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

Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

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

  • #46
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

    Originally posted by owl View Post
    The worst part on DJ is he is so bad on offense.
    FTFY. The fact that he hasn't been able to pass, shoot, or run any semblance of any offense is by far the worst thing about DJ. We knew his defense was terrible. The second unit offense should work, in theory. Green's a spot-up shooter, Young moves without the ball, Ian hits from mid-range and Tyler crashes the boards. All these guys do need someone to set them up, and DJ has been completely inept at running the PnR and setting anyone up. Because of that, you ask Green to make creative decisions, Young to shoot too many jumpers, and Ian to drive to the basket like Lebron. It's wrong to put it all on him, but DJ's job is to run that unit, and he's been so bad, it's like Tony Clifton playing point guard.
    You Got The Tony!!!!!!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      If anyone is expecting any moves then you best dial it back- This team is hovering around .500... still has a chance at the playoffs... has a built in excuse for coming up short ("We didn't expect Danny to miss this much time").... AND has Donnie Do Nothing Walsh running things. He'll be more busy preparing new contracts and checks for the existing players than actually talking to anyone about any trades.

      Checkbook Donnie in charge of negoiating DWest, Granger, and Paul G's coming contracts scares the carp out of me. I'm so afraid he'll bury the Pacers in cap hell again, then walk out the door leaving the Pacers for years saddled with no way to do anything until contracts expire.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

        these are some general observations:
        every player has had some off nights. this is totally understandable. however, of all the guys who are in the regular rotation, dj has been by a large margin imo- the absolute worst. i am more than ready to give ben a shot instead. he may be a rook but, i am willing to see him give it a go as i don't see how he could do much worse as that would be impossible as far as i can tell.
        i agree with most of those who say tyler has made substantial improvements on defense. this was absolutely necessary as it has been really bad since he got here. thing is though even while his mid-range 10-17 foot jumpers were inconsistent then- now they are non-existent. i swear i haven't seen him hit one this year despite trying several times. this is an absolutely essential aspect to his game given his physical limitations. imagine if west had no jump-shot? he would not start anywhere if he didn't. and this is something else about tyler that bugs me, he is never going to be more than a mediocre rebounder at best. i see him play around 15 minutes a game and he seems to rarely pull down more than 1-2 rebounds. i worry donnie will go into his "we gotta re-sign our guys mode" and bring him back but, unless i saw something more than i have seen already- i am not interested in bringing him back.

        frank has still shown a desire to go all bench and i don't think that is ever going to work out with this group. i am on board with the "we need at least 2 starters out there whenever possible" and his stubborn refusal to call timeouts when other teams make their runs troubles me. back in the day, bob knight used to do this at IU and i swear far more often than not- the whole "they gotta figure it out on their own" backfired. i remember some saying phil jackson did it this way too but hey, phil jackson also had the luxury of having some of the absolute greatest players of all freakin time on his teams and that makes a HUGE difference and you can afford to play it that way when you got guys like jordan and shaq playing for you.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
          I mean, that's not fair. We lost two first round picks (to draft Paul, trade for Hill) and 20 million dollars (David West).
          True, obviously nothing is free. All I met is that we didn't give up any core foundational players to get those guys. We lost draft picks, Troy Murphy, and some money. I'll take it.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Even if Green is "neutral" paying him 3mil a year to be "neutral" is a huge fail.
            I'm not arguing that he has liked up to any expectations, just that he shouldn't be lumped in with DJ. Green still looks like he could turn it around and average 10 or so points efficiently. DJ just looks like a player who wouldn't make it in high school.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

              Quick response:

              Paul George actually blew two lay-ups (four points)
              The refing at the end was awful. Miller got two fouls, one for tripping over his feet, one for diving with Lance guarding him. Also, Lance got thrown to the ground on a rebound. If lance get's those calls his game looks much better.
              Is it to early to mention cutting DJ, not just benching him? The only thing I've ever seen worse than him running the offense is his D.

              The second unit can't play all at the same time. It doesn't work.

