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

Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

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

  • Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

    I've been critical of him in the past, so I need to give him credit for this column.


    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart



    Bob Kravitz
    Kravitz: Poor choices can be fatal
    December 11, 2007


    Fine. We can all agree, staying out until 3 a.m. and later at a nightclub in a dangerous neighborhood is not the smartest thing in the world. It's especially dim considering Jamaal Tinsley, the Pacers guard at the center of this latest incident, already is facing charges for his alleged role in an earlier bar fight.

    Tinsley's on-court decision-making has improved measurably this basketball season, but off the court, he remains yet another guy who just doesn't get it.

    We can all agree: Really bad judgment. Really bad. And very nearly deadly.

    That said, I would hope we could all agree that nobody should be suspended, traded, dumped, stuck with a curfew or otherwise persecuted for the heinous crime of being in the crosshairs of some looney-toon with an assault rifle.

    That's the part that we should not forget: Based on the facts that we know -- today, this moment, always subject to change -- Tinsley and equipment manager Joe Qatato were victims.

    Did you see the photos of the Rolls Royce, the driver's side window pocked with bullet holes? Qatato is lucky he was only shot in the elbows. Tinsley is lucky he escaped without physical harm, although his already diminished reputation took another hit.

    This would be a good time to remember Stephen Jackson's role in the Club Rio fiasco. There was a rush to judgment that Jackson, who had a well-deserved reputation for being a hothead, had beaten up somebody at the bar, then fired gunshots in the parking lot. As the facts were later revealed, we learned that Jackson was essentially firing in self defense after a driver tried to run him over with his car.

    It's a dangerous thing, playing Matlock with a media pass. There was a rush to judgment in the Duke lacrosse case. There was a rush to judgment in the Sean Taylor murder.
    I've been guilty, too, too quickly assuming the worst, especially when it has involved a Pacer. The 24/7 news cycle demands instant analysis, and sometimes, the portrait ends up looking nothing like the snapshot.

    That mistake will not be repeated here.

    I will accuse Tinsley of monstrously poor judgment, something he copped to after Monday's practice, but I will not accuse him any more than that. So he was out late. Very few of us are angels in that regard. Sometimes we stay out late and do stupid things. Guilty as charged.

    The easiest thing Pacers president Larry Bird and coach Jim O'Brien could do right now is flex their muscles and make their bloodthirsty fans happy by fining, suspending or trading Tinsley. But they can't trade Tinsley considering he's signed through 2011, and they won't trade Tinsley because he's having a great season and is their only productive point guard.

    And what's he been charged with here? Being a target?

    Instead, they are going to do nothing, continue with business as usual and, if later facts reveal that Tinsley had a sinister role in all of this, that will be another story.

    It's not very satisfying, especially for a fan base that has become almost numb to these kinds of things, but the only fair way to approach this is with patience and caution.

    If Tinsley and Qatato were the victims, where's the fairness in victimizing them again?

    However this thing plays out, it's incumbent on Tinsley to finally see the light, before he loses his career or even his life. He almost got killed Sunday morning. Same with Qatato. Bad things can happen anywhere and any time, but the percentages are a whole lot higher on West 38th Street at around 3 in the morning.

    Jealousy and alcohol can be a toxic mix, one that can even kill you.

    It's still up to the athlete, though, to make the initial decision. The Colts don't get into these kinds of scrapes. The Pacers do. So it comes back to personal responsibility.
    I understand that Tinsley is guilty in the court of public opinion. For a lot of folks now, it isn't even a matter of right or wrong, whether Tinsley was the perpetrator or, as most of us currently suspect, the victim in a shooting that could have ended in a deadly fashion.
    It's another incident.

    It's another Pacers incident.

    Another brick in the wall that has been erected between the local NBA franchise -- the TrailPacers, indeed -- and their ever-diminishing, heart-sick fan base, which deserves better than this. And you thought attendance was bad now.

    Even if it turns out Tinsley was a victim here, there will be a greater victim: The Indiana Pacers.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-11-2007, 10:37 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz with a gem - and Vecsey has some new info!!!

    there are a couple of new pieces of information here


    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...man_251510.htm



    TINSLEY WAS MARKED MAN
    By PETER VECSEY


    December 11, 2007 -- DECADES ago I remem ber an Odd Couple episode in which Felix and Oscar walked into a Manhattan jewelry store to find the owner gagged and tied up in the back. He told them it was the fourth time he'd been robbed.
    "Why don't you move to a better neighborhood?" one of them asked.

