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

Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

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

  • Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/caught_the...011_07_25.html

    Pacers left big impression on Mullin
    Conrad Brunner Pacers.com

    Indianapolis (July 25, 2011) -- Chris Mullin built his Hall of Fame credentials as a member of the Golden State Warriors but that doesn't mean his relatively brief time with the Pacers was merely an asterisk on his prolific career.
    He views those three seasons in Indiana from 1997-2000 as more of an exclamation point.

    "Our family loved it, I loved it, my teammates, Larry (Bird), Rick (Carlisle), it was incredible," Mullin said. "No drama, just basketball, professional -- to me the way it's supposed to be played and the way you're supposed to conduct yourself.

    "You know what? That team was the right team for Indiana. They love basketball so much, Larry and Donnie (Walsh) put together the right group of guys."

    Mullin will become the fourth former Pacers player to be enshrined in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame with ceremonies Aug. 11-13 in Springfield, Mass. He is the longest-tenured, playing 179 games with Indiana. That's more than Alex English (135 games from 1978-80), Gus Johnson (50 in 1972-73) and Adrian Dantley (23 in 1977).

    When Bird joined the Pacers as head coach in 1997, he and then-President Donnie Walsh agreed the team needed another perimeter threat. Mullin was acquired in an August trade for Erick Dampier and Duane Ferrell.

    "It was huge because when I took the job I told Donnie we need another scorer at the wing position and we were very fortunate to get Chris," Bird said. "The Pacers had some success the years prior but I always felt they double-teamed Rik (Smits) and face-guarded Reggie (Miller), so if you had another scorer that we could probably turn the corner and do a little bit more. He was very instrumental the first two years getting us where we wanted to go."

    Mullin moved right into the lineup, starting all 132 games those first two seasons (the 1998-99 season was cut to 50 games by a lockout), averaging 25.4 minutes, 10.9 points, 3.1 rebounds and 2.1 assists while shooting 45 percent from the 3-point line. He led the NBA with a .939 free throw percentage in 1997-98.

    The Pacers reached the Eastern Conference Finals each of those seasons, losing in seven games to the Bulls in '98 and six to the Knicks in '99.

    "It was an incredible experience for me to play for the Pacers at that time," Mullin said. "I mean Reggie Miller, a Hall of Fame player obviously, a guy who before I became his teammate I really didn't know much of and probably was not too fond of, actually. But when I was his teammate he was probably one of my favorite teammates of all-time, probably the hardest working guy I was around. And he was humble and selfless, the total opposite of what my impression of him was. That was a treat.

    "Playing for Larry was incredible, having idolized him and to be able to play with him on the Dream Team (in 1992) and to be able to play for him. Being reunited with Mark Jackson after so many years -- I've known Mark since high school -- was a neat experience and all the other guys, Rik Smits and Antonio (Davis) and Dale (Davis), just a great, great experience.

    "And the guy in charge of it all was one of the most respected guys I know and a guy I respect the most, Donnie Walsh. He put that whole thing together. Look at Rick Carlisle now; we had him as an assistant coach -- just incredible basketball people."

    Jalen Rose replaced Mullin in the starting lineup for the '99-00 season when the Pacers reached the NBA Finals, losing to the Lakers in six games. In three seasons with the Pacers, Mullin appeared in 38 playoff games, including three conference finals and one NBA Finals.

    In 13 seasons with Golden State, he played in 33 playoff games and did not reach the conference finals.

    "For sure, I wish I had that experience when I was a younger player. But it didn't take anything away from it," Mullin said. "You wanted to have more, but there wasn't enough time left in my career to have more. I wouldn't have traded that in for anything. My years with Golden State I was always hoping we could become that type of team, it just never happened.

    "And then when the opportunity to came to get to Indiana, I jumped on it and I enjoyed my whole time there. Even my last year when I wasn't playing a lot, I still felt part of the team, felt like I had a decent influence on the guys. Really, looking back, it was three incredible years of my life and my basketball career."

    Though his statistics were modest, Mullin played an important role in that team's success. Not only did he provide timely scoring and deadly shooting -- he is the franchise's career leader with percentages of .441 on 3-pointers and .912 on free throws -- he set a supreme example for veterans and young players alike.

    Here was a proud veteran, a five-time All-Star, four-time All-NBA, two-time Olympic gold medalist, willing to serve as a role-player -- not only without complaint, but happily.

    "That was Reggie's team and the way the team was put together, those pieces fit," he said. "We played a different style -- we almost played a platoon system -- and it worked. It wasn't just myself, you had to have the right guys to be able to play that way and to accept playing that way. And we did have the right group and that's where Larry and Donnie knew what they were doing.

    "How can you argue two conference finals and the NBA Finals? We were right there. Against the Lakers, we really were pretty close. We were right there, but Shaq played like Wilt the whole series. The energy and the excitement of that outweighed not playing at that point."

    Mullin played one more season with the Warriors in 2000-01 before retiring. He moved into the team's front office and served as Executive Vice President for Basketball Operations from 2004-09. He currently is an NBA analyst with ESPN.

    Though Miller did not get the necessary votes in his first year of eligibility to join the Class of 2011, Mullin has no doubt he will soon get the call for the Hall.

    "I don't think there's really a question he'll be in the Hall of Fame," he said. "That's not a question at all. I'm not really up-to-date on how the process works, to tell you the truth, but he's a Hall of Fame player, there's no question about it. It's as automatic as anything -- as automatic as his jump shot."

    Three seasons, three deep playoff runs, no distractions. It was an almost idyllic end to a proud career for Mullin.

    "I was just up at Springfield and they asked me about the Pacers," he said. "It just was low maintenance, high character, all business."

    And business was booming.

  • #2
    Re: Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

    I just finished reading this on pacers.com

    Great read.
    Follow me at @Bluejbgold

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

      Love it. Basketball is best when played as a team, and good team players obviously are a big part of that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

        I always liked Mullin, but even more now.

        A refreshing viewpoint on so many fronts. While I realized that the Pacers of that era were top notch, this interview truly reinforces what the Pacers came to represent under Brown, Bird, and Carlisle until the wheels came off.

        I can't wait to see the next iteration of a world class franchise filled with professionalism here in Indiana. And now, it appears that there may be a chance of that happening with a high caliber coaching staff, and more and more players who respect the opportunity of playing in the NBA and for the Pacers, with the possibility of adding more talent when the CBA is settled.

        Also, his view on Reggie reinforces Reggie's status as a hall of fame player and that he is the type of person that Reggie's fans believe him to be.

        Excellent piece by Brunner!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          http://www.nba.com/pacers/caught_the...011_07_25.html

          Pacers left big impression on Mullin
          Conrad Brunner Pacers.com
          Great article

          I wish this was forwarded to the FA class of 2011-2012 and 2012-2013

          Maybe Naptown wont look so bad afterall
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Chris Mullin article on Pacers.com

            Originally posted by Constellations View Post
            I just finished reading this on pacers.com

            Great read.
            As soon as I finished the article I thought to myself, great read.

            Comment

            Working...
            X