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

Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

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

  • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    I stand corrected. I wasn't back in town yet during the Lucas Oil Stadium stuff, and since I'm only peripherally a Colts fan I didn't follow it.

    One point in Irsay's favor, I guess. If the Pacers end up getting screwed, though, I'm still going to be upset with him. Not as upset as I am with Nelson Skalbania, but there you go.
    I hadn't heard that name in a long long time.


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

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      Not as upset as I am with Nelson Skalbania, but there you go.
      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      I hadn't heard that name in a long long time.
      Show of hands of the people who actually remember who he is.

      Show of hands of the people who think NS will be mentioned in an upcoming column.

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

        Originally posted by grace View Post
        Show of hands of the people who actually remember who he is.


        Originally posted by grace
        Show of hands of the people who think NS will be mentioned in an upcoming column.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

          I'll bite... Who is Nelson Skalbania? Why is he so hated?
          ...Still "flying casual"
          @roaminggnome74

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

            He owned the Indianapolis Racers hockey team (the one that had Wayne Gretzky). His Wikipedia page doesn't make him sound all that bad as the owner. All I remember about him was how everyone was when he folded the team.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

              Originally posted by grace View Post
              He owned the Indianapolis Racers hockey team (the one that had Wayne Gretzky). His Wikipedia page doesn't make him sound all that bad as the owner. All I remember about him was how everyone was when he folded the team.
              I wasn't alive yet and I'm angry.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                The wikipedia page glosses over things and makes it sound like he tried to save the Racers. That may be a neutral reality, but as I remember it he swooped in, sold off the best players and other assets, then folded the team and went home with his bulging wallet.

                Thus proving again why out-of-town owners suxxors.
                BillS

                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  The wikipedia page glosses over things and makes it sound like he tried to save the Racers. That may be a neutral reality, but as I remember it he swooped in, sold off the best players and other assets, then folded the team and went home with his bulging wallet.

                  Thus proving again why out-of-town owners suxxors.
                  Was this why the had Messier on the roster for like 2 months or was that just player movement?

                  Was there an opportunity to roll the Racers into the NHL with Quebec City/Edmonton/Hartford and the others?
                  "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

                  Bob Netolicky

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                    Originally posted by Drewtone View Post
                    Was this why the had Messier on the roster for like 2 months or was that just player movement?
                    Frankly, I don't remember.

                    Originally posted by Drewtone View Post
                    Was there an opportunity to roll the Racers into the NHL with Quebec City/Edmonton/Hartford and the others?
                    As I recall he folded the Racers just before that. My personal anger stems from a feeling at the time that if he hadn't stripped the team of assets and had held on they would have been part of the merger, but his actions seemed to show his purpose was to loot the team rather than try to save it.

                    I was young and headstrong and much of this may not have been backed up in facts, but the emotions were definitely stirred up.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Question - does anyone talking about the Pacers' sweet lease deal on the Fieldhouse factor in the $57M they contributed to building the facility?

                      Do any of the other teams trying to negotiate the same lease intend to pay for part of a new arena?

                      I have a feeling that the lease deal and the construction costs are not being seen together. I certainly have not heard of any other facility in recent years being built with contributions from the team it was being built for. Why does no one seem to look at this?

                      In actual fact the Pacers are also paying another 79 million dollars, which was not the state/city part of the build but a loan to the pacers to get the build done, afaik in exchange for the loan and location the Pacers pay for the building and the city owns it.

                      If the pacers leave the running cost of the building remain the same as they are today, 15 million dollar minimum, with 8 milllion less income (taxes paid by Pacers atm)

                      As for SB and tax calculation, only tax that comes in is from concession and rstaurants and hotels, non on tickets, the deal makes that impossible.

                      Gate on SB goes to the NFL, stadium has to be prepared etc etc by Indiana for the "honour" of hosting it.

                      Income out of SB is totally different to the numbers spat out, count is far more accurate and indeed the low-end and then it is in "(in-)direct related income".

