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

Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3151079

    INDIANAPOLIS -- Jamaal Tinsley appears calm and under control in surveillance videos taken after the Indiana Pacers guard and his entourage were shot at in a parking lot outside a five-star hotel over the weekend.
    Tinsley was not injured, but Pacers equipment manager Joey Qatato was shot in both elbows at the Conrad Hotel early Sunday morning in downtown Indianapolis.

    Police said the trouble started at a nightclub on the city's west side. Tinsley's group had arrived at the "Cloud 9" club in a Mercedes, a Rolls Royce and a Dodge Charger, all owned by Tinsley. A group gathered around the Rolls Royce and harassed Tinsley about his cars and his earnings.

    After leaving the club, the group realized a car carrying at least four people and a pickup truck with at least two people were following them, said Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Sgt. Paul Thompson. When they pulled into the hotel parking lot, someone in the truck opened fire with a .223 caliber assault rifle, spraying bullets on the hotel, Tinsley's cars and nearby buildings.

    Qatato was struck while sitting with Tinsley in the Rolls-Royce. Qatato, 48, was taken to Methodist Hospital, treated and released.

    Following the shootings, Tinsley's entourage drove to the hotel entrance. Police released surveillance videos, with no sound, taken at the hotel. The timeline after the initial shootings, according to the clock on the video:

    • 3:42 a.m.: Tinsley's Rolls-Royce pulls up in front of the Conrad. Four men get out, Qatato is last.
    • 3:43: Qatato walks into the hotel with his shirt around his elbows to stop the bleeding.
    • 3:44: Tinsley and another man who had been in the Rolls-Royce enter the lobby but quickly leave. The Mercedes drives up, two men get out and Tinsley points up the street in the direction the truck had headed. Qatato sits down in the lobby and is attended to by hotel employees. Clearly shaken and nervous, he is instructed to put his feet up on a chair.
    • 3:45: Tinsley's Charger arrives, and both the Charger and the Mercedes turn north onto Illinois Street, apparently to follow the truck, while Tinsley remains behind with Qatato.
    • 3:49: A police officer arrives at the Conrad lobby; at 3:51 an exasperated Tinsley is seen walking with both hands on his head.
    • 3:53: An ambulance arrives for Qatato.

    According to police, while pursuing the pickup truck, Tinsley's brother James fired shots with a 9 millimeter handgun. There were at least three guns in Tinlsey's group, all of which were legal. Though police didn't say Jamaal Tinsley was carrying a gun, he does have a permit, as does his brother.

    According to a 911 call, multiple shots were fired before Tinsley's group entered the Conrad.

    "As far as I could tell, because I wasn't listening for it, six or seven," a Conrad employee told police.

    Thompson said detectives told him there were five bullet holes in the Charger, "a bunch" in the Rolls-Royce and none in the Mercedes.
    James Tinsley hasn't been charged for firing a handgun because the incident is still under investigation, Thompson said.
    Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/column...Tinsley-071211

    We've come to the stage where we point the finger of blame at the victims, when even the target of a shooting says, essentially, "My bad." All of this after we learned that sometimes the safe decision can get you killed just as easily.

    The Indiana Pacers questioned guard Jamaal Tinsley's judgment following a nightclub argument that led to his cars getting shot up early Sunday morning. Tinsley himself said he made a "stupid mistake."

    Being out at 3 a.m. in an area that is not among Indianapolis' top neighborhoods might not be the best move. But in a year that saw Eddy Curry and Antoine Walker tied up and robbed in their own homes, and Sean Taylor shot and killed by burglars who broke in while he was tucked under the covers with his girlfriend and daughter, can we really say there are crime-free zones? Haven't we learned to step back and take a breath after initial speculation implied that Taylor had it coming to him?

    Sure, Tinsley took a calculated risk. But I don't think anyone could have envisioned his actions culminating with shots fired from an assault rifle.

    One simple line from the Indianapolis Star's account of the Tinsley incident stood out: "Tinsley's attackers took issue with his luxury cars -- a Rolls-Royce, Mercedes CL6 and Dodge Charger -- and his wealth, police said."
    If that's true, someone needs to explain what Tinsley did wrong. I don't believe an athlete's driving a nice car is an invitation to get shot any more than I believe a woman's wearing skimpy clothing is an invitation to get raped.

    It's understandable that someone making more than $6 million would buy expensive cars. And he should be able to drive them out of the garage. Money should be liberating, not restricting. There's no need for Tinsley to barricade himself in a room like Howard Hughes.

    Tinsley might have been a victim of location. Smaller towns don't always provide the option of going to a good place or a bad place. Sometimes your only choice is the place. When there's only one spot, you'll find every element there.

    When I was in Indianapolis for the 2000 NBA Finals between the Lakers and Pacers, I went to a club recommended by a Pacers player. By the time I got there the party was already over. There had been a fight, the police shut things down and everyone was just milling around the parking lot. You're not as likely to get those results at the places players hang in New York or L.A.

    But crime can happen anywhere. I'm reminded of something former Temple coach John Chaney said: "You can never end stupidity. Never." It knows no boundaries, can't be contained. Over the past couple of years there have been a series of robberies in some of the best, ritziest neighborhoods in Los Angeles. The solution isn't always simple. Hire security? Well, this report noted that an investigation into robberies in Orange County led to the arrests of two armed guards.

