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

Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

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

  • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

    IMHO, it would not hurt if this thread were closed.

    Comment


    • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      I've not read the entire thread but I did read the initial post and this is the problem I have with it:
      The entire post could've been made without naming names or even stating clues that might point to players or team officials knowing what player it was (such as the meeting in the airport and what city it was ("waiting in line" could've sufficed as to explain the meeting circumstances). The conversation itself could've been repeated as "Talked to a player today"... not "Talked to Brandon Rush". It could've said "This player told me that Rush driving to the hoop and then later just camping out at the 3 point line was because of JOB" (That would work since there were comments about other players too so no way to pinpoint which player you must've talked to).

      I think there's a lesson here for all posters to consider when repeating 'inside' info. Exact details could be shared more privately such as via PM with more trusted/known posters/friends. The reason it's a lesson is the next time someone has a chance to learn some inside info they might instead get nothing but generic tripe... or all but ignored entirely.

      It might be one thing when it's good news... it's another when it's a critical analysis of coaching and players. Especially, when someone is still a part of the team.

      ...imho...
      Again, all fair enough.

      However, try to sit in my shoes.

      It's already been insinuated that I was potentially dishonest. I saw that coming, and as such, gave specifics so that people could verify what I was saying. Imagine if I did what you said. Everyone would totally say I'm full of it.

      I didn't see anything as particularly either inflammatory or something that he'd say privately to me (and not to his teammates). Also, how do you know that I've shared all aspects of the conversation? From my perspective, he'd say all those same things directly to the folks he alluded to.

      Comment


      • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

        Originally posted by docpaul View Post
        Again, all fair enough.

        However, try to sit in my shoes.

        It's already been insinuated that I was potentially dishonest. I saw that coming, and as such, gave specifics so that people could verify what I was saying. Imagine if I did what you said. Everyone would totally say I'm full of it.

        I didn't see anything as particularly either inflammatory or something that he'd say privately to me (and not to his teammates). Also, how do you know that I've shared all aspects of the conversation? From my perspective, he'd say all those same things directly to the folks he alluded to.
        I would have done the same thing, as would most people.

        Comment


        • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
          Exactly, Rush fully expects to be traded after the last 2 deadline trades where it almost happen. It's pretty obvious, even to Rush, he isn't part of the core going forward. It doesn't take a brick wall to have to fall on him to see he's not part of the future.

          I've said it from day 1, "Paul George was drafted to be Rush's replacement at SG." Rush has seen the handwriting on the wall, and would like to be traded to a contender like Chicago. I don't see Bird giving him his wish of trading him to Chicago. It's just a pipe dream on Rush's part.
          Sure he would if he could get someone in return who will help the pacers. If you are trading someone you don't want on your team why be afraid that player will come back to haunt you?

          Comment


          • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            But that's what a 20 year old rookie SHOULD do.

            It shows he's smart and knows how to be a good teammate. He wasn't Lebron James, so as a rookie, no way could he come in and demand control of the team.

            At this point, Brandon was actually one of the older guys playing, and at the time more of a vet. And he was still more passive (when he shouldn't have been) than PG.
            According to Brandon, Paul George was the anti-Stephenson, meaning that he actually has the skills and cares enough to get along with his teammates to do what it takes to make that happen.

            Brandon himself is hardly a good judge of what leadership is, because if he had those qualities himself he could easily be a rising star in the league instead of someone looking at a lessening role in the face of younger players coming in to compete for his position, along with yet another veteran being brought in to replace what he should have brought to the team himself at the 2.

            I still stand by my belief that JOB completely changed Brandon at a fundamental level with his inconsistent maddening substitutions and banishments, and may have done so at a depth that not even Brandon himself is fully aware of, and what docpaul has related to us here gives a little more life to that view in my opinion.

            Comment


            • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              docpaul - IMO you made a big mistake in naming the player. You could have and IMO should have posted everything you posted without naming the player. Could have just said a curent pacers player.

              As far as what Rush said, I had to laugh with his comments about George not having the killer instinct. Really Brandon? sounds to me you are talking about yourself there
              Exactly x 100.

              I would wager that Rush felt as though he was having a casual, private conversation with a fan. And never thought in his wildest dreams that his private thoughts would find themselves in print either here or in a newspaper.

