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

Our young guys

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

  • Our young guys

    Collison, Price, Stephenson, Rush, George, Granger, Hibbert, Hans, McRoberts, and possibly Magnum.

    Not bad to build on.

    Collison and Price - I'm not as huge on Collison as some of you (although some of you aren't as huge on Price as I am) But I think we can all agree, that the PG position is more than likely in good hands, between the two of them. As I posted before, if they are equally good, we trade one. If one's clearly better than the other, one's the backup and one's the starter. Pretty simple. Our offense can now be completely geared to PnRs, and also we have a fast paced/half court option here. Collison clearly prefers the up and down game. Price, although he can play both well, actually prefers the half court game, which I know we didn't see much...Anyway, I think the PG answer is in there.

    Stephenson/Rush/George - more than likely a SG of the future there, with some solid versitile players. George and Rush can slide over to the three easily.

    Granger as our SF

    McBob and Hans - we'll probably need a better PF, but both of these players can be roll players.

    Hibbert and Rolle- Center and possible backup.

    More importantly, I want to see these guys play together this season.

    A lineup of Collison, Rush, George, Granger, Hibbert would probably work out really well. I think Collison having shooters and a good big man in the game would be what he needs to be successful.

    I'm interested in seeing Price and Stephenson playing next to each other. That could be a fun option off the bench. Starting a defensive minded backcourt with Collison and Rush, and then bringing in Price and Stephenson to shoot the offense in the arm.

    I also wanna see Danny with these young guys. I'd love to see more of the Price/Rush/Hibbert group, that seemed to have a ton of chemistry last season.

    Lots of options here, a lot of potential. Good Job Larry

  • #2
    Re: Our young guys

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    I also wanna see Danny with these young guys. I'd love to see more of the Price/Rush/Hibbert group, that seemed to have a ton of chemistry last season.
    Add George and McRoberts and we have a well-oiled machine . Seriously though, I think that combination will just click, big time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Our young guys

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      Lots of options here, a lot of potential. Good Job Larry
      i gotta agree. Bird made a fantastic move today to land a young pg with very good potential. were a very young team, and thirty plus million in expirings.

      im happy for Larry Bird, he has recieved quite a bit of heat, hopefully he is placed in higher esteem by pacer fans after the offseason we have had, in addition to the next offseason as well.

      i bet Granger is very happy with this deal, along with Hibbert. looking forward to seeing how this teams chemistry develops.

      im thinking were 3-4 seasons away still with the Miami Dream team, but at least we have something to build on now, a direction this team is moving in.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Our young guys

        The thing I love is that these are all very skilled young guys. There isn't any huge projects there, besides maybe Paul George. All three rookies showed very impressive multifaceted games in the summer league I thought. They just need NBA bodies and conditioning, along with some experience. McRoberts and Hibbert both have great passing ability for big guys along with other valuable skills as well. Collison showed a lot last year as a rookie. He practically carried them to a near .500 record without Chris Paul in the west which is very impressive for a rookie. I think he is much better than Price myself. But I liked what I saw of Price last year also, and I think he could be a great back-up for Collison. They seem to complement each other pretty well. Hansbrough is Hansbrough, and every team could use a Hansbrough. And Brandon Rush has all the ability in the world and is already a good player, the only question with him is how good will he be.

        There is a lot of athleticism in that group too. The Pacers suddenly have the 10 young guys to form that young nucleus they have been talking about. And all the sudden the whole picture has been flipped. They have financial breathing room all the sudden, all their draft picks and and a good mix of deadline trade ammo/cap space and young pieces to go after anyone that comes available. I love our situation for the first time in a long time.

        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
        i gotta agree. Bird made a fantastic move today to land a young pg with very good potential. were a very young team, and thirty plus million in expirings.

        im happy for Larry Bird, he has recieved quite a bit of heat, hopefully he is placed in higher esteem by pacer fans after the offseason we have had, in addition to the next offseason as well.

        i bet Granger is very happy with this deal, along with Hibbert. looking forward to seeing how this teams chemistry develops.

        im thinking were 3-4 seasons away still with the Miami Dream team, but at least we have something to build on now, a direction this team is moving in.
        I am happy for Bird as well. People around here just want something to get excited about. That's hard to do when you are stuck in a financial mess like the Pacers have been, people know that. But the team is finally turning the corner and Larry will definitely be treated differently now. I seriously doubt any of the criticism bothers him, he has some pretty thick skin. Indiana is actually pretty soft on the local sports figures compared to most towns anyways.
        Last edited by Taterhead; 08-12-2010, 02:06 AM.
        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Our young guys

