Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Melo was injured last year, Amare was injured, Lin got injured, Baron Davis had a freak injury and was not 100% all year, Dwill was injured, Brook Lopez was out of the year, etc,etc,etc, the Pacers were just lucky not to have one of their core players injured or out for the year so yeah seriously...
    You left out the part where all those Knicks pieces fit together terribly, Amare is a shadow of his former self, Baron Davis's freak injury was obesity, the Nets were at best a borderline playoff team with a healthy Deron and Lopez.

    The Pacers were lucky with their health, but your crusade to minimize all of their accomplishments is silly. Injuries happen every year in the NBA. Every year you can make this argument about a slew of teams. It's the nature of the beast.

    Comment


    • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

      U
      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      You left out the part where all those Knicks pieces fit together terribly, Amare is a shadow of his former self, Baron Davis's freak injury was obesity, the Nets were at best a borderline playoff team with a healthy Deron and Lopez.

      The Pacers were lucky with their health, but your crusade to minimize all of their accomplishments is silly. Injuries happen every year in the NBA. Every year you can make this argument about a slew of teams. It's the nature of the beast.
      Yes is the "nature of the beast" but not every year you get to face teams who's franchise players or all star players are either out or hurt, how many were they? the short season was perfect for young teams, I don't expect to be the same way in an 82 games season.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

        Originally posted by Kemo View Post
        For a 71 year old especially, I think 9 hour days IS most definitely workaholic characteristics.. Especially considering the hours he put in when he was younger..

        Being away from one's home, family and other desires for 9 hours every day wears thin on a person, it don't matter if it's deskjob/easy work or hard manual labor.. it still drains a person mentally as well as physically...


        Heck I work anywhere from 6 1/2 hrs to 7 1/2 hours every night 3rd shift .. come home for a couple hours at 6:30/7 am , then come back for 3 more hours from 10am to 1pm .. I definitely consider myself a workaholic.. and believe me it wears thin on me very much so.. So I can only imagine how it would be for a 70+ year old guy .. lol

        Heck he should be retired and enjoying what time he has left on this earth .. Which at 71 , realistically and statistically the best he could hope for is another 25-30 years, and out of those years how many will old age have made unbearable to enjoy?
        Believe me, 20 years go by pretty damn quick when you aren't paying attention .. Hell I still can't wrap my head around it being 20 years ago since I was a senior in highschool.. It only seems like yesterday in my mind.. It sucks because my mindset is close to the same as it was when I was 18/20 yrs old except with the added wisdom of my years.... I feel like a 19/20 year old stuck in a 38 year old's body with a 45 year old's hairline lmao..

        It makes me feel old and sad at the same time.. lol Damn you father time ..


        .




        .

        .
        10 am - 6pm is 8 hours....just sayin
        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


        Comment


        • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

          Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
          10 am - 6pm is 8 hours....just sayin
          That is maybe why they couldn't bid on Brand or Scola the office was closed
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            I can definitely see the rationale behind using the retrospect-o-scope to be critical of previous moves that didn't work out. I can definitely see the value in praising moves that did work out. But what I can't understand is trying to prejudge moves before they've even had a chance to play themselves out.
            I state my opinion before things fail so I cant get the "hindsight defense" after the totally unforseeable circumstance occurs. Plus its much more fun to argue what hasnt occured yet.


