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

Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

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

  • #61
    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    There's nothing that Memphis has that the Pacers don't.
    If by "nothing" you mean every other position but shooting guard I guess you are right........
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

      Originally posted by Peck View Post

      This was proven to be a myth. I don't have time right now but someone will provide us the link to the article showing that Nash went directly to the Lakers and the Pacers (nor any other team) made an offer.
      The Pacers offer was a myth created by some kid who had a bunch of followers on twitter and regarding the offers to Nash, Toronto offered him a bunch of money and he turned them down so there is one team and NY was also trying to get him but didn't have the money.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

        Originally posted by BillS View Post
        OK, nobody said folks like that don't exist. The implication has been that it is the stand of the majority (if not the VAST majority) of fans (and of the owner and FO).

        Extreme positions exist on everything; their mere existence isn't proof of their commonality.
        I'm not going to say the majority but I think a big part of Pacers fans agree with that line of thinking, now I'm starting to understand why so many here are so quick to judge guys like me because I'm not happy to be mediocre.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          If by "nothing" you mean every other position but shooting guard I guess you are right........
          How did we win more games than them and make it farther in the playoffs then? Maybe Vogel is just that good.

          That being said Gay vs. Granger is a lot closer than most people would say. Randolph vs. West this year was pretty much a wash. I'll take Roy over Marc Gasol....Maybe there's not a huge difference, but I would take our rosters over Memphis. To act like the rest of their starting 5 is clearly superior to ours other than shooting guard is just not true IMO


          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            I'm not going to say the majority but I think a big part of Pacers fans agree with that line of thinking, now I'm starting to understand why so many here are so quick to judge guys like me because I'm not happy to be mediocre.
            Do you really believe that though? I think we are all here to hopefully watch the Pacers win a title...or we're just a bunch of masochists


            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              I have said all along he is a good manager (whatever title you want to give him) of basketball talent, however whenever you are dealing with Walsh Warriors that is never good enough. Every move he made is the not only the only move that was available at the time it was the exact perfect thing to do.

              It's very hard to combat that type of thinking.

              It's already happening again in this day and age. Look at how many people are running to defend this off season by saying what was done were the only options available and even though they were the only options available they were great.
              I don't know if you are lumping me into this group or not... But my main point is that none of us on either side KNOW what all went on inside the summer war rooms... None of us KNOW the intentions of management or ownership... We all just make assumptions based on either our pessimistic or optimistic tendencies... I try very hard to distinguish between something I know to be a fact and something I believe to be true that is usually based on optimism... What drives me crazy about VNZL and sometimes OlBlu and others is that they state their negative opinions as facts instead of beliefs... And then when facts do come in that contradict their beliefs they refuse to change their minds and simply ignore the new facts presented to them and avoid the topic from then on...

              And I don't consider myself a Walsh Warrior... Like most human beings he has had some success and some failings... But whoever is sitting in our head chair will get support from me until I find out for certain that they had a chance to do something and completely wiffed... And I have seen absolutely no valid proof of the shortcomings the dark siders claim go on in our front office... Other than the outcome that they wanted didn't happen... They have no idea what lead us to that outcome... They just make assumptions that the FO made no attempt to do anything...
              Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                Originally posted by J7F View Post
                I don't know if you are lumping me into this group or not... But my main point is that none of us on either side KNOW what all went on inside the summer war rooms... None of us KNOW the intentions of management or ownership... We all just make assumptions based on either our pessimistic or optimistic tendencies... I try very hard to distinguish between something I know to be a fact and something I believe to be true that is usually based on optimism... What drives me crazy about VNZL and sometimes OlBlu and others is that they state their negative opinions as facts instead of beliefs... And then when facts do come in that contradict their beliefs they refuse to change their minds and simply ignore the new facts presented to them and avoid the topic from then on...