              I believe that WE, as posters, and especially as fans of the Pacers, have a responsibility. It is perfectly fine to post comments regarding casual encounters we have with players, but we should ALWAYS draw the line when it comes to posting any comment that might cause hard feelings or problems between players or staff.

              As Buck has mentioned, if comments that can be interpreted as negative are to be included, perhaps not mentioning the player by name would be wise.

              To give an example of how far some players can take their privacy, let me relate the following. For years, I have known George / Linda McGinnis, Antonio / Kendra Davis, Reggie Miller and ex Marita, the Q95 gang and spouses, etc. along with an entire entourage of friends and relatives that introduced me to these nice folks. I learned a ton of tidbits through the years, some of which I have shared and some which I have not. I rarely mentioned how I got the info.

              Many years ago, the younger brother of a friend of my son sustained injuries that landed him in Riley Hospital for several weeks. Early one Sunday morning, as my son and I were going into Riley to bring breakfast to my son's friend shortly after 7AM, we ran into a Pacer player leaving to go home. A nurse later told us that the player had been there the entire night and spent his time with kids who were unable to sleep and with some of the families in the lounge areas. By the way, the Pacers played in Atlanta on Saturday evening and did not arrive home until after midnight.

              At the time, this player knew me only casually and didn't even know my name, but we exchanged a few words. Later I posted a few words about my encounter with the player. Obviously, my post was very positive. A few weeks later I ran into the player and we had a conversation about my post. The player basically told me that he didn't require any expression of appreciation for any good deed that he did privately, and would really prefer that no one ever knew about it. As I've gotten to know this individual better through the years, I've learned of many, many good things he has done for our community, and talk about some of these things with friends that we have in common, but no longer feel compelled to share them through posts here on the forum.

              So, I would urge everyone to be respectful regarding the players. If you have an encounter with a player, ask yourself a couple of very important questions. Could posting about it cause problems for the player or team? Even if everything to be posted shows the player in a"good light", is this something that the player would want posted?

              As you can see from my experience, even something that presents a player in the best possible light is not always something that the player would want to be publicly known.

              Comment


              • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                So your saying if you run into a player in a bath room & have a one sided conversation you should pretty much keep it to yourself?


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

                Comment


                • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  So your saying if you run into a player in a bath room & have a one sided conversation you should pretty much keep it to yourself?
                  You say this jokingly but it shows that any conversations with fans are only as private as the player makes them. Fans are not bound by any oaths. Each conversation that a fan has a player is not the player's property. If the player didn't want that information to get out then maybe he shouldn't have said anything. Conversation with fans are not "off the record." Players should know that.

                  I wonder, if Rush told docpaul all of this through a series of tweets, would any of us have this type of reaction? The "blame," to the extent that there is any, is solely on Rush's shoulders.

                  Past that, we just get into "shoot the messenger" fallacies: docpaul for posting it in a board, Hicks for tweeting it, the moderators for not deleting the thread, all of us for posting in the thread, etc.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                    Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                    Exactly x 100.

                    I would wager that Rush felt as though he was having a casual, private conversation with a fan. And never thought in his wildest dreams that his private thoughts would find themselves in print either here or in a newspaper.

                    I believe that WE, as posters, and especially as fans of the Pacers, have a responsibility. It is perfectly fine to post comments regarding casual encounters we have with players, but we should ALWAYS draw the line when it comes to posting any comment that might cause hard feelings or problems between players or staff.

                    As Buck has mentioned, if comments that can be interpreted as negative are to be included, perhaps not mentioning the player by name would be wise.

                    To give an example of how far some players can take their privacy, let me relate the following. For years, I have known George / Linda McGinnis, Antonio / Kendra Davis, Reggie Miller and ex Marita, the Q95 gang and spouses, etc. along with an entire entourage of friends and relatives that introduced me to these nice folks. I learned a ton of tidbits through the years, some of which I have shared and some which I have not. I rarely mentioned how I got the info.

                    Many years ago, the younger brother of a friend of my son sustained injuries that landed him in Riley Hospital for several weeks. Early one Sunday morning, as my son and I were going into Riley to bring breakfast to my son's friend shortly after 7AM, we ran into a Pacer player leaving to go home. A nurse later told us that the player had been there the entire night and spent his time with kids who were unable to sleep and with some of the families in the lounge areas. By the way, the Pacers played in Atlanta on Saturday evening and did not arrive home until after midnight.

