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

Kravitz:"Deal Artest now"

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

  • Kravitz:"Deal Artest now"


    7 days Archive

    Bob Kravitz
    The time is now to unload problem


    Related content

    • Pacers give their worst
    • Artest says he asked team to take time off
    • Kravitz: The time is now to unload problem
    • Notebook: Carlisle wants to see fewer risks and turnovers
    • Box score

    November 11, 2004


    In the end, it doesn't matter exactly what Ron Artest did to get himself booted by his coach. It doesn't matter if it was a disagreement over touches, a hygiene issue or some strange request to take a month off to concentrate on the promotion of his rap album.

    What matters is, Artest is The Story again. What matters is, Artest is a distraction again. What matters is, after all this time, Artest still has no idea how to be part of a team, and remains a player the Indiana Pacers simply can't trust -- now, or when the big pressure comes to bear in May and June.

    If they couldn't count on him to step up and help fill the void caused by all these early injuries, how can they count on him when the season is on the line?

    They can't.

    Deal him. Deal him before his trade value is diminished even further. Deal him before he destroys a team that has a chance to win an NBA championship.

    It doesn't matter that they won't get equal value in terms of raw talent. This is addition by subtraction. And there's a lot to be said for bringing in another player who will show up to work every day.

    "Can you trust him?" I asked coach Rick Carlisle before Wednesday night's Pacers game against the Los Angeles Clippers.

    "Yeah," he said. "He's part of the team."

    Then he paused and said, "It's up to him and the other guys on the team to prove they're trustworthy. Trust has to be earned all the way around. We're all accountable."

    That is, with all respect to Carlisle, a bunch of disingenuous gobbledygook. And in his heart, he has to know that.

    How can any straight-thinking basketball coach or executive believe they can count on Artest to be there?

    The cover-ups, the half-truths, even the lies -- like Carlisle telling reporters Monday there was nothing going on with Artest -- are bathing this organization in an unflattering light. Carlisle said he booted Artest for "compromising the integrity" of the team, but by continuing to play these insipid games with Artest, management is compromising its own integrity.

    "You know, this is a family," Carlisle said, "and we're needing to remind ourselves that we need to be a family."

    Compassion, patience, understanding, those are all noble things.

    I'm sorry that Artest has troubles, and nobody wants to throw him under the bus, but we all have crosses to bear. At some point, you owe it to the rest of the family to do what's best for the larger group.

    Here we are, just a week and a half into the season, the Pacers limping around with an injured roster, and Artest is talking nonsense about taking time off.

    Now, I'd be happy to share the gist of Artest's pregame comments Wednesday, but I don't speak Artest-ian, nor did I have a translator at my disposal. Suffice to say this was a performance at the Theater of the Absurd.

    Somewhere between the mumbles and forays into circular logic, I deduced that Artest wanted some time off, possibly to pursue his musical interest, expressed that desire to Carlisle in a hugely inappropriate way, and the coach benched him for two games.

    Which seems bizarre, even by Artest's lofty standards.

    But, then, at one point Wednesday, he was asked about his burgeoning music career. His answer suggested maybe that scenario wasn't so bizarre, after all.

    "Yeah, I think I've been doing a little bit too much music and I needed some rest," he said. ". . . I've still got the album coming out Nov. 23. After that, I'm going to make sure all my energy is focused on winning a championship."

    Huh?

    How about if the Pacers bench him -- without pay, this time -- until after Nov. 23?

    Artest had a lot of other odd things to say, but it's what he didn't say that was most bothersome.

    He didn't say he was sorry.

    Usually, we can count on a heavy dose of contrition, but not this time. He just insisted "there wasn't that much harm done," and "what happened wasn't too negative."

    Really?

    Carlisle and team president Larry Bird know this better than anybody else: Championships are built on a foundation of trust and a shared willingness to sacrifice for the greater good.

    Where does Artest figure into that equation? He doesn't. And the longer the Pacers kid themselves into believing they can control him with tough love, the more likely it becomes that Artest will be at the root of their demise.

    I not only believe the Pacers can win without Artest, I believe they can win a championship. Already, we've seen what Stephen Jackson brings. We've seen how Fred Jones has developed. We've seen how Austin Croshere and Scot Pollard have come back from the end of the bench.

    Put it this way: If the Pacers want to keep Artest, they lose the right to complain about his eccentricities.

    "Ron, should your teammates be concerned that they can't trust you?" I asked Artest.

    He shook his head.

    "No," he said. "I'm not worried. I'm just worried about winning games."

    Could have fooled us.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz:

    I just fail to see how anybody other than just a pure blind Artest fan can disagree with this.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz:

      Originally posted by Peck
      I just fail to see how anybody other than just a pure blind Artest fan can disagree with this.

      Amen! Just unreal.

      Doesn't get more selfish than this. I can't think of a team that would touch him now.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz:

        Agree with what? Artest should be traded or we can win a championship without him?

        If you're saying only a blind fool could possibly think a championship is out of our reach without Artest, then - OWWW! I didn't see that light post I just walked into.
        "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz:

          Our chances of dealing this guy are low. What team is crazy enough to take this risk?
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz:

            If you want to dump him for an expiring contract:

            Indiana trades:
            C Scot Pollard (7.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.3 minutes)
            SF Ron Artest (24.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 38.0 minutes)

            Indiana receives:
            C Samuel Dalembert (4.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 0.5 apg in 21.0 minutes)
            Glenn Robinson (No games yet played in 2004/05)
            Change in team outlook: -27.6 ppg, -7.8 rpg, and -2.5 apg.

