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

Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

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

  • Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

    By Marc Stein
    ESPN.com
    Only three more sniping days 'til Christmas for Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant.


    Only three more days, too, until the Detroit at Indiana undercard. That may be the day Jermaine O'Neal returns -- unless the commissioner's original ruling stands up in federal court, in which case it's 21 days after Saturday until the Pacers get O'Neal back from suspension.



    Despite fight night, the Pacers will welcome O'Neal back with open arms -- as early as Saturday.
    "It seems like a million years away to me," said Pacers president Donnie Walsh earlier this week, referring to O'Neal's return.


    And you can understand the sentiment. For most of us, a month has elapsed rather quickly (and quietly) since The Malice of Auburn Hills. As predicted in this cyberspace from the start, no matter how ugly and scary and shameful the melee was, fans have not stopped going to and watching the games. Once again we say that it was not the darkest day in league history. Once again we argue that initial wave of moral outrage never lasts as long as you think it will at the moment of impact. It was not a doomsday, just as the baseball playoffs did not suffer one whit after a Texas Rangers pitcher threw a chair into the stands.


    Of course, for Walsh and the short-handed Pacers, time marches slowly. For what seems like forever, they have been playing without O'Neal , Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest. Meanwhile, they've had to deal with myriad injuries and some serious inexperience among the fill-ins.


    But guess what?


    They awoke Wednesday at 12-11, right there with Detroit. They're just 5-9 since the brawl, but the rest of the December schedule, Christmas aside, is pretty inviting.


    They're simply a resilient team, especially considering Indy's status as the biggest long-term loser in this mess.


    "I don't think this team has given up," Walsh said. "We'll survive these suspensions, and if we can get our team back then I think we'll contend."


    What follows is a look at that team -- where it was and where it's going -- from several different angles:



    WHAT IF?



    “ When this is all over, I think we can make a run. This team hasn't changed any of its goals. ”
    — Pacers president Donnie Walsh
    One of the harder aspects of the brawl fallout for the Pacers to stomach comes when they remember how good life was until the final minute of that fateful fight night.


    The win at Detroit launched Indy to a 7-2 start in spite of numerous health issues. It followed a victory at mighty Minnesota just days earlier in which O'Neal, plagued by a sore foot, had to come off the bench, a game that came just a day after Artest had stunned the franchise by suggesting he might want to take the whole season off to promote an album he co-produced and to spend more time with his family.


    In spite of the latest Artest flap and Indy's spate of injuries, the Pacers were looking awfully dangerous early. The team believes it was one play away from the NBA Finals last spring -- Tayshaun Prince's sprint and swat of a Reggie Miller layup having helped turned the conference finals for Detroit -- and which seemed inarguably stronger than it did last season.


    "After those two performances [vs. Minnesota and Detroit]," Walsh said, "I thought we were pretty good."



    WHAT NOW?



    Now? The Pacers' roster was decimated by the suspensions, to the point that, coupled with various injuries, there have been games where Carlisle has been forced to coach without six to nine of the players he expected to have available. The first two fill-ins they signed, furthermore, were subsequently deemed ill-fitting and have likewise been replaced: Britton Johnsen and Tremaine Fowlkes were brought in and then waived to make room for Marcus Haislip and Michael Curry, who played for Carlisle in Detroit.


    However ...


    Look at the standings. If there's any solace for the team in this mess, it's that Stern's punishment of the Pacers didn't include a mandate that Indy be shipped to the Western Conference. Because they're still in the East, the Pacers haven't slipped very far out of contention, not even after a recent seven-game losing streak that followed the brief three-win honeymoon immediately after the brawl.


    Look at the standings again. The Pacers, as of Wednesday morning, were a mere two games back of Cleveland in the Central Division. Cleveland, not Detroit.


    Which means the original goal -- winning the Central, to ensure homecourt advantage in a playoff rematch with the Pistons -- remains intact.


    Detroit, remember, has struggled since the brawl almost as much as Indiana has, even though the Pistons' penalties were essentially limited to Ben Wallace's six-game suspension.


    It must also be said that the progress made in December by Pacers youngsters Fred Jones and David Harrison -- along with the long-serving Jamaal Tinsley -- suggests that Indy will be even deeper than anticipated in the season's second half.


    "The one thing I am happy about is that this team has really held the fort," Walsh said. Speaking specifically about Tinsley, Walsh added: "He's shown a lot of things he can do, as a scorer, that he doesn't do when he's out there with the full team."



    WHAT NEXT?




    If Stephen Jackson returns to action with the same fiery attitude he took into the stands, the Pacers should be cooking.
    By the end of January, Indiana will have both O'Neal and Jackson back and still have a whopping 39 games left on the schedule.


    The Pacers should also have plenty of pent-up, us-against-the-world fury to unleash on the rest of the league.


    Thus it's probably Detroit, not Indiana, that should really be worried this Christmas, with the Pistons having squandered a nice opportunity to gain some serious ground on their rivals.


