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:
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

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

Isiah to become Knicks coach ? Second article

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Isiah to become Knicks coach ? Second article

    This is too juicy to pass up.


    May 14, 2006 -- HOOP DU JOUR AMONG the "celebrities" who ambled over to Lincoln Center to watch David Blaine immerse himself in a water bubble was Isiah Thomas. If anybody can appreciate someone who stands around the West Side doing nothing, it's the Knicks president.

    Then again, should information from a high-level team source prove precise, I'll be forced to wolf those words.

    According to that Knicks hearing aide, Thomas suddenly has a plan; who cares if it's borrowed from his bosses? From what I'm told, Cablevision boss James Dolan and Garden President Steve Mills are endorsing the buyout of Larry Brown's remaining $44 million, four-year obligation, and strongly urging Thomas to take over as head coach, a position he held for three years with the Pacers.

    That's one way, I guess, of holding Thomas accountable. Since replacing Scott Layden 21/2 seasons ago, he's assembled and re-assembled the roster.

    Presumably, he thinks his chosen ones can play more than a lick.

    Presumably, he still likes most, contrary to Brown, who loathes most, none more than Stephon Marbury, Isiah's poisonous pet who recoils on orders. That's why Stephon didn't make his season-ending speech to the media, as threatened; his cult figure commanded him to holster his fangs.

    Presumably, Thomas will be able to extract more energy, caring and loyalty from his recruits than a drill instructor who habitually rags them in public. Marbury won't exactly be the only player celebrating, should Brown be bounced.

    The way I hear it, Thomas is positive the Knicks will improve appreciably with him in charge. He's confident a tweak here, a tweak there, and his talent pool's win total will soar from 23 to close to break even.

    For months, the piqued, the turned off and the tuned out have advocated the deportation of Mills, Thomas, Brown and Marbury, altogether aware it would never remotely happen in its entirety during this off-season or, considering their bloated contracts, in seasons to come.

    Convincing Dolan to extinguish himself is a more practical prospect. You can't as much as tempt him to sell his family cable company and all its accoutrements; it's not like people haven't made the effort.

    "The only way to get the Knicks out of Dolan's clutches," groans the above-mentioned insider, someone who's been there, tried that, "is to pry it from his cold hands." At the very least (at best, in other words), the popular rumination by those lost in a daydream is that even Dolan, Mills and Thomas must recognize that Brown and Marbury cannot return for another venomous go-around.

    One pollutant or the other - hopefully both - must be eradicated before next season's projected mediocre presentation is too far gone to resuscitate.

    Unless Brown's health issues - and advantageous insurance clauses - compel him to split, that would have seemed to leave Marbury as the odd man out. Judging by quotes from Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor, it's not unreasonable to visualize a trade to re-acquire Kevin Garnett's former kindergarten playmate.

    That was the common-held belief. Yet, we figured wrong.


    Presumably, that means more than the firing/expiring of Joe Favorito, so far the sorry season's lone casualty . . . though I often suspected the veteran Madison Square Garden publicity man was responsible for a lot of the Knicks' problems.

    My next 10 thoughts, exhumed from the cracks in my cranium re: Thomas coaching the Knicks:

    1. I like it. Why ask your overpaid, underperforming figurines to tune out two different overpaid, underperforming figureheads when you can eliminate the middle man and pass the savings on to no one.

    2. What size gurney does Thomas take?

    3. Let's see if I get this: Thomas, an abject failure in one job - president of basketball operations - is given additional duties. Who's running Camp Cablevision? Howard Dean?

    4. Did Anucha Browne Sanders sign off on this?

    5. How long will it take Thomas and Marbury to fall out of love?

    6. Is this the Knicks' way of offering to serve St. John's probation?

    7. What happens to Next Town Brown? Has someone considered his feelings? I mean, the guy's been about nothing but stability for three decades. This might very well be a shock to his system.

    8. Where are poll numbers worse - 2 Pennsylvania Plaza or 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

    9. I smell a Maloof.

    10. Someone tell Next Town, if he makes this racial, there's a job opening at Power 105.1.


    The rules say a team must win four games to win a series. However, the Heat may have accomplished the same thing to by winning four minutes.

    New Jersey was clinging to an 81-80 lead Friday nigh with just over 4:30 to go in Game 3. Then, Miami continued as the aggressor (free throws, Heat 34-40, Nets 12-20) and the home team was caught in a series of compromising situations caused by confounding stupidity. Unforced errors, players out of position thanks to poor ball (and bowel) movement led to late-game turnovers and ill-advised shots. Nothing says "Kobe" quite like Vince Carter hoisting 34 shots (he did hit 17 en route to 43 points) while his teammates stand around like they're the Devils.

    This just in: Charles Barkley accused Carter's surrounding cast of being selfish.


    Finally, Shawn Kemp wanted me to pass along his annual Happy Mother's Day greeting. "And to those not yet blessed, be patient. The stork and I are working as fast as we can."

  • #2
    Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

    I absolutely don't think it will happen, but I had the thought after reading this. Larry Brown as Pacers coach part two.

    One reason, if NY buys Brown out they will probably have it in the buyout that Brown can't coach in the East for a year.


    • #3
      Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

      God, that guy can't write. I couldn't get all the way through it.


      • #4
        Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

        Originally posted by Will Galen
        I absolutely don't think it will happen, but I had the thought after reading this. Larry Brown as Pacers coach part two.

        One reason, if NY buys Brown out they will probably have it in the buyout that Brown can't coach in the East for a year.
        Dear God, no. LB is already making a killing mooching off of Detroit and now possibly New York while sitting at home doing nothing. And we have enough health issues without having to worry about our coach as well. It's time for Brown to hang 'em up.

        Btw, I think most of us knew that Zeke would likely eventually end up on the Knicks' bench, if he didn't get canned first.


        • #5
          Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

          Originally posted by bulletproof
          God, that guy can't write. I couldn't get all the way through it.
          Now now. Just because you don't like what a reporter says, doesn't mean you should criticize him.

          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!


          • #6
            Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

            As for the story, I'll believe it when I see it. If it were to happen though, I do think Isiah would do a better job than Larry did last year. Granted, that's not saying much.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!


            • #7
              Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

              Originally posted by Kegboy
              Now now. Just because you don't like what a reporter says, doesn't mean you should criticize him.

              Is Vecsey a reporter or a columnist?


              • #8
                Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                Originally posted by bulletproof
                God, that guy can't write. I couldn't get all the way through it.
                I was hoping it wasn't just me. That seemed like the most disconnected, random, babbling article I've seen printed by a "professional" -- ever.

                As to Brown, he's a good coach.


                Why add another person to this team that has health problems?

                BTW, what makes IT think he's a better coach than Brown?
                It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.


                • #9
                  Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                  Originally posted by pizza guy
                  I was hoping it wasn't just me. That seemed like the most disconnected, random, babbling article I've seen printed by a "professional" -- ever.

                  As to Brown, he's a good coach.


                  Why add another person to this team that has health problems?

                  BTW, what makes IT think he's a better coach than Brown?
                  I see you're new to reading the NY Post, and Vecsey in particular...


                  • #10
                    Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                    No, I've read Vecsey before, but that was really strange. I don't mind random stuff thrown in, but not at the cost of "readability." That was just very hard to make sense of.
                    It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.


                    • #11
                      