          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
          The thing I love is that these are all very skilled young guys. There isn't any huge projects there, besides maybe Paul George. All three rookies showed very impressive multifaceted games in the summer league I thought. They just need NBA bodies and conditioning, along with some experience.
          .
          I don't see how Stephenson can be considered anything other than a project. Does he have some NBA ready ability? Yes. But here are the facts: He's a 19 year old rookie coming off a somewhat disappointing freshman year in college that has a fairly "raw" body. He isn't the athletic phenom that John Wall is. He'll need at least a year to refine his body and his skills. At least. That's not to say he can't get minutes this year and be effective.

          Here is everyone on the team age 25 or younger:

          Rush (25)
          Hansbrough (24)
          Hibbert (24)
          Price (23)
          McRoberts (23)
          Collison (22)
          George (20)
          Stephenson (19)

          Rolle (24) * Unsigned at the moment

          Probably about 3 of these players have birthdays before the season starts...but shhh don't tell.

          Three years from now, Stephenson and George will both be about 23 years old, the age of many rookies. How their game grows between now and then will be a big part of our future. The other players I'd argue are in more of a Present Term territory. As in they have to get out and do it today.

          So THIS YEAR we have 5/6 young players that probably need to produce today, and 2/3 young players we can afford to be more patient with.

          Some of these guys will be moved out in deals over the next year or two and/or be possibly replaced by 2 more draft picks each year.

          This is truly a youth movement in Indiana people. When was the last year we saw so many youngsters on the team?
          "man, PG has been really good."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Our young guys

            Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
            I don't see how Stephenson can be considered anything other than a project. Does he have some NBA ready ability? Yes. But here are the facts: He's a 19 year old rookie coming off a somewhat disappointing freshman year in college that has a fairly "raw" body. He isn't the athletic phenom that John Wall is. He'll need at least a year to refine his body and his skills. At least. That's not to say he can't get minutes this year and be effective.

            Here is everyone on the team age 25 or younger:

            Rush (25)
            Hansbrough (24)
            Hibbert (24)
            Price (23)
            McRoberts (23)
            Collison (22)
            George (20)
            Stephenson (19)

            Rolle (24) * Unsigned at the moment

            Probably about 3 of these players have birthdays before the season starts...but shhh don't tell.

            Three years from now, Stephenson and George will both be about 23 years old, the age of many rookies. How their game grows between now and then will be a big part of our future. The other players I'd argue are in more of a Present Term territory. As in they have to get out and do it today.

            So THIS YEAR we have 5/6 young players that probably need to produce today, and 2/3 young players we can afford to be more patient with.

            Some of these guys will be moved out in deals over the next year or two and/or be possibly replaced by 2 more draft picks each year.

            This is truly a youth movement in Indiana people. When was the last year we saw so many youngsters on the team?
            I just said I don't think he is a huge project. I think he clearly has the body, athleticism and basketball talent to be a pretty good NBA player. It's about the mental side with him. People have made him a bigger project by moving him to PG. But I feel like at worst you got a pretty talented 2 guard there who will contribute to this team, whether he's a star or just a spark plug off the bench.

            And your second point is a good reason why I said that. Those guys who are gonna take a few years, have the time. They have more ready guys in front of them. Collison, Rush, Jones, Dunleavy and Granger will be in front of George and Stephenson and you got Hansbrough, Foster, Hibbert, Jones and McRoberts ahead of Magnum. It just seems like a great situation for them and the team.
            Last edited by Taterhead; 08-12-2010, 02:39 AM.
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Our young guys

              Whats this mean for stephenson? Collison will be our starting guard with out a doubt. Collison will play 30min or so a game with AJ backing him up. That leaves little room for him to get min at the point. We also don't need him at pg hardly at all now. They may still try to see what he can do their but his big strength is putting points on the board. He has an amazing shooting game. Possibly the best shooter in the draft even with hayward, and babbit. So shouldn't we let him play more time at SG. rush can start and lance n dunleavy can split the other minutes. At some point in the year i expect dc, rush, posey, granger,hibbert to start a game. With granger getting alot of minutes at pf that leaves some minutes for paul and maybe d.jones. really d.jones and posey are the same type players but, posey is bigger and possibly more effective then jones. so jones shouldn't get many minutes they should instead go to paul. Magnum's situation hasn't really changed with granger eating up as many min as murph would. Tyler seems to be doing well too and will see about the same minutes he averaged last year. might even get some more this yr. mcbob will see the same minutes unless tyler gets hurt cause we need to see what we have in rolle too.

              pretty much with murphy being gone and us gettin help at the point. the rooks will be lookin at a much different set up then before.
              2012: Pacers return to glory

              Paul George All Day

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Our young guys

                Originally posted by Pacers2012 View Post
                Whats this mean for stephenson? Collison will be our starting guard with out a doubt.
                little room for him to get min at the point. We also don't need him at pg hardly at all now. but his big strength is putting points on the board.

