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

Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

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

  • #46
    Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

    Except the Colts have repeatedly said that Pollack will play OG, and not center, and the fact that he started 13 games last year at RG.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      Except the Colts have repeatedly said that Pollack will play OG, and not center, and the fact that he started 13 games last year at RG.
      Thats why its called insurance. THe fact that they were able to resign Saturday immediately meant that Pollack was going to be moved to Guard because we all know we didn't have great guards last year either.

      The same was done with Tarik Glen and Ugoh. They knew that the age of Glen and Saturday (contract) were putting the team at risk of having a gaping hole in an important position.

      They dodged a bullet by being able to resign Saturday which was mainly due to Harrisons realease and an unexpected 4 million increase in the salary cap. If that doesn't happen then we don't resign Saturday and we replace him with one of the 3 centers we drafted the year prior. In the case of Ugoh replacing Glen we took a bullet to the head.

      Its not uncommon to draft a guy to fill a hole a year ahead of time and this is what happened with Pollack. The hole just happened not to be their lucky for us.
      Last edited by Gamble1; 08-10-2011, 11:54 AM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

        Or they knew they would be able to sign Saturday, and thought Pollack would be a good fit at OG..... Not everything has to be some super secret plan. Could his versatility have some play? Probably. But you're sounding like the main reason he was brought it was to fill in a spot that they might have open. They need OL help in other areas too, and he helped fill those holes.

        If Saturday retired, or signed with another club, then sure he could slid over. But I don't think that was the plan, but rather an option.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          Or they knew they would be able to sign Saturday, and thought Pollack would be a good fit at OG..... Not everything has to be some super secret plan. Could his versatility have some play? Probably. But you're sounding like the main reason he was brought it was to fill in a spot that they might have open. They need OL help in other areas too, and he helped fill those holes.

          If Saturday retired, or signed with another club, then sure he could slid over. But I don't think that was the plan, but rather an option.
          The ceiling for the salary cap wasn't known yet and they knew the projections didn't make it likely that they could resign him. The unexpected addition of 4 million was what did it and the Colts if I remember right confirmed this. Also I believe Saturday had serious consideration from the Steelers but because we up our offer with the 4 million making him one of the highest paid centers during that time gave us the ability to retain him. We drafted 3 centers in 2008 (the year prior) because the Colts had serious concerns about meeting the contract demands of a probowl center.

          Converting centers to guards is common place in the NFL especially if they can't make it as a center in the NFL which is exactly what happened to Pollack IMo. Converting guards to centers though is not very common and this is why we took 3 centers in the 2008 draft and not 3 guards.

          Edit: Even if we took Pollack to be guard its not like thats a feather in the cap of Pollain. The guy has been beaten out by multiple lower picks and hasn't helped the run offense very much.
          Last edited by Gamble1; 08-10-2011, 12:32 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

            I'm not trying to say it's a feather in his cap. I'm saying that this idea that we only draft position players, and not draft players that help on areas of weakness is bunk.

            Just because some of them haven't panned out, like planned, doesn't mean that they haven't tried addressing those areas, which is what Bball is trying to say.

            The Colts have drafted quite a few OL, and not DL. Jerry Hughes is the perfect example. He's more of a run stopping DE. But oh God, everyone's upset that he plays the same position as Freeney and Mathis.

            So we Colts fans ***** about run stopping, Polian goes out and drafts a DE that is supposed to help stop the run, and now people ***** that he plays the same position as Freeny/Mathis.

            It's a no win situation. And then all this is proof that Polian doesn't care enough.

            It gets old.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              I'm not trying to say it's a feather in his cap. I'm saying that this idea that we only draft position players, and not draft players that help on areas of weakness is bunk.

              Just because some of them haven't panned out, like planned, doesn't mean that they haven't tried addressing those areas, which is what Bball is trying to say.

              The Colts have drafted quite a few OL, and not DL. Jerry Hughes is the perfect example. He's more of a run stopping DE. But oh God, everyone's upset that he plays the same position as Freeney and Mathis.

              So we Colts fans ***** about run stopping, Polian goes out and drafts a DE that is supposed to help stop the run, and now people ***** that he plays the same position as Freeny/Mathis.

              It's a no win situation. And then all this is proof that Polian doesn't care enough.

              It gets old.
              Well theres one way to stop the complaining and thats by stopping the run and being half way decent in the running game.

              You honestly believe we drafted Hughes because he could stop the run? The guy was a duel threat but if he couldn't get to the QB on passing downs no way would we have taken him in the first round. By the way Ricardo Matthews was that pick to stop the run in 2010 not Hughes. Matthews is now or backup NT yaa!

              I think the main issue that I have is that it was a luxury pick when we had other pressing needs that could have been addressed. By in large though I didn't mind the pick as long as the other needs are addressed like another NT on the team.

              We have like 5 three technique DT's on the team and one legit NT. I personally just can't understad that way of thinking. Its not like the base tampa 2 defense doesn't ask for NT depth. Even the one we have is mediocre at best.

              Hopefully Polain gets another NT and all is well but the best time to have done that was in the draft and during the recent FA frenzy.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                Well theres one way to stop the complaining and thats by stopping the run and being half way decent in the running game.
                No, the *****ing will just transform into a different area. You don't think Steelers fans complain? Or Pats fans?

                At one time everyone just wanted a superbowl. Now that they have one, they want multiple.

                Some people can't be satisfied.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  No, the *****ing will just transform into a different area. You don't think Steelers fans complain? Or Pats fans?

                  At one time everyone just wanted a superbowl. Now that they have one, they want multiple.

                  Some people can't be satisfied.
                  Well some complaints are more warranted than others. Being terrible in run defense for years and not addressing it through the draft or FA's is just asking for it.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                    Except the fact that the Colts have signed FA players, and drafted players to address being horrible on the run.

