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

Kwame Brown?

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

  • Kwame Brown?

    Would anyone be interested in seeing Kwame Brown on the Pacers?
    Rumour has it the Pacers are interested. Fred Jones for Kwame?
    I think I would take the risk of Brown not panning out but you never know.

    owl
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

  • #2
    Re: Kwame Brown?

    Washington is looking for a shooting guard. Would Fred Jones be enough to
    pry Kwame away from Washington?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++

    Cap is hindering front-line needs
    Isiah's desire for a shot-blocker will be difficult to fulfill with the current crop of free agents


    Email this story
    Printer friendly format

    BY GREG LOGAN
    STAFF WRITER

    July 10, 2005

    Isiah Thomas scored a draft- night coup when he took advantage of a contractual snag in the Kurt Thomas-for-Quentin Richardson trade to pick up Phoenix's first-round pick and add pocket rocket point guard Nate Robinson to promising big men Channing Frye and David Lee.

    But the team president's stated goal of adding a shot-blocking big man in the free-agent market might be difficult to achieve for the Knicks, whose $120.8-million payroll for next season is far beyond the projected salary cap of $48 million. They would have to do a sign-and-trade to offer more than the mid-level cap exception of $5.1 million to the top prospects, with the possible exception of unrestricted free agents Jerome James and Steven Hunter.









    Chicago's Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler, Philadelphia's Samuel Dalembert and Washington's Kwame Brown are restricted free agents whose teams have the right to match any offer. Of those, only Brown is on the trading block, but one Eastern Conference personnel expert said the Wizards want a starting shooting guard to replace Larry Hughes, who signed with Cleveland.

    In talking with the Knicks, they have made it clear they are interested in Richardson, not Jamal Crawford, the starting two-guard last season. Although third-year power forward Mike Sweetney is available, the Wizards need more for the 6-11 Brown, who is only 23 and would project as the Knicks' starting center despite coming off an injury-plagued season.

    Another possibility is Memphis power forward Stromile Swift, who is only 6-9 but is a leaper who averaged 1.53 blocks last season. He visited the Knicks but figures to get more than the mid-level from teams with more cap flexibility than the Knicks.

    If the Knicks go the sign-and-trade route for another power forward, Boston's Antoine Walker might be the top target. Celtics president Danny Ainge recently said it's unlikely he would trade Walker to a division rival, but agent Mark Bartelstein suggested Boston's youth movement could force Ainge's hand.

    "Isiah and I have talked, and they definitely have the door open," Bartelstein said. "It's complicated to do a sign-and-trade, but the Knicks are the biggest stage, and I know Antoine would thrive there. I think there's intense interest, and he loves to be under the lights."

    Ainge traded Walker to Dallas two years ago but reacquired him from Atlanta last season, and he led the Celtics to the Atlantic Division title.

    "We've got to see what happens with Danny," Bartelstein said. "He wants to play the young guys, and they're not going to play if he signs Antoine ... Danny has a decision to make. A number of teams are interested in Antoine - the Knicks, Houston, Seattle, Sacramento, Indiana, the Clippers. He's the most talented free agent on the market."

    Walker is no shot-blocker, but he would offset the rebounding and shooting the Knicks lost when they traded Kurt Thomas.

    If Isiah Thomas can add James or Hunter on the cheap, it would improve the Knicks' defensive presence in the middle. James started 80 games for Seattle and averaged 1.39 blocks but played only 16 minutes a game and didn't produce much until the playoffs. The 7-foot Hunter averaged 1.34 blocks in just 13 minutes a game for Phoenix, but he's 80 pounds lighter than the 7-1, 300-pound James.

    Notes&quotes: According to Sports Illustrated's website, Detroit owner Bill Davidson is likely to fire Larry Brown, which would make him available to coach the Knicks if he resolves his health issues.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kwame Brown?

      I'd take a chance on Kwame Brown probably take Fred Jones and maybe Scot Pollard , I imagine Kwame will want more than Fred's $2.3 mil salary. With the new CBA contracts will be shorter in length.

      While Brown .has been a disapointmnt with the Wizards there was a lot of pressure on him as the #1 pick overall in the draft and being picked by MJ.