                Remember Price is recovering from an injury. If Ford is moved there may be more minutes at the point than you think for Lance

                He has an amazing shooting game. Possibly the best shooter in the draft even with hayward, and babbit.

                No, you're confusing him with George. Lance's game is his ability to score and his playmaking skills.

                but, posey is bigger and possibly more effective then jones.

                Posey's ancient. He's looked like he has declined quite a bit the last couple of years. His shot was off last year too. Even so, he has a DECENT 3pt shot. He's also more suitable for the SF and PF spots while Dahntay fits better as a SG.

                mcbob will see the same minutes unless tyler gets hurt cause we need to see what we have in rolle too.

                I don't know. I think we see McBob getting a big chunk of minutes. Murphy's absence is 32.6 mpg. I see McBob getting around 10 of those, depending on the health of Hansbrough

                pretty much with murphy being gone and us gettin help at the point. the rooks will be lookin at a much different set up then before.

                Word
                Sorry I cut your post up so much but I wanted to specifically address some points lost in that Godly paragraph.
                "man, PG has been really good."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Our young guys

                  Before any of you pencil McRoberts, Rolle and Hansbrough into the PF rotation...let's look at the PF/C rotation as it stands now:

                  Hibbert
                  Foster
                  Hansbrough
                  McRoberts
                  Solo
                  Magnum ( maybe )

                  Add in Granger and George getting likely some backup PF/C minutes...do you think that Bird and Morway will be content with this JUST FOR THIS season?

                  I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up trading for a more experience PF...one that would even have a long-term contract. As to who? I have no clue....but I wouldn't stay on cloud 9 for too long. Didn't Bird say that we probably won't be going into the season with this roster intact as the way it is now?
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Our young guys

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    Before any of you pencil McRoberts, Rolle and Hansbrough into the PF rotation...let's look at the PF/C rotation as it stands now:

                    Hibbert
                    Foster
                    Hansbrough
                    McRoberts
                    Solo
                    Magnum ( maybe )

                    Add in Granger and George getting likely some backup PF/C minutes...do you think that Bird and Morway will be content with this JUST FOR THIS season?

                    I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up trading for a more experience PF...one that would even have a long-term contract. As to who? I have no clue....but I wouldn't stay on cloud 9 for too long. Didn't Bird say that we probably won't be going into the season with this roster intact as the way it is now?
                    I could see the Pacers trying to bring in another young PF/C to fight for minutes along side those players, but I have a hard time seeing the Pacers bringing in a PF that is clearly better than anyone we have now. I just don't think we have the pieces to bring one back, and it may just be too tempting to wait and try to get Horford.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Our young guys

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      Before any of you pencil McRoberts, Rolle and Hansbrough into the PF rotation...let's look at the PF/C rotation as it stands now:

                      Hibbert
                      Foster
                      Hansbrough
                      McRoberts
                      Solo
                      Magnum ( maybe )

                      Add in Granger and George getting likely some backup PF/C minutes...do you think that Bird and Morway will be content with this JUST FOR THIS season?

                      I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up trading for a more experience PF...one that would even have a long-term contract. As to who? I have no clue....but I wouldn't stay on cloud 9 for too long. Didn't Bird say that we probably won't be going into the season with this roster intact as the way it is now?
                      To be honest, bringing in a new PF is reasonable, and if Hans and McBob only play ten minutes each, that's fine with me.

                      If Ford gets minutes over Collison, Price or Lance, then I'm gonna be upset

                      If Dunleavy gets minutes over George, (okay, I know he will), Lance (yea probably then too), or Rush I'll be upset.

                      If DJones gets minutes over George, Lance, and Rush I'll be upset

                      If Foster gets minutes over Hibbert...

                      I think with our young guys, there's a good chance every position is covered besides PF. (maybe SG, but one would hope that, just like between Collison and Price, between Lance, Rush, and George..one of them would be the SG of the future.) So I'm okay with them looking for a solid guy there.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X