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

Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

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

  • #16
    Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    Let me clarify on the weather: the warm weather favors the Cardinals, but not as much as cold weather would strongly favor the Steelers.
    I agree 100%.
    I don't agree with your assessment of the Steelers D-line, from a scheme perspective. But I would like to hear more about how the Patriots put Warner under pressure.

    For the Steelers, Smith, Keisel and Hampton are run stuffers and against the pass their job is to occupy as many blockers as possible so that Harrison, Woodley and Timmons have blitzing lanes. Its the prototype 3-4, remember? Now, will LeBeau likely pull Hampton and Foote, and replace them with Timmons and a nickel back? Yes. Then he'll rush four, including the obvious three (Keisel, Smith, Woodley) but leave them guessing on whether Harrison or Timmons is rushing or dropping into coverage, and drop Farrior into coverage. If we've got to go to a dime, which I think we might, either Harrison or Timmons gets pulled. Said another way, our nickel D looks like a 4-2, but the "DEs" are really our LBs.

    I'll bet we've blitzed with a DB less than 10 times this season. Troy has become the master decoy in that regard. Collinsworth said earlier in the season that he's never seen LeBeau blitz this little, and remember those guys were together in Cincinnati for a decade so Collinsworth knows a lot about LeBeau.

    We'll concede the out pattern. They can't get enough first downs against us passing that way.
    I wasn't saying that the Steelers DLine wouldn't have success, merely that this year Warner has been phenomenal against blitzing teams due to his quick release, the talent that Arizona has at the skill positions, and the system that Arizona runs. From what I have seen this year, the teams that have traditionally had the most success against the Cardinals were the teams that could pressure Warner with their DLine. The first team to really figure that out was actually the Eagles back during the regular season when they walloped Arizona 48-20. I remember reading that Warner has thrown something along the lines of 12-13 TDs and 2 INTs against the blitz this year which is phenomenal.
    If by "shred through the air", you mean the first QB to get over 240 yards against our pass defense, then okay.

    Manning, Rivers (twice), McNabb, Romo, Collins, Campbell, Cassel, Garrard, and the other Manning have all been held to 240 or less.

    Of our four losses, two were attributable to early season struggles with the pass rush (Eagles, Giants), and two were attributable to Ben's occasional tendency to turn the ball over (Titans, Colts).
    If the Cardinals are going to win this game, Warner will need at least 300 yards or Big Ben is going to have to make some mistakes.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

      I've seen a lot of Super Bowls and this Steeler vs Cardinal matchup will be another one.




      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

        Originally posted by Moses View Post
        If the Cardinals are going to win this game, Warner will need at least 300 yards or Big Ben is going to have to make some mistakes.
        Yes and yes.

        One other option, though, is that Warner could turn E. James loose. Wisenhutt and Grimm know quite well that if Manning had discipline to stick with Edge in the second half of the 2005 playoff game, the Colts might have been able to make a full comeback. Cowher planned, correctly, that Manning would generally become one dimensional and LeBeau overcommitted to the pass.

        Manning only really went to Edge in one series, and the Colts moved the ball right down the field. Then he went back to passing, and if the NFL didn't blow call on Polamalu's interception, that next drive would have been over long before midfield.

        And that's why I keep saying Manning is a far better QB than offensive coordinator.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

          Originally posted by Moses View Post
          I wasn't saying that the Steelers DLine wouldn't have success, merely that this year Warner has been phenomenal against blitzing teams due to his quick release, the talent that Arizona has at the skill positions, and the system that Arizona runs. From what I have seen this year, the teams that have traditionally had the most success against the Cardinals were the teams that could pressure Warner with their DLine. The first team to really figure that out was actually the Eagles back during the regular season when they walloped Arizona 48-20. I remember reading that Warner has thrown something along the lines of 12-13 TDs and 2 INTs against the blitz this year which is phenomenal.
          Fair enough. We'll do it with our linebackers, though, not the D-line.

          Not really a Super Bowl preview, but Peter King has a nice description of it here from an article last month:

          The Dream Scheme
          Dick LeBeau's revolutionary philosophy—pressure the passer, but keep zones covered—just gets better with age
          Peter King
          http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.c...9835/index.htm

          LeBeau was a good pal of Bob Knight's when both attended Ohio State in the late '50s, and they've kept in touch to this day. Their conversations inevitably turn to defensive pressure on the ball. It worked for Knight on the basketball court, and it has worked for LeBeau, especially since the idea of safe pressure came to him while preparing for his first coordinator job, in Cincinnati in 1984. While scouting for the '84 draft, LeBeau talked to LSU coach Bill Arnsparger about pressuring the passer while still being able to cover receivers. That got LeBeau to thinking: On obvious passing downs, what if he dropped a defensive lineman or two or a linebacker into a shallow zone and blitzed a defensive back or linebacker? Zones wouldn't be left unmanned, and by the time the quarterback saw an open receiver, the confusing blitz package would have—hopefully—done its job. The zone blitz was born.

          LeBeau's scheme began to flourish when he joined Bill Cowher's Steelers staff as secondary coach in 1992, and it has really taken off for him since '03, LeBeau's single season as a Bills assistant. That year Buffalo improved from 15th in total defense to second, and the players bought into the scheme on opening day when 335-pound defensive tackle Sam Adams dropped into the middle linebacker's zone, picked off Tom Brady and returned the interception 37 yards for a touchdown. In Pittsburgh since 2004, LeBeau's units have ranked first, fourth, ninth and first overall, with this year's team playing better than any unit LeBeau has coached.