    "The closest good neighborhood is in Ohio."

    Today the closest good neighborhood is on the outskirts of Never Never Land.

    Today we're all susceptible to violence regardless of what hour of the day or night. Today we're all sitting targets for nut jobs, road-raging tailgaters, spurned lovers and dime-a-dozen wannabe punk gangsters looking to invade homes of the seemingly affluent and stick up athletes flaunting Benjamins, bling and rimmed-out rides.

    Sunday it was Pacer point guard Jamaal Tinsley's turn to be targeted. After attending the R Kelly concert, Jamaal, three brothers and friends, including the team's equipment manager, went back to his Indianapolis condo to watch the Floyd Mayweather fight. At 1 a.m. they went to Cloud 9, an upscale club.

    Informed a fight had occurred there earlier, Tinsley's group decided to leave almost immediately. Three males hovered near Jamaal's recognizable Rolls-Royce. They insisted on partying with him; wherever Tinsley was headed, they demanded to accompany him. Ticked at being told he was going home, they issued this menacing message: "We're going to party with you whether you like it or not."

    Words you don't hear in the bible were then exchanged right about the time a truck packing backup muscle and an assault weapon arrived. The 100 mph chase was on. Tinsley's three-car caravan of chrome could not shake the posse.

    Rather than keep trying to get home, Tinsley's group headed to the Conrad Hotel, the city's priciest, most lit-up lodge, where there figured to be security on tap. At once the parking lot turned into a firing range, shots sprayed everywhere.

    According to reports, two of the cars and Joey Qatato, 48, sitting behind Tinsley in the passenger seat, were hit; the veteran equipment man, brought to Indiana from Boston by loyal friend Larry Bird, may lose mobility in one of his two bullet-ridden elbows.

    Tinsley's brother, James, one of three in Tinsley's group carrying licensed heat, pursued the vehicle with the shooter and returned fire.

    A preliminary police investigation theorized the plan was to follow Tinsley to his downtown crib and rob him.


    I know what you're thinking. When is Tinsley (and others at his plateau) going to learn to stay away from places that attract the rudest and crudest element?

    Or might that actually be the attraction?

    How many professional players must have welts on their necks from the necklace strippin' or killed outright before it's understood it might be wise to get off the streets at a reasonable hour?

    The incontrovertible comeback is, "See all of the above."

    As anyone who was ever young, single and had too much time and money on their hands can argue convincingly, "Why shouldn't Tinsley be out and about?"

    In that same position, I used to say to my friends at the start of the night, "If we're lucky we'll get in trouble."

    But back then it was a much different kind of trouble. We were thinking women and glasses of beer. Today they're not thinking at all; we're talking deadly trouble.

    Tinsley's biggest strength is his biggest weakness. Hanging tough is what he is, it's what he does. His attitude is Brooklyn to the hard core.

    But unless your crew is instantaneously ready to escalate a confrontation with their crew to the red zone and not give a spit about the consequences, you cannot compete in that warped world.

    A good idea would be to stay away from it as much as humanly possible.

    You would think Tinsley would understand by now that criminals looking to drop his decimals have nothing to lose.

    Meanwhile, Jamaal earns $6.3 million, has three years guaranteed remaining at $6.75, $7,2M and $7.5M, has a young son he adores, and is enjoying his most productive season by far under Jim O'Brien.

    You would think one of the NBA's slickest point guards would exercise better off-the-court decision-making.

    On the flip side, Tinsley could've been chilling in his Indy condo by 11 p.m. when, out of nowhere and without provocation, the same insane crew could've pulled a Biggie Smalls, "kick in his door, wavin' the .44."

    With that in mind, column castigator Frank Drucker has been kind enough to provide five pristine safe houses:

    In the mountains with Osama; 14 stalls over from Sen. Larry Craig; International Space Station; Norman Rockwell's America; a womb with a view.

    peter.vecsey@nypost.com
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-11-2007, 10:20 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz comes up with a gem - and Vecsey's take

      sounds like Kravitz is actually growing up...kudos.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz comes up with a gem - and Vecsey's take

        Wow, look at the New York papers scooping the local hacks that just want to see a feeding frenzy. This rendition of the story shows a little more of how Tinsley and his party were victims when they tried to do the right thing. They tried to leave immediatly once they found out there was a fight earlier. Where was that in any......... ANY of the local coverage?!?!?!?!?