    What's sad is when the behavior of the law-abiders mirrors the behavior of the lawbreakers.

    When I saw Floyd Mayweather clowning around and waving stacks of cash on HBO's "Mayweather-Hatton 24/7" show, it took me right back to the pictures I'd seen only a few days before: those shots of Sean Taylor's alleged killers flashing wads of money on their MySpace pages.

    Any time I see someone holding a large wad of cash, I don't think that person is rich. I think he's stupid. If that money is in his hand, it means it's not in an account somewhere, earning even more money. I heard Mayweather say that he flashes his cash for the camera to show kids they can get rich a legitimate way, through sports, instead of through crime. There's a little something to that, but if he really wanted to set a good example, he'd have the cameras follow him to a meeting with his accountant. They could go over his investment portfolio, look at a few pie charts and bar graphs, and track his assets. Maybe that isn't compelling television, but at least it shows the way it should be done. Not only is that smarter, it's safer. People don't get jacked for their monthly statements.

    The problem is that far more people share Mayweather's love of material things than they do his talent and work ethic. When he mocked Ricky Hatton's fans by changing the lyrics to their incessant song, he wasn't kidding. There's only one Mayweather. He's the best in his sport, one of the most phenomenal athletes of our time.

    So the lazy ones don't even bother to try. They don't want to put in the effort it takes to become a Floyd Mayweather, Sean Taylor or Jamaal Tinsley. They want the shortcut. They grab a gun instead of a gym bag. They're the ones who deserve our contempt.

    J.A. Adande joined ESPN.com as an NBA columnist in August 2007 after 10 years with the Los Angeles Times. Click here to e-mail J.A.
    "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

    "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

    "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

    Originally posted by macgumerait View Post
    So the lazy ones don't even bother to try. They don't want to put in the effort it takes to become a Floyd Mayweather, Sean Taylor or Jamaal Tinsley. They want the shortcut. They grab a gun instead of a gym bag. They're the ones who deserve our contempt.

    J.A. Adande joined ESPN.com as an NBA columnist in August 2007 after 10 years with the Los Angeles Times. Click here to e-mail J.A.
    Adande is spot on with what he writes right there.


    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

      Originally posted by some stupid Californian
      Tinsley might have been a victim of location. Smaller towns don't always provide the option of going to a good place or a bad place. Sometimes your only choice is the place. When there's only one spot, you'll find every element there.

      When I was in Indianapolis for the 2000 NBA Finals between the Lakers and Pacers, I went to a club recommended by a Pacers player. By the time I got there the party was already over. There had been a fight, the police shut things down and everyone was just milling around the parking lot. You're not as likely to get those results at the places players hang in New York or L.A.

      As it turns out, Cloud 9 is the only place open in Indianapolis after midnight, so Tinsley and Co, had to go there. they didn't have a choice, because Indianapolis is sooo small.
      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

      • #4
        Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

        Originally posted by Putnam View Post
        As it turns out, Cloud 9 is the only place open in Indianapolis after midnight, so Tinsley and Co, had to go there. they didn't have a choice, because Indianapolis is sooo small.
        Yes, well - that part was a little ridiculous.
        "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

        "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

        "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

          I have to agree that a lot of people jumped to conclusions because of Jamaal's past issues. My question is what is so bad about a young single man out on the town going to a club? If he was just another regular guy who lays drywall or something like that most people wouldn't care as long as he was driving sober.

          Also, I live around the Indy area and I know there are clubs open past midnight.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

            Reading between the lines, I can see where Adende was going with his comment that Putnam highlighted. Honestly, he was not that far off in his comments. No, I'm not saying Indy only has one night club because it's so small... I'm saying Indy's urban night clubs are usually located in areas of town that cater to many different types of people from the wealthy to the low end slimeball looking to take advantage of the situation.

            Bottom line, I agree with J. A. Andande's column 100%.
            Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 12-12-2007, 04:25 PM.
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

              That's just one article. What's the other?
              This space for rent.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                That's just one article. What's the other?
                its two - one is by AP

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                  more than anything this is just going to make it that much harder for us to lure in any Free Agents with all these incidents...

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                    Today's lesson?

                    Drive a Mercedes.


                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      Today's lesson?

                      Drive a Tercel.
                      fixed
                      This is the darkest timeline.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                        Tercel - yikes.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                          nothing says safety like...

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            As it turns out, Cloud 9 is the only place open in Indianapolis after midnight, so Tinsley and Co, had to go there. they didn't have a choice, because Indianapolis is sooo small.

                            He's actually right about that in comparison to larger cities like Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles. I said something similar in a different thread... "Even though there was more crime in Oakland, Ca. when I lived there, I was never afraid to live there. I'm becoming afraid to live in Indianapolis".

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Two Espn Articles about Jamaal & the Conrad shooting

                              Originally posted by macgumerait View Post
                              Yes, well - that part was a little ridiculous.
                              Not really, not when your reference is Chicago, LA, NY, Boston, Miami, San Fran and so on.

                              Relatively speaking you can go a lot of miles after midnight and not see very much open in this city. When I moved back from Houston I was a little freaked out while driving in the lonely, darkened stretch of 465 on the NW side, relative to what I'd been used to in Texas (ie, no stretch without something open all the time).


                              Man, the video and descriptions make this more scary to me, and it already bothered me.

                              Comment

                              Previous template Next
                              Working...
                              X