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

More on possibility of Artest coming back

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

  • More on possibility of Artest coming back

    There is of course the article on Indystar.com, figure most of you have read that.

    Here is an article out of Detroit


    http://www.detnews.com/2005/pistons/.../C05-81136.htm


    Pacers might yet get Artest back

    Indiana's suspended star could return for the end of the regular season or the playoffs.

    By Chris McCosky / The Detroit News



    AUBURN HILLS--Don't sleep on the Indiana Pacers. They might not be dead just yet.

    They stopped a six-game losing streak Friday against Dallas, without point guard Jamaal Tinsley and small forward Stephen Jackson, and they play in Atlanta today.

    With a victory against the dismal Hawks, they could ease back into the eighth playoff spot and get back on their feet with a relatively easy February schedule in front of them.

    On top of all that, I have a sneaky suspicion that Commissioner David Stern is going to free Ron Artest and reinstate him before the end of the season.

    Stern has been asked about Artest repeatedly, and he has never completely rejected the possibility of allowing him to come back.

    "I refuse to reject (that possibility), but I don't accept it either," Stern told the Rocky Mountain News Friday. "I just (don't) want to say, 'Never, never, never.' "

    He said the same thing in an ESPN interview. The window obviously isn't closed and sealed against Artest coming back. Why else would Artest be practicing with the Pacers?

    My guess, and it's only a guess, is that Stern will work out some kind of compromise. Perhaps he will allow Artest to come back after March 1 and finish the regular season, but make him ineligible for the playoffs.

    Or, he could go the other way and reinstate him for the playoffs, sort of rewarding the Pacers for their perseverance.

    Either way, I think the guy is coming back this season.

    Pacers President Larry Bird wisely refuses to speculate on that topic, but he believes, ever so cautiously, that Artest has been reformed.

    "Oh, yeah," Bird said, unable to conceal a smile. "I've said that to other teams, too. They call about Ronnie and I say, 'Hey, man, we're over the hump now. We get through this year and we're over the hump.' "

    Bird believes that the time away from basketball will make Artest more tolerant.

    "Ronnie was always one of those guys who'd say, 'I don't need this, I can always go back to where I grew up and hang out and play ball,' " he said. "That's over with. He realizes he loves this league. He's like everybody. He took it for granted and now he doesn't have it. "It's not just the money part, but the actual basketball part, the competing. When people retire the thing they miss is the locker room and the competition. That's what he's finding out."

    We'll see.


    On the block


    With more than a little help from my colleague Mark Montieth of the Indianapolis Star, here is quick list of players on the trade block as the Feb. 24 deadline approaches.

    1. P.J. Brown, New Orleans: A quality big man still at 35, but he is owed $16 million over the next two seasons. Tough sell.

    2. Nick Van Exel, Portland: At least five teams have been inquiring about him, and you have to believe Indiana is one of them. He makes $11.8 million this year, with a team option ($12.7 million) next year.

    3. Dale Davis, Golden State: If you have $10 million in tradable assets, you can have him. He's on the last year of his deal.

    4. Eddie Jones, Miami: The Heat have been trying to trade him for a couple of years. His $13.5 million could come off the books next season.

    5. Toni Kukoc, Milwaukee: A perfect pickup for a late-season push. Hasn't played much all year and he only makes $3 million.

    6. Donyell Marshall, Toronto: The Raptors are asking for a king's ransom in return for Marshall and Jalen Rose. But, as the deadline gets closer, his talent and his $5 million contract, on its final year, will become more attractive.

    7. Gary Payton, Boston: He has made it clear he wants to move back to the West Coast, though league rules prohibit his return to the Lakers (which has been rumored). Boston isn't going anywhere, and they need to play Marcus Banks. So, they might as well use this chip while they can.

    9. Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Portland: Elbow surgery has taken his name off the front burner, but he is expected back after the All-Star break. He is in the final year, making $14 million.

    10. Glenn Robinson, Philadelphia: Just have a feeling somebody might take a flier on him (maybe even the Sixers). He's in the last year, making $12 million.


    Sound bytes


    • Wizards coach Eddie Jordan, on his team ranking 30th, last, in team defense: "We're not 31? Sometimes, I think we're 31. I don't know, there may be an NBDL team that might be better than us right now."