            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            But so much of what is creating the red meat around here is based on supposition, and frustration with the FO on "not making better moves". Can we start having a discussion on specifics? Who would have been a better move? Why? Why were our moves so terrible?
            Fair statement. I havent said much about the moves this offseason. This is largely because, IMO, the team erred a few years ago more than they have this offseason. The best chance for this team to add a top level talent was through the draft - not free agency or trades. Of course at that point I was constantly told that tanking was not the way to build a team. Many of the same people that are now saying the Pacers did everything they could this offseason were saying that they just needed to become a good team with cap space and then they could sign difference makers instead of drafting them. Of course I knew that wasnt the case. So now everyone states how hard it is to get difference makers and state TPTB are doing everything they can. Seriously, look at some of the posts after yours stating that you only find players like that in the draft or that people arent giving good players away. And people are thanking the posts. No ****, its hard to get those type of players. Thats why they should have used the time they sucked to acquire higher picks instead of playing Murphy, Dun, and DG 36+ mins a night at the end of meaningless seasons. Now what I see is a team that will be stuck below championship level. Yes the team is only a player or two away. the problem is that they are missing the hardest piece to acquire. If they didnt acquire that player in the draft and they cant get him in free agency, where are they going to get him? IMO, trades are by far the hardest route to go. They have a much higher cost than the draft or free agency. In the best case scenario, the Pacers would have to gut the team to equal enough talent to get a deal done. The reality is they will lack the players with the dreaded "P" work that GMs want to see when trading a star. GMs trading a star want draft picks and high potential guys. Drafting Tyler Hansbrough and Plumlee over guys like Holiday and PJ3 have left the roster pretty thin on those type of players. PG and Lance are the only guys that match that description.


            Here is my stance on the moves they did make this offseason:

            - re-signing Roy: He isnt worth the max, but with the current team philosophy he had to be matched.
            - re-signing Hill: Mistake. contract is too much for too long. The Pacers should have let him sign an offer sheet and decided from there.
            - trading for Mahinmi: I'm fine with the acquistion, but I dont see the need for the trade. The team gave away DC unnecessarily. I dont even like his game, but he had more value than they got. Mahinmi should have been a straight FA signing.
            - signing Green: I have no problem with it. Good move.
            - signing Augustin: Whatever. I dont really like his game, but its a one year contract.

            But, as I said, the team missed the boat several years ago. IMO, they have very little oppurtunity to change the course now - at least with the current TPTB. For me it feels like I'm trying to read a book that I already know the ending to.



            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            Isn't it even remotely possible, that one or more of the players on our active roster develop into our go-to scorer?
            IMO, no. DG, PG, and Green lack the handle necessary to fill the role. PG is much closer to McKey than he is to McGrady - even though few want to admit it yet. Roy is completly dependent on a point guard that can get him the ball consistantly. Hill is a good backup. West couldn't hold his position in the playoffs against a small forward. Augustin is pretty bad offensively. Hans, Plum, Mahinmi? uhhh - no. Lance is the only one that may have a shot. So far he hasnt been able to show us anything so you can say Im very skeptical that he will turn into that level of player.
            Last edited by rm1369; 07-24-2012, 09:05 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
              10 am - 6pm is 8 hours....just sayin
              lol you right.. it's that damn fuzzy math Bush often spoke of.. haha
              "They want to be famous. We want to be champions. They want to be rappers and backup dancers. We want to play football." - T.J. Ward, Denver Broncos

              Comment


              • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                The other thing about Melo trading for AI was a terrible idea. Allen Iverson and Melo are way to ball dominate they are actually pretty close to the same player especially considering AI was on the downside of his career. If that is what Donnie means by not chasing a name player than I get it but we dont have the name player to build around. All 3 of those guys were dampener by poor management same with LBJ in Cleveland.

                If Cleveland hadn't ****ed up the draft so many times and got LBJ a great compliment around him he would still be a CAV IMO.




                Aldridge is basically untouchable especially for Danny and West that makes 0 sense for Portland who is rebuilding

                Batum and Aldridge>>>> West and Danny especially for a rebuilding team who has a great PnR pg.
                I doubt it unless Wade and Bosh wanted to join Cleveland with him. He, Wade, and Tag Along planned this out way before Cleveland had the chance to make more horrible draft picks.

                Comment


                • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Like having their center injured didn't have anything to do with that, take Roy out and the Pacers are out of the playoffs.
                  So...

                  Your contention was that DWill could DWill his team to a better record than the Pacers with a bunch of scrubs...
                  Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Melo was injured last year, Amare was injured, Lin got injured, Baron Davis had a freak injury and was not 100% all year, Dwill was injured, Brook Lopez was out of the year, etc,etc,etc, the Pacers were just lucky not to have one of their core players injured or out for the year so yeah seriously...
                    And the Knicks played their best ball of the season without Carmelo and Amare...

                    And it's not like the Nets had a fantastic record with DWill playing vs. their record when he wasn't...

