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

Tinsley needs to watch this video...

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

  • Tinsley needs to watch this video...

    ...over and over again, because this is the point guard we need him to be.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2ikqKQ3XSA

    A point guard who makes players like Rik Smits, Dale Davis, Antonio Davis and Danny Manning coach-selected all stars.
    Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

  • #2
    Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

    Forgot he was that good...thanks for posting.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

      God I miss Mark Jackson.Never thought I would say that. When he was with us I took him for granted.I complained about his lack of defense,and lack of shooting and I overlooked all the great things he did for us while he was here.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

        I really wish someone would've coached the NYC playground out of his game.....
        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

          Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
          I really wish someone would've coached the NYC playground out of his game.....


          I think what Rat is alluding to is Tins has those same playground moves. What sets the two apart is leadership ability. Mark had it and it's just not in Tins nature. Too bad because that's what we're really missing from this team.
          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

            Originally posted by RWB View Post


            I think what Rat is alluding to is Tins has those same playground moves. What sets the two apart is leadership ability. Mark had it and it's just not in Tins nature. Too bad because that's what we're really missing from this team.
            The other thing that set them apart was coaching who tolerated those playground moves.


            Edit: I am not saying Jamaal is as good as Mark just that with the right coaching he could be. He has more talent but lacks the focus and the opportunity.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

              Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
              The other thing that set them apart was coaching who tolerated those playground moves.


              Edit: I am not saying Jamaal is as good as Mark just that with the right coaching he could be. He has more talent but lacks the focus and the opportunity.

              What, should they play him more? He already starts every game. Should he shoot more?

              Tinsley has alot of problems. Opportunity isn't one of them.
              The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
              http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
              RSS Feed
              Subscribe via iTunes

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                Man, I cried watching that video. That was a thing of beauty watching Jax make all those no-look passes, getting his teammates totally involved in the game. How I miss those days...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                  Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                  What, should they play him more? He already starts every game. Should he shoot more?

                  Tinsley has alot of problems. Opportunity isn't one of them.
                  Opportunity is the biggest and that has nothing to do with starting or minutes.

                  Jax was given the regins, dspite having a lot of set plays already tehn RC had no free hand in running htem, if it even looked close to to much LB would whistle him back and tell him to let the guys play.
                  (This comes directly from one of the last LB interviews)

                  RC now has far more set plays, and he wants them ran.

                  I would just like to see Tinshave a free hand for a half, let him call the plays as he sees the floor and the development, but that will never happen.
                  The way RC was laughing with Reggie and Jax on the radio and chuckle how he benched JT when he arrived made clear that he does not and has never "liked" JT.
                  Their relationship is poor to say the least and most ppl here will pull their hair out when Tins DOES get free reign elsewhere.

                  I even want to bet he will shoot way less as well.
                  Tinsley's skillset is enormous, or do you think all PG's do "through the legs" passes regularly?

                  To clarify what I'm saying and to leave no doubt: RC is holding JT back and in that process killing a good PG for this team.
                  So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                    Tinsley has all the physical tools of Mark Jackson, but is severely lacking the smarts and leadership.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                      Originally posted by able View Post
                      To clarify what I'm saying and to leave no doubt: RC is holding JT back and in that process killing a good PG for this team.

                      So what should Rick do? Burn the playbook and say "do whatever you want"? If a player can only be good when he has complete, autonomous control of the court, is he truly a good player?

                      What plays do you think Rick is calling? I'm pretty sure "hold the ball for ten seconds, pass it to the right wing, recieve return pass from wing, run out rest of shot clock trying to feed JO, chuck up airball three" isn't in the playbook.

                      If Tinsley was playing well under a strict system, I can see somebody saying "well, let's open it up and see if he has more potential". But if he is making poor decisions within a structured playbook, how in the world is he going to make good decisions under basketball anarchy?
                      The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                      http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                      RSS Feed
                      Subscribe via iTunes

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                        Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                        So what should Rick do? Burn the playbook and say "do whatever you want"? If a player can only be good when he has complete, autonomous control of the court, is he truly a good player?

                        What plays do you think Rick is calling? I'm pretty sure "hold the ball for ten seconds, pass it to the right wing, recieve return pass from wing, run out rest of shot clock trying to feed JO, chuck up airball three" isn't in the playbook.

                        If Tinsley was playing well under a strict system, I can see somebody saying "well, let's open it up and see if he has more potential". But if he is making poor decisions within a structured playbook, how in the world is he going to make good decisions under basketball anarchy?

                        Exactly! I think that emotions and likes and dislikes of certain players clouds fan's assement of said players. I fell into that trap with Sars, thought he was the second coming, however after taking the blinders off, I realized how wrong that I was. The glaring difference in Tins and Mark's game is, Mark got results with his street game ,and Tins does not.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                          I vote that the rest of the team watch the video to see bigs running the floor, players cutting to the hoop and 3 point shooters making shots.....
                          PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                            LOL@MR

                            but seriously, what on earth does possess you elgin56 to even consider that my judgement is clouded? because you think you are right?
                            Stop and think about that for a little while, when you grasped it I will continue:

                            There are two extremes, 1: Coach calling all (or most) plays, the situation we are in, not because of lack of skill of players involved but because we have a micro manager as coach
                            2: let the pg and team do as they will (and honestly I don't know any team that has that situation)

                            Now first thought in to that; it is known RC runs more plays in the 1st Q then most other teams all game, it was like that under LB (who held him back from that) so it wont certainly be better now.
                            second thought; even with all those plays you do not need the coach on the sideline calling out the plays, your pg has a brain and (often) sees more then the coach.
                            Final thought; give the set of plays to the pg and let him decide in the flow of the game, after reading the defense, etc what to do and which play to run.

                            first situation;what we have, resulting in a (usually) less happy players, delays in setup; stringent calls means that players have to get in place before the pg can make a move to initiate etc etc etc and in the end it ruins the faith in your pg, the pg's self-esteem and confidence and the team's confidence.

                            second situation; does not exist (anymore)

                            Third situation; for instance (extreme) Suns, but basically all good teams, in recent history; LB's 2000 Pacers.


                            As I now stated many times (and not me only) RC was held back from doing what he does now when he was doing the O for LB, it is clear that he can only work with a PG like AJ who is slow to begin with and needs the "hand from the bench" instead of any "free" pg who has smarts.

                            You can only lead as far as you are allowed to lead

                            Tins can not lead this team because the coach makes that impossible.
                            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Tinsley needs to watch this video...

                              Originally posted by Shade View Post
                              Tinsley has all the physical tools of Mark Jackson, but is severely lacking the smarts and leadership.
                              Hell, I have the physical tools of Mark Jackson. (Jax wasn't going to beat anyone in a footrace, nor vertical jump contest.) It just goes to show you how, at this level, it's 90% brains on making yourself a cut above.
                              Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X