              Hibbert, hit a freakin' shot.
              Danger Zone

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                Good summary. If you just called for Donnie Walsh's head for squandering a huge amount of cap space on this down graded bench it would be perfect.
                This is getting old. I'm sure Donnie is just as disappointed as any of us. He signed a guy who is the most athletic player ever to wear a Pacers jersey, can create his own shot and shot a high percentage from deep. He signed a starting PG to be our back up and an athletic 7 footer to back up Roy. I would say 95% of us felt that he got exactly what this team was lacking last year and that our bench would be much improved.

                Stop acting like you saw this coming from day one and that he "squandered" cap space!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                  Originally posted by 2minutes twoa View Post
                  This is getting old. I'm sure Donnie is just as disappointed as any of us. He signed a guy who is the most athletic player ever to wear a Pacers jersey, can create his own shot and shot a high percentage from deep. He signed a starting PG to be our back up and an athletic 7 footer to back up Roy. I would say 95% of us felt that he got exactly what this team was lacking last year and that our bench would be much improved.

                  Stop acting like you saw this coming from day one and that he "squandered" cap space!
                  I guess I was in the 5%. I was never of the opinion that DW made the right moves and brought in just what we were lacking. Some were that blind, but I think most were disappointed from what he did with our long waited cap space anyway. I thought it was a crime to spend significant amounts of cap space on a shuffle of the bench from the word go. However you're right in that I didn't think the bench would be this much worse and I hope DW is disappointed.
                  The thing is that it's his job to spend that cap space on the right players and to manage the timing of signing our own players. He failed at this and should be held accountable.
                  If you're a DW fan don't worry though, it won't happen. Our best bet is to hope that he doesn't screw with the roster any more until he retires which I hope is at the end of the season.
                  Until then or until I see this bench out playing last year's bench, I'll be calling out DW.
                  Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                  Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                    Originally posted by 2minutes twoa View Post
                    This is getting old. I'm sure Donnie is just as disappointed as any of us. He signed a guy who is the most athletic player ever to wear a Pacers jersey, can create his own shot and shot a high percentage from deep. He signed a starting PG to be our back up and an athletic 7 footer to back up Roy. I would say 95% of us felt that he got exactly what this team was lacking last year and that our bench would be much improved.

                    Stop acting like you saw this coming from day one and that he "squandered" cap space!
                    I did and was trashed for it, Sollozo and Bball saw it coming too.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                      I guess I was in the 5%. I was never of the opinion that DW made the right moves and brought in just what we were lacking. Some were that blind, but I think most were disappointed from what he did with our long waited cap space anyway. I thought it was a crime to spend significant amounts of cap space on a shuffle of the bench from the word go. However you're right in that I didn't think the bench would be this much worse and I hope DW is disappointed.
                      The thing is that it's his job to spend that cap space on the right players and to manage the timing of signing our own players. He failed at this and should be held accountable.
                      If you're a DW fan don't worry though, it won't happen. Our best bet is to hope that he doesn't screw with the roster any more until he retires which I hope is at the end of the season.
                      Until then or until I see this bench out playing last year's bench, I'll be calling out DW.
                      I guess I just don't see any moves that could've been made that would've been drastically better than what was done.

                      I like the addition of Ian. The way he was added was a little puzzling though.

                      I loved the addition of Green. DW was the only guy who thought highly of him. Both Pritchard and Shaw thought he would be a real difference maker off the bench. No clue why he's been so irrelevant.

                      I thought DJ was a good signing. Starter experience and a low risk 1 year deal.

                      In a perfect world, I would've loved to have gotten Mayo and Kaman, but neither wanted to be backups. I liked Barbosa, but his complete fade in the Miami series left a really bad taste in everyone's mouth.

