post a cool album cover that /mu/ wont have seen before
>>129851839>wont have seen beforeI'm sick of ESLs shitting up my website.
>>129851859there’s nothing wrong with that phrase you fucking spastic
>>129851839https://youtu.be/oS78JD8I4ok
>>129851877Hasn't seen before, is what you're looking for. Speak my language properly or get the fuck out, fecaloid.
>>129851839>>129851889But are they good albums? Don't make me waste my time, I want to listen to albums with cool covers.
>>129851859>illiterate brainlet can't cope with future perfectlmao please keep humiliating yourself its hilarious
>>129851877>>129851859Technically it should be "wouldn't have," but most most people don't speak proper English, even when it's their first language. It's perfectly understandable either way.Whenever someone says ESL, they're most likely third-worlders pretending to be white. Because no American would call OP out as ESL. And even then, he posted about obscure foreign album covers. What a fucking shock that English may not be his first language.
>>129851890Kek
>>129851839
>>129851923You are retarded "wouldn't have seen" is a conditional perfect, it would only work in a sentence such as "If I had posted it last week, the forum wouldn’t have seen it before."OP's sentence is still the most natural choice. "Hasn't seen" is also correct, but yours is just wrong.
>>129851923youre wrong. for instance, you say>I will have finished by the time you get herenot>I would have finished by the time you get hereor>I will play you a song you won't have heard beforenot>I will play you a song you wouldn't have heard before"will" (or will not/won't) is the usual auxiliary verb to use in future perfect
>>129851898that would be a subjective judgement. Group Sounds is kind of retro psychedelic rock. I like it but you would might've had hating'd ithttps://davidcwbriggs.bandcamp.com/track/by-hack-or-by-crack
>>129851923The word you want is "understandishable."
>>129851968>>129851973This is why ESL is always a retarded call out. All us native English speakers can't even agree on this. Still, I will die on the hill that "wouldn't have" is the most fitting. We're also not talking about the future, we're referring to the past. the key word in his post is "BEFORE," as in unknown to you until this thread. Therefore the future present doesn't fit.
>>129851859ESL site now you benchod bitch
>>129852253>AILMAAAAAO
>>129852253op here. nope, I definitely meant albums which /mu/ knew nothing of. your AI made an incorrect assumption and gave the wrong answer.and to think, 30 gallons of water will of had have died for this
>>129852359>will of had have diedbased Briton EFL chad
>>129852359Ok, I take back everything I said. You really are an ESL faggot, Jesus Christ.
>>129851954cool pic and I will'n't'd've seened it until before than now but its not an album cover is it
>>129851973>not>>I will play you a song you wouldn't have heard beforeFalse
>>129852253natural ai using benchod bet you dont listen to any kino ever
I enjoy this one. Also mainly posting to see what captcha I get this April Fools :) it was spurdo
>>129853574>Google benchod>It's a hindi wordWhy do you faggots know hindi? The amount of people who shit on Indians while simultaneously knowing so much about their culture and language is hilarious. Its gotten to the point where anytime someone (out of the fucking blue, might I add) mentions Indian shit, I can't help but assume they're Indian too. Anyway, I already posted some stuff here. Dumb faggot OP didn't even listen to it and just asked if it was good. This is why /mu/ is dead. Not Indians, just lazy fucking faggots.
>>129851859ESL GQDS own your tranny ass
>>129853786well that doesnt make sense at allthe only person who asked if stuff was good was >>129851898but he also asked if the album OP posted was good, and got a reply >>129852017thereuponwhence indicating that he is not OP the one and only possible explanation is that your English comprehension is extremely poor, perhaps of the standard one might expect of someone FOREIGN, a suspicion confirmed by your inability to recognise the banter being perpetrated by various posters throughout the thread for what it isoh and >>129851889is not good
>>129851973This is valid grammatically:>I will play you a song you wouldn't have heard before
