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

Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

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

  • Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

    I realize this is a dead issue, but I was taken aback by how critical Mark was of Rick. Mark said that the coach is the person who was supposed to install the discipline on the team and Rick didn't. Rick's offense was never going to work, and the "running game" last season was abandoned without explanation. Rick tried to overcome his personality defects by giving certain players such as JO special treatment and that caused other team problems. Mark isn't sure if Rick will get another head coaching job because he's getting a bad reputation around the league.

  • #2
    Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

    Hmmmm....interesting...

    It's not like Monteith to bad-mouth anyone let alone RC or any former player or coach, but he's right in most respects. I don't agree with his assessment that RC will have difficulty finding another head coaching gig. Maybe not this year, but eventually - perhaps within the next year or two - some team will hire him.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

      I can buy what he's saying. But it's cowardly to not say it from September 2003 through May 2007. That's "coverage" from the Indianapolis Star.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

        I agree, I always respected Mark, (even though I know a lot of you don't) but after hearing and reading some of his comments about Rick since his firing I've lost a little respect for Mark. Not because of the things he's said, but the manner in which he's said them - after Rick is fired.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

          Exactly. These were issues all along (just like when Ron went nuts during the Miami series in 2004). But the fluffly-soft coverage, IMO, helps keep the franchise in the middle of the pack.

          Those of us demanding improvement and change, and having high standards, are muffled by the masses who think everything is fine (because they're only getting 25% of the real story) and think we are 'chicken little' alarmists.

          Bob Kravitz, much to everyone's chagrin, writes columns that are much closer to the "truth" than MM does. Probably also true about Mike Wells, but he seems to have another agenda instead of just holding the team accountable.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

            Yes, I heard it and I AGREED with it 100%!!!! I was so happy to hear it that I nearly ran my truck into a ditch!

            If I were to guess why Mark M. had to wait to criticize Carlisle. I'd have to bet that Monteith's job as "beat writer" not "columnist" would be where to look. I believe that his "opinions" could have put his "coverage" of the team in jeopardy. If the team's beat writer is taking shots at the current head coach...his coverage could be viewed less as coverage and possibly more as opinion.

            Now that Carlisle is gone, there isn't any reason to hold back when this is an opinon that he has wanted to share for a long time, now. I 100% agree that Carlisle got a free pass on issues that many coaches in this league have in the past been fired for. It was nice to hear someone as respected as Montieth putting reason to why he is not coaching here and why he is not this iconic coach a lot of you believe him to be.

            Just like I said about Ron...you can take Ron Artest away from the craziness, but you can not take the craziness out of Ron.

            The craziness is part of the package!!! There is no way to get Ron Artest the player with out getting Ron Ron the lunitic. Same applies to Rick Carlisle...

            You can't get the great X's and O's out of Rick without getting all the crumby personality attributes that made him the "wrong" guy for the job.



            Flame away....
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

              Originally posted by Mal View Post
              I can buy what he's saying. But it's cowardly to not say it from September 2003 through May 2007. That's "coverage" from the Indianapolis Star.
              Yup I agree with you. I agree with what he says, but wish he would have said something sooner.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                Hmmmm....interesting...

                It's not like Monteith to bad-mouth anyone let alone RC or any former player or coach...
                If you take a look back at the blogs he and Wells have at indystar, you'll find where both of them have ragged on Carlisle a number of times since the firing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                  Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                  I 100% agree that Carlisle got a free pass on issues that many coaches in this league have in the past been fired for.
                  Seems a number of us feel the same way about Bird.

                  If Bird were to leave, I wonder what Montieth and Wells would write.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                    Seems a number of us feel the same way about Bird.

                    If Bird were to leave, I wonder what Montieth and Wells would write.
                    I could only imagine...

                    Then again, even if Bird left or was asked to leave...I believe that his "legend" in the state would slow these kind of opinions and criticisms comming from the team's beat writer. Heck, after B. Knight was shown the door, it seemed like it was open season on any kind of columnist.
                    ...Still "flying casual"
                    @roaminggnome74

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                      Mark loved Rick to death while he is here. The little respect I had for Mark just went out the window. That's just pansy-like. Rick's a classy dude, and got a dealt a bad hand--no, a HORRIBLE hand--in his time here. I wish him luck elsewhere.

