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

Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

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

  • Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....6a13cd05.html

    Mavs looking into trading Finley to East

    Option could be win-win: financial relief, another player


    02:11 AM CDT on Sunday, July 3, 2005


    By EDDIE SEFKO / The Dallas Morning News


    Since news broke of a provision in the NBA's new collective bargaining agreement that allows a team to waive a player and be relieved of his luxury-tax burden, the Mavericks have been flooded with inquiries about Michael Finley.

    The bottom line is unlikely to change – Finley, in all probability, has played his last game as a Maverick.

    But the mechanism for his departure could change. Although the possibility still exists that the Mavericks could use the "amnesty" clause in the new CBA, president of basketball operations Donnie Nelson said they also have been approached with trade possibilities that could accomplish the same thing: provide financial relief for the team, as well as the bonus of acquiring an asset in return.

    "Our first choice would be to keep Fin in a Mavericks uniform until he retires," Nelson said. "But as we run through the creative options, there seems to be less and less prospect of that happening. We have heard from a lot of people."

    The Mavericks have been exploring all their options since they received word of the new clause in the CBA, which is expected to be signed by July 22. Any team can use a one-time exception to waive a player and not have that player count against any luxury tax the owner must pay.

    The team would still have to pay the player's contract – over $51 million in Finley's case – but could save that amount in luxury taxes. The luxury tax has been imposed twice and owners expect it to be in effect in coming years, too. When teams exceed a certain payroll, they have to pay a dollar-for-dollar tax above that threshold.

    Owner Mark Cuban could save $51 million in tax alone on Finley's deal.

    Although that possibility is tempting, a more palatable solution would be to trade Finley for a player or players with shorter-term contracts, preferably an Eastern Conference team that would afford Finley a chance to win a championship.

    There is another reason trading Finley might be feasible. The new CBA has restructured the trade rules that allow teams to match up salaries within 125 percent of each other for trade purposes. Previously, combined salaries had to be within 115 percent.

    When speaking of Finley's $15.9 million salary this season, that means an extra $1.5 million buffer on matching up salaries for trade purposes.

    What kind of players could the Mavs expect if they were to trade Finley rather than waive him?

    A sampling of possibilities, if the Mavericks are intent on shipping him to an Eastern contender:

    • Indiana could package the contract of Reggie Miller, who has announced his retirement, or Scot Pollard with Austin Croshere and get in the range of Finley's contract.

    • Miami has Eddie Jones, whose contract ($30 million for two years) is similar to Finley's, but one year shorter.

    If the Bulls want to bring back the hometown hero, they could package Antonio Davis and Eric Piatkowski.

  • #2
    Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

    I just don't see them trading Reggie's contract. Croshere and Pollard are garbage. The only thing attractive about Pollard is his contract coming off of the books.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

      Reggie will never be associated with any franchise other than Indiana, even if it is only a contract.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

        Whoever wrote this needs to get in grip with reality.

        With the Pacers payroll as it is, they are looking for relief, not add idioticly overpaid contracts to the mix.

        Relief at end of this season for P's: Reggie and Scott's contrazct ( 12 million total) and at the start of the season; 10 million for waving Cro under the new CBA amnesty.

        And he seriously thinks the P's think Fin is worth 102 million dollar for 3 years to them????


        blegh, they should fire people who write crap like that.
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

          Able, I totally agree.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

            all this is, is posturing by the mavs.....they saying theyve had numerous inquiries....bull****....they are trying to drum up any interest they can to get anything in return they possibly could....as mentioned...anything would be better than waiving him and paying him his full contract while he plays for someone else....this is pie in the sky thinking and propaganda.....hoping they will bait somebody into biting.....but noone will....well...i guess theres always the raptors.....

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

              Originally posted by able
              And he seriously thinks the P's think Fin is worth 102 million dollar for 3 years to them????
              I'm pretty sure that's not the way it would work. The Mavs have to pay the remaining amount on his contract, but he could go play somewhere else for substantially less. Like Dale Davis. But I may have my facts confused.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                Why not trade a couple guys like Pollard & Croshere to get Finley & then waive Finley?

