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

Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

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

  • Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

    I had always thought that Reggie Miller retired because of the immaturity of his teammates and yesterday it was confirmed.

    In the NBATV special, Looking Back at Reggie, Reggie stated that the brawl and the constant bickering between Ron Artest and Jermaine O'Neal lead him into retirement. He stated that the young players on the team were more interested in having a good time than they were on working on their game and studying the playbook. Most importantly, he said that it was the first time in his life that "basketball wasn't fun".

    He did praise Al Harrington, Jermaine O'Neal, and Stephen Jackson for having good work ethic so I figure he was pointing the finger more at Ron Artest and Jamaal Tinsley as being the ring-leaders of the Knucklehead brigade. That team also had David Harrison on it who's knucklehead status is certified. Maybe Fred Jones was one of the immature players too since the Pacers made no efforts to re-sign him when his contract was up.

    I found it interesting that Reggie said that if he had been playing in the game against the Pistons the night of the Brawl, he thinks he would've been able to prevent things from getting out of hand. I don't know if I agree with him on that but it was surprising to hear that he thought that.

    This was the most insightful interview Reggie has had regarding the Brawl and his final season. If you haven't seen you definitely should. I think the entire show, Looking Back at Reggie is online at NBA.com. I didn't see any threads regard the program so maybe this could be the official reaction thread for the show too. He talked in depth about his career, playing on Dream Team II, his rivalry with the Knicks and Michael Jordan, and the touching conversation he had with his father after finding out he had been accepted into the Hall of Fame.

    http://www.nba.com/video/channels/ha...s_miller.nba/#

  • #2
    Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

    Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
    I had always thought that Reggie Miller retired because of the immaturity of his teammates and yesterday it was confirmed.

    In the NBATV special, Looking Back at Reggie, Reggie stated that the brawl and the constant bickering between Ron Artest and Jermaine O'Neal lead him into retirement. He stated that the young players on the team were more interested in having a good time than they were on working on their game and studying the playbook. Most importantly, he said that it was the first time in his life that "basketball wasn't fun".

    He did praise Al Harrington, Jermaine O'Neal, and Stephen Jackson for having good work ethic so I figure he was pointing the finger more at Ron Artest and Jamaal Tinsley as being the ring-leaders of the Knucklehead brigade. That team also had David Harrison on it who's knucklehead status is certified. Maybe Fred Jones was one of the immature players too since the Pacers made no efforts to re-sign him when his contract was up.

    I found it interesting that Reggie said that if he had been playing in the game against the Pistons the night of the Brawl, he thinks he would've been able to prevent things from getting out of hand. I don't know if I agree with him on that but it was surprising to hear that he thought that.

    This was the most insightful interview Reggie has had regarding the Brawl and his final season. If you haven't seen you definitely should. I think the entire show, Looking Back at Reggie is online at NBA.com. I didn't see any threads regard the program so maybe this could be the official reaction thread for the show too. He talked in depth about his career, playing on Dream Team II, his rivalry with the Knicks and Michael Jordan, and the touching conversation he had with his father after finding out he had been accepted into the Hall of Fame.

    http://www.nba.com/video/channels/ha...s_miller.nba/#

    A failure of management and some of the players. Sad to hear. Ron Artest and Jamal....You just cannot have more than one knucklehead at the MOST on any team. And preferably none. That team had 2-3.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

      There you guys go again, talking about team chemistry and team leaders. Those things aren't important. Just stop. /green
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

        There was a special on NBA TV...Miller hated that Artest and Oneal were always bickering with one another. They both had a chip on their shoulders as to whos team it is...Miller tried sticking in their heads that if they could get along, they could win many championships...Miller mentioned that, at the time, Artest was the best perimeter defender and Oneal was one of the best inside defenders...

        so sad how the maturity level of our team put us back about 10 years.
        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

          really the brawl, but yes that was included as well
          Smothered Chicken!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

            Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
            really the brawl, but yes that was included as well
            I think the point he was making, IMO, is that the team was immature before the brawl but it wasn't until after the brawl that the immaturity of the team at that time really started to wear on him. I think he retired because he felt the Pacers weren't going to be able to win a championship by moving forward with JO and Artest. So sad.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

              At the time, I remember Reggie saying he was retiring after missing clutch free throws at the end of a game. That was the moment he knew he didn't have it anymore.

              Now we know the truth.


              Also, I've heard people discuss the fights between JO and Artest, but is this the first time it's been publicly acknowledged? Reggie told it exactly the way I'd been told.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                Anyone know where one could find that special online?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                  I am not surprised. This was assumed anyway. But for him to disclose solidifies my opinion on JO. I never want to see his uniform again. On a fan, but especially in a rafter at the Fieldhouse.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                    It's cut up into different videos but I think the entire program is on NBA.com. Try the video link below and the videos should be listed below. The comments by Jalen Rose are pretty funny. I still love him as a player.

                    http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nb...e_jackson.nba/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                      Reggie had mentioned this at some point previously, maybe not in as much detail, because the JO-Artest bickering isn't news to me.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                        I don't know when the first official report came out that there might be in-fighting between Jermaine and Ronnie but the first time I ever caught wind of it was actually from the series "Beyond the Glory" that used to be on Fox Sports. They did an episode on Reggie. I remember specifically one part of the interview where Reggie is saying something something along the lines of how hard it is to get the younger guys to "play the right way" amongst other things. It was more the way he said it that kind of struck me as odd considering that this particular episode aired during the spring of 2004 which was when we were just wrapping up the best regular season in franchise history. The team was playing so well that I couldn't really imagine more right of a way for them to be playing. Granted, I'm sure the interview was taped in early 2004 or late 2003. Still, prior to seeing that I hadn't heard previously of any internal issues granted I was also only 16 at the time and didn't pay much attention to that type of stuff. Interestingly enough, 7 months after the episode aired the brawl happened. So it would seem to indicate the infighting had been going on for a while for Reggie to mention it in an interview in late '03/early '04. Considering we acquired Artest mid 2002 the fighting probably began not long after he got here.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                          Don't forget, in Reggie's role as commentator he said (and I'm paraphrasing) "People think Ron Artest is the bad egg in the lockerroom but he isn't". So that led to the unanswered question "Who was?"

                          I don't think it's necessarily safe to infer that Artest and Tinsley were necessarily the targets of his bad work ethic comment.

                          Me personally, I came to believe Tinsley was the 'bad egg'. Maybe in retrospect Reggie has come to see Artest as a bad egg in the lockerroom too. Or maybe he's just trying to forget Artest. I also remember Reggie praising Artest and saying he wished he could have played alongside Artest when he was younger (in his prime) because he thought he could've helped Artest handle some things.
                          Last edited by Bball; 09-07-2012, 12:20 PM.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                            Of course the thing you knew with Artest is that he's not quite 'stable' (in a word) but you also knew he could be very good for the team. So why was JO picking at him or allowing Artest to get under his skin? JO should've had the maturity to understand you need to treat Artest differently. Even if he had to bite his tongue. It's about what's good for the team in the end.

                            OTOH, how long did TPTB think they could keep 'fire and ice' together and not have it blow up in their faces?
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Reggie retired because of the immaturity of his teammates

                              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                              Reggie had mentioned this at some point previously, maybe not in as much detail, because the JO-Artest bickering isn't news to me.
                              His first night as a TNT commentator, so day 1 of the 2005-2006 season.
                              "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                              "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X