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

Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

    Am I the only one that would much rather trade Tinsley for an equally bad contract ( and hopefully a player that can help out ) or even let him sit on the bench until his contract is worth something then buy him out?

    Buying him out just removes him from the team but his horrible contract on the salary cap.

    One more thing.....I really think that IF we were to make the Playoffs.....I really think that Tinsley's experience...even if it meant that he was splitting time with Flip and Diener....would have really helped the team. I really think that he would have made a difference when we need a veteran PG....especially when Diener's shots aren't falling while he is getting outmuscled in the paint by whatever PG he is defending ( which is every PG in the league that doesn't have the first name of Beno or Jameer ) and Flip is dominating the ball worst then Tinsley ever has while doing some fancy behind the ball dribble that he ends up losing.

    Don't get me wrong....I know that Tinsley has his faults and I'm not suggesting that he isn't prone to doing something stupid like he did in Phoenix....but I think that Tinsley...in small doses......helps the team more then he hinders it. While it was easy to recall what he did in the Sun's game.....many easily forget that when Tinsley was focused earlier in the season....he was easily one of the best players that we had on this team.
    Last edited by CableKC; 03-23-2008, 10:21 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

      This isn't a big suprise to me.
      It was just a matter of time before they let everyone know.
      Oh well, hopefully he'll be gone next year.


      Some people want it to happen, some
      wish it would happen, & others make it happen.
      ..Michael Jordan.

      Pressure is something you feel when
      you don't know what the hell you're
      doing.
      ..Peyton Manning.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

        If Jamaal is truely injured then I feel a little bad for him because he was put in a position to be injured by being over played min. early in the season.

        O'Brien should never EVER have put Tinsley in the position to play in that many min. that early in the season. Even a player who is not injury prone, and I'm sorry guys but I don't even see how that is debatable anymore, would get worn down with that time on the floor.

        Look I hate that 1/9 game more than any other human alive, it caused me to go from "O'Brien seems like a decent enough coach" to "I'd almost rather have George Irvin back".

        Jamaal Tinsley is not to blame for that dung heap of a game. That was all O'Briens fault. As Satan's fan said he could have pulled him at any point in time.

        If he did that to set Jamaal up to fail, then I guess I'm really worried considering you can about pinpoint the time in our season when we went from poor to downright awful.

        However taking O'Brien out of the picture I still have to come back to this. This is the 5th or 6the (I don't remember right now) season in a row where we have had to have some issue with our point guard.

        It's well past time for a change.


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

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          It took how many games for JO'B to realize this?

          Good frickin' God.....
          More like it took David Harrison so long to get his head on right and understand his importance in the offense. The way I see it DH probably saw himself as a "throw-in"...someone to just absorb fouls and spare other players for a few minutes. And so, he probably didn't give it his level best. But now that he knows he has JOB's confidence particularly on the heals of his 1-game suspension where he blew a gasket after the Spurs game, maybe he has finally figured out he's more valuable to the team's interior defense than that.

          Here's hoping he continues to keep his head on straight the rest of the season and continues to perform as admirably as he has these last few games. I, for one, have been rather impressed with him of late.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            If Jamaal is truely injured then I feel a little bad for him because he was put in a position to be injured by being over played min. early in the season.

            O'Brien should never EVER have put Tinsley in the position to play in that many min. that early in the season. Even a player who is not injury prone, and I'm sorry guys but I don't even see how that is debatable anymore, would get worn down with that time on the floor.

            Look I hate that 1/9 game more than any other human alive, it caused me to go from "O'Brien seems like a decent enough coach" to "I'd almost rather have George Irvin back".

            Jamaal Tinsley is not to blame for that dung heap of a game. That was all O'Briens fault. As Satan's fan said he could have pulled him at any point in time.

            If he did that to set Jamaal up to fail, then I guess I'm really worried considering you can about pinpoint the time in our season when we went from poor to downright awful.

            However taking O'Brien out of the picture I still have to come back to this. This is the 5th or 6the (I don't remember right now) season in a row where we have had to have some issue with our point guard.

            It's well past time for a change.


            We've discussed this before and I think you know I disgree with you. To support my position - after the Suns game when JT took all those shots, there were several reports that JT and O'Brien's relationship fell apart. After that game Tinsley stopped shooting, started playing strangely - started looking like the JT of prior years. That tells me that O'Brien got all over him about his play in OT of the Suns game - Tinsley pouted and was even "suspended" for a game.

            I know the argument is well O'Brien should have taken JT out of the Suns game once he realized what was going on. First, the only real offensive advantage we had in that game was JT going against Nash - so it makes sense to have JT make the plays in OT (not take every shot) Second, it happened so fast, I don't think there was really time to take JT out. Third, we especially at that time had no backup point guard. Fourth, how often in the NBA do you see coaches benching their starting point guard and best player (at least in that game) in OT. Never happens

            Peck, you are entitled to hate O'Brien all you want - hate him for all the 3-point shots, hate him for the defensive system, hate him for his substitution pattern. But I think it is unfair to hate him for one game - especially the Suns game.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              We've discussed this before and I think you know I disgree with you. To support my position - after the Suns game when JT took all those shots, there were several reports that JT and O'Brien's relationship fell apart. After that game Tinsley stopped shooting, started playing strangely - started looking like the JT of prior years. That tells me that O'Brien got all over him about his play in OT of the Suns game - Tinsley pouted and was even "suspended" for a game.
              Jamaal started playing strangely DURING that game, not after. I've continued to believe there was more to the story than we got. For all of his faults, Jamaal's never frozen out his teammates like that in the entire time he's been in the league. Called his own number a few times, sure. But nothing like that. It's very difficult to believe that he suddenly went that way with no provocation.