                And I don't consider myself a Walsh Warrior... Like most human beings he has had some success and some failings... But whoever is sitting in our head chair will get support from me until I find out for certain that they had a chance to do something and completely wiffed... And I have seen absolutely no valid proof of the shortcomings the dark siders claim go on in our front office... Other than the outcome that they wanted didn't happen... They have no idea what lead us to that outcome... They just make assumptions that the FO made no attempt to do anything...
                Nope, you were not being lumped in the Walsh Warrior group. They know who they are.


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

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Do you really believe that though? I think we are all here to hopefully watch the Pacers win a title...or we're just a bunch of masochists
                  Yup... It's just that some people don't think the sky is constantly falling like VNLZ... Do I think we have a shot at winning a championship in the next 5 years... Yes we have a shot... Albeit a small percentage of a shot... We are still in a much better position to do it than 90% of the league... And that is just not good enough for VNLZ... And I understand his line of thinking... I just don't think it is realistic for anyone to expect a championship... Whether you support the Lakers or the Pacers... Nothing is guaranteed to you... You just have to put yourself in a position to do the best you can... And I believe our front office does that...
                  Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                    We all know for Vnzla stands by now, until we have a lineup of Chris Paul, Monta Ellis (), Lebron, Kevin Love, and Dwight Howard, we are just not trying hard enough.

                    I don't agree with him, but I definitely understand where he's coming from on that end. I've accepted by now that for the Pacers to win a title they either need to have a miracle drop into their laps on draft day or they need to follow the Pistons plan which remember did include fleecing someone at the trade deadline for an all star type player (Rasheed), so right now I think we're one move like that away from competing for a title in that route. That's just not the route Vnzla would like to use.


                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                      [QUOTE=Peck;1493966]
                      Originally posted by spazzxb View Post

                      This was proven to be a myth. I don't have time right now but someone will provide us the link to the article showing that Nash went directly to the Lakers and the Pacers (nor any other team) made an offer.
                      Thanks, I believe you.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                        Originally posted by Spazzxb View Post
                        I have no respect for your viewpoint.
                        This is an opinion board. He expressed his quite well. You should respect that, even if you strongly disagree with him.

                        Originally posted by WhoLovesYaBaby? View Post
                        The OP demonstates that he know little about sports or NBA basketball.

                        Why did I even look at this thread?
                        I feel the same way about your post. Get a life.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                          [QUOTE=Peck;1493966]
                          Originally posted by spazzxb View Post

                          This was proven to be a myth. I don't have time right now but someone will provide us the link to the article showing that Nash went directly to the Lakers and the Pacers (nor any other team) made an offer.
                          Here: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/81...akers-happened

                          I'm not 100% sure if this is what you meant, but this was the article that came to mind. It chronicles Nash's path to the Lakers and how he wasn't going to realistically think of any team that took him too far away from his twin daughters.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                            Mattie -

                            You're absolutely killing me. You are sucking the air right out of my room. You see, I'm 60 years old and I have very few remaining on my bucket list. One of the most important for me, one that I have absolutely no control over, is seeing the Pacers win an NBA championship before my days are done.

                            First off, you've given us an extremely well written position. I've understood your position for some time, but this serves very well to summarize your viewpoint. However, I don't agree with the lack of faith that you have in TPTB.

                            The reason I say this is that I can understand and can certainly accept their rationale for making the moves that they have made this summer. I could easily join in with those that feel we may have overpaid for some of the deals that were made, but I really don't take exception with the personnel retained or acquired, or the reasoning behind it.

                            I break a game into about 3 components. Game initiation/start, mid-game (perhaps further broken into Q2 and Q3/early Q4) and end-game situations.

                            Quite frankly, once the move was change was made to start Hill (with Collison's injury) and to stick with him (even after Collison returned), I don't believe that anyone can reasonably argue the point that our starting lineup was not capable of playing with anyone in the league in game start (Q1) situations. I think the scoreboard has proven that point.

                            Our early leads were often lost in late Q1/early Q2 when there were usually 3-4 bench players on the floor along with one starter. It was then not uncommon to see the starting unit either rebuild a lead or play back to even by halftime once they were re-inserted into the game in Q2. Starting the second half, our starters sometimes built leads or held their own.

