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

Kravits new article....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #1

    Kravits new article....

    is exactly how I feel.

    I wish somebody else would have written it because Bob has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the only time he will comment about the pacers is when there is some monumental issue occuring. Be it playoffs, brawls or court apperances this is the only time Bob looks our way.

    It does not take away from what I feel represents my feelings to a T about the entire debacle. As I stated in the other thread the other day, I fully beleive that Ron will be here next year. U.B. asked why the change?

    I can't say for sure, but Bob seems to put a finger on it.

    Here it is with a link.

    First things first: Just because Ron Artest was on the Indiana Pacers' practice court Monday doesn't mean the NBA is extending an olive branch or in any way backing down on the seasonlong suspension.

    Unless NBA commissioner David Stern has a sudden epiphany -- or a full frontal lobotomy -- nothing is going to change in the case of The NBA v. Ron Artest.

    "No," said Pacers coach Rick Carlisle as his team prepared to depart for tonight's game in Boston. "We're working under the assumption he won't be back this season, and have no reason to think otherwise."

    The real issue confronting the Pacers, one pounded home again Tuesday with five Indiana players in a suburban Detroit courtroom, is whether Artest will be back with the Pacers next season.

    More and more, it seems like the Pacers have neither the inclination, nor the stomach, to make a deal they know won't fetch anything near equal value.

    Now, some of us -- we're the haters, remember -- feel that moving Artest for a bent rim and a ball rack would be a sage move. To me, a bad move would make more sense than no trade. Not because he's a lousy guy or he's inherently evil, but he has shown, time and time again, that he can't be trusted.

    Not only did Artest essentially subvert this Pacers season, but he probably ruined any chance Reggie Miller had to win a ring in what we believe will be his final year.

    But again . . . I'm the Bad Guy.

    As for the Pacers?

    Even after all Artest has put them through, it's unlikely -- incredible and unlikely -- that the organization will trade him this season or next season.

    Apparently, he hasn't screwed up enough.

    It's more likely, though, that the Pacers can't swallow the realization that they're not going to find equal value for Artest on the open market. They know they can't make a good deal for Artest, not before the Feb. 24 trading deadline and not this summer. So they will stick it out, foolish as that may be.

    The problem is, he is a top-15 player who is making a bargain-basement salary of $6.2 million, about $8 million a year less than most players at his level.

    If you trade him straight-up, that means moving him for another player making roughly Artest's salary. And, believe me, there's nobody making $6 million a year who comes close to being in Artest's league -- except maybe Peja Stojakovic, and the Kings have made it clear they're not interesting in dealing him.

    Another option -- sort of -- is for a team to deal an expensive player in the final year of his contract for Artest and others.

    First, the other team has to be one that's out of playoff contention and is willing to wait until next season for Artest to play.

    Second, we're probably talking about guys in the $14 million range -- Shareef Abdur-Rahim and Antoine Walker come to mind -- so the Pacers would have to toss another $8 million worth of players into the deal.

    I wouldn't shed a tear if Indiana dealt Jonathan Bender, who makes $6.5 million and can't stay healthy for more than a week at a time. But the Pacers wouldn't do it after the time and investment they've made.

    It might be a long shot if we were talking about a player who would do for Indiana what Rasheed Wallace did for Detroit one year ago. But we're talking about Walker, who is a bad shot waiting to happen, and Abdur-Rahim, who plays the same position as Jermaine O'Neal.

    If the Pacers could dump that salary at season's end and use the newfound cash to pursue a big-time free agent, it would make sense. But the Pacers already are over the cap, and wouldn't be in a position to make a play for anybody.

    So it would be Artest, Bender and whoever for . . . nothing.

    Which, even I would concede, would be a lousy deal.

    For the time being, then, the Pacers likely will stand pat with Artest, and continue to believe he is capable of change.

    I think they're fooling themselves, just as they've been fooling themselves for three years. I think this isn't a risk worth taking -- again.

    But you know what? I hope they're right. I sincerely hope they're right. Not just for the sake of the organization, which has been deeply wounded by what happened that night in Detroit, but for Artest's sake. When his head is screwed on right, his game is a joy to behold.

    As all that plays out, there's still a season going on, and now Stephen Jackson returns to the lineup against Boston. Even after everything that has happened, they are still contenders, remaining above .500 and well within shooting distance of the division title. That's a testament not only to the coaching staff, but to guys like Freddie Jones and David Harrison and the others who kept this thing together during tough times.

    So Artest practices and Artest waits. He shouldn't be a Pacer next season. But he will be.
    http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/212412-6917-179.html


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Kravits new article....

    Kravitz, "Not only did Artest essentially subvert this Pacers season, but he probably ruined any chance Reggie Miller had to win a ring in what we believe will be his final year."



    I guess you all know my argument. The only reason Reggie and the current Pacers team had a chance to win a ring this season to begin with is because of Artest.