              And I'm not saying he's blameless. It was the most atrocious thing I've seen a PG do at the NBA level. But it was totally out of character for him, and the lack of any reaction from his teammates makes me think there's more to the story.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Second, it happened so fast, I don't think there was really time to take JT out.
                Buck, that's crazy. It was like 8 minutes of game time.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  Jamaal started playing strangely DURING that game, not after. I've continued to believe there was more to the story than we got. For all of his faults, Jamaal's never frozen out his teammates like that in the entire time he's been in the league. Called his own number a few times, sure. But nothing like that. It's very difficult to believe that he suddenly went that way with no provocation.

                  And I'm not saying he's blameless. It was the most atrocious thing I've seen a PG do at the NBA level. But it was totally out of character for him, and the lack of any reaction from his teammates makes me think there's more to the story.
                  So I am supposed to believe from what you are saying and even more so from what Peck is saying that Jim O'Brien wanted him to take all those shots. First of all no coach ever designs a play for only one person to take the shot - especially a point guard. Sure a point guard is supposed to create a shot for himself or a teammate. it makes zero sense to me that O'Brien wanted JT to take all those shots. (I've had this same exact argument in the past during Carlisle's days as coach - some were arguming that Rick most have wanted JT to take all those shots) Back to OB it makes 100% sense to me that OB was pissed about JT's taking all those shots and that is why OB was upset at Jamaal after that game

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Buck, that's crazy. It was like 8 minutes of game time.
                    So you want our coach to take out our best player on the court. How many times have you ever seen an NBA coach take out the teams best player who was having a good game up to that point

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      Jamaal started playing strangely DURING that game, not after. I've continued to believe there was more to the story than we got. For all of his faults, Jamaal's never frozen out his teammates like that in the entire time he's been in the league. Called his own number a few times, sure. But nothing like that. It's very difficult to believe that he suddenly went that way with no provocation.

                      And I'm not saying he's blameless. It was the most atrocious thing I've seen a PG do at the NBA level. But it was totally out of character for him, and the lack of any reaction from his teammates makes me think there's more to the story.

                      Watching that game and the several prior, everyone else appeared "afraid" to shoot when the game got tight. I think Tinsley's always had a problem trusting his teammates in close situations, but up until recently we haven't had anyone act like they wanted to win a game. I'm not justifying Tinsley's awful play that night, but I kind of understand.

                      And yes, O'Brien had an entire OT to take Jamaal out. That was completely his fault (maybe he was trying to prove a point, which failed badly).

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        So you want our coach to take out our best player on the court. How many times have you ever seen an NBA coach take out the teams best player who was having a good game up to that point
                        I'm just saying that "There was no time" is crazy talk.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          If Jamaal is truely injured then I feel a little bad for him because he was put in a position to be injured by being over played min. early in the season.

                          O'Brien should never EVER have put Tinsley in the position to play in that many min. that early in the season. Even a player who is not injury prone, and I'm sorry guys but I don't even see how that is debatable anymore, would get worn down with that time on the floor.

                          Look I hate that 1/9 game more than any other human alive, it caused me to go from "O'Brien seems like a decent enough coach" to "I'd almost rather have George Irvin back".

                          Jamaal Tinsley is not to blame for that dung heap of a game. That was all O'Briens fault. As Satan's fan said he could have pulled him at any point in time.

                          If he did that to set Jamaal up to fail, then I guess I'm really worried considering you can about pinpoint the time in our season when we went from poor to downright awful.

                          However taking O'Brien out of the picture I still have to come back to this. This is the 5th or 6the (I don't remember right now) season in a row where we have had to have some issue with our point guard.

                          It's well past time for a change.
                          Peck, as much as I respect your opinions... you seriously can't be blaming O'Brien entirely for what happened that night? While I think you have a good point (as O'Brien should have pulled him sooner), this "performance" happened against a good club that we could have beat that night, and so I'm guessing that O'Brien wanted to go with his ace. Don't you remember how much respect OB had for Tinsley early in the year?

                          Here's the box score:

                          http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2008010921

                          ...and here's the play by play:

                          http://www.nba.com/games/20080109/IN...laybyplay.html

                          Tinsley took *all* shots for the last 8 min of the game, including every single shot in overtime.

                          You can't seriously think that O'Briens game plan was a 1 on 5 grudge match?

                          This was a temper tantrum... it's so obvious! It will always define for me the end of Tinsley in Indianapolis.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                            Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                            like eric snow
                            That would be a coup for us.
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:

                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              So you want our coach to take out our best player on the court. How many times have you ever seen an NBA coach take out the teams best player who was having a good game up to that point
                              If Avery Johnson has enough balls to take out Jason Kidd right after he got there, and considering what all they gave up/went through just to get him, for the last few seconds of a game, then JOB certainly should be able to sit Tinsley's *** down.

                              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                              How does a dude sit out nearly three months with a "sore knee"? There's either something wrong with it or there isn't. This whole thing is weird.
                              They can't say anything about the injury unless Tinsley tells them they can release info. Tinsley controls what amount can be released, if any.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers' Tinsley will sit out rest of season

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                So you want our coach to take out our best player on the court. How many times have you ever seen an NBA coach take out the teams best player who was having a good game up to that point
                                UB, I agree with you that, taken on the whole, JOB seems to have confronted Tinsley after the game which led to Tinsley pouting and getting reinjured, etc.

                                So JOB gets a couple of points for that. But I also believe a point gets subtracted for not doing it in the game. Sure, you want your best player out there to win. But impudence and defiance needs to be confronted immediately, no matter who it is or how good they are.
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X