                      I.e. possible conferecens sold in the wake, hotelrooms, carhire restaurants etc etc etc.

                      The reason the Pacers never went for it is because it does little for the fans and costs a fortune.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                        Originally posted by able View Post
                        In actual fact the Pacers are also paying another 79 million dollars, which was not the state/city part of the build but a loan to the pacers to get the build done, afaik in exchange for the loan and location the Pacers pay for the building and the city owns it.

                        If the pacers leave the running cost of the building remain the same as they are today, 15 million dollar minimum, with 8 milllion less income (taxes paid by Pacers atm)

                        As for SB and tax calculation, only tax that comes in is from concession and rstaurants and hotels, non on tickets, the deal makes that impossible.

                        Gate on SB goes to the NFL, stadium has to be prepared etc etc by Indiana for the "honour" of hosting it.

                        Income out of SB is totally different to the numbers spat out, count is far more accurate and indeed the low-end and then it is in "(in-)direct related income".

                        I.e. possible conferecens sold in the wake, hotelrooms, carhire restaurants etc etc etc.

                        The reason the Pacers never went for it is because it does little for the fans and costs a fortune.
                        http://louisville.bizjournals.com/lo...9/daily20.html

                        " Indianapolis has landed the 2012 Super Bowl.

                        The 32 National Football League team owners voted Wednesday afternoon to award Super Bowl XLVI to Indianapolis. Phoenix and Houston also were in the running to hold the game, which will be played on Feb. 5, 2012.

                        The announcement was made at the NFL Owners' spring meetings in Atlanta, the NFL said on its Web site, www.nfl.com.

                        The game will be played in Lucas Oil Stadium, the Indianapolis Colts' new $750 million, 75,000-seat stadium, which is expected to open in time for the 2008 season.

                        The Indianapolis Business Journal reported that Indianapolis businesses and individuals pledged $25 million to help stage the event.

                        The publication also reported that sports economists estimate that more than 250,000 visitors will come to Indianapolis for the game, creating an economic impact of $300 million to $400 million for Indianapolis.

                        Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who is in the Middle East visiting Indiana National Guard troops deployed there, issued a statement shortly after the announcement.

                        "As a Colts fan, I'm thrilled. As a citizen of Indiana, I'm proud," Daniels said in the statement. "This cements our state's reputation as a sports and big events capital."


                        Just showing people where I am getting the information from. I couldn't find the original story from the Indiana Business Journal, but this story quotes the story I read.

                        Even if the estimate is a little high, you cannot honestly believe that having 100k+ tourists in a city doesn't have a huge impact on all levels of the economy. And I definately believe this estimate is a lot closer than the others I've seen in this thread.
                        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                          http://louisville.bizjournals.com/lo...9/daily20.html

                          " Indianapolis has landed the 2012 Super Bowl.

                          The 32 National Football League team owners voted Wednesday afternoon to award Super Bowl XLVI to Indianapolis. Phoenix and Houston also were in the running to hold the game, which will be played on Feb. 5, 2012.

                          The announcement was made at the NFL Owners' spring meetings in Atlanta, the NFL said on its Web site, www.nfl.com.

                          The game will be played in Lucas Oil Stadium, the Indianapolis Colts' new $750 million, 75,000-seat stadium, which is expected to open in time for the 2008 season.

                          The Indianapolis Business Journal reported that Indianapolis businesses and individuals pledged $25 million to help stage the event.

                          The publication also reported that sports economists estimate that more than 250,000 visitors will come to Indianapolis for the game, creating an economic impact of $300 million to $400 million for Indianapolis.

                          Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who is in the Middle East visiting Indiana National Guard troops deployed there, issued a statement shortly after the announcement.

                          "As a Colts fan, I'm thrilled. As a citizen of Indiana, I'm proud," Daniels said in the statement. "This cements our state's reputation as a sports and big events capital."