            Philadelphia trades:
            C Samuel Dalembert (4.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 0.5 apg in 21.0 minutes)
            Glenn Robinson (No games yet played in 2004/05)

            Philadelphia receives:
            C Scot Pollard (7.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.3 minutes)
            SF Ron Artest (24.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 38.0 minutes)
            Change in team outlook: +27.6 ppg, +7.8 rpg, and +2.5 apg.

            TRADE ACCEPTED



            ----
            Glenn plays no D at all but his 12 million comes off the books. Dalembert would be our best defensive Center by far.


            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz:

              I'm afraid this ugly episode by Ron is just the beginning of a very ugly ending to his Pacers career.

              I can only assume by the response of the members of PD that most people are disgusted with this latest event.

              With that said, it is not hard to imagine the crowd booing Ron with great vigor the next time he plays at home. We've seen Ron flip off opposing crowds. How's he going to react to his own crowd? Can any of us say with any confidence that he won't melt down on the Pacers crowd? That is when they will reach the point of no return.
              [edit=524=1100179131]wording[/edit]

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz:

                Someone please tell me howw we are going to get any value for this guy? If we deal him, championship hopes are out the window. I guess I am a blind fool.
                Heywoode says... work hard man.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz:

                  I truly believe Artest has the mind of a child in a man's body.
                  The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz:

                    Didn't we just beat Minnesota on the road without him?

                    I've said this once and nobody picked up on it - I think his teammates really wanted to prove to Management, Ron, Ron's fans, and the rest of the world that they can beat a top team without him.

                    As for the game against the Roach Clips, hey we ran out of gas. Look back to the first month prediction thread. Rick's done an amazing job patching this team together. We just got a little dose of injury-bug reality last night.

                    The only point of Kravitz in which I disagree is suspending him. DO NOT suspend him - that's what he wants. Make him attend every practice and every game. Make him dress for every game. But give him DNP-CDs until at least after the album is out, then decide if he or James Jones should be Stephen Jackson's backup. Reggie and Fred Jones can split the SG minutes.

                    As long as JO and Tinsley are healthy and Rick is coaching, we're a contender.

                    Now's the time for Rick to really hammer home the message that he's going to play the guys that want to be part of the team. The rest of you can draw your paychecks, and sit and watch while you fade into oblivion while the team (when healthy) keeps winning without you.
                    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: Kravitz:

                      Didn't we just get hammered by the Clippers at home? We are not good enough to win a championship while getting peanuts for Artest. We may be good enough to ride this storm of injuries for a while, but this whole thing is going to catch up with us badly very soon. I admire the team for what they have done so far and that win against Minnesota was great.

                      Lost in this whole mess is that Jermaine O'Neal just reinjured his foot. Perhaps he will be back soon, perhaps not. If Artest were reliable, I would feel much better about the next several games than I do now.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz:

                        Originally posted by pacertom
                        If you want to dump him for an expiring contract:

                        Indiana trades:
                        C Scot Pollard (7.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.3 minutes)
                        SF Ron Artest (24.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 38.0 minutes)

                        Indiana receives:
                        C Samuel Dalembert (4.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 0.5 apg in 21.0 minutes)
                        Glenn Robinson (No games yet played in 2004/05)
                        Change in team outlook: -27.6 ppg, -7.8 rpg, and -2.5 apg.

                        Philadelphia trades:
                        C Samuel Dalembert (4.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 0.5 apg in 21.0 minutes)
                        Glenn Robinson (No games yet played in 2004/05)

                        Philadelphia receives:
                        C Scot Pollard (7.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 0.7 apg in 29.3 minutes)
                        SF Ron Artest (24.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 2.3 apg in 38.0 minutes)
                        Change in team outlook: +27.6 ppg, +7.8 rpg, and +2.5 apg.

                        TRADE ACCEPTED



                        ----
                        Glenn plays no D at all but his 12 million comes off the books. Dalembert would be our best defensive Center by far.


                        Wow, Artest and Iverson on the same team. How'd you like to coach that bunch?

                        All they would need to do is hire Rodman out of semi-retirement, and they could field the All-Time headcase team.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz:

                          Originally posted by tseramid
                          Didn't we just get hammered by the Clippers at home? We are not good enough to win a championship while getting peanuts for Artest. We may be good enough to ride this storm of injuries for a while, but this whole thing is going to catch up with us badly very soon. I admire the team for what they have done so far and that win against Minnesota was great.

                          Lost in this whole mess is that Jermaine O'Neal just reinjured his foot. Perhaps he will be back soon, perhaps not. If Artest were reliable, I would feel much better about the next several games than I do now.
                          With an injury-riddled, distracted team, I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on the Clippers game.
                          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


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz:

                            Could we involve Kravitz in a deal along with Artest?

                            Kravitz is worthless.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz:

                              Wow, Artest and Iverson on the same team. How'd you like to coach that bunch?

                              Duo rap album.

                              [edit=74=1100191719][/edit]
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X