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

Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

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

  • #16
    Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

    Here is my take on Tinlsey.

    A part of me doesn't want him here. I would be 100% against him being here if Rick Carlise was still the coach because clearly that is not a good fit.

    Tinlsey has talent. In terms of pure point guards in this league, Tinsley is one of the best distributors on offense at his position. He has developed a jump shot and if he is in shape I think that under OB and Dick Harter Tinsley's defense will be just fine.

    However Tinsley is still not the guy I want running this team. With OB as our coach I want more of a shooter. We can't get Billups and I was just reading an article the other day about him where it said that the Bucks and Bobcats, the teams with cap room, are not interested in him. So I think we can count out Mo Williams as well. Jason Terry is rumored to be avaliable but I don't know that I want him.

    So with OB as our new coach I have some hope for Jamaal. I still perfere him to be traded but if we keep him I hold hope that he will be alright under OB.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

      I am willing to give Tins another chance for several reasons...

      A.) I really like Tins as a player and even though his play this season soured my outlook, who exactly did play well on the Pacers this season? Chew on that one for a while. I can come up with 2 or 3 people who had acceptable seasons everyone else was subpar IMO.

      B.) Who like Montieth said are we going to get that is significantly better than Tins? Mo Williams? Mo Williams is not better than Tinsley he is just a different player. If you think he is going to solve our problems at the one defensively you are going to be mistaken. Tins has negative trade value right now both thanks to the media and Pacer fans and Tins himself. There is nothing wrong with hanging onto him and hoping he and Obie get this turned around. Tins has talent and deep inside I believe has a fire and passion for the game. Its just a matter of finding the right coach to unlock it.


      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

        Ugh Indy! If you need someone else (i.e. coach) to unlock your ability or passion for playing and being a professional you got a lot of serious problems.
        The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

          So is anyone really sad that Jax, Al and Artest are gone? I know that I am not and I am very pleased with the Jax trade even though the P's took on salary they took on good players with character who can contribute.
          I am very pleased with the JOb hiring. His is personable and not dour.
          I am going to hang in there with Bird and let him do his thing. If he fails after
          a few years then it is time to go. Walsh took time to make his mark also.
          Patience is needed in professional sports. Look at the Colts and Polian.
          You have to have a vision and plan and then stick to it despite all the
          criticism. Go Bird!!!
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            It wasn't Ron's fault the Pacers help defense was horrible in 2003. In 2004 under Mike Brown's defense Ron owned Pierce
            All I remember is pull-up jumpers in Ron's grill. Now, granted, I'm sure it was Mike's idea for Ron to pull his pants down in '04. He's craftier than he looks.

            Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go wrap my head around you crediting Ron's defensive ability to Mike Brown.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

              Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
              Tinsley is not a ticking time bomb like Artest, and he's a lot more cool-headed than Stephen Jackson (for better or worse, and despite the frequent "And1 Mother****er!"s), so I don't believe your prediction to be accurate or fair. While comparisons between the players can be drawn - the fans think he is the biggest problem and that all will be fine when he's gone, or at least a little better - it is simply not right to do so in this manner. I'd like to see Tinsley in a Pacers uniform next season. Last shot.
              Just like they did with Jackson.

              I agree with your view, and that you didn't put Jack down as a time-bomb because honestly that's not him at all. He just stops to go off on refs and when he loses it he gets his money's worth and gets tossed. But you'd love to see his fire in Tinsley's belly.

              I appreciate Mark's level view of Tinsley myself, I totally agree with his assessment. I like that he didn't sugar coat it either.
              As a most unpredictable summer approaches, the Pacers certainly could trade Tinsley. He’s hardly achieved untouchable status. He doesn't show much leadership, he isn't punctual and, regardless of whether he’s found innocent or guilty of the charges stemming from the nightclub incident at 8 Seconds Saloon, the off-court scouting report is that he spends too much time in the clubs.
              We know there are issues and they aren't just due to Rick. He peaked out year 1, but Isiah was still coach in year 2. Plus I don't totally agree that he peaked in year 1 overall. Year 3 with Rick he looked pretty solid once he got the chance, and post brawl his handles went to a new level and made him almost unstoppable at moving the ball around the court. Plus his 3pt% was roughly 10 points higher those 2 season (37% vs 28-30% other years).

              So you can't just simply say "well he was better before Rick", not if you include the 3pt threat and better, smarter ball handling. The drop is more closely paired with the extension than it is with the coaching change, though I don't put full blame on that either due to his post-brawl play (which was insanely tight).

              The guy looked like he just didn't care last season, like he wasn't fully engaged with being a Pacer. Maybe he hated his image after Rio/8 Seconds, maybe he has a more serious issue (drinking) that has him at the club so much, because he certainly has talent to be a pass-only PG.

