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.
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
-
“Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais. -
Re: Insider Request
Team USA's foul free throws posted: Wednesday, August 2, 2006 | Print Entry
filed under: NBA, Olympics
LAS VEGAS -- Greetings once again from Las Vegas, where we got our first long look at Team USA on Tuesday night in a scrimmage against Puerto Rico.
In a nutshell, we'll say this: These guys are really getting after it defensively, using pressure to disrupt the movement of the ball upcourt and taking advantage of the opportunities this creates. They forced Puerto Rico into 30 turnovers, several of which turned into emphatic dunks, and they had only occasional bouts of the type of sloppiness that Larry Brown railed against two years ago.
But enough of the good. Nobody wants to read chapter and verse about how good these guys are. They're supposed to be good.
Let's focus on the bad, since that's what their opponents will be focusing on in an effort to find the chinks in this team's armor.
Problem No. 1, and coach Mike Krzyzewski backs me up on this, is free-throw shooting. LeBron James was the first U.S. player to go to the foul line, and he missed his first two attempts (and his third, too). As a team, the Americans shot just 21-for-38 from the line, with Elton Brand going 1-for-4, James 2-for-6 and Dwight Howard 3-for-5. Brad Miller was 1-for-2, Amare Stoudemire was 0-for-1, Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade were 1-for-2, Joe Johnson was 3-for-5 and Chris Paul was 2-for-3. Only Kirk Hinrich (4-for-4), Antawn Jamison (2-for-2) and Carmelo Anthony (1-for-1) were perfect.
"I think some of that means we've got to be accustomed to playing at that speed, and then you stop. That's a big thing when you play pressure defense. It affects you offensively when you stop," Krzyzewski said. "Whether it's an out of bounds or a free throw, you've got to get accustomed to that and getting back to that level of focus."
Anthony was the unquestioned offensive star of the game, continuing his strong camp showing by shooting 10-for-13 overall and 2-for-4 from 3-point range. James scored 20 points, and Johnson with 10 was the only other Team USA scorer in double figures. All 15 players scored, with Brand bringing up the rear with one point. The best 3-point shooter, surprisingly, was center Miller, who went 2-for-2. As a team, the Americans were 11-for-31 from behind the arc -- not exactly the kind of shooting performance that will inspire dread among the teams overseas who are already plotting their 40-minutes-of-zone strategies.
"We'll shoot better," Coach K said. "That's also about getting adjusted to playing with that type of intensity. We're not resting on defense, so you're a little tired when you get to the offensive end."
Team USA plays its first official exhibition game Thursday night, also against Puerto Rico. Tipoff is 11 p.m. ET.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!). -
Re: Insider Request
Way to go Jamison!!!
Hopefully this is just a sign of things to come. Didn't PR kill us last year?? Also I knew Miller would work out well in international play.STARBURY
08 and Beyond
Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Wow, another completely boring article by Sheridan.
I honestly can't believe that ESPN makes people pay for that kind of writing. A fifth grader could come up with a better article.
Outside of numbers, there's nothing even about the actual game
Shesh. Sorry Tom, for even thinking it was worth the time to actually post.
I'll post another link for Friday's article, when I see it.
“Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Wow...it seems I was totally off on my assessment of Melo. He could easily start. I wonder if he plays the 3 or the 4.Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Dunno. Here's what a 5th grader's attempt would look like:Originally posted by Since86Wow, another completely boring article by Sheridan.
I honestly can't believe that ESPN makes people pay for that kind of writing. A fifth grader could come up with a better article.
Outside of numbers, there's nothing even about the actual game
Shesh. Sorry Tom, for even thinking it was worth the time to actually post.
I'll post another link for Friday's article, when I see it.
TAM USAS FU FRE THROWS POSTAD W3DNASDAY AUGUST 2 206 | PRINT ENTRY
FIELD UNDER NBA OLYMPIS
LAS VEGAS - GRETNGS ONC3 AGANE FROM LAS VAGAS WHERA W3 GOT OUR FIRST LONG LOK AT TEM USA ON TUESDAY NIGHT IN A SCRIMAEG AGANEST PU3R2 RICO
IN!!111! OMG WTF A NUTSH3L WEL SAY THIS TH3S3 GUYS R RILLY G3TNG AFTER IT D3F3NSIEVLEY USNG PRASURA 2 DISRUPT DA MOV3M3NT OF TEH BAL UPCOURT AND TAKNG ADVANTAEG OF DA OPORTUNITEIS THES CR3AETS!11!1 OMG THAY FORC3D PUAR2 RICO IN2 30 TURNOV3RS SEVERAL OF WHICH TURNAD IN2 AMPHATIC DUNKS AND TH3Y HAD ONLEY OCASIONAL BOUTS OF DA TYPA OF SLOPIENS TAHT LARY BROWN RALEED AGANEST TWO Y3ARS AGO
BUT!!!1!!! 3NOUGH OF DA GOD!!111!1 WTF NOBODY WANTS 2 READ CHAPTER AND VARSE ABOUT HOW GOD THESE GUYS AER!1!!1!1 OMG THERE SUPOSAD 2 B GOD
L3TS!!1!111 OMG WTF LOL FOCUS ON TEH BAD SINCA TAHTS WT OPONENTS WIL B FOCUSNG ON IN AN 3FORT 2 FIND DA CHINKS IN THES TEMS ARMOR
PROBL3M!!1111! OMG WTF NO!!1!! OMG WTF 1 AND COACH MIEK KRZYZ3WSKI BAX ME UP ON THIS SI FRE-THROW SHOTNG!!1!11! OMG LOL LEBRON JM3S WAS TEH FIRST US!1!!11 OMG WTF PLAEYR 2 GO 2 DA FU LIEN AND HE MISED HIS FIRST TWO AT3MPTS (AND HIS THIRD 2)!111!!! WTF AS A T3M TEH M3RICANS SHOT JUST 21-FOR-38 FROM TEH LIEN WIT AL2N BRAND GONG 1-FOR-4 JMAS 2-FOR-6 AND DWIGHT HOWARD 3-FOR-5!11!!!1 OMG LOL BRAD MILAR WAS 1-FOR-2 R S2UDAMIER WAS 0-FOR-1 CHRIS BOSH AND DWYAEN WAED WERA 1-FOR-2 JOA JONSON WAS 3-FOR-5 AND CHRIS PAUL WAS 2-FOR-3!!1!! OMG WTF ONLEY KIRK HINRICH (4-FOR-4) ANTAWN JMISON (2-FOR-2) AND CARMELO ANTHONY (1-FOR-1) WARE PERFECT
I!!111 OMG WTF LOL THINK SOMA OF TAHT MEANS W3V3 GOT 2 B ACUS2MED 2 PLAYNG AT TAHT SPED AND THEN U S2P!111!!1 LOL TAHTS A BIG THNG WHEN U PLAY PR3SURA DAFANS3!!!!!1 LOL IT AFACTS U OF3NSIEVLEY WH3N U S2P KRZYZAWSKI SADE!1!1!!! OMG WH3THER ITS AN OUT OF BOUNDS OR A FRE THROW U GOT 2 G3T ACUS2MED 2 TAHT AND GETNG BAK 2 TAHT LAVEL OF FOCUS
ANTHONY!1!!1 OMG WAS DA UNQUESTION3D OFENSIEV STAR OF DA GME CONTINUNG HIS STRONG CMP SHOWNG BY SHOTNG 10-FOR-13 OVERAL AND 2-FOR-4 FROM 3-POINT RANG3!!!!111 OMG JMAS SCORED 20 POINTS AND JONSON WIT 10 WAS TEH ONLEY OTHAR T3M USA SCORER IN DOUBLE FIGURES!!1!! OMG WTF LOL AL 15 PLAEYRS SCORED WIT BRAND BRNGNG UP TEH R3AR WIT ON3 POINT!1111!1 DA BST 3-POINT SHOT3R SURPRISNGLEY WAS CANTAR MILER WHO W3NT 2-FOR-2!!111! OMG AS A TEM DA MERICANS W3RE 1-FOR-31 FROM BHIND TEH ARC - NOT AXACTLEY TEH KIND OF SHOTNG PERFORMANCA TAHT WIL INSPIER DRAAD MONG DA T3MS OVARS3AS WHO R ALR3ADY PLOTNG THERE 40-MINUTES-OF-ZON3 STRAETGEIS
WEL!!!!11! SHOT BT3R COACH K SADE!!1!111 OMG WTF TAHTS ALSO ABOUT GETNG ADJUSTED 2 PLAYNG WIT TAHT TYPE OF INTANSITY!!111!!11 OMG WTF LOL WER3 NOT R3STNG ON D3F3NSA SO UR A LITL3 TIERD WHAN U GAT 2 DA OFENSIEV END
T3M!!!1!! USA PLAYS ITS FIRST OFICIAL 3XHIBITION GME THURSDAY NIGHT ALSO AGANEST PU3R2 RICO!111!!! TIPOF SI 1 PM!!1!111! OMG LOL 3T!1!!!!! LOLComment
-
Re: Insider Request
Wow, that took quite a bit of work, but I enjoyed it.......
I highlited the bolded section for a reason, and here's the reason. On the front page of the NBA section there's this photo:Kobe's knee trouble leads to a 'we' problem
By Chris Sheridan
ESPN Insider
LAS VEGAS -- Kobe Bryant's choice of pronouns was somewhat revealing Tuesday as he made his first appearance with Team USA.
He didn't sound like a member of the team, even though he technically still is one.
Bryant watched from the fifth row of the stands as the American team played its first scrimmage against another national team, looking especially sharp defensively in defeating Puerto Rico 116-82 behind 23 points from Carmelo Anthony and 20 from LeBron James.
For most of the game, Bryant was seated with team director Jerry Colangelo and agent Rob Pelinka, and he did not interact with the players on the bench during the game, in the locker room prior to tipoff, or on the court following the final buzzer.
"The waves with which they play [are] something that's amazing and fun to watch. They come at you in waves, and it's non-stop, the pressure they put on full court," Bryant said. "The quick hands, the quick feet that they have, one through five out there on the court, everyone is extremely athletic and physically gifted. They're all playing well together, doing well defensively. I think defensively is really their area of emphasis."
For those keeping score, that answer included six references to "they" and its variants, zero references to "we."
Bryant's comments were his first public statements of the summer, coming nearly three weeks after he underwent what was termed as "minor" knee surgery to clean out scar tissue and "impingements," as Bryant described it.
The news of Bryant's surgery came as a shock to Colangelo and coach Mike Krzyzewski when they learned of it just three days before camp was to open, and some had questioned why Bryant waited until mid-summer to address the problem.
"It's been there all season, but it was something we didn't think was anything that was going to linger," Bryant said. "I had knee problems in the past and just played through it, and once I played through it, it felt great. This summer I started my training regimen, and the knee just wasn't getting any better. We had to take a look at it and found out we had to do a little tweak."
A tweak? Not many people call surgery a tweak.
"It wasn't like I had to repair a damaged ACL or anything like that. But you've been in this league for some time, you've got some issues going on with your knee that need to be addressed," Bryant said. "So I had to go and take care of that.
"We didn't really know it to be something that required surgery until we were into the summer. It was one of those things that just continued to linger, and we jumped on it as early as we could."
Bryant, Paul Pierce (impending elbow surgery) and Lamar Odom (death of his infant son) were the only three members of the 24-man national roster who did not make it to training camp, and Bryant was the first of that trio to make an appearance.
When news of Bryant's surgery was first released, the announcement said Bryant still planned to travel with the team to China, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan. But those plans have changed.
"Mr. Colangelo and Coach K both thought it would be best for me to stay back and take care of my situation since it's a three-year commitment, making sure I get completely healthy to go next summer and hopefully in the '08 Olympics," Bryant said.
Colangelo was quick to point out that Bryant is likely to join the team at some point when it gets to Japan for the World Championship, but only because he'll be doing promotional appearances there for Nike.
The first day we'll finally see Bryant in a USA jersey (he had to withdraw from the team in 2003 and 2004) -- and the first time he'll call the team "we" instead of "they" -- will remain undetermined for at least another year.
Sheridan is retarded. The whole article is bashing Kobe for saying "they," instead of "we," and making him seem like he doesn't want to be apart of the team. So he talks about how he's not around the players, but yet that photo clearly shows him talking to 'Melo ON THE FLOOR, which he says he didn't do in his article. Whoever decided to post that pic, hung him out to dry.
The little respect I had for him, just went to nothing.Last edited by Since86; 09-06-2007, 01:52 PM.“Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Since86, I completely agree with you. Kobe is an easy target...even when there is nothing to report.
Are we forgetting that Kobe was the number one guy targeted by Team USA? The first guy to come out and say he wants to play. Please, back off Kobe. It's childish and old.Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Why did you assume a 5th grader would use so many numbers? I'm not saying I was a Nobel-winning author as a 12-13 year old, but I also wasn't a friggin retard...is education different in the Midwest?
PS: There's no way anyone can mistake "CANTAR" for center.
The Kobe/Melo picture is photoshopped...Kobe isn't wearing his SO wristband.
(I'm not being completely serious)Comment
-
Re: Insider Request
Agreed....You're only strengthing our East Coast superiorty complexes.Originally posted by LoneGranger33
Pretty funny stuff thoughComment
Tweet
Comment