                    At the time, this player knew me only casually and didn't even know my name, but we exchanged a few words. Later I posted a few words about my encounter with the player. Obviously, my post was very positive. A few weeks later I ran into the player and we had a conversation about my post. The player basically told me that he didn't require any expression of appreciation for any good deed that he did privately, and would really prefer that no one ever knew about it. As I've gotten to know this individual better through the years, I've learned of many, many good things he has done for our community, and talk about some of these things with friends that we have in common, but no longer feel compelled to share them through posts here on the forum.

                    So, I would urge everyone to be respectful regarding the players. If you have an encounter with a player, ask yourself a couple of very important questions. Could posting about it cause problems for the player or team? Even if everything to be posted shows the player in a"good light", is this something that the player would want posted?

                    As you can see from my experience, even something that presents a player in the best possible light is not always something that the player would want to be publicly known.
                    Quite frankly these are all things Brandon needs to think about, not the fan. A player should never assume a conversation with a fan, especially in a random run in at the airport, is going to be private. Your situation is different as you had much more interaction with the players and a certain level of trust is established there. Even barely knowing the one player you speak of matters. And said player then approached you later on saying he rather it be private. Brandon didn't do that in the conversation. Also the way things get out so easily with the internet now, if Brandon didn't want this to be public, he shouldn't have said any of it and if he did, he should have told Docpaul not to say anything.

                    The responsibility doesn't belong to the fan, it belongs to Brandon. Saying these things out in the open at the airport isn't much different than saying it on Twitter.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                      You say this jokingly but it shows that any conversations with fans are only as private as the player makes them. Fans are not bound by any oaths. Each conversation that a fan has a player is not the player's property. If the player didn't want that information to get out then maybe he shouldn't have said anything. Conversation with fans are not "off the record." Players should know that.

                      I wonder, if Rush told docpaul all of this through a series of tweets, would any of us have this type of reaction? The "blame," to the extent that there is any, is solely on Rush's shoulders.

                      Past that, we just get into "shoot the messenger" fallacies: docpaul for posting it in a board, Hicks for tweeting it, the moderators for not deleting the thread, all of us for posting in the thread, etc.
                      Ha, didn't read this before I posted. Couldn't agree more.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                        Ok, then none of you should be upset when players refuse to talk to the fans. If I were a player I wouldn't talk to fans in this day and age.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Ok, then none of you should be upset when players refuse to talk to the fans. If I were a player I wouldn't talk to fans in this day and age.
                          Only jr. high girls and Kravitz get upset when players won't tell their deepest darkest secrets.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                            I think there is a huge difference between something tweeted and something passed along privately through conversation. Once tweeted, it is public domain, and has been put "out there" for God and country to see.

                            However, a private conversation is another matter. First off, a reporter who has a conversation with a player is either recognized by the player as such straight off, or often announces his/her credentials to the player before any conversation takes place. This informs the player that he is "on the record".

                            What I am saying is that the vast majority of us here are Pacer fans. We are more than casual Pacer fans; many of us live and die following the result of each game they play. We love this team that much. Does it not make sense that we would not choose to post anything that might cause dissension between players on the team? Certainly no good can come of doing so, but potentially harm to our team may result.

                            Let's use a little common sense here. If you love the team, then bite your tongue, or fingers in this case, and choose to protect it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              So your saying if you run into a player in a bath room & have a one sided conversation you should pretty much keep it to yourself?
                              Your story remains one of my favorites of all time, in and out of sports-related content.

                              I admired your ability to laugh at yourself and to relay the entire humor of the event to the rest of us here on the forum. And, I'm quite certain that McKey (I believe it was) laughed his butt off too, if he happened to have read it.

                              You are also one of my favorite posters to tease, primarily because I know that you take it in good humor. As an example, who was it again that will one day "revolutionize the power forward position"?
                              Last edited by beast23; 09-12-2011, 10:34 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                                So NBA players can say anything they want to any person they want, but it's the job of that person to decide which information they pass on or which they keep silent?

                                How about this.

                                If the player doesn't want it to be said publically, then how about they don't say it publically?
                                Last edited by Since86; 09-12-2011, 11:23 AM.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X