                    You listed some yourself.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Except the fact that the Colts have signed FA players, and drafted players to address being horrible on the run.

                      You listed some yourself.
                      The last time we seriously tried to address the problem was when we won the superbowl, go figure. Booger cost the Colts a second round pick and he was well worth it but thats 4 years removed and we haven't addressed it since with adequate players. Its fair to be critical of glaring and persistent weaknesses of the team that only one man can fix.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                        My exact point.

                        You went from saying the Colts haven't done anything, to they've done stuff, just not enough.

                        It went from "Manning needs to win a superbowl," to "Manning needs to win another superbowl." All the evidence you need is right here in this very thread.

                        People like to complain. If they would have went out and got Wilfork somehow, people would still *****. "They need better CBs." "They need a better OL" "Freeney gets downfield too fast, they need a DE who can support the run."

                        Every team has it's weaknesses, and every fan base *****es about them constantly. The Colts aren't any different.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                          For a contending team the Colts have been traditionally very slow to address weaknesses, let alone have shown more of a band-aid approach then actually looking to address the problem straight ahead.

                          When you can't stop the run, let alone can't run yourself, you're not going to win many championships because the other teams can kill you in time of possession. It doesn't matter how good Peyton is if he's on the bench and what few possessions there are have to be nearly perfect because you might not see the ball again.

                          More importantly, it's not that we can't run per se.... it's that we can't pick up 3rd and short.

                          Noticing this isn't being a bandwagon fan... It's pointing out reality.
                          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


                          • #58
                            Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            My exact point.

                            You went from saying the Colts haven't done anything, to they've done stuff, just not enough.

                            It went from "Manning needs to win a superbowl," to "Manning needs to win another superbowl." All the evidence you need is right here in this very thread.

                            People like to complain. If they would have went out and got Wilfork somehow, people would still *****. "They need better CBs." "They need a better OL" "Freeney gets downfield too fast, they need a DE who can support the run."

                            Every team has it's weaknesses, and every fan base *****es about them constantly. The Colts aren't any different.
                            What?

                            Since when did I say they did nothing. Gesshh by your logic I could drag you out there and say play NT. Hey look everyone I tried to address the problem. It didn't work but hey I tried.."

                            You miss the whole point of why people complain about run defense. Either Polain fixes it or he doesn't. Saying you address the problem when you really haven't is just lying to your fan base.

                            The last time Polain tried to address the run problem was with Booger. The last 4 years have been smoke and mirrors. Nothing really was done and the results were on the field to prove it. I can accept a miss draft pick like Pitcock but just because you miss in one draft doesn't mean you never invest a high draft pick again at that position.

                            Case in point Polain has invested 2 high draft picks (round 3 or higher) in DT's since 1998. TO me only Pitcock was an actual NT and Tripplet was the other pick.

                            Thats 14 drafts and only 2 high draft picks at an important positon. Hey if Polain sucks at drafting NT's then I am fine with trading a second rounder for a Booger type player if that means we get to stop the run and go to the superbowl.

                            Saying Polain has tried to address the run defense is just false. He hasn't tried for the last 4 seasons because like everyone else I know when somebodies actually trying and when their not. It doesn't take a career in football to know this.

                            I agree with your point that all teams have weaknesses but they don't have persistent weaknesses in the same area every year for the last 4 years. Last year the Packers sucked at running the ball but they haven't sucked for years and years.

                            I can accept certian weaknesses given the defensive or offensive system ran. Case in point I think we can get away with not being a top 15 team in running the ball because of Manning's passing ability.

                            The main reason I harp on the run defense is because the tampa 2 needs a legit nose tackle. Not a pot smoking turd or a practice squad throw away. When your DE's are fast and small to get to the Qb then you need a NT to control the line. Likewise the linebackers are also light weight and can't shed blocks. Having a NT covers up mutilple weaknesses at different positons on the defense and we've seen that proven 4 years ago.

                            The man problem I have is that you act like this is unreasonable to complain about and I really don't understand that.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                              Noticing isn't. Elevating your expectations into thinking the Colts should win multiple SBs and then getting upset when reality sets in, is what makes "bandwagon" fit.

                              If fans can't appreciate this time in the history of the Colts, what are they gonna do when/if the Colts become the Bengals for a while? A team that should be good, but fails. (I'm saying Bengals, without the off-field problems)

                              How are they going to stay around and remain dedicated fans? I doubt they do.


                              Like I've said from the beginning. There are a lot of different things that I disagree with Polian about. I think we were pretty spoiled with Edge being in the backfield, we didn't realize just how bad the OL was, because he was good enough to make up for it.

                              But at the same time, Addai has a lot of blame for why we can't convert on 3rd and 2 as well. He doesn't read the holes very quickly and he makes too many cuts in the backfield. Which is why Brown is a nice change of pace. He gets the ball and starts running downhill. He might only get 2-3-4 yards, but he rarely gets caught in the backfield, unlike Addai.


                              It will be interesting to see how Colts fans react when this time comes to an end. I seriously doubt we will be like the Browns, who have a rabbid fanbase regardless of their W-L.

                              But I think they're starting to go in a better direction. From what I'm hearing Constanza, I mean Costanzo, is a pretty damn good player. Hopefully we see a better OL/DL in the future. I don't think Manning will be able to put both sides of the ball on his shoulders much longer.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Well some complaints are more warranted than others. Being terrible in run defense for years and not addressing it through the draft or FA's is just asking for it.
                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                What?

                                Since when did I say they did nothing.
                                Uh.....right here.

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Well some complaints are more warranted than others. Being terrible in run defense for years and not addressing it through the draft or FA's is just asking for it.
                                There's a difference in not addressing it, and not addressing it adequately.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X