                Without the trade the best we could do would be to waive Croshere.

                Doing the trade for us would allow us to "consolidate" a handful of bad contracts into 1 easy to waive one.

                Granted the duo of Croshere & Pollard isn't gonna get it done. The Mavs would want more than that.

                Bender? Who knows?

                Draft picks? More than likely.

                Would you trade Croshere, Bender & a #1 for Finley, only to waive him?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                  Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
                  Why not trade a couple guys like Pollard & Croshere to get Finley & then waive Finley?

                  Without the trade the best we could do would be to waive Croshere.

                  Doing the trade for us would allow us to "consolidate" a handful of bad contracts into 1 easy to waive one.

                  Granted the duo of Croshere & Pollard isn't gonna get it done. The Mavs would want more than that.

                  Bender? Who knows?

                  Draft picks? More than likely.

                  Would you trade Croshere, Bender & a #1 for Finley, only to waive him?
                  From a business standpoint, I like that a lot.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                    u dont think a team that is getting ready to waive the guy and pay the remainder of his contract for nothing, wouldnt take croshere-whose contract expires in 2 years and would be able to play minutes for them, and pollard-whose contract expires???????

                    they would take that so fast u wouldnt have time to blink....let alone a 1st round draft pick....

                    now stop and think...really stop and think....why in the world would we want to do that....all that would do is leave us in salary cap hell for another year longer.....it also would make the second year worse.....

                    waiving finleys contract does nothing but cost the franchise even more money while being in salary cap hell longer....

                    there is no way in the world the pacers do that....they will not even think for one moment about trading for finley....for anything....i dont care if they traded bender and croshere or anything else....no way....

                    this is not a contest to see how much u can waive....the mavs are one of the few teams that are in worse shape than us as far as the cap goes....the last thing we are gonna do is trade places with them....and thats all that it would be.....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                      Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
                      Why not trade a couple guys like Pollard & Croshere to get Finley & then waive Finley?

                      Without the trade the best we could do would be to waive Croshere.

                      Doing the trade for us would allow us to "consolidate" a handful of bad contracts into 1 easy to waive one.

                      Granted the duo of Croshere & Pollard isn't gonna get it done. The Mavs would want more than that.

                      Bender? Who knows?

                      Draft picks? More than likely.

                      Would you trade Croshere, Bender & a #1 for Finley, only to waive him?
                      While I am not opposed to Bender being traded or waived for that matter, I am dead opposed to the trade of Croshere, Bender & a # 1 for money relief for the Simons.

                      We are NOT fans of their money, we are fans of the team & I ask in what possible way does that improve the team in an on floor capacity?

                      We still would not be under the salary cap so we still would not be able to make trades without the matching $$ provision & we still would not be able to sign any more free agents than we could right now.

                      In fact, putting Finley on our payroll just would add to our overall salary cap for another year.

                      Yes, I understand that this is a business & that the Simons should be able to make some money or at the very least not lose a lot of money. But at the end of the day none of us are going to stand on monument circle & have a parade & "thank you" day for them getting under some imaginary $$ figure.

                      We got David Harrison with the last pick in the first round. Would anybody be happy to give up a # 1 pick just to give it away?

                      This wasn't intended to be a blast at you Jose, I know you were just throwing things out there to see what sticks.

                      But I think there are to many times we sit & fret over an imaginary $$ figure instead of making the on court situation better.

                      I don't know about the rest of you but I put my season ticket money in to see the team give it's all to win, not to just make the Simons more money & trust me I have nothing against the Simons. In fact they are the best owners in the world.

                      But if I thought for a min. that they were more concerned with making money than they were with winning I wouldn't support the team with my money. I might watch for free on t.v. but no way would I shell out the thousands of $$ a year I do.

                      The Simons are on record with two things.

                      1. They don't want to pay the luxuary tax

                      2. They will pay the luxuary tax if management says they need to


                      There is a hell of a lot of differance between not wanting to pay the tax & refusing to.

                      They are in the Not wanting to pay the tax mode.