                    Again... You said Melo and DWill could win better than the Pacers with a bunch of scrubs surrounding them... Those injuries to their teammates only better proves that your original statement was incorrect...
                    Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                      Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                      When you start off your post by basically calling anyone who might disagree with you ignorant and/or a homer, it pretty much cancels out anything else you have to say. Just sayin.
                      After reading all of the condecending posts to vnzla81 and others that arent just thrilled with the direction of the team, I dont really care. Hell, a couple posts above yours someone again suggested we root for another team. Dont be so thin skinned.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        First of all you turn a lot of people off when you suggest some of us have blue and gold glasses on. Honestly with me that taints everything you say after that. You are implying that some of us are not able to see the team as it really is.
                        See my previous post

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        So do you really think they aren't trrying or willing to upgrade the starters. Of course they are. Come on, think about it. The problem is it is very difficult to upgrade these starters. It is very, very difficult to acquire a player better than Roy, David or Danny. Upgrading the bench is easy so do that first. This team has not been together for very long, a shortened season. lets not gamble and make a bad trade, lets not gamble (make a potentially bad trade) right now. lets see how good this team can be with a full season and with a better bench. I think that is at the very least a reasonable approach. But yes they are always trying to upgrade the starters. I mean do we really have to state that.
                        I think they would upgrade the starters as long it was a no risk move - like signing West. Will they take any chances? No. You want to see where this current group can go and thats fine. I'm pretty certain I know. I have no choice but to wait and see if I'm right. But I can look at the past 25 NBA champs and see only one looks even remotely like this team - and I personally believe they were significantly more talented. I know that you yourself say that you have to have one of the top players to win a title. The Pacers dont. Do I expect them to rectify that this off season? Of course not. They missed the boat at even that remote chance when they wouldnt sacrifice a few meaningless regular season wins for a chance at a much higher pick during the down years.

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        OK, so the Colts get lucky, I mean as lucky as any franchise since the Spurs drafted Duncan and you are suggesting the pacers should try to be so lucky. How do you do that?
                        The Spurs are the small market team that everyone points to as the proof that you dont have to be a destination city to win an NBA title. Who else would you attempt to emulate? For all of their smart managment, their biggest piece was acquired through tanking. It certainly wasnt deliberate at first, but they didnt rush D Robinson back either. Is it a long shot? sure. But I'd say you have a better chance at emaulating them than you do at recreating the Pistons team.

                        The Colts were certainly lucky. Lucky they didnt win too many games. IMO, where they beat the Pacers is in their willingness to sacrifice short term stability for long term gain. Any doubt that they would be better next year if they would have brought back Manning, Saturday, Clark, etc? No way in hell the Pacers would make a similiar decission.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                          All we need to do is get Monte and Josh Smith and we can set back and watch the championships roll in.
                          "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG"

                          Comment


                          • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                            Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                            After reading all of the condecending posts to vnzla81 and others that arent just thrilled with the direction of the team, I dont really care. Hell, a couple posts above yours someone again suggested we root for another team. Dont be so thin skinned.
                            Maybe both sides / everybody can work harder at not being bossy or condescending or otherwise off-putting? Can we try to remember that at the end of the day it's just a bunch of good people wanting to enjoy a basketball team and that keeping things a little more lighthearted is probably more important than putting anyone in their place? I think everyone would appreciate it if both sides of this could keep that in mind.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                              [QUOTE=Kemo;1487495]

                              For a 71 year old especially, I think 9 hour days IS most definitely workaholic characteristics.. Especially considering the hours he put in when he was younger..QUOTE]


                              I don't doubt Walsh is a hard worker, but you think Walsh is working a solid 9 hours? He doesn't take a lunch? Working 8-9 hours a day at the 71 years young doesn't constitute a workaholic. I know farmers older than Walsh whose days start at dawn and work to dusk. They consider the hours Walsh works BANKERS HOURS!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                That is maybe why they couldn't bid on Brand or Scola the office was closed
                                If I ever get a FO job you will see a work addict. I probablly would sleep on the sofa in the office. I would work 12 to 16 hrs a day. Mostly watching college and international tape when the others are home

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X