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

This sounds very familiar...

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #31
    Re: This sounds very familiar...

    Every fiber of my being is telling me to stay out of this, let it go and just move on. All people are entitled to their own opinions so maybe we should all just collectively hug and celebrate Pacer fandom.

    But I've never known when to be smart I guess.

    Jay all I can can say is that if the next line coming from you would be "supporting J.O. equals supporting the Pacers" I don't think I would be suprised.

    Ok where to start, well where to start that the omnicient BBall hasn't already beaten me to.

    Jay says: b) What's so wrong about having your best player - your franchise player - asking to get the ball where he can help his team the most?

    There are so many answers to this my head is spinning trying not to just come back with some sarcastic response, but I'll give it a try.

    1. Frankly, he's not that good. That's right I said it, he's not that good. What you guys are seeing now in terms of what bad teams look like around very good players is what it was like to be a fan of the Vancouver Grizzlies back in the 90's (that's right we all know where I'm going with this). Shareef Abdur-Rahim was everything for a few seasons that J.O. is right now minus the shot blocking. J.O. is just a 20 and 10 guy. Now that is nothing to sneeze at by any sense of the words, there aren't a lot of players who can do that. However you do not build your entire offensive structure over a guy who is just that. Now if J.O. average 26 ppg. & 12 RPG then your talking true star player, but he doesn't and never has.

    The fact that he only get's 20 points a game should say something in itself, our entire offense when he is on the floor is designed so that he can get a shot on most plays.

    2. We were 8 games into the season and had a 4-4 record. His wanting to change the offense to suite him (however you want to say it that was the end result) resulted in a cascade of bad things that sent the team into a tailspin that caused the trade that caused an even bigger dive in the standings.

    Your buddy and mine (Foster) was brought back in to start. Al was moved to a position that he was no longer able to play at and Danny Granger was moved to the bench. Thus making Quis Daniels and Shawne Williams obtain several DNP-CD's because there was no place for them on the floor.

    Now let's examine the Foster issue for a moment shall we? I don't like watching him play any more than you do but here is what I've come to realize.

    The Pacers don't want him to be the starter either, every single year that he has started the team has tried to replace him to only wind up having to go back to him because everybody that they try and replace him with is either truely a forward or is crazy (Harrison).

    Now here is my question to you. Why do they need to put Jeff in the game? Well because Jeff is in there to guard the better offensive players in the post on the other team? Why is this I ask?

    Let's see I think there is another player on the team who is 6' 11" tall and weighs 260lbs and has a muscular frame. From what I'm told he was, until he was injured, (again) the leading cadidate for D.P.O.Y. (well if you listen to people on here anyway).

    Why do we need Foster in there again? Prime example go back and watch the game vs. the Magic. Look at who guarded who.

    Most of the time it was Jeff Foster on Dwight Howard and it was Jermaine O'Neal on Tonnie Battie.

    Now go to the other end of the floor. Tonie Battie was on Jeff Foster and Dwight Howard was straight up on Jermaine O'neal.

    Why is this? You and I both know the answer to this. Jermaine O'Neal does not like physical contact. This goes back to his first season here.

    3. Help his team the most? That's an interesting way of putting it.

    I'll ask you what I asked you two or three days after we heard about the "heated discussion".

    Do you honestly think for one moment that J.O. would have marched into that office and demanded that the ball be fed more to (pick any player here) because he felt that the team was being hurt by focusing so much on himself? The answer is no, he went in there for Jermaine O'Neal and let's not kid ourselves otherwise.

    The team was 4-4 with two new starters and several new bench players all trying to adapt to a new offense that everybody (other than J.O.) on the Pacers wanted to run.

    We had one bad loss and boom, we must make sure that J.O. gets more low post shots.

    Now I'm not opposed to J.O. getting more low post shots & frankly if you want to say that it's Rick's fault for not figuring out a better way to do it I won't argue with you. But for 4 years now (at least) getting J.O. more low post shots means that the Pacers must all assume the position (two players stand at the three point line on opposite ends of each other, p.g. must be at the elbow to execute an entry pass and Jeff Foster must be in position to sumo wrestle bigger players) all so J.O. can get some low post love.

    What J.O. needs are new team mates. He needs Steve Kerr to be the point guard, Reggie Miller to be the shooting guard, Glenn Rice to be the Small Forward and Ben Wallace to be the Center. That way everybody can knock down the three when he decides to finally pass out of the triple team and Ben doesn't need to many shots to be happy.

