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

Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

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

  • Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

    ROCHESTER HILLS, Mich. -- Prosecutors in suburban Detroit will request jail time for Indiana Pacers guard Stephen Jackson when he returns next month for a probation violation hearing after police say he fired a gun outside an Indianapolis strip club.

    Jackson already was serving a year's probation after pleading no contest to misdemeanor assault and battery charges for his role in a 2004 brawl between Pacers players and fans at The Palace of Auburn Hills. The 28-year-old appeared in a Marion County, Ind., court Thursday for arraignment on a felony charge of criminal recklessness and misdemeanor counts of battery and disorderly conduct.


    Jackson is scheduled to appear at a probation violation hearing at a Rochester Hills district court on Nov. 13. He could face up to three months in jail.

    "Anybody who has been brought before a court and has been sentenced clearly understands the ramifications of engaging in criminal behavior while under the thumb of the court system," Oakland County Prosecutor David Gorcyca told The Oakland Press of Pontiac.

    Police said Jackson fired a gun in the air at least five times during an Oct. 6 fight outside Club Rio. Jackson originally told police that he fired the gun in self-defense, but Prosecutor Carl Brizzi said Jackson retrieved his gun from his car and fired it before he was struck and injured by another car.

    Defense attorney James Burdick said the probation would have been completed but was extended while a fan involved in the Nov. 19, 2004 incident at The Palace seeks restitution. Burdick said Jackson's probation was extended for one year but without any oversight or reporting to a probation agent.

    He said he will ask Rochester Hills District Judge Julie Nicholson to set aside the probation violation.

    Meanwhile, Marion Superior Court Judge Patricia Gifford entered a not guilty plea Thursday for Jackson, who was booked into jail and released on $10,000 bond. He's scheduled for a pretrial hearing Nov. 1, with his trial to start Jan. 8.

    The criminal recklessness charge carries a prison term of six months to three years.

    Jackson could play Saturday when the Pacers host Utah depending on how well his injuries from the fight heal, head coach Rick Carlisle said.
    Indy Star
    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

  • #2
    Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

    I thought that there had to be a conviction first.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

      Originally posted by Harddrive7 View Post
      I thought that there had to be a conviction first.

      Most probation claims state that you can't get in trouble with the law, and that's already been done, doesn't matter if he's guilty or not

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

        Originally posted by Harddrive7 View Post
        I thought that there had to be a conviction first.
        Nah - there are some limitations but being on probation means the court owns you. The terms of his probation will have included possible jail time if he was in violation. He would have gotten an extension since he didn't fulfill all the terms but they've now changed their mind and it looks like they'll declare him in violation.

        They didn't even need legal trouble to do it though that's obviously the reason here.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

          Since the thread this was posted in got hijacked, I'll repost it here:

          Originally posted by microwave_oven View Post
          I found out today that Larry Bird told Steven Jackson over the summer that he was on a zero tolerance policy. Bird made it very clear that if Jackson didn't get his head on straight, then he would be out of here. In light of the recent events....

          Larry Bird issued a meeting today between TPTB and the advisers. During the over 2 hour meeting, they weighed all their options. Things the Pacers will be looking for at first are any possible trades of SJax, then if their hands are tied there, they will look to initiate some sort of buyout.

          However they will have to let the legal process take its place, because IF Jackson IS convicted of a felony, then his contract can be voided by the team. To my understanding, the team is not responsible for paying the remaining contract nor does the salary count against the cap. Committing a felony is a violation of the player's contract and is subject to be terminated.

          The decision to hold Jackson out of practice was made by all the advisers and Top Brass, it was not just Larry Bird's call. (Although he did have the most say in it.) Whether Jackson will be held out of more practices/games is up to Bird. At this time however, Jackson's immediate return is considered "unlikely."

          After the events that took place today, I strongly believe that Jackson will be gone and may even have to sit out similar to Artest's situation.
          Now jail time is quite possible in the near future, I can definitely see the above happening... but who knows, I'm an outsider that knows nothing >>
          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

            Originally posted by Harddrive7 View Post
            I thought that there had to be a conviction first.

            I think the right response to the comment is, Yes, there does have to be a conviction. And there already IS one. Jackson is guilty for the infractions on 11/19/04, and already owes Michigan some jail time. They can call him in anytime. There would be no legal rule that he had to be convicted of another crime before he could be punished for the first one. As Displaced Knick says, the court owns Jackson already.
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

              Originally Posted by microwave_oven
              I found out today that Larry Bird told Steven Jackson over the summer that he was on a zero tolerance policy. Bird made it very clear that if Jackson didn't get his head on straight, then he would be out of here. In light of the recent events....

              Larry Bird issued a meeting today between TPTB and the advisers. During the over 2 hour meeting, they weighed all their options. Things the Pacers will be looking for at first are any possible trades of SJax, then if their hands are tied there, they will look to initiate some sort of buyout.

              However they will have to let the legal process take its place, because IF Jackson IS convicted of a felony, then his contract can be voided by the team. To my understanding, the team is not responsible for paying the remaining contract nor does the salary count against the cap. Committing a felony is a violation of the player's contract and is subject to be terminated.

              The decision to hold Jackson out of practice was made by all the advisers and Top Brass, it was not just Larry Bird's call. (Although he did have the most say in it.) Whether Jackson will be held out of more practices/games is up to Bird. At this time however, Jackson's immediate return is considered "unlikely."

              After the events that took place today, I strongly believe that Jackson will be gone and may even have to sit out similar to Artest's situation.

              --------------

              I MISSED THE ABOVE when it was posted originally.... When is this from, today? When is practice today? Was Jax there? Where's Micowave?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                Originally Posted by microwave_oven
                I found out today that Larry Bird told Steven Jackson over the summer that he was on a zero tolerance policy. Bird made it very clear that if Jackson didn't get his head on straight, then he would be out of here. In light of the recent events....

                Larry Bird issued a meeting today between TPTB and the advisers. During the over 2 hour meeting, they weighed all their options. Things the Pacers will be looking for at first are any possible trades of SJax, then if their hands are tied there, they will look to initiate some sort of buyout.

                However they will have to let the legal process take its place, because IF Jackson IS convicted of a felony, then his contract can be voided by the team. To my understanding, the team is not responsible for paying the remaining contract nor does the salary count against the cap. Committing a felony is a violation of the player's contract and is subject to be terminated.

                The decision to hold Jackson out of practice was made by all the advisers and Top Brass, it was not just Larry Bird's call. (Although he did have the most say in it.) Whether Jackson will be held out of more practices/games is up to Bird. At this time however, Jackson's immediate return is considered "unlikely."

                After the events that took place today, I strongly believe that Jackson will be gone and may even have to sit out similar to Artest's situation.

                --------------

                I MISSED THE ABOVE when it was posted originally.... When is this from, today? When is practice today? Was Jax there? Where's Micowave?
                Its right before the "Bird did not want SJax at practice" thread disintegrated.
                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


                • #9
                  Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                  Its right before the "Bird did not want SJax at practice" thread disintegrated.
                  Thank you, I almost always bail on those when the Bell gets rung. Was there any additional info on this?

                  It wouldn't surprise me with some of the players quotes about moving forward, good luck to JAX almost sounded like they were not expecting him back anytime soon, but I'm obviously reading alot into it too.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                    Its right before the "Bird did not want SJax at practice" thread disintegrated.
                    I prefer the word, "improved" myself.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                      Where are those that were telling me that Michigan would have no bearing on this. That his offenses in Indiana meant nothing to Michigan (well outside the state anyway since they were misdemeanors) ???????
                      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                        Where are those that were telling me that Michigan would have no bearing on this. That his offenses in Indiana meant nothing to Michigan (well outside the state anyway since they were misdemeanors) ???????
                        Well, they were wrong. Not sure what people thinks it means when someone tells someone, "You're on probation" but it shouldn't be that everything's hunky-dory in your world.

                        In the legal system it's even worse than that. Until you've served your probation, that court owns you.

                        Or in other words, probation means you're in jail but for the time being you've earned the privilege of walking around - and that privilege can be revoked if you do anything wrong.

                        If Jackson had completed the original terms of his probation he'd have been off in late September and Michigan wouldn't have any claim on him. He didn't and they do. And what he did wrong isn't necessarily anything to do with what happened last week. Because he didn't fulfill the terms of his original probation in the time allotted, they had the right to place him in violation - and throw him in jail.

                        By all accounts they weren't going to do this - they were just going to extend his probation until he did complete all the terms. But now they've changed their mind - and they didn't HAVE to have Club Rio to do that (though in this case that is the reason).
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                          I cannot imagine any team trading for Jackson, I don't care if we traded Granger and 4 first round draft picks along wiuth Jax and we only got back a terrible contract - I just don't see a trade happening.

                          If Jax is in jail up in MI starting in November that would push the trial back if he's in for 90 days. Maybe if they cut that in half and give him 45 days the trialwill take place as scheduled.

                          I'd be shocked if Jackson's lawyer doesn't move for a continuence and from what I know it will likely be granted. So unless a buyout is worked out, Jackson will be dangling out there all season. I suppose if Jax's atty believes his client will be coinvicted, he might look for an early buyout.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                            I only see one trade being offered the Pacers: a package for Stephon Marbury - who will surely excercise his option next year.

                            I'd rather buy Jackson out.
                            “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


                            • #15
                              Re: Jail in Michigan looms for Jackson

                              Jackson apparently did NOT "fail" to meet the terms of his probation. This was a technicality in that the probation was ALSO DEPENDENT ON the civil suit being completed.

                              Jack apparently did meet all the normal terms (anger classes, fine, community service) but since the civil suit is still ongoing they chose to extend the probation period for another year. Not sure if he could file for an early end once the civil suit was done or not...moot point now.

                              Doesn't change the fact that he was still technically on probation it appears (not sure how the filing of extension paperwork fits in here) and because of that he will face prob violation issues, though some court discretion is possible here it sounds like.

                              I'm not defending Jack overall, but like so many other stories around this, that "probation violation" story was reported....poorly some might say. cough ***sensationalism**cough*cough***

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X