                      They happen to have a very good steward of their money in charge of the franchise so even though we have always been over the salary cap, I don't think they've ever paid a tax.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                        Originally posted by Harmonica
                        I'm pretty sure that's not the way it would work. The Mavs have to pay the remaining amount on his contract, but he could go play somewhere else for substantially less. Like Dale Davis. But I may have my facts confused.
                        As the writer is proposing a trade, we would get Fin's salary in return to deal with, only if we waive him under the amnesty would we not be in LT land, but then we have simply gained more to pay no matter what for nothing at all, and we are paying his salary while he plays for the Pistons for the vet min, to add to his already paid for salary.

                        Some things to think about before everyone starts writing like the dimwit above:

                        1. a trade remains a trade, whatever salary comes back needs to be paid, one way or another.
                        2. In exchange for the amnesty to paying LT over a salary you will still have to pay the player's salary while he can not play for you, the player is free to sign wherever he wants for whatever he wants, it will only be added to his salary he is receiving from the team that waives him under the amnesty.

                        3. In the given proposition the P's can offer Fin the mid-level if they want, and not loose a penny more, while still waibing Cro to get under the LT, while Dallas still pays Fin for the next 3 years 51 million, but not the LT over that amount.

                        So this entire "trade" idea is A: useless for the Mavs as they do not get LT relief (they get players back, but they still count against the LT) it only saves them on the duration of the money

                        it is useless for the P's as it only adds a ridiculous amount of salary we will HAVE to waive in order to not pay the 51 million dollar in salary PLUS 51 million dollar in LT
                        So what does the trade net the Pacers, 51 milion dollar in salary to pay over the next 3 years with no player to show for.
                        What do the Pacers loose: 2 contracts totalling 12 million that end this year (real cap & salary relief) plus one waived salary of 21 million over 2 years counting against the LT.
                        in numbers: Pacers "give" away 33 million to pay 51 million with no players left, while if they do nothing they still have the "services" of Cro and Polly.

                        Get real.

                        There is no way on Gods green earth that such a thought is pondered over by PS&E longer then 0.01 second.
                        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                          One of the very few times I agree with able on anything.

                          If the Mavs want to trade Finley, then they would have to be willing to pay the luxury tax, in which case they'd be better off KEEPING him in the first place.

                          The only possible option would be for the Mavs to find a take who'd trade contracts plus a first-rounder for finley, which probably won't happen. In that scenario, the Mavs could cut whomever they received, and they'd at least get a pick out of the deal.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                            there is an outside...and i do mean outside chance, that miami might consider trading eddie jones for finley...if they feel finley would help them more the next year or 2 than jones would....jones has 2 years left on a contract that pays him a similar amount to finley.....so dallas would save the one year....and to me finley is better than jones right now....so who knows....its very unlikely at best....

                            now...one thing that might be possible though not likely....and we havent gotten all the details yet-so the cba might try to eliminate this sort of loophole....but, potentially two teams in luxury tax territory could get together on something....something like this maybe.....and there arent many options that would work..

                            philly and dallas agree to a trade....finley is traded for chris webber....they both have 3 years left on their contracts....so the trade is consummated and then each player is waived.....and in turn each player resigns with their original team, thereby allowing both teams to avoid the luxury tax penalty....and the players (depending on how the cba addresses this issue) stand to make a few more bucks, but the teams gladly do it because they end up spending substantially less on the player due to saving all the luxury tax dollars....its pretty convoluted....and i wouldnt be surprised if the language of the cba somehow addresses this option....but as we know things now, it would be possible....its just hard to find the right two players....they need tohave similar contracts both in dollar amount as well as the years left....and the pacers would not fit the bill in trading with the mavs in this case.....

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Finley might be traded to East, (Pacers mention)

                              Finley on the Heat would make them a lot better.

                              Just offering Finley for Jones and a 1st round pick and hopefully the Heat would do that. The money is less over each year for the Heat, while Dallas gets out of Eddie's contract faster than they do for Finley.

                              And Eddie could go back to the Heat when he got cut by Dallas.
                              "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                              ----------------- Reggie Miller

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X