    • Utah coach Jerry Sloan, confronting rumors that some of his players wanted out: "I asked them if anybody wanted to be traded. If they did, we'd try to get them out of here. If they thought it was too tough, if there was something we needed to do, we can take care of it. ... They have to decide who they're going to listen to -- their agents, their mom and dad. Who's going to coach them?"



    Chris McCosky's quick hits


    • Shaquille O'Neal always gets the last laugh. Last year, Mavericks coach Don Nelson one-upped him. After Shaq had told Nelson he would never get the best of him because "when it's all said and done, I'll have five (championship rings) and he'll have none," Nelson promptly reminded Shaq that he won five rings with the Celtics. Undaunted, Shaq fired back, "He did win five? I didn't know that. He's the Jack Haley of his era." Jack Haley, of course, was the bench-warmer and Dennis Rodman caddie on Bulls and Lakers title teams.

    • Grant Hill has a little surprise in store for All-Star teammate Vince Carter. He's going to do to Carter what Scottie Pippen used to do to him -- make him guard the toughest assignment. "When I was young and Scottie (Pippen) and I were both the forwards, the West starters were Shawn Kemp and (Charles Barkley)," Hill said. "Neither of us wanted to guard Kemp because he was a beast, and Barkley was usually hung over. So Scottie would stick me on Kemp. I'm the veteran now and I'm going to put Vince on the other man I don't want." Well, it's pick your poison, Grant. The choices are Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett.

    • Don't be surprised, though, if Duncan opts to skip the All-Star Game. His body is banged up, and mentally, he's drained. "It would be an exceptional time for me, not only physically, but, oddly enough, also mentally to just get away from the game," Duncan said. "I've been playing basically for three, four years straight, so it would be great to get away from it for a little bit of time."

    • Detroit Mercy's Willie Green is really going through the NBA roller-coaster in Philadelphia. Over a 16-game period, he started four games (including a career-high 32-point effort), came off the bench in seven games but playing less than 10 minutes in four of those, and had five games where he didn't play at all. On the year he has 18 starts and seven DNPs. "It's been like that so I'm kind of numb to it," he said. The problem is, Green and Allen Iverson don't play well together -- they are both undersized and both have to dominate the ball to be effective. So, Green's minutes come when Iverson is down -- which isn't very often.

    • Get this. Long-time NBA scholar, Bulls second-year point guard Kirk Hinrich (you catching my sarcasm?), thinks Eddy Curry should be an All-Star. "At the center spot in the East, who else is better than him besides Shaq?" Hinrich said. Hmm, Ben Wallace? Ever hear of him? Zydunas Ilgauskas, Chris Bosh, Emeka Okafor -- any of those guys ring a bell?

    • Sounds like free agent-to-be Michael Redd is doing some serious stumping to be in Cleveland next season. The Bucks star is from Columbus, and he wasn't shy about his desires. "Being from Columbus, that's why I went to Ohio State because it was close to home," Redd said. "The pros are different because it's about my livelihood. Life throws you curveballs and throws you into different situations. (In terms of where I'll play next year,) we'll see what happens. I love Columbus, and I have family in Cleveland." Redd is not a maximum-contract player, in my estimation, but Cleveland will probably have to offer him that to pry him away from the Bucks. The Cavs are one of only three teams expected to be able to offer a max deal (the Hawks and Warriors are the others).

    • Seems that when Carlos Arroyo was traded to Detroit, he left the local Jiffy Lube folks in Utah in a bad spot. Just a couple of days before the trade, Jiffy Lube launched its winter promotion campaign -- Carlos Arroyo lunch boxes. The company is now stuck with 6,800 lunch boxes. Ouch.

    • According to his agent, Cliff Robinson didn't fail a drug test. He was suspended for five games because, agent Bradley Marshall said, he missed a phone call check-up during a Warriors road trip in January. He is on probation because of a Feb. 5, 2001 arrest for driving under the influence and marijuana possession in Scottsdale, Ariz. Marshall said Robinson is appealing the suspension to get back the money ($65,000 per game).

    • The details of Rudy Tomjanovich's stress-related resignation from the Lakers are sad and scary. He was apparently so stressed that he was on medication that was potentially addictive. He said he tried an anti-depressant. When that didn't work, his doctors put him on something "stronger than that." The medication left him so groggy, he said he was stopping to get big cups of coffee twice on his way to work. No wonder his body, and mind, broke down.