                      Kudos to you guys for seeing this coming. What moves do you feel should've been made instead?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                        I think we could have landed Kaman with a longer contract offer in the same price range and that would have been my first choice. Having Kaman playing at the 4/5 would have been a huge upgrade over what we had and a huge upgrade of giving those minutes to Ian and Hans. That and the bench we had and we'd be talking about how much closer we've came to the finals not hoping to make the playoffs. Failing to do that I think the F.O. should have forced the signings of Hibbert and Hill back a week or 2. Scola was already waived prior to the signings so they had that knowledge and all they would have had to do was to back up the signings by a few days to make a run at him. They should have forced those signings back to be able to land bargain players beyond what they knew about Scola. Once Nash was gone I didn't see any reason to go after a pg since no real upgrade was available and as nice as Mayo would have been, going after another backup wing player was not a priority to me and we had no knowledge of what was going on with Granger.
                        Imagine right now Kaman coming in for Hibbert then rotating West out and Hibbert in, no more Ian and Hans. Imagine having DC backing up Hill and having the option of starting Barbosa, Jones, or Lance and never seeing Green or DJ on the floor.
                        Last edited by Pacerized; 12-09-2012, 11:34 AM.
                        Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                        Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                          Ah, the classic, "no one could have seen this coming," argument. It gets used often here, historically. For example drafting Shawne Williams instead of Rondo. No one could have known we should draft the best PG available instead of a SF when SF was our strongest position! Drafting Tyler over Holiday... we still have no point guard, but NO ONE could have known drafting the best point guard available instead of a low ceiling big man who can't even play both positions in his best case. Now this, no one could have known giving a marginal bench big a 4 year contract would be foolish. NO ONE could have known that acquiring players from the worst teams in the league last year wasn't going to improve us. No one.

                          Except those of us who said all of these things prior to them happening. It's not hindsight bias when you call it long before it happens. No one... smh.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                            Only few of us(the haters) could see this coming, there is a whole thread full of people ("sunshiners and positive people") trashing us because we didn't agree and still don't agree with their point of view, the same "sunshiners" and "positive people" are still in denial about the off season maybe because they don't want to prove us "hater" right or because of pure blindness.

                            The fact is that the Pacers had the potential to have one of the best off seasons ever and they screwed it up by signing a bunch of scrubs, I mean they had everything, cap space, trade assets, picks, they were also under the cap what else do you Fing want?

                            They also had a one time opportunity to sign amnesty players without having to give up anything of value because they were under the cap but they decided not to pursuit anybody because "they knew what they were doing", how stupid can a front office be to decide not to sign quality players pretty much for free?

                            I've been saying it for a while the Pacers signed the equivalent of Solomon Jones, Kareem Rush, Travis Diener and to do it they decided that this time they were going to spend 10mil dollars a year, how stupid is that?

                            Just imagine if the Pacers had a competent front office and instead of signing the scrub of Mahinmi(while giving away a trade asset) they have waited for Philly to amnesty Brand, or for Houston to amnesty Scola, imagine if instead of signing the scrub of Green they decided to keep Barbosa for veteran minimum, imagine if instead of DJ we have DC and instead of Young we have DJ.

                            If the Pacers had a competent front office they would have made similar moves to the ones I'm describing but instead they decided to make moves that only worse GM's could think about making, hell I don't think I can see another worse GM making the same stupid moves I just can't.
                            Last edited by vnzla81; 12-09-2012, 02:02 PM.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                              The one that gets me the most is I often see people lamenting how we haven't had a quality point guard here in a decade or so... yea, of course we haven't, we let teams behind us draft all the good point guards ala Rondo, Holiday, and Lawson. Then they STILL refuse to hold the management accountable. Woe is me we don't have a point guard, but let's not be upset that all star quality point guards get drafted behind us repeatedly, that's no one's fault!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Only few of us(the haters) could see this coming, there is a whole thread full of people ("sunshiners and positive people") trashing us because we didn't agree and still don't agree with their point of view, the same "sunshiners" and "positive people" are still in denial about the off season maybe because they don't want to prove us "hater" right or because of pure blindness.
                                You trash every move. It's a self-fullfilling prophecy. Other people, that have diverse opinions, get credit.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X