          The Steelers may have the two perfect outside linebackers for the zone blitz: five-year veteran James Harrison and second-year man LaMarr Woodley. They're equally adept at coverage and rushing the passer, and the 265-pound Woodley is a good run stuffer.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
            Yes and yes.

            One other option, though, is that Warner could turn E. James loose. Wisenhutt and Grimm know quite well that if Manning had discipline to stick with Edge in the second half of the 2005 playoff game, the Colts might have been able to make a full comeback. Cowher planned, correctly, that Manning would generally become one dimensional and LeBeau overcommitted to the pass.

            Manning only really went to Edge in one series, and the Colts moved the ball right down the field. Then he went back to passing, and if the NFL didn't blow call on Polamalu's interception, that next drive would have been over long before midfield.

            And that's why I keep saying Manning is a far better QB than offensive coordinator.
            All of that is definitely true. But you do have to give Manning credit for sticking to the run in the the 06 playoffs (Baltimore game and Superbowl esp).

            I think he learned a valuable lesson during the 05 and 06 playoffs. It's just that this year he had no running game to depend on.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

              I dunno, from what I can remember, the Steelers pretty well had the stretch play devoured during that playoff game. I was glad when Manning went away from it. (Yeah, maybe it worked for one drive, but I think an even bigger problem was not having any effective running play that wasn't the stretch.)
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                This matchup will be strength on strength. How the Steelers offense does against the Cardinals defense likely won't make any difference (with one caveat, below), ...
                I've been thinking about this, and it may not be right.

                The Steelers offense has a pretty low ranking overall, but it has been able to move the ball at times against all of its opponents not named "Philadelphia Eagles".

                Turnovers have been the un-doing, along with a conservative red zone strategy (with our defense, we can live with scoring in "three's".)

                We've faced, this season, the #2 defense (measured by total yards) three times, the #3, #4, #5, #7, #8, #10 and #11 defenses once, and the #12 defense twice. Of our 18 games, 12 games were against teams ranked in the top 12. When we lost to the #11 defense, we actually outgained the Colts in total offense 326-290 but were plagued by turnovers. When we lost to the #7 defense, we outgained the Titans in total offense 374-322 but turnovers killed us. Now, the Giants and Eagles beat us soundly in both total yards and turnovers.

                Perhaps the Cardinals at #19 in total defense can force some turnovers? The seem pretty good at forcing fumbles, statistically.

                Not sure what to make out of this...

                Turnover differential often determines Super Bowl outcome
                NFL.com (no author named)

                http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story?i...o&confirm=true

                The Cardinals finished the regular season tied for 17th in turnover differential, having turned over the ball as many times (30) as they took it away. Including the playoffs, Arizona is 10-0 this season when posting a positive turnover differential.

                Pittsburgh finished the regular season with a plus-4 turnover differential -- good for a 11th-place tie in the league. Like their Super Bowl counterparts, the Steelers have come out victorious in all 10 games in which they have recorded a positive turnover differential.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                  Originally posted by Moses View Post
                  If the Cardinals are going to win this game, Warner will need at least 300 yards or Big Ben is going to have to make some mistakes.
                  The first has happened only once in 18 games played (Philip Rivers) and the next closest was 240 yards, I think (Peyton Manning).

                  I think that the Cardinals need to use some 4-wide spead formations, though that would leave them more vulnerable to the pass rush. If to get adequate protection they have to keep a tight end and a running back in there just to help pass block and only send a couple of guys out on patterns, I think that they are doomed.

                  They aren't going to run the ball, unless they run from spread formations. That's the one thing the Patriots did well-- I think Kevin Faulk had some nice runs early when the Steelers were spread out and playing deep. But otherwise they will need to spread the D, not necessarily to throw deep since I doubt Warner will have tons of time, but to get a lot of shorter crossing routes where the D doesn't have enought time to converge. They don't seem to throw to the backs much though, despite the fact Edge has the ability to catch and even split out or line up in the slot.

                  Personally I hope the Cards play well but I expect a fairly decisive Steeler win driven by fewer turnovers.
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                    Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                    The first has happened only once in 18 games played (Philip Rivers) and the next closest was 240 yards, I think (Peyton Manning).
                    You're right. I forgot that Philip Rivers piled 175 passing yards into the fourth quarter of that game to make the final score appear closer.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                      I have almost forgotten that there actually was a Super Bowl this weekend. This has to be one of the most boring, least hyped Super Bowls ever. If it weren't for the commercials and Springsteen, I doubt I'd even watch.

                      Hopefully Warner and Fitz. can give it some spark.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                        Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
                        I have almost forgotten that there actually was a Super Bowl this weekend. This has to be one of the most boring, least hyped Super Bowls ever. If it weren't for the commercials and Springsteen, I doubt I'd even watch.

                        Hopefully Warner and Fitz. can give it some spark.
                        you are kidding right? This is the most overhyped Superbowl. Sportscenter talks about it 45 minutes out of every hour. Talk shows rehash the Warner, Boldin, Fitzgerald, and Big Ben stories to the point where I get a headache. I have listened less to sports talk than ever before. I hate having the NFL crammed down my throat. I was a bigger fan before the force fed it to me.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                          Don't forget your 3D glasses.
                          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Jay's official Super Bowl preview thread

                            I'm not planning on watching. Now I'll be at a SB party but I'm so disinterested that my goal is to get loaded enough to where my buddy doesn't get overly PO'd when I try to get myself a good look at his wife's hooters.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X