    Helping the team, IMO, would be doing what the coach asks of you and not dictating how the game should be played.

    You would have lost your mind if Ron Artest had demanded the same treatment and you would have been right to do so.

    Jay then say's: "Too bad he doesn't get much support from his coaches and teammates."

    To me this is the old Allen Iverson argument. Allen can't win because his team mates aren't good enough. Yet year after year after year good players are moved away because they can't play with Allen Iverson because he dominates the ball to much.

    IMO, same thing goes for J.O.

    Jermaine & Jalen can't play together, goodbye Jalen (yes I know no loss there), Jermaine & Ron can't get along, goodbye Ron (again he was nuts and disgrace our entire team so no loss there) now he can't play with Al (this I think will be his undoing with TPTB & I'll try and explain why in a moment)

    Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest big man to ever play but he didn't win a damn thing until he melded in with a great team and focused on being part of a machine and not the machine itself.

    Jermaine while being a great player will never be part of anything until he realizes that he is not the show.

    Absorb this for a moment will you & trust me it pains me to say this as much as it will pain you to read it.

    Jermaine O'Neal has not been on anything other than a poor or mediocre team without Ron Artest.

    Now is it J.O.'s fault that Ron is nuts? No, but one of Ron's biggest problems here was that he was stiffled offensively. Now you and Ragnar and other are immediately going to scream Rick Carlisle.

    But before you do answer me this.

    In Detroit Rick did not have a post dominated offense. He may still have been a control freak (I won't deny that) but the Pistons were not a low post half court offense. After the brawl and after Jermaine's injury (whatever one it was that time) the Pacers were not a low post half court offense.

    If you will recall Rick was in charge of our offense during the Bird years, you would hardly call us a low post half court offense. Half court yes, but certainly not the grind it out dribble dribble dribble back to the basket turn around fadeaway jump shot that we get from Jermaine. Jackson was the low post offense on that team and he used it to start the offense not to grind it to a halt.

    The only time that Rick Carlisle has had a low post grind it out bore the opponet and the fans to sleep offense is when Jermaine O'Neal is on the floor.

    Even then for 8 games Rick tried something else.

    Yet that wasn't good enough for someone was it? 8 games 8 new players a .500% record and it was time to put his foot down and get more low post shots, translations everybody else must adjust to me.

    Jay says: "You want him gone? You really believe the team can play without him like they did in the second half against San Antonio for a 30-game college season? Ha. (No f'ing way.) And certainly not for an 82-game NBA season.

    Subtract JO from this team for a pick and other future-type considerations, this is an 16-22 win team. For a few seasons. You want a ping-pong balls, that's a sure way to get ping-pong balls. This is not the time for addition-by-subtraction. Getting rid of Artest, Jackson, and Saras were the right times for addition-by-subtraction, but not JO."
    Oh the sweet sweet irony. I believe it wasn't but three years ago someone else said almost the same thing, but they were talking about Ron Artest.

    Here is the truth though. With J.O. or without J.O. this team is going nowhere. It needs a real and true fresh start. Now that doesn't mean winning 20 games for a few years for the hopes to get the #1 pick to change our lives.

    But until we either get rid of a player who demands that we all force the ball into him whenever things go wrong or completely restructure the team so that it suite him (see my above team of Wallace, Kerr, Rice & Miller) we will be stuck in the one thing that is as bad as stinking. (mediocrity)

    Being Mediocre means you make the playoffs (Walsh's dream) yet you do nothing there. It means you win anywhere from 38 to 42 games and your fan base while not being electric will not be the empty seats we have now.

    However being mediocre means you can't get the good players in the draft because they generally go higher than you pick.

    I don't know why I'm wasting my time on this, everybody's mind is made up.

    Look at it like this, at least I didn't compare him to John Koncak.


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

    Comment

    • #32
      Re: This sounds very familiar...

      Interesting Q&A from JO on how he likes to play the post.

      http://www.betterbasketball.com/jermaine-oneal/

      Jermaine O'Neal is featured on Better Basketball's video Better Post Play. Jermaine sits down with basketball guru Rick Torbett and discusses the game of basketball. Better Post Play covers the fundamentals and philosophy of playing in the post, ways to get open without the ball, moves with the ball, and drills to improve your post game. Below are some sample questions and answers from Jermaine O'Neal and Rick Torbett's discussion.

      Rick Torbett. What is your favorite move?
      Jermaine O'Neal. The turn around jump shot. If you take a dribble or two into the lane and spin toward the baseline, you can create good spacing and its hard to stop.