                            The only time that I can sometimes take exception to the performance of our starters would be in end-game situations (last 5 minutes) against the best of the best. The better teams have more talented star players that focus better in end-game situations. And, I cannot disagree when the top players of the best teams are playing more focused, they more often than not can get the better of even our starting players.

                            So, I see the challenges for the Pacers being the strength of their bench and what they provide as a unit when the starters are out of the game in late Q1 and late Q3 situations, and the performance of even our best players in late game situations.

                            I honestly believe that that TPTB believes that they have addressed both needs. Is it unreasonable to believe that the overall performance of this team would be improved by improving the talent and capabilities of the bench players that come onto the floor in late Q1/late Q3? Is it really unreasonable to believe that Hibbert and George will continue to improve or that West will perform better as he further heals, thereby perhaps providing even more cushion to help the subs maintain leads that our starters have built? I believe this is where the TPTB took a position as one solution and that I really can't argue against the position that they took. It is reasonable and was probably the easiest solution to execute.

                            I believe that by retaining our starters, we have a unit that will perform no worse than they performed late last year. And, if George, Hibbert and West do improve, the starting unit building comfortable Q1 leads will be the norm. A better bench that can maintain those leads will eventually lead to opponents starters having to play more minutes in an attempt to overcome those leads.

                            That takes us to late-game situations. Hopefully the extra minutes players by the opponents starters will help our starters in their attempt to perform better in the final minutes of games against the leagues best players. If not, then I believe that definite needs will reveal themselves to TPTB. You could be very correct in that the Pacers will need to replace West with a player that is better suited to defend the paint in late game situations. If that is the case, then I hope by then that someone else becomes much better at providing scoring in end game situations, because right now I believe that West is the most consistent scorer we have in those situations.

                            As for our starting unit being as is for 5 years, I just don't see it. Even with a top-performing team like we had in the late 90s, that has never been the case. I don't see it now. First off, West will be a free agent and I don't see the Pacers paying him the type of money that it might take to retain him, which is probably about what he is making now. The only way would be if West will give us a break due to an enjoyment he has in playing with this team or due to some new-found loyalty he might have. But playing him his present dollars would only set us up for team salary difficulties when have to renegotiate with Granger and George.

                            I believe that this season is put up or shut up time for Paul George. If he does not elevate his game quite a bit this year, the Pacers might even go a different direction at SG. Who knows.... maybe by acquiring a new PG and moving Hill to SG. But at any rate, if tinkering with the roster through rebuilding the bench is not the answer, I don't believe TPTB will hesitate for a moment to look at attempting to bring in a new starter or two.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                              Originally posted by mildlysane View Post
                              Oh ye of little faith...optimism is a lifestyle, not just a mindset (). However, I can see your point very clearly. Alot of things have to go right for us to compete for a Championship. But, you never know. The right injury can propel a number of teams into Title contention. .
                              Oddly enough, I really agree with you. If Lebron blows out his knee halfway through the upcoming season, I think the Pacers would have a definite shot of making it to the final, and a slim chance of beating any team from the West (to me the Heat are by far the best team, followed by LA, then trailing a ways behind SA and Okc.)

                              Does this mean that I have to not just cheer for the Pacers, but for someone (Delonte West for examplem, on Wednesday January 2, 2013) to take out Lebron's knee? Feel kind of bad hoping it happens. Not so bad if it happened to Wade, but I think Miami could still beat us without Wade if they had James...
                              Danger Zone

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                                Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                                . . . I believe that this season is put up or shut up time for Paul George. If he does not elevate his game quite a bit this year, the Pacers might even go a different direction at SG. Who knows.... maybe by acquiring a new PG and moving Hill to SG. But at any rate, if tinkering with the roster through rebuilding the bench is not the answer, I don't believe TPTB will hesitate for a moment to look at attempting to bring in a new starter or two.
                                to this. and lance, tyler, jeff and roy. time to grow up and play like men.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X