                          Just showing people where I am getting the information from. I couldn't find the original story from the Indiana Business Journal, but this story quotes the story I read.

                          Even if the estimate is a little high, you cannot honestly believe that having 100k+ tourists in a city doesn't have a huge impact on all levels of the economy. And I definately believe this estimate is a lot closer than the others I've seen in this thread.
                          and all you did was confirm what i said, "economic impact" the money that is flowing into the state in the form of hotel nights, car rental, food and drink, this is all "turnover" not profit, low pay jobs, most temp.

                          The actual "honour" of organizing it COSTS money, hence the pledge for 25 mio and a lot more will be needed.

                          Colts get a small percentage, city gets the taxes on spending in the city.
                          nothing more, rest will have to come as a spinoff of the "advertising" it is for the city.

                          Perhaps you should do a search for cost to a city ?
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                            Thank you, Abel.
                            And I won't be here to see the day
                            It all dries up and blows away
                            I'd hang around just to see
                            But they never had much use for me
                            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                              Originally posted by TheDanimal View Post
                              I'm curious, I'm not a big NHL fan by any means...but has the city ever looked at bringing in a NHL team to help out? I'd think an NHL and NBA team would be able to split the costs of the arena easily. I know many teams in the NHL move around alot, and it seems like Indiana would be an ok fit, atleast better than Phoenix. Thoughts?
                              I don't know if it has been brought up; but Conseco Fieldhouse is not built or configured at all for NHL level hockey. You would have to drop a lot of money into the fieldhouse to make it usable to an NHL franchise. When the Indiana Ice play there; a quarter of the arena is blocked off because of the amount of space an ice rink takes up; and the amount of space a basketball only venue has. Sure, you can stage occasional hockey games there and stage occasional ice-surface events; but no NHL team is going to want to play at Conseco as is.

                              Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                              Cities NEED to stand up to these franchises and tell them that they're not going to support something that is unprofitable and is in many instances viewed as an expensive hobby, but that hasn't happened yet and even if it did I am unsure of how that would actually change anything.
                              The only problem with this logic, is there will ALWAYS be another city looking to score a franchise. Whether that is OKC throwing itself at the Sonics or Indianapolis stealing the Colts in the night, there will ALWAYS be another city itching to give a sweet deal to a pro sports team; which is what forces cities to bend over backwards to keep their teams. Look at the NFL; how did the Colts and many other teams get nice new stadiums with great lease deals in the past decade. Having Los Angeles open has been great leverage for NFL owners the past decade.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana Pacers future in jeopardy from financial losses [ESPN]

                                Originally posted by able View Post
                                and all you did was confirm what i said, "economic impact" the money that is flowing into the state in the form of hotel nights, car rental, food and drink, this is all "turnover" not profit, low pay jobs, most temp.

                                The actual "honour" of organizing it COSTS money, hence the pledge for 25 mio and a lot more will be needed.

                                Colts get a small percentage, city gets the taxes on spending in the city.
                                nothing more, rest will have to come as a spinoff of the "advertising" it is for the city.

                                Perhaps you should do a search for cost to a city ?
                                You aren't judging economic impact in your post. You are looking at this from a business perspective. 200 million earned vs. 200 million spent in business is indeed a wash. But the same 200 million spent vs. 200 million earned in economics is a fire lit.

                                You have the same argument as b&g and putnam, you act as if this money suddenly vanishes after it is initially earned. You also classify the expenses as a loss. Failing to recognize that even those expenses are revenue to the people earning them. The truth is it is all, expenses and earnings, revenue in economics. You put 400 million in an economy the size of Indianapolis and the impact is staggering compared to what happens when you remove it.

                                If anyone thinks the impact is minimal they are flat out wrong. If they were right there would actually be very little benefit to even having a sporting franchise to begin with. You can scoff at low wage jobs all you want. But they are essential in virtually any money making venture. They are also essential for all levels of economic growth.
                                Last edited by Taterhead; 03-17-2009, 11:11 PM.
                                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X