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

Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../1088/SPORTS04

    It has been four years now, and finally, finally all the remnants of The Brawl have been swept into the dustbin.

    Ron Artest is gone. Stephen Jackson is gone. David Harrison is gone. Jermaine O'Neal is gone. And Jamaal Tinsley is virtually gone.


    There is only one player left from that November night in 2004 -- Jeff Foster -- and he was a relative non-participant in The Brawl.

    Everybody else? History.

    Can I get a hallelujah?

    "One of the things we talked about this past summer was getting beyond The Brawl, getting it out of here," Indiana Pacers president Larry Bird said Sunday after the team's well-attended Fan Jam. "We wanted to start fresh with guys who want to play here and guys who will do the necessary things in the community."

    Conseco Fieldhouse finally has been swept clean, and while the new version of the Pacers doesn't figure to be a whole lot better than recent incarnations of the team -- I'm saying they will miss the playoffs for the third consecutive year -- they surely will be more watchable, more competitive and more likable.

    The increase in Q ratings won't earn them many victories, but the team Bird and general manager David Morway have cobbled together will begin the rebuilding process that should have begun two years earlier.

    This is, by conservative estimate, a .500 team in the best of circumstances. If their top players stay relatively healthy, if coach Jim O'Brien can coax another career season from Mike Dunleavy and sustain the progress of Danny Granger, this team could fight for the final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference.

    But while making the playoffs might be important to the owners, the front office and the players, the postseason isn't imperative when you look at the bigger picture. This team is a star or two from being a true contender, and the only real way to get those kinds of players is through the draft lottery.

    The best move Bird made was moving O'Neal's onerous contract, which would have handicapped the Pacers for two more years at more than $44 million. Now they're not only below the luxury tax threshold -- a very important number for owners who've lost money on the Pacers recently -- but figure to have some salary cap flexibility next summer.

    Rasho Nesterovic is in the final season of an $8.4 million deal. Marquis Daniels has one year left at $6.8 million. Both Jarrett Jack and Granger will be restricted free agents, although it's likely the Pacers will sign Granger to a long-term deal.

    "We'll be in a position to make some changes that fill certain needs," Bird said.

    The biggest improvement will come in the backcourt, which has gone from an area of weakness to a strength in one summer. T.J. Ford was born for O'Brien's system. And Jack is as solid a backup as there is in the league.

    The Pacers also figure to have a lot of flexibility at the swing positions. Dunleavy is coming off the best year of his career. Daniels, an intriguing talent whose health has betrayed him so far in Indianapolis, can be a nice player if he stays in one piece. Brandon Rush has shown glimpses of excellence, although it can never be forgotten that he's a rookie.

    Then there's Granger, who has the freedom now to be a leader and has the contractual incentive to grow into an All-Star. This is his "show me" season, a chance to establish himself as the future centerpiece of this franchise.

    It's in the frontcourt that there are questions.

    Nesterovic is a solid big man with a nice shooting touch, but he's not going to strike fear in opponents on defense. Troy Murphy has myriad offensive skills, but again, he's limited defensively. Foster? We know his game; he will hustle and get rebounds, but he won't score in the post.

    The real intrigue will be watching the development of Roy Hibbert, who, like Rush, has shown good signs in the preseason. It often takes big men longer to develop than it does smaller players, but if the young guy can contribute on defense without fouling out in 10 minutes, the Pacers will have a gem.

    Give Bird and Morway credit: They've done the necessary dirty work to make the Pacers palatable again. They've made the hard decisions that former CEO Donnie Walsh had neither the stomach nor the desire to make. They've mopped the floors and scrubbed the walls and even did some latrine duty along the way, which isn't the kind of thing you might expect Larry Legend to be doing at this point in his life.

    All of the Brawlers are gone, or, in the case of Tinsley, almost gone.

    Even Shawne Williams, the perpetually misguided bust of a first-round draft choice, was dealt for the equivalent of a fish sandwich.

    Bird has two years left on his contract, and I asked him if two years was enough to complete the rebuilding of this franchise.

    He didn't wince.

    "I'm not worried about that," he said. "Whether I'm here or not, whoever comes in is going to have a great start. I didn't worry about (the contract) my last year of coaching and I'm not worried now."

    Four years after The Brawl, that terrible night outside Detroit is finally in the rear-view mirror.

    Finally, the Pacers, the New Pacers, can move on.

    ************************************************** *******

    He alludes to it later in the article but I want to say it for him. I think it is appropriate to include Donnie Walsh in that list of people who are out the door in all of this as well.

