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

Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

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

  • Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_050407.html

    Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?


    Thursday, April 7, 2005
    If you'd like to pose a Question of the Day to Conrad Brunner, submit it along with your full name and hometown to Bruno's_mailbag@pacers.com. Brunner’s opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Pacers players, coaches or management.
    QUESTION
    OF THE DAY
    Conrad Brunner

    Q. Didn't the Olympics show that a reasonably talented team playing team basketball can beat a team of superstars taking turns going one-on-one? Is there a resident of the State of Indiana that didn't learn that lesson years ago watching (Bob) Knight's Hoosiers, (Gene) Keady's Boilermakers, (Tony) Hinkle's Bulldogs, or their favorite high school team? (From Frank in Indianapolis)



    A. Thank you, Frank. Now, when somebody asks me to explain just how this shorthanded, overmatched, undermanned and battered team is managing to not only survive but climb the playoff bracket, I finally have a sensible answer: the Pacers have become Argentina.

    The voluminous list of talents they lack has been much-discussed – everywhere but inside the locker room. What they have done is exactly what Argentina did in the Olympics: overcome any perceived disadvantage in physical ability with collective execution, commitment and will. In a league dominated by two- and three-man sets, the Pacers are playing five-man basketball both offensively and defensively, and the results are manifest not only in their record, but the fan response to their performance.

    Though Stephen Jackson and Reggie Miller are doing most of the scoring, every player has ownership of the current surge. Scot Pollard, Dale Davis and Jeff Foster have taken care of the dirty work inside. Anthony Johnson has been a revelation at the point. Fred Jones, James Jones, Austin Croshere and Eddie Gill have made the second unit a consistent positive factor.

    Whether they can do as Argentina did, shock the world and win the gold medal remains to be seen. But what the Pacers already have done, and continue to do, is comparably inspiring to watch.

  • #2
    Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

    ...And playing this same type of basketball with even more talented players can only be better and go farther IMHO...

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

      I find it interesting to contrast what Brunner says with what Mark Montieth says, pretty much opposite answers to the same question.

      http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=10808
      -----

      Question: I know I speak for lots of other Pacer fans by stating the obvious here, and asking you this question: The Pacers seem to be playing excellent "team basketball" without the services of Ron Artest, Jermaine O'Neal and Jamaal Tinsley. I understand the underdog mentality and the "it's us against the world" thing, but is it more than that?

      If I can see it, then Donnie Walsh, Larry Bird and Rick Carlisle HAVE to be seeing it! Maybe we really don't need all three of these "team stars" after all? Don't you think there must be some thought being directed toward this situation "upstairs"? Hopefully, the aforementioned "stars" are taking note of what's happening as well. (Steve from Fortville, Ind.)

      Answer: I'm sure the front office has noticed the recent play. It's important, however, to point out that most of the recent wins have come over weak teams, with the exception of the one over Miami. And while this team will make the playoffs, it might not get past the first or second round. Obviously the front office has greater ambitions than that.

      The effort and unselfish play have been impressive, but I don't think many people consider Artest, Tinsley or O'Neal to be selfish. It's really a matter of how Carlisle directs the offense. When Artest and O'Neal play, he runs the offense through them around the basket, which leads to others standing and watching. With this lineup there's a need for more movement on the perimeter and more balance, which brings out the best in Reggie Miller, Anthony Johnson and others.

      The bottom line, however, is that you can't win a title without having some All-Star caliber players. A team such as the Pacers have now might make for a good story and be fun to watch, but a team like that has never won a championship. The trick is to get All-Star players and get them to play within a team system. The Pacers certainly did that last season when they won 61 games.

      If there's a lesson to be learned from the current lineup, it's that the fundamentals of rebounding, setting screens and defending pay off. The injured players should keep that in mind when they return.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

        Originally posted by Will Galen
        I find it interesting to contrast what Brunner says with what Mark Montieth says, pretty much opposite answers to the same question.
        Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't see it as that big of a contrast.

        Could you elaborate?
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

          Originally posted by Anthem
          Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't see it as that big of a contrast.

          Could you elaborate?

          Brunner;
          What they have done is exactly what Argentina did in the Olympics: overcome any perceived disadvantage in physical ability with collective execution, commitment and will.


          Montieth;
          "The bottom line, however, is that you can't win a title without having some All-Star caliber players."

          Brunner is saying they have a chance, Montieth is saying they have no chance without All Stars.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

            Originally posted by Will Galen
            Brunner;
            What they have done is exactly what Argentina did in the Olympics: overcome any perceived disadvantage in physical ability with collective execution, commitment and will.