      But Kwame Brown is still only 23. Fred Jones is already 26 . Kwame , has the tools to become a very good pf/c . He has Jermaine O'Neal as the model he say he wants to copy as a player. What better chance to use JO as a measuring stick than to play against him in practice and with him on the court ? In 2003-04 as a 21 year old until March , Kwame averaged 10.9 ppg and 7.4 rpg , very solid numbers for his age and limited experience. Last summer he had surgey , came back and struggled all season to find his role with the Wizards. Ending with his suspension during the playoffs.

      At 23 , he is too young to consider a total bust. Unlike Bender , his 2003-04 season showed he can produce when given consistant minutes. Kwame has more NBA ready total game than any Pacer bigman not named Jermaine. I know most on here will not agree on that , but its my opinion.

      Fred Jones while a good player is already 26 . He is also entering his last year of his contract. With Stephen Jackson now playing sg 34+ minutes a night , Fred will want more minutes than 14-20 a night in the last year of his contract. At 6'2 Fred will forever be an undersized sg , with no time to play and being a free agent after the season ,he'll want time and money to stay here.

      If we could acquire Brown with a new contract (shorter termed with new CBA) a still young 23 ,former #1 overall opick for Fred Jones and Pollard's contract to me you do it . Brown's upside is far greater than Fred's will be here in limited minutes.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kwame Brown?

        IF Freddie and Pollard and say a future 2nd rounder would do it... then I'm all for it. However that DOES mean we are going to need another back up SG. AJ can play limited minutes there and who knows Granger or JJ could play a little there too. But, what are we going to do IF SJax goes down a month or more with an injury?

        Regards,

        Mourning
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kwame Brown?

          We have heard little hints Jalen Rose could end up here if waived. Could it be Larry and Donnie have already been considering that and are seeing Jalen as a backup sf/sg/pg here???

          Also think at worse if we dealt Fred Jones , and Stephen got hurt we could move Ron Artest to sg for awhile. That would mean Granger and James Jones playing a lot of sf.

          Artest is not the ideal sg but he could play there for awhile.

          Kwame Brown to me is player who is not ready for fulltime starter pressure but a player who is only 23 , and has skills could blossom quickly in the right surroundings(winning team, low expectations , young experienced vets). I'm sorry I'm in the group that feels Fred Jones will ever be anything but a part time player here .

          But with the Wizards he'd get a chance to play. To me his limited playing time here will turn into another Al Harrington situation. With Fred a free agent after this season I'm sure he's gone to greener pastures.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kwame Brown?

            I would go for a trade like this as I believe Kwame could help more than Fred
            ultimately. Plus we need a replacement for Croshere and Kwame could easily
            fill that bill. Would it not be interesting if we released Croshere and we picked
            up a released Jalen. That would limit the sting of still having to pay Croshere's
            salary. Someone else would be paying Jalens. Something is going to happen in this off season. You can just feel it. Hmmm, that could just be gas : 0


            owl
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kwame Brown?

              I'd take him... especially over Walker..

              Maybe we can swing a Bender/Jones trade for him....

              Potential for potential...
              Here, everyone have a : on me

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kwame Brown?

                I'm a big fan of Fred's but I would give him up for Kwame. When we traded for JO people said why did we do that, JO hasnt proven anything. Well we can have another JO on our hands with Kwame. He would give us alot of help, if not starting at the 5 he could at least back up JO and give us scoring in the paint once JO is out.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kwame Brown?

                  If some of you question the Pacers mental toughness, just wait because Kwame is very weak mentally, about as weak as it gets.

                  I really like Fred Jones and I think he is a handy player to have around. But I would not be true to my principles if I did not want Fred traded for Kwame. Kwame has too much talent not to take the chance

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kwame Brown?

                    I posted the below in the otehr thread but it is more relevant here -

                    I am convinced. Donnie shops at the neighbour hood Goodwill store for bargains. I would not mind trading Freddie for Kwame. This guy has the physical tools and hopefully a change of scenery(the successful Pacers franchise) will definitely shore up his mental strength. Even if it does not pan out, we have not lost much. Freddie Jones is good but will never be a star in this league.
                    ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kwame Brown?

                      Unless Washington doesn't wake up and realize they are about to lose a young big man, Kwame is going to NY if Isiah can hold onto his MLE.

                      I have only one reason I think this will happen, Isiah and Kwame need each other. They both need an immediate positive turn of events. If Kwame signs the shortest MLE contract available and does well, he could possibly make up for it later with earnings outside of basketball.

                      For Isiah, he as the slim chance of losing his anti-christ rep. A slim chance.