              I do wish his shot didn't flat-out stink, and I don't just mean the 3pt shot.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                Ive posted this question in a couple other threads but noone seems to want to answer so Ill give it one last try:
                The thought of JOB giving Tinsley free reign to do whatever he wants scares the crap out of me. Do you guys really want to watch non-stop Jamaalstar having retarded playground battles with the opposing team's pg??
                My answer?
                <<< see my avatar

                How long are TPTB going to ignore this glaring problem? Its not going to go away on its own. Ok maybe Tinsley wont be that bad, maybe he'll all of a sudden figure it out and decide he wants to be a good player again and that he likes the new coach. But what are the real chances of that? Do we really want to put our faith in him AGAIN? That is the same 'wait-and-see' attitude that has gotten us here (see Artest and Jax) in the first place. I thought the general consensus around here was that this team as it is built is going nowhere and that it was time to blow it up and rebuild around Granger and Williams. It seems that in the last couple days since JOB was hired, the team is fine now and we should go back to the 'wait-and-see' approach and give everyone a new chance under a new coach.

                Sorry, but a new coach does not change the fact that this team is put together horribly. Despite what many of you think, Carlisle was not that bad of a coach. The problem last season was God himself could not have worked miracles with the joke of a roster we have. A coaching change alone will not fix this craptastic team.

                Ok maybe I went a little off-topic there. So back to Tinsley. I guess if our only goal is to barely make the playoffs for a quick 1st round and out, then keeping Tinsley is the best idea. Judging by Bird and O'Brien's words, and the general opinion around here, that seems to be the approach for next season. Tinsley is deffinitely the best PG we can get for next season. But what if we just barely miss the playoffs again instead of barely making them? It only takes a few more losses. Can we finally move Tins then and blow up the rest of the team? I dont see that happening. I for one am ready to consign to another decade of mediocrity.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                  Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                  Speakout be ready to be disappointed. Troy Murphy if here will hang out around the 3 point line- all you have to do is look back to how he used Raef LaFrenz as a Celtic. Raef would trail on the break and shoot 3's after his defender dropped into the paint.

                  LaFrenz was never inside -look at the similarities in their games both 6'11 lefties , who like to float away from the hoop and hit 3's. I see Troy being told shoot the open 3 when you have it, O'Brien already said his offense has a lot of opportunities for "good 3 point shooting" Murphy shot over 40% from 3's thats good 3 point shooting.
                  You're not saying you want another Lafrenz because one is just too many.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                    I was thinking the other day O'Brien may be the perfect coach for Tins. He's demanding on the defensive end and allows freedom on the otherside. If Tins can't play for him he can't play for anyone.
                    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                      Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                      i think its a little overstating stephen jackson going to GSW. yes he played well and helped them get into the playoffs but as the season ended, i remember reading at least one article about the warriors really wanting to move him because they're worried that it is only a matter of time before he totally melts down. his performance in the playoffs wasn't the most compelling evidence that he won't be a problem.

                      so dispite helping the warriors get to the playoffs for the first time in a decade, the honeymoon seems to be over, at least with the media.

                      i tend to think tinsley would thrive initially in another environment. but so did artest at first. i also think that there are a couple of PGs out there that would fit into O'Brien's system too (chucky atkins, mo williams as free agents, calderon and probably arroyo as trade prospects). thats not to say i wouldn't give tinsley a chance if he wasn't included in the laker deal.
                      That was just one article and one guy's opinion. Everything else I have read and heard from D nelson and the rest of the GS folks has been absolutely positive about SJax.
                      As much as everyone wants SJax to fail there, I think he is gonna have a great career in GS.

                      back on topic ...I would like to see Tinsely stay, if it is really going bad then bench/trade him after a few months. Obviously this would be his last chance.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                        Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                        As much as everyone wants SJax to fail there, I think he is gonna have a great career in GS.
                        Agree. He's Sheed Part Deux... the clean slate should be all he needs.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                          I know everyone says Tinsley is terrible on defense and I do believe this also. But Tinsley was actually 15th in the league with steals this year. I think with the help of O'Brien and his new staff, Tinsley could flourish quite nicely and maybe even make a name for himself.
                          I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                            Originally posted by indyman37 View Post
                            I know everyone says Tinsley is terrible on defense and I do believe this also. But Tinsley was actually 15th in the league with steals this year. I think with the help of O'Brien and his new staff, Tinsley could flourish quite nicely and maybe even make a name for himself.

                            Right, if everyone is playing excellent team defense, Tins can really be disruptive with the passing lanes. He has great HUGE hands. Where he really sucks is trying to defend fast PGs 1 on 1. He will get beat, badly, every time.
                            Quick hands slow feet.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                              I guess Montieth has a point. It's doubtful we'll make the playoffs next year anyway so might as well give him one last chance. He's trade value can only go up. Its doubtful but maybe he will get inspired with a new system and we all know Harter is a great defensive coach so if Tinsley will just listen and learn he could be better defensivly.

                              With that being said I'd given up on Tinsley long ago simply because he's not a leader and IMO you need your pg to lead and play with passion and he does neither, but since we are basically rebuilding it won't bother me too bad to see if he can change his ways one last time. He has the talent.

                              One more thing....I get tired of the Jackson and Tinsley supporters that say that it is us the fans who are ruining trade value and running these players out of town. It's laughable and .

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Time to rethink Tinsley. Montieth blog - some interesting stuff

                                I love it...hell if we have to suffer without Jo....we might as well be able to watch tinsley...this guy could be an all star.
                                "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X