            Montieth;
            "The bottom line, however, is that you can't win a title without having some All-Star caliber players."

            Brunner is saying they have a chance, Montieth is saying they have no chance without All Stars.
            A solid argument could be made that Reggie, AJ, Jax and Dale are all playing at an "All-Star caliber" level right now.

            but I'll leave the details to someone else.
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

              I don't know about a 'solid' arguement for any of them other than Jack.

              AJ, Reggie, and Dale are, however, playing like legit NBA-starters, and previously they either weren't or, in Dale's case, he was relegated to the end of someone else's bench but he replaced a guy that we all like as a backup C but only a few people actually like as a starting C.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                Originally posted by Will Galen
                Brunner;
                What they have done is exactly what Argentina did in the Olympics: overcome any perceived disadvantage in physical ability with collective execution, commitment and will.


                Montieth;
                "The bottom line, however, is that you can't win a title without having some All-Star caliber players."

                Brunner is saying they have a chance, Montieth is saying they have no chance without All Stars.

                Playoffs are a sprint. The season is a marathon. You have to have the players to make the playoffs, and just relying on us against the world won't last that long. Once other teams figure you out, it's over. If there was a chance to play Argentina, or any of the other teams, 3 or 4 times before the olympics then the outcome is different. Film can only show so much. Playing against the teams shows you how your team can exploit their weaknesses.


                This team is playing great, but I wouldn't bet one days pay that they'd make the playoffs if all the current players were gone from the start. That's the difference between a good NBA player and a superstar, the superstar has more talent to work with.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                  Originally posted by Since86
                  This team is playing great, but I wouldn't bet one days pay that they'd make the playoffs if all the current players were gone from the start. That's the difference between a good NBA player and a superstar, the superstar has more talent to work with.
                  If all the current players were gone from the start . . . we wouldn't have any players.

                  So I wouldn't bet anything either . . . (grin)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                    Lol. You know what I mean.......hopefully.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                      Originally posted by Since86
                      Lol. You know what I mean.......hopefully.

                      If you meant this current team wouldn't have made the playoffs if they had started the year, I disagree with you! I think they would have a better record than they have now.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                        Originally posted by Will Galen
                        If you meant this current team wouldn't have made the playoffs if they had started the year, I disagree with you! I think they would have a better record than they have now.
                        Right after the brawl this team played great as well. Then what happened? Teams figured out how to stop them, and then went into the dive. Fortunately JO came back to stop the bleeding, then Sjax.

                        Why am I even rationalizing this out? Take any teams top 3 players away from them for the whole year, and not one would put a better record together.......The top THREE.......

                        The lakers didn't even loose their top 3, and got back some talent. Look at where they are.......
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                          Originally posted by Since86
                          Right after the brawl this team played great as well. Then what happened? Teams figured out how to stop them, and then went into the dive.
                          This team has more pieces than the post 11/19 one did. That team started Eddie Gill at PG, with no real backup, Fred at SG, with no real backup, James Jones at SF, with no real backup, Croshere at PF, with no real backup, and then at Center we had Harrison, an off-and-on (the bench) Pollard, and John Edwards.

                          Now we have AJ backed up by Gill, Reggie playing like it's 2000 backed up by Fred Jones, Stephen Jackson backed up by James Jones, Dale Davis backed up by Austin Croshere, and a healthier Scot Pollard backed up by Jeff Foster. That's a hell of a lot more than the post 11/19 team had, even when you count the CBA wannabes we signed along the way.

                          To top it off, we're getting JO back for the playoffs.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Conrad Brunner Q/D, Are Pacers a Team of Olympic Proportions?

                            Originally posted by Hicks
                            This team has more pieces than the post 11/19 one did. That team started Eddie Gill at PG, with no real backup, Fred at SG, with no real backup, James Jones at SF, with no real backup, Croshere at PF, with no real backup, and then at Center we had Harrison, an off-and-on (the bench) Pollard, and John Edwards.

                            Now we have AJ backed up by Gill, Reggie playing like it's 2000 backed up by Fred Jones, Stephen Jackson backed up by James Jones, Dale Davis backed up by Austin Croshere, and a healthier Scot Pollard backed up by Jeff Foster. That's a hell of a lot more than the post 11/19 team had, even when you count the CBA wannabes we signed along the way.

                            To top it off, we're getting JO back for the playoffs.
                            Agreed. But honestly, theres a reason these are backups. As much as I like Reggie, I have a hard time thinking that he could play at this level all season.

                            This team is making a sprint against some low level teams, and just out hustling other teams. I highly doubt that a full season's record would be equal, let alone higher than it is right now.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X