    The assumption going into the season held that Detroit and Indiana, in some order, would post the top two records in the East. In that scenario, the teams were thus destined to meet in the second round of the playoffs, because realignment dictates that top three playoff seeds are reserved for the three division winners. In that scenario, then, winning the Central would guarantee the homecourt edge in a second-round showdown.


    In the new scenario, Miami is the favorite to post the East's best record, barring any kind of long-term injury to Shaquille O'Neal or Dwyane Wade. And Detroit's ongoing malaise leaves the Pistons with only a handful of games, at best, in which to amass any sort of edge on the Pacers before their O'Neal returns.


    Indiana has 11 games left, as of Wednesday, before O'Neal's original suspension ends. Detroit has 12 in the same span ... and a fretting coach.


    "Yeah, I think so," Brown says when asked if he's worried. "We're not playing great.


    "I think there's a lot of factors. Sometimes we forget why we won a championship and how we went about it. The new rules (officials calling games tighter on the perimeter) have kind of impacted us a little bit. We've had injuries and that terrible fight six weeks ago has kind of hung over heads for quite a while. We've had a hard time shaking that.


    "Obviously it's one of the ugliest things I've ever seen or been part of.... My son doesn't even want to go back to a game. And then wherever we go, it's news. A month after the fight we go to Memphis for the first time or Dallas for the first time and that's all they want to talk about. And it has affected our team. I think a lot of people look at us differently.


    "It only lasted for five minutes, but it seems like it lasted for hours," Brown continued. "It wouldn't end and it hasn't ended."


    You can expect more lamenting from Larry when O'Neal does come back, having rested up after playing hurt throughout training camp and the season's first three weeks, and Detroit gets a clearer sense of the opportunity it squandered.



    Even without Artest, Donnie Walsh (right) likes where the Pacers are going.
    "When this is all over," Walsh said, "I think we can make a run."



    WHAT ABOUT ARTEST?



    Yes, Walsh meant even without Artest, who's eligible to return to practice even if, as expected, commissioner David Stern upholds his own suspension of Artest (an arbitrator has already upheld the suspension). The Pacers are simply deciding how they want to work him back in; Artest's usual reps with the starting lineup, for example, wouldn't make sense if the suspension were to be upheld for the rest of the season.


    "He's not estranged from our team," Walsh said. "He's part of it and will remain part of it."


    Without its best defender, it's difficult to envision Indy winning a championship. That said, the Eastern equation hasn't changed much.


    Assuming both teams are healthy, the Pacers will be deeper than the Heat in the playoffs, even without Artest. The Cavs are growing up fast, but LeBron James hasn't seen a minute of the playoffs yet, so it's tough to imagine a thin Cleveland squad, in LeBron's first postseason run, challenging the East's top three.


    Which leaves Detroit. That's the conference opponent against which Indiana would obviously miss Artest most. Of course, that applies only if the Pistons become the Pistons again. Detroit has its own depth woes, ranking last at present in bench scoring at only 16.6 ppg. Indiana, even in its depleted state, is getting close to 20 a game from its reserves.


    "The way I look at it is, all these (suspended) guys are right around 25 years old," Walsh said. "Eventually they're all coming back to the team at some point.


    "This team hasn't changed any of its goals."


    Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here. Also, click here to send a question for possible use on ESPNEWS.

  • #2
    Re: Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

    "He's not estranged from our team," Walsh said. "He's part of it and will remain part of it."

    "The way I look at it is, all these (suspended) guys are right around 25 years old," Walsh said. "Eventually they're all coming back to the team at some point.

    I think this tells me the Pacers aren't ready to give up on Ron Artest, they could feel his value is still to high and there not going to sell him down the river for a bag of chips.

    Now I like Ron as a player and defintely was disappointed , but maybe this is what Ron needs to wake up and smell the coffee so to speak. I hope Ron realizes that if there is another incident most likey he will be banned for life we all know Ron is a great player and I don't think anyone doubts his desire to be a winner.

    I really don't think we can win a championship without Artest but I guess we will find out that answer soon enough if everything holds it's course.
    Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

      Interesting take Sauce. I read the article the opposite way. It seemed like Walsh was saying that we don't ned Artest and don't really want him.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

        Originally posted by Larry Brown
        and that terrible fight six weeks ago has kind of hung over heads for quite a while. We've had a hard time shaking that.
        Oh, BOO FREAKIN' HOO! Yeah, YOUR team had it SOO rough after the fight.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Marc Stein Article from ESPN.com

          My take was closer to SauceMaster's... my feelings on Ron are going to totally depend on what he does with himself during the suspension. If he can be a good teammate, reliable, keep himself in shape, etc, then I think this could really be a "growing up" time for him.

          Because while I fully disagree with almost 100% of what Jay says about him, there's no question that Ron has some growing up to do. If this doesn't get the point across, then nothing will.
          This space for rent.

          Comment

          Working...
          X