        Local media: Don't let the facts get in the way of pushing your agenda!

        Oh yeah, one last thing....**** you, Greg Garrisson!
        Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 12-11-2007, 10:13 AM.
        ...Still "flying casual"
        @roaminggnome74

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz comes up with a gem - and Vecsey's take

          Call 911 anybody????????????????? This adventure probably took 15 minutes at least.
          Have the police meet you at the Conrad?
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz with a gem - and Vecsey has some new info!!!

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Informed a fight had occurred there earlier, Tinsley's group decided to leave almost immediately. Three males hovered near Jamaal's recognizable Rolls-Royce. They insisted on partying with him; wherever Tinsley was headed, they demanded to accompany him. Ticked at being told he was going home, they issued this menacing message: "We're going to party with you whether you like it or not."
            Hadn't heard this before... is this new? How did Vescey get this and we didn't?

            Or is he just making crap up?
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz comes up with a gem - and Vecsey's take

              If Tins did one thing right it was going to the Conrad. If he had gone home he'd be dead right now. I'm convinced of that.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz comes up with a gem - and Vecsey's take

                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                Wow, look at the New York papers scooping the local hacks that just want to see a feeding frenzy. This rendition of the story shows a little more of how Tinsley and his party were victims when they tried to do the right thing. They tried to leave immediatly once they found out there was a fight earlier. Where was that in any......... ANY of the local coverage?!?!?!?!?

                Local media: Don't let the facts get in the way of pushing your agenda!

                Oh yeah, one last thing....**** you, Greg Garrisson!

                The local media hasn't done a very good job of describing the whole evening - which gives it proper context. For all the local media was telling us I figured they had been at the 9 cloud place all evening. Although I would love to have heard the conversion that took place when deciding whether to go the 9 cloud place. Those type of things facinate me, as I think back at the things I was talked into doing and place I was talked into going at 1 in the morning.

                Owl, Sure they should have called the cops, although if I was driving 100 MPH south on 65, I would expect the police would find us, or some other car not involved in what sounds like a 4 or 5 car chase, would have called the police. Although I wonder what the chase was like from 65 to the Conrad.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz with a gem - and Vecsey has some new info!!!

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  Hadn't heard this before... is this new? How did Vescey get this and we didn't?

                  Or is he just making crap up?
                  Why would he make something like that up, say what you want about Vecsey but he has a ton of sources throughout the NBA.

                  By all rights Tinsley easily could have been killed, or seriously injured to the point he never would have played basketball again let alone walk. (the sad thing is to think of how different the story would be right now if Jamaal had been shot)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz with a gem - and Vecsey has some new info!!!

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Hadn't heard this before... is this new? How did Vescey get this and we didn't?

                    Or is he just making crap up?

                    i guess it depends on how much you believe walsh has vescey's ear.



                    i've said it before and i'll say it again: nothing good ever happens once RKelly is involved.
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

                      I'm guessing the source is Quatato.

                      He's a good friend of Bird's. Came over from Boston. He was a first-hand witness (was he ever!), told Bird the whole story, who told Walsh, who we all know is a key Vescey informant.

                      In this situation, TPTB have the info they need to make a good decision.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

                        Frustrating set of circumstances...

                        Frustrated to see yet another event to tarnish the leaps and bounds the team has made on the court.

                        Frustrating to see how the media can escalate the circumstances...

                        Frustrating to think that Tinsley might revert back to sinuspoutitis, as he realizes that his local fan base would still rather not see him around... even though I personally believe he's given this season his full effort.

                        Frustrating that this team can't seem to avoid controversy off the court...

                        Frustrated that the local media can't portray the events in such a way as to get behind their team, and that the true events come from a New York paper, of all places...

                        Frustrated that my support of the team necessitates having to wade through the off court drama, and prevents me from convincing my wife to go to games with me...

                        Grumble...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

                          I doubt Vescey would have said that if he did not have it straight from Bird or Walsh. So considering that I would say its the gospel.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz with a gem - and Vecsey has some new info!!!

                            Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                            i've said it before and i'll say it again: nothing good ever happens once RKelly is involved.
                            Well I was just standin' here...
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz on Tinsley - and Vecsey with new info !!!

                              The Vecsey info is very intriguing. Makes this thing look much better from a PR standpoint for Tinsley and the crew. The one thing I don't understand though... if they went to Cloud 9 at 1am, left almost immediately and had a 100 mph chase back to the middle of town, why was it almost 3:40am when the police were called?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X