                      With the loss of Hughes I would think the Wiz would be willing to kiss and make up, Kwame does have talent, on a good day he looks like the second coming of Jermaine.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kwame Brown?

                        I think you definitely make an offer for Kwame.

                        We, of all people, should know how a change of scenery can help someone. Kwame has all the athletic ability and god-given physical attributes to be something special. He has proven that he can be a force in this league from time to time.

                        I think he needs to be surrounded by coaching, staff, and players who will be a positive influence on him; who push him to his limits, make sure he works hard, and forces him to play up to his potential. And of course, who better to be the lead-mentor than Jermaine?

                        As for Freddy, I like UB's mode of thinking. He's a great guy to have on your team...but you just can't pass on an opportunity to get a #1 draft pick like Kwame.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kwame Brown?

                          Originally posted by diamonddave00
                          I'd take a chance on Kwame Brown probably take Fred Jones and maybe Scot Pollard , I imagine Kwame will want more than Fred's $2.3 mil salary. With the new CBA contracts will be shorter in length.

                          While Brown .has been a disapointmnt with the Wizards there was a lot of pressure on him as the #1 pick overall in the draft and being picked by MJ.

                          But Kwame Brown is still only 23. Fred Jones is already 26 . Kwame , has the tools to become a very good pf/c . He has Jermaine O'Neal as the model he say he wants to copy as a player. What better chance to use JO as a measuring stick than to play against him in practice and with him on the court ? In 2003-04 as a 21 year old until March , Kwame averaged 10.9 ppg and 7.4 rpg , very solid numbers for his age and limited experience. Last summer he had surgey , came back and struggled all season to find his role with the Wizards. Ending with his suspension during the playoffs.

                          At 23 , he is too young to consider a total bust. Unlike Bender , his 2003-04 season showed he can produce when given consistant minutes. Kwame has more NBA ready total game than any Pacer bigman not named Jermaine. I know most on here will not agree on that , but its my opinion.

                          Fred Jones while a good player is already 26 . He is also entering his last year of his contract. With Stephen Jackson now playing sg 34+ minutes a night , Fred will want more minutes than 14-20 a night in the last year of his contract. At 6'2 Fred will forever be an undersized sg , with no time to play and being a free agent after the season ,he'll want time and money to stay here.

                          If we could acquire Brown with a new contract (shorter termed with new CBA) a still young 23 ,former #1 overall opick for Fred Jones and Pollard's contract to me you do it . Brown's upside is far greater than Fred's will be here in limited minutes.
                          When you said that Fred Jones was 26, I couldn't believe it. I would have guessed that Fred was about 24. It was hard to believe he was already 26. But you are indeed correct as his birthday is 3/11/79. So at the end of next season, Fred will already be a 27 years old.

                          I've said it many times, Fred Jones is a decent player to have, but backup guards like him are a dime a dozen. If things stay the same, Fred Jones will never be a starter here. Even if we made a move, it would probably produce a better perimeter player, and Jones would still not start. The Pacers wouldn't have much trouble finding a backup guard like Jones.

                          Like Unclebuck said, Kwame is extremely weak mentally. But I agree with him, he'd definitely be worth it for Fred Jones. Kwame has alot of potential, he's always reminded me of a young JO. I think he just needs some time.

                          Kwame's just played 4 years. JO's first 4 years were in Porland, where he didn't make a whole lot of noise either. Sure, Kwame has had alot of time to try and produce, while JO was stuck on the bench behind Wallace, Grant, and Kemp. I think Kwame will pan out. He's only 23..

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kwame Brown?

                            Um, guys....where the hell will we play Brown if he gets here?

                            He is a powerforward, Power being in question.

                            Jermaine O'Neal is a powerforward, yes he can play some center but he doesn't like to & he isn't as affective there.

                            J.O. blossomed in Indiana because he was the only low post option we had, period. There is no way in hell J.O. will take a back seat to let Kwame Brown grow.

                            There are not enough balls on the court for a lineup of Artest, Tinsely, Jackson, Brown & O'Neal.

                            No, like Tim said it really would be in Browns best interest to go to N.Y. I mean I have nothing for or against him but I just don't see where he fits here at all.


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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kwame Brown?

                              Peck, I don't think anyone would argue with you, but if the Pacers can trade Fred for Kwame you have to make the trade and worry about the stuff you mention later.

                              I think there is very little if any chance of the Pacers acquiring Kwame, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.

                              The Wizard will gt better offers than Fred

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X