      Rick Torbett. Favorite move to get open?
      Jermaine O'Neal. First you have to be patient and don?t fight with guys. Let the play develop, let the ball rotate. If the ball is rotated and you are on the weak side, quickly duck into the lane to get the ball.

      Rick Torbett. What do you do when someone fronts you?
      Jermaine O'Neal. I think it is a great move to let them front you. Your guard can lob it over their head or if the ball is rotated, be strong and seal them off to receive a pass from the top of the key or opposite wing.

      Rick Torbett. What is the easiest basket or move for a post player?
      Jermaine O'Neal. Run the floor and beat the other team?s post player down the floor. Beat them down the floor and set up on the block for an easy pass from the guards.
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment

      • #33
        Re: This sounds very familiar...

        Originally posted by RWB View Post
        Rick Torbett. What is the easiest basket or move for a post player?
        Jermaine O'Neal. Run the floor and beat the other team?s post player down the floor. Beat them down the floor and set up on the block for an easy pass from the guards.
        I say that big talk's worth doodly-squat....
        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment

        • #34
          Re: This sounds very familiar...

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          Tell me this: Did Jermaine convince Carlisle, or scare him, or blackmail him, or what? Why would Carlisle cave so completely?
          I used this term a few weeks ago, but Rick was nudered coming into this season. They force his best friend out - Kevin O'Neill. KO might be a jerk and an idiot and the players might hate him - but he knows how to coach defense. Next TPTB traded AJ - thus forcing Rick to play JT and Saras. Next, Bird is very critical of Rick in the media, questioning his offense in the media - saying point blank - he lost the team. Larry if you really believe that then fire Rick.

          OK, so Rick brings in JD to help with the offense - they work probably most of the off season in designing a different type offense then what Rick has run as Pacers head coach. They work on it through training camp, they work on it during 8 preseason games and then run it during 8 regular season games.

          OK with that setup. After a horrible loss at Boston your best player storms into your office and in front of management he demands changes in the offense.

          Put yourself in Rick's shoes - what do you do. If you want to have a decent season you cannot lose your best player - that is the quickest way to a horrible season - "feuding with the star player" - that is a death wish. If your best player does not believe in what you are doing - then all is lost. At that point Rick IMO has very little choice, but to cave in to JO. Afterall the past offseason proved that Rick was not really in control of the team

          Comment

          • #35
            Re: This sounds very familiar...

            is it really every year? it's been about two years since reggie left and team went downtrend. And also it could be the same 'problems' thats making JO say the same thing.

            Comment

            • #36
              Re: This sounds very familiar...

              Here's last year's version:

              http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=19304
              PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

              Comment

              • #37
                Re: This sounds very familiar...

                Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                Here's last year's version:

                http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=19304
                It does seem like a broken record, doesn't it?

                Even in the thread Jay refers to, from Feb. '06, rcarey (in post #10) recalls hearing the same things from the year before that. I think he remembered correctly.

                Comment

                • #38
                  Re: This sounds very familiar...

                  Here is the version from 11 years ago


                  http://www.nba.com/allstar2006/playe...ine_oneal.html

                  Comment

                  • #39
                    Re: This sounds very familiar...

                    Peck sure does make a convincing argument. I definately agree that he's not good enough that he should be given as much say/control as he is.

                    But at the same time, making stupid trades and failing to get marquee players who are on the market are the main reasons this team is so damn bad.

                    And that, along with giving free reign to O'Neal, falls on the GM.

                    Comment

                    • #40
                      Re: This sounds very familiar...

                      2 years ago........
                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=10852
                      PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                      Comment

                      • #41
                        Re: This sounds very familiar...

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Here is the version from 1996
                        Wow...the problem must go back farther than anyone even realized!

                        -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

                        • #42
                          Re: This sounds very familiar...

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          Wow...the problem must go back farther than anyone even realized!

                          -Bball
                          I was trying to make a joke. Did it come across as a typo. Too late now

                          Comment

                          • #43
                            Re: This sounds very familiar...

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            Wow...the problem must go back farther than anyone even realized!

                            -Bball
                            George Glymph called nothing but low-post iso plays at Eau Claire, even though JO just wanted to fit in.......
                            PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                            Comment

                            • #44
                              Re: This sounds very familiar...

                              Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                              Bball, you need to take those rose colored glasses off.
                              Hell just froze over.

                              Second line.
                              “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X