    Correction: Obviously I don't mean to say that Artest is the "only" reason the pacers are a good team
    Yes, I realize the argument on the other side is if the Pacers had traded Artest last summer, then whoever they got in the trade would help offset Artest, and with the Artest distractions even a leser talented player would be more valuable than Ron. Well the Kings turned down trading Peja. Does anyone think Bonzi Wells would help the Pacers much at all.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Kravits new article....

      Compared to what Ron is giving us right now?


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

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Kravits new article....

        I Hate Kravitz.

        If we didn't have Artest, we wouldn't have won. If we would have done the Peja trade like he wanted, I still don't think we would have won. Peja is soft IMO. If we would have kept Al, traded Ron for anyone, I don't think we would have won. We need Ronnie to win a title. Our system is set up for two forwards, Jermaine and Ron...maybe Jermaine and Stephen will help.
        Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Kravits new article....

          My heart sinks everytime I hear or read "subverted the season". I've tried to put out of my mind what could have been. I think the best I might ever be able to feel about Ron-Ron is indifference.
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Kravits new article....

            Spoken like a truwarrior


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

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Kravits new article....

              Should there ever really be M.V.P. voting? I think it's pretty obvious who is the M.V.P. of the entire league without guessing.


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

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Kravits new article....

                Say what you will about Kravitz (and I've said my share) he's right about this:

                Ron Artest's actions destroyed our season.

                Blame anyone else you care to, from Stern to Green to Palace security...but had RA NOT GOTTEN UP OFF THAT BENCH, all would be hunky dorey with the world today. I don't give a crap about anybody's arguement regarding standing up for your manhood or whatever else you call it, HE KNEW there would be a penalty to be paid and he accepted that when he went into the stands. I comes down to this...just like a bball game...don't put yourself in a position where a bad call by an official (Stern) determines the outcome. Had he not reacted, Stern would have had no chance to make a bad ruling. Ron Artest, and Ron Artest ALONE decided the fate of our season.
                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Kravits new article....

                  Originally posted by Peck
                  Compared to what Ron is giving us right now?


                  Peck, your point has been brought up before. Right now Michael Curry is helping the Pacers more than Artest. But no one could have foreseen the events of 11/19, or anything close to that. Did anyone last summer predict Artest would miss 73 games, Jax 30 and J.O. 15. There was no way to predict anything like that. Even two years ago, Artest missed 12 games ?due to suspensions, and no one thought it could be that bad again.

                  I suppose I can't make a final decision until I see the Pacers team with Jackson playing, but unless the team is significantly better than it has shown the past three weeks (since J.O.'s return), then they'll be lucky to win in the first round of the playoffs. But let me wait a few weeks to see how the team looks.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Kravits new article....

                    Maybe they can't win it all with him, but they definetly can't win it all without him.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Kravits new article....

                      Originally posted by Grant
                      Maybe they can't win it all with him, but they definetly can't win it all without him.


                      and the world is flat.
                      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Kravits new article....

                        Originally posted by btownpacer
                        Uh, I think a lot of us predicted Ron would once again subvert our season. Just like he always does.

                        I think your statement is just plain false, "Just like he always does" Without Ron the Pacers lose to the Heat. But more than that when did he subvert our season in prior years (I don't think for one minute that he subverted our season last year either) He played great against the Celts in 2003, and very well agaisnt the Nets in 2002. Prior to that he was on the Bulls

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Kravits new article....

                          Well basically he says make a "lousy" trade this summer with Ron and Jonathan. He says it won't happen, but that it should. Well he mentions some players, but the ones he mentions are BEYOND lousy with regards to returning value for us and he concedes that too. Than he mentions that IF we did do that it would be off virtually no use either, because we still won't have the money than to acquire a quality FA.

                          SO, WHAT THE HELL DOES THE MAN WANT, except Ron to be gone? He wants things to go well he says, but critisizes management and offers NO alternative and admits that too. I mean as a columnist what's that for position?

                          Regards,

                          Mourning
                          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Kravits new article....

                            Just thinking out aloud but I wonder if we should not start talking about Artest with regard to trades and equal value in terms of 'net' value, not simply 'basketball' value....
                            "I’m your favorite player’s favorite player. And it’s not enough for me for him to know that. I want the world to know that." -- Michael Beasley

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Kravits new article....

                              And the line continues:

                              "Which, even I would concede, would be a lousy deal.

                              For the time being, then, the Pacers likely will stand pat with Artest, and continue to believe he is capable of change.

                              I think they're fooling themselves, just as they've been fooling themselves for three years. I think this isn't a risk worth taking -- again."

                              He doesn't want to take the risk of Artest on the team next year. Well he won't be bought out which leaves a trade, even though he concedes it would be a lousy one. IF not than WHAT is he saying?

                              credit he isn't holding on to trading Bender, but I think he is to his "it would be best if we got rid of Ron"-line.

                              Regards,

                              Mourning
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                              Working...
                              X