    • Timberwolves coach Flip Saunders sees a trend with the departures of Tomjanovich, Lenny Wilkens, Hubie Brown and with Don Nelson missing numerous games this season. "What I wonder, it seems like a lot of the basketball purists are the guys that are leaving," he said. "Whether it's Lenny Wilkens, Hubie Brown, the guys you consider purists, teachers. ... when you're a coach and that's all you've done, you're in it for the camaraderie, the teaching, all those factors. And that's what makes it all worthwhile. When some of those things start to be compromised, you lose a little bit of your passion." I think Larry Brown can relate to that.

    • Most coaches don't feel comfortable campaigning to get their players reserve spots on the All-Star team. Brown won't do it, for example. None of the old-school coaches will. But, as we know, Rick Carlisle has. Now Magic coach Johnny Davis is doing it. He has sent letters to coaches asking them to vote for Steve Francis. Weak.

  • #2
    Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

    As I said about a couple of weeks ago, I now believe he will return.

    Both this season & next.

    Oh well at least I'm happy for you. I know what it's like to not be able to watch your favorite player so for your sake I guess I'm glad.

    However for my sake I think I will need lots of Pepto Bismol. Not like I don't need that now anyway.


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

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

      But I'm not going to get my hopes up yet. He has not said anything remotely close to yes, and until he does, I am going to assume he won't be back.

      But I sure can pray.
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

        Interesting that Mark Montieth is credited in that article

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

          Well they should credit him, at least two parts of it are copied from his articles.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

            Originally posted by Hicks
            Well they should credit him, at least two parts of it are copied from his articles.

            That's not unusual, out of town writers copy from the local guys all the time

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

              Yes, he will wait until we are mathematically out of contention for a playoff spot, but still in the hunt for one of the best lottery spots, then offer to let Artest come back.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                If he does the "compromise" of letting Ron back for the regular season but NOT the playoffs, I may stop watching the NBA until October.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                  Originally posted by Peck
                  As I said about a couple of weeks ago, I now believe he will return.

                  Both this season & next.

                  Oh well at least I'm happy for you. I know what it's like to not be able to watch your favorite player so for your sake I guess I'm glad.

                  However for my sake I think I will need lots of Pepto Bismol. Not like I don't need that now anyway.

                  WORD
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                    Originally posted by Hicks
                    If he does the "compromise" of letting Ron back for the regular season but NOT the playoffs, I may stop watching the NBA until October.

                    I don't see how he could do that.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                      Let me ask a general question.

                      If Stern does let Artest back in before the season is over & allows him in for the playoffs, what will you think of him.

                      If, as I suspect, this was his plan all along then he will have done two things.

                      1. He stopped the bad P.R. dead in it's tracks with his blitzkrieg of suspensions.

                      2. He gave Ron a long suspension, which I haven't even read one of you Ron supporters say that he shouldn't have gotten.

                      So if this is all true, will you eat your words about Stern & give him credit for being probably the most market savey Commish. in the world or will you still hate him for screwing our season?


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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                        I'll thank him for giving this season a chance.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                          Hope can drive a man crazy.

                          I'm not going to get excited until I actually see #91 back on the court.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                            I will also thank him for giving this season a chance.
                            Super Bowl XLI Champions
                            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: More on possibility of Artest coming back

                              I'm starting to think what we are seeing/hearing are trial balloons being floated by Stern. This talk should let him guage media and fan reaction to Artest's possible early return. I'm seeing more positive articles and comments than negative.

                              Why is this not a dead issue to Stern? Why keep talking about it? Why not just say the door is shut?

                              Of course SJax needs to keep his emotions in check because any Pacer control issues could reflect on any sliver of a chance he'd let Artest come back early.

                              Why would he do it? Because in retrospect a full season suspension probably was more of a kneejerk reaction and causes more attention than it should've, didn't take into account mitigating circumstances, and most importantly: drags this whole thing out thru the summer and into next season when it could end this season if Artest was allowed back.

                              Why he wouldn't do it? Doesn't believe that, or want it to appear, he made the wrong decision in the first place.

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

                              ------

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

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X