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

Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

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

  • Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...612280473/1088

    "One of the things I'm looking at is a guy like Shawne Williams that can help this team," Carlisle said. "He and Granger are probably our best athletes. He's a live body that can shoot the ball. We're going to look for opportunities to play him. He's got to earn the minutes when he's in there. Something like this can help deepen our team a little bit.

    "We're not just looking to win a game today, we're looking to compete in the East. That's not just throwing five guys out there that look like they should be starters. There can be a more complex formula to that."

    I'm intrigued by the last statement. Sounds like Al might be heading to the bench......

  • #2
    Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

    Why does he go to the press about this? What will that solve?

    Does Carlisle demand respect from the players? Do they respect him? If they do - why in the world would an article like this make it to the press instead of staying in the lockerroom? I read this article to say that the players have tuned Carlisle out (have we heard that before?).

    I don't know----something does not smell right with this article.

    What if TPTB "leaked" a story saying "Carlisle had better show some consistency in the next 3 games or some changes will be made"?

    This article comes out days after Al makes a comment about being frustrated with the substitution patterns???????

    I just do not think Carlisle is the right coach for this team. I do think he is a really good coach - for a more disciplined veteran team. Not for this team.

    Me persoanlly - I would prefer a much more veteran disciplined team with Carlisle as the coach. That's just me.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

      Originally posted by FSU-IU View Post
      This article comes out days after Al makes a comment about being frustrated with the substitution patterns???????


      Rick made these comments in his post game press conference after the Rockets game Tuesday night

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

        Rick's definition of "the future" is thinking two games ahead.
        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


        • #5
          Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

          The media is one of many tools at a coach's disposal, I have no problem with him using them.

          However, the whole "3 games" is a bit wishy-washy to me. We play Detroit and Charlotte Friday and Saturday, then we don't play Dallas until next Thursday. If a change is to be made, better to do it after 2 games, when you've got all that practice time to work on new rotations.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            The media is one of many tools at a coach's disposal, I have no problem with him using them.

            However, the whole "3 games" is a bit wishy-washy to me. We play Detroit and Charlotte Friday and Saturday, then we don't play Dallas until next Thursday. If a change is to be made, better to do it after 2 games, when you've got all that practice time to work on new rotations.


            The three games included the Rockets game.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              The three games included the Rockets game.
              But he said it after the Rockets game, so unless he expects the players to go back and time and put more effort into the Houston game, he has to be referring to the three games Kegboy has listed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                But he said it after the Rockets game, so unless he expects the players to go back and time and put more effort into the Houston game, he has to be referring to the three games Kegboy has listed.
                He told the media after the Rockets game, but he told his team before the Rockets game. After the horrible T-Wolves game. I don't have the exact time though

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                  I'm starting to get the sense that Rick doesn't even know what the hell he's doing anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                    Originally posted by FSU-IU View Post
                    I just do not think Carlisle is the right coach for this team. I do think he is a really good coach - for a more disciplined veteran team. Not for this team.

                    Me persoanlly - I would prefer a much more veteran disciplined team with Carlisle as the coach. That's just me.
                    I dunno...

                    I think Carlisle is probably a genious at x's and o's. I think someday he'll make an excellent "#1 assistant".

                    The vibe I get is that he doesn't have the people/ social/ communication/ motivational skills to be the guy in the HC seat for very long. And he's great at seeing the trees, but I'm not sure he even knows he's in a forest when he sees the trees.

                    I, frankly, think he would still struggle with a team of veterans in terms of getting everyone to "buy in" to their roles. Put Rick in charge of Miami last season... do you see GP and Walker playing the same way as they did for Riley? I just don't.
                    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


                    • #11
                      Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      He told the media after the Rockets game, but he told his team before the Rockets game. After the horrible T-Wolves game. I don't have the exact time though
                      OK then that makes sense. I'm curious as to who he's referring to. Effort is something I may not be good at identifying on the floor (other than when a player is going above and beyond).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                        Plenty of regular coaches don't win COY, let alone run off 4 straight top 5 votes. Plenty of regular coaches don't win a single division title, let alone 3 straight to start their career. Plenty of regular coaches don't win 60 in a season ever. Plenty of regular coaches don't reach the conference finals, let alone in back to back years.

                        I'd say the #1 assistant thing is well beneath his accomplishments already.


                        My understanding of Rick's comments were the same as UncleBuck's. AFTER the Houston game to the media but after the Minny game to the team.

                        Al's comments IMO were a RESPONSE to Rick's point of view, and I think many of us suspect that to be because the swap would be Danny for Al in the starting lineup. Of course Al has no history of complaining about coming off the bench so that couldn't possibly be his motivation here.


                        Rick has traditionally been the MOST political coach out there in terms of protecting players in the press. He spins almost every answer in a way that protects individual players from blame.

                        Honestly this is one of the very rare times that Rick has let his confrontation/challenge to the team come to light in the press.

                        Ask yourself this, what was Rick's version of JO coming into his office and yelling enough that Wells could overhear it? Now compare that to these comments and you know that the pressure is on either from Rick or above for these guys to do more than just float by at .500.

                        It's probably a view that the team could still linger around .500 while developing Granger and Shawne more. The "vets" have to take it to a higher level than that to justify the current PT situations. That's my guess at the view on this.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                          I am completely with Seth and Buck on this.

                          Rick is one of the best coaches out there. I am so happy to have this guy as our coach. We our one of the few teams in the NBA that never has to worry about coaching and it's because we have this guy. Fantastic basketball mind.

                          If the Pacers are going to win a championship it's going to be when Danny and Shawne have kicked it up a notch and JO is still in his prime (I figure we have a 3-4 year window on that).

                          Like Seth said, if the vets can't get above .500, why not develop some consistency for Granger and Williams who most certainly will be able to get us above .500.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                            IMO, a coach should always be thinking of the future. I understand the concept of putting your best players on the floor, and of earning your playing time, but I also believe that young players need to be given an opportunity to learn in a real, game situation, not just in practice.

                            For example, you might take Williams and play him 8-12 minutes a game, in the same generally time span - the second quarter for example. Do this for a stretch of 4-5 games. Play him in just a single position and call few plays where he knows exactly what he is supposed to do.

                            Over the years I've felt that the Pacers, no matter who the coach is, haven't done a very good job at developing their draft picks quickly enough. Obviously, we've had some success with our draft, but I just think that certain players could have developed quicker had we used a little bit different approach.
                            You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                            All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                            - Jimmy Buffett

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Carlisle Thinking of the Future? - Indystar.com

                              Originally posted by Doug View Post
                              IMO, a coach should always be thinking of the future. I understand the concept of putting your best players on the floor, and of earning your playing time, but I also believe that young players need to be given an opportunity to learn in a real, game situation, not just in practice.
                              That's exactly what the first two-three months of the regular season are for.

                              I don't mind a coach expirimenting or tinkering. But I also don't like the coach to abandon something as "not working" after a couple of weeks instead of a couple of months. Danny - Al - JO did not get enough time together as a starting frontcourt? Maybe I'll be happier with Danny - Jeff - JO, but I doubt it.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X