    I am not going to get into a Donnie debate here as we have covered this a million times. But I think the entire team needed a makeover and frankly it wasn't going to happen with Walsh at the helm.

    As to the rest of the article, meh. It's Bob what can you say. He is just doing his job by trying to be the straw that stirs the drink.

    Of course I happen to agree with him on this one though.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

    His article reminds us who know, the obvious. I guess it is good for the people who have lived under a rock for a few years, or have put themselves under a rock to embrace this "news".

    Mr. Kravitz, you never fail to amaze me. And not in the good way.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

      excellent read !
      "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

        Excellent article.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

          And Jamaal Tinsley is virtually gone.
          So by saying this, is this how he intends to get out of walking to Kokomo?


          Training camp has broken, and Tinsley is still on the roster.

          START WALKING KRAVITZ

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Even Shawne Williams, the perpetually misguided bust of a first-round draft choice, was dealt for the equivalent of a fish sandwich.
            i thought we at least got a value meal for him.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

              Was that actually a somewhat even-handed article by ?

              I guess he was loooooooooong overdue.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                Bob doesn't have to walk to Kokomo - Tinsley is not on the roster as far as I'm concerned.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  Bob doesn't have to walk to Kokomo - Tinsley is not on the roster as far as I'm concerned.

                  Sorry to say UB, but I must disagree.

                  While he is no longer an active member of the team, technically he is still
                  on the roster taking that 15th spot that could be occupied by a potential
                  contributor.

                  http://www.nba.com/pacers/roster/index.html


                  I recommend getting some Dr. Scholls insoles for your walking shoes before
                  getting started Mr. Kravitz.
                  Last edited by RamBo_Lamar; 10-29-2008, 10:07 AM.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                    I just skimmed the article, like I always do, so couple that with me usually being wrong, but isn't this the opposite direction he had about two weeks ago?
                    “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                      I was listening to Kravitz's show on the way home yesterday and he volunteered to walk 10% of the way and was hoping to somehow incorporate charity into the mix.
                      Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                        Soooo Kravitz writes a column on opening day. Seems logical to me. The obvious he states seems no more offensive than those who watch post game highlights or press onferences. I mean, you saw the game why do you need to see or hear the obvious afterward? Or even moreso, why do you need to listen to the announcers tell you what you are seeing with your own eyes?

                        I don't have feelings one way or the other about Bob but there are too many guys who take what he writes wayyyyyyyy too seriously. It's an OPINION and we all have those.
                        The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Bob doesn't have to walk to Kokomo - Tinsley is not on the roster as far as I'm concerned.
                          He still gets paid doesn't he? That means he's still a member of the team and better start walking and not come back!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                            I decided to consult our good friend Wikipedia to help decide this question as to whether Tinsley is truly "on the roster"

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roster

                            A roster can be a list of people and the times when they are required to work.

                            A roster may also mean a list of people who participate in an event. Although rosters can be associated with non-competitive events, they are most commonly associated with athletics.

                            __________________________________________________ ___________________________

                            Ok, clearly Tinsley is not required to show up to work, nor is he a person who participates in an event. So I think it is crystal clear - JT is not on the roster. (No where on Wkipedia does it say a roster is a list of names on Pacers.com)

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Obviously the season is beginning so Bob will share his views with us...

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              I decided to consult our good friend Wikipedia to help decide this question as to whether Tinsley is truly "on the roster"

                              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roster

                              A roster can be a list of people and the times when they are required to work.

                              A roster may also mean a list of people who participate in an event. Although rosters can be associated with non-competitive events, they are most commonly associated with athletics.

                              __________________________________________________ ___________________________

                              Ok, clearly Tinsley is not required to show up to work, nor is he a person who participates in an event. So I think it is crystal clear - JT is not on the roster. (No where on Wkipedia does it say a roster is a list of names on Pacers.com)
                              He counts towards the cap doesn't he? As far as the league's concern, he is a Pacers player.

                              EDIT: Don't you know wiki isn't a credible source?

                              Dictionary.com defines a roster as:
                              1. a list of persons or groups, as of military personnel or units with their turns or periods of duty.
                              2. any list, roll, or register: a roster of famous scientists; a roster of coming events

                              http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/roster

                              Tinsley is on the list of Pacer players, so he is on the roster.

                              EDIT #2: Hell, he's even on the Pacers website on the roster.
                              http://www.nba.com/pacers/roster/index.html
                              Last edited by Since86; 10-29-2008, 02:42 PM.
                              “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X