult.
Okay, okay! I'm going to out myself... I bought the pigments and 2 lippies :bang: :fit: :barf: But in my defense I have legit ADHD which comes with zero impulse control.

The next day (12/26) I sent an email saying I wanted to cancel the order and asked for the ingredients. I didn't get a response until 12/1 (no ingredients included). I'll see if I can figure out how to post it so ya'll can help me decide what to do.
I can't figure out how to post a screenshot of it.

I'm split because I'm curious, but I also don't want to spend much money. Definitely want to refund Brute. Want to refund the pigments too, but will be pissed if I have to pay for shipping on something I canceled way before it was shipped out. If that's the case I will probably let my bank handle it.

I kinda like the color of May whateveritscalled though.... Part of me says you can get the exact same thing for like $5 but the other part says I should just keep it to see what happens.

Tell me what to do!

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by PistolsFiring »

bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:

This is exactly what I mean! I'm not saying it's not dumb for him to use the word, but it is definitely a word.

User avatar
auntiflo13
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6562
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 4:29 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 19 times
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by auntiflo13 »

I deciphered the word oxfoliate some pages back and it means to remove leaves/flakes with oxygen.... not with an emollient. The journal that was mentioned in the previous page looks like it's the 'legit' definition : removes a chemical with oxygen particles (??) ...it's definitely not scrubbing lips with vaseline and a towel lol xxx
Stay home, stay safe & keep healthy <3

User avatar
LeGarconBleu
True Gossiper
True Gossiper
Posts: 1005
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:28 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by LeGarconBleu »

PistolsFiring wrote:
PistolsFiring wrote:
Jesters Trix wrote:
LeGarconBleu wrote:
Jesters Trix wrote:I kind of hope that nitwit is reading here because I would LOVE to see him actually put that hot mess he calls make up (none of which actually goes together in any kind of cohesive way so it must have been on dollar store clearance) on his own face and DO A LOOK.
I mean at least Jeffree S. can pull out his own cosmetics and whip up an amazing look. Granted not all of them are something I would do but the man has talent, sorry but he does.

So Johnny Boy let's see it. Stop subjecting that poor girl Francine to your ridiculousness (and she should have known better so she's a moron too imho) and slap some of that warpaint on your face and do an actual look. Oh wait, you can't can you? And why is it that when you smeared that shit all over that poor girls face (finger or sponge) it looked NOTHING like your "live swatches." The reason is because it's shit, and as someone pointed out, I could do the same with any dollar store brand and make it look good in an arm (or in your case thigh..ugh) swatch.

By the way, what day was it that he posted that 80% (read: all 4 sets) of the orders had shipped? I'm impatiently waiting for someone to actually get this crap and serve this kid up on a platter.
CandyBabe posted a pic of someone saying they got their shipping confirmation on 11/30


And I saw that 80% SC about the middle of last week. Looking because I think I made a comment about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmmm and no buzz about it on Twitter. You know if it was great someone would have spoken up by now, especially the Crookian Cult.
Okay, okay! I'm going to out myself... I bought the pigments and 2 lippies :bang: :fit: :barf: But in my defense I have legit ADHD which comes with zero impulse control.

The next day (12/26) I sent an email saying I wanted to cancel the order and asked for the ingredients. I didn't get a response until 12/1 (no ingredients included). I'll see if I can figure out how to post it so ya'll can help me decide what to do.
I can't figure out how to post a screenshot of it.

I'm split because I'm curious, but I also don't want to spend much money. Definitely want to refund Brute. Want to refund the pigments too, but will be pissed if I have to pay for shipping on something I canceled way before it was shipped out. If that's the case I will probably let my bank handle it.

I kinda like the color of May whateveritscalled though.... Part of me says you can get the exact same thing for like $5 but the other part says I should just keep it to see what happens.

Tell me what to do!
Well i don't want to tell you what to do, it's your money. But if you don't want to spend money it's def not worth it on krookian, even if it is just to swatch and critique. You can def get similar colors from reputable brands.

I would also add, since Krookian is known to pop through here, do not post anything that can tie you to an order number. Your order alone could let him pinpoint and possibly cancel your entire order out of spite. Stay safe :tu:

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by PistolsFiring »

bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria

Under the pedicures

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by PistolsFiring »

bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:
Another one : in the description under the light blueish product on the left

https://www.transdesign.com/compare/8634/7385/8643/7388

User avatar
yadayadayeah

Re: John

Post by yadayadayeah »

PistolsFiring wrote:
bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria

Under the pedicures
Someone already tried to do that on twitter. I remember posting it here. It is the exact same one site.
Image
That account came out of the wood work to defend him and has proceeded to go silent since.

That being said, I personally don't think he made a mistake based on how he worded it as : "Oxfoliate lips (exfoliate with an emollient)." Had it been "Exfoliate lips (exfoliate with an emollient)." It just sounds redundant. Like everybody knows what exfoliate means and I don't think even Kuckian is that stupid. That being said I do think he was trying to sound smart / credible. :roll:

At this point, oxfoliate -> :horse: This horse is so dead it's starring in GOT season 8

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by PistolsFiring »

auntiflo13 wrote:I deciphered the word oxfoliate some pages back and it means to remove leaves/flakes with oxygen.... not with an emollient. The journal that was mentioned in the previous page looks like it's the 'legit' definition : removes a chemical with oxygen particles (??) ...it's definitely not scrubbing lips with vaseline and a towel lol xxx
Sorry not believing you. All of the time I saw it in journals it was talking of removing some sort of flesh or organic matter. How did you decipher it? By saying ox means oxygen?

Here are examples of modern day useage in cosmetic. You can't convince me it three coincidences. It's a word ffs!

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria
Description of two pedicures
https://www.advancedskincarevt.com/microdermabrasion
Under precision peel
https://www.transdesign.com/compare/8634/7385/8643/7388
In the description under the light blueish product on the left


Okay. Done now :tu: :tu: :tu:

User avatar
beahunny
True Gossiper
True Gossiper
Posts: 1186
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:37 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by beahunny »

Image

I think we are splitting hairs. Even if he never used a "made-up" or antiquated word, he is still a malicious, uneducated, unprofessional fraud. Give the baby his bottle and let him have "Oxfoliate". He is still private labeling his fraudulent cosmetics being sold via a charitable foundation?
Last edited by beahunny on Mon Dec 04, 2017 3:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Twiglet
Informer
Informer
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 1:27 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by Twiglet »

PistolsFiring wrote:
bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria

Under the pedicures
Again, from that link:

"*our warm citrus salt (cucumber, tangerine, lavender ,pomrgranate) oxfoliate and invigorate your legs, warm citrus butter is applied and massage followed by shoothing warm towl plus extra 15min hot stone massage(60 min.)"

Forgive me for not buying into the legitimacy of a listing that says, "pomrgrante:," "shoothing," and "towl."

PistolsFiring
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by PistolsFiring »

I'm not very good at using this forum :bang:

I think I'm going to try to have them cancel and refund everything including shipping except for one of the lippies just fun.

Wish me (or maybe just my bank) luck! :tchin:

B17
Learner
Learner
Posts: 57
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:33 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by B17 »

notnot wrote:lmao
After lurking since around the time of the launch party announcement I finally signed up just to post this haha Ah well, at least now I can join in with the discussion and not just lurk haha
But thank you guys so much for all the entertainment you've brought me over the past few weeks haha its been great!

User avatar
Jesters Trix
True Gossiper
True Gossiper
Posts: 1041
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by Jesters Trix »

So I'm not savvy enough to be able to post pics from SC to here (shh!) but that latest with that idiot of a girl Francine (idiot for taking part in this scam because I believe she will be somewhat responsible when this all falls apart in some way) trying to pose saying that's HIS makeup. Yes well why is no one making a VIDEO of these applications so we can see for ourselves. Hmm? I'm calling shenanigans.
Call me whatever you want, but don't forget to include Keyboard Cowgirl and Queen of the Typos

gg518
Talker
Talker
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:48 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John

Post by gg518 »

bitchboy wrote:
gg518 wrote: Even if it wasn't... Why use a word that only appears in a couple of medical journals back in the early 1900s? As you've said this is before spell check programs and publications would often be released with mistakes. Every single source I've found that used it (and theres really only a small handful) have other typos in them. It most definately IS a made up word.

So you made a typo, why act like it's on purpose? This reminded me of Jerry when his shirt was backwards. Instead of actually looking into it he just pretends like he meant it that way so CE he's so afraid of looking stupid
Image
i mean, a lot of peer reviewed articles in the databases i have access to for my job use it. but it's not a consumer word.
here's literally just the first example.
Image

it's from a biology database, so it makes sense why he would know the word.. not all scientific/medical terms are for use in everyday conversation. most of them are hopelessly antiquated in this language. working in science, with english as my second language, this is something i've had to figure out on my own, lol!

this is another journal that came up in my database search, with a hit on the word 40 times in the journal, but my institution does not have access. http://journals.sagepub.com.proxy.libra ... a/home/trj

edit: obviously not white knighting for kooks here, i just think we ought to be specific in how we call him dumb :rofl:
Nice I have friends that went to Carlton. I almost want there because of their nano program.
And that looks legitimate. I still think its stupid to use that word incorrectly by the looks of it, but I'm glad that atleast now we know it is a word.

User avatar
Jesters Trix
True Gossiper
True Gossiper
Posts: 1041
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by Jesters Trix »

Actually, now that I think about it, if and when it comes out that Crookian has intentionally defrauded however many people, in various countries, is this Francine chick going to bear any responsibility? I ask because I would assume that the jump could be made that she has/had knowledge of his fraud since she was present at the "launch" and one might assume she would know wtf he was smearing all over her face. Thoughts?
Call me whatever you want, but don't forget to include Keyboard Cowgirl and Queen of the Typos

gg518
Talker
Talker
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:48 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by gg518 »

Sorry for double post, won't let me edit.
PistolsFiring wrote:
auntiflo13 wrote:I deciphered the word oxfoliate some pages back and it means to remove leaves/flakes with oxygen.... not with an emollient. The journal that was mentioned in the previous page looks like it's the 'legit' definition : removes a chemical with oxygen particles (??) ...it's definitely not scrubbing lips with vaseline and a towel lol xxx
Sorry not believing you. All of the time I saw it in journals it was talking of removing some sort of flesh or organic matter. How did you decipher it? By saying ox means oxygen?

Here are examples of modern day useage in cosmetic. You can't convince me it three coincidences. It's a word ffs!

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria
Description of two pedicures
https://www.advancedskincarevt.com/microdermabrasion
Under precision peel
https://www.transdesign.com/compare/8634/7385/8643/7388
In the description under the light blueish product on the left


Okay. Done now :tu: :tu: :tu:
Were you that person on twitter? Just wondering why you'd repost these since 2 are typos and 1 is in reference to an actual procedure that isn't simply exfoliating (though this could also be a mistake considering it's just some random cosmetologists site).

The salon one is clearly by one of those salons where even the manager doesn't speak English. Its riddled with typos.

The other is a product description that contains a typo. Search "EzFlow - 2 In 1 Balance" on Google images. You'll see an image of the actual product which says "exfoliate with..." On it rather than "oxfoliate with". The description is also modified for reputable sites selling the product. It doesn't say that on the listing for it on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/Flow-Balance-Dis ... B004NMYJGW

As we've learned thanks to bitchboy it's a word. But it isn't used in cosmetics. 2-3 typos on the internet isn't unbelievable considering how much pages there are on it. YES this whole argument is splitting hairs. But it's justified considering he loves latching on to people for stuff like this.

User avatar
yadayadayeah

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by yadayadayeah »

gg518 wrote:Sorry for double post, won't let me edit.
PistolsFiring wrote:
auntiflo13 wrote:I deciphered the word oxfoliate some pages back and it means to remove leaves/flakes with oxygen.... not with an emollient. The journal that was mentioned in the previous page looks like it's the 'legit' definition : removes a chemical with oxygen particles (??) ...it's definitely not scrubbing lips with vaseline and a towel lol xxx
Sorry not believing you. All of the time I saw it in journals it was talking of removing some sort of flesh or organic matter. How did you decipher it? By saying ox means oxygen?

Here are examples of modern day useage in cosmetic. You can't convince me it three coincidences. It's a word ffs!

https://www.coconail-spa.com/price-list ... e-galleria
Description of two pedicures
https://www.advancedskincarevt.com/microdermabrasion
Under precision peel
https://www.transdesign.com/compare/8634/7385/8643/7388
In the description under the light blueish product on the left


Okay. Done now :tu: :tu: :tu:
Were you that person on twitter? Just wondering why you'd repost these since 2 are typos and 1 is in reference to an actual procedure that isn't simply exfoliating (though this could also be a mistake considering it's just some random cosmetologists site).

The salon one is clearly by one of those salons where even the manager doesn't speak English. Its riddled with typos.

The other is a product description that contains a typo. Search "EzFlow - 2 In 1 Balance" on Google images. You'll see an image of the actual product which says "exfoliate with..." On it rather than "oxfoliate with". The description is also modified for reputable sites selling the product. It doesn't say that on the listing for it on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/Flow-Balance-Dis ... B004NMYJGW

As we've learned thanks to bitchboy it's a word. But it isn't used in cosmetics. 2-3 typos on the internet isn't unbelievable considering how much pages there are on it. YES this whole argument is splitting hairs. But it's justified considering he loves latching on to people for stuff like this.
Per the Twitter poster, allegedly, it is a bougie word used in British spas :roll:

User avatar
Banannie
Learner
Learner
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:12 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by Banannie »

All the "oxfoliate" discussion is valid, but can we sit for a minute and talk about toxic ingredients. I don't know if that was discussed before but it's concerning as fuck.
I'm just here for the giggles.

User avatar
yadayadayeah

Re: John "Chief Exaggeration Officer" Crookian - Part 5

Post by yadayadayeah »

Banannie wrote:All the "oxfoliate" discussion is valid, but can we sit for a minute and talk about toxic ingredients. I don't know if that was discussed before but it's concerning as fuck.
Lethalcosmetics analyzed his ingredients on this page: http://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?f ... &start=250

Idk what is allegedly toxic in there. I would think lethalcosmetics would say if anything in there was of concern.
Last edited by yadayadayeah on Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked

Return to “John Kuckian”