                      Supporting Rick-Rick = Supporting the Pacers





                      But really... Rick got a raw deal.
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                        I don't see the point of ripping on anyone, coach, player or GM, once they're gone. This applies to Thomas as well as Rick. It just shows no class.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                          Originally posted by madison View Post
                          I don't see the point of ripping on anyone, coach, player or GM, once they're gone. This applies to Thomas as well as Rick. It just shows no class.
                          I still wish I had tape of Slick ripping Isiah after-the-fact for not playing Mercer enough.

                          Yes, it's not an endearing quality. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to hear them bashing Bird, though.
                          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            I realize this is a dead issue, but I was taken aback by how critical Mark was of Rick. Mark said that the coach is the person who was supposed to install the discipline on the team and Rick didn't. Rick's offense was never going to work, and the "running game" last season was abandoned without explanation. Rick tried to overcome his personality defects by giving certain players such as JO special treatment and that caused other team problems. Mark isn't sure if Rick will get another head coaching job because he's getting a bad reputation around the league.
                            Here's my problem with this...

                            how many games did the Pistons win before Rick got there? How did Ron manage to stay under control for an entire season with Rick after totally melting down the previous spring with Isiah? How many games did the Pacers win the year before Rick when they still had Brad Miller (named to the AS team that season even)?

                            Okay, so just how does that turn into a bad rep? I mean if that's bad then what's the rep that Bob Hill has (and he got rehired) or any number of other coaches who'd love to sniff 50 wins from time to time, let alone 60.

                            This will ALWAYS be an issue for me. Yes, the car won the 500, won the points championship, set a land speed record, and turned 2 different bland drivers into champs...but really it doesn't handle all that well and kinda sucks.

                            Talk about contradictions. Someone really needs to resolve how Rick has overcome his horrible people skills and total incompetence in order to post 3 50+ win seasons and 4 trips to at least the 2nd round of the playoffs in 6 freaking years.

                            How that gets redefined into not being a good coach is beyond me. I can handle that he lost control of the Pacers situations, and honestly I put plenty of blame on the players (did Nellie get Jackson under control in the playoffs? Nope) and management. Or did Bird have his hands tied when it came to punishing Tinsley for being late to practice all the time?

                            For all of Rick's "bad coaching" he hadn't yet let his teams slip under 500 till after the GS trade. I don't buy that the introduction of Dunleavy and Troy was the final straw that destroyed the positive team attitude and ruined any chance to win due to personality problems.

                            Frankly Troy's note in the Star says that he wanted to get in here and be a part of things, and both he and Dun did see playing time. Rick adjusted plays to both of them, using the curl and catch to get Dun going after finding out just how dead his 3 ball was and putting Troy into more of a Croshere role once he saw that he could put the ball on the floor in the right situations.

                            Neither of those things were there for them in those first 5-8 games, those were adjustments to get more out of them which shows me that the coach was paying attention to them and their skill set, not pushing them to the side (ahem, Nellie and Ike anyone?). The last 3 months of the season featured a winning pace of around 25 games over a season. Odd that in 5.5 years no Rick team lost at that rate and then magically just as a pure coincidence with the trade "the truth about Rick's ability" appeared.



                            Plus, as mentioned, where were these articles in 2004?


                            Rick's gone, some hated him, some were just tired of him, I can accept some of that and I can certainly see that perhaps the well was just poisoned in Indy now. But to stretch that into a rep as a bad coach? At least let me see JOB win with THIS ROSTER.

                            BTW, you tell me if any of you or TPTB or Mark M actually believe it was all about Rick...hands up, who WANTS the roster to stay the same because Rick was the problem which JOB now fixes. Ron's gone so I don't expect 55 wins, but 46 damn sure better happen with the CURRENT roster if it was as simple as Rick's coaching and discipline.

                            Bird's desire to get shooters and perhaps move JO says something different. That says "we built a poor roster that now needs to be fixed". And everyone calling for those changes agrees with that by association.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-29-2007, 07:54 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Did anyone just hear Mark Montieth on JMV ripping Carlisle

                              The goofy thing is that MM's blogs seem to have been a bit more "honest" than his print edition coverage, but nothing like his aftet-the-fact potshots he's lobbed around.

                              Those are clearly opinions he's formed from watching events that he chose to ignore is his coverage.

                              Clearly MM knows of numerous instances where RC played favorites, or chose not to discipline some of these immature bozos while punishing others.

                              Its not hard to envision the toxic coach-player relationships that spewed from this.

                              But a few more facts and anecdotes in real time might have helped smart, but misguided, fans like UB and Seth to understand that, no matter how good the x's and o's, the HC was a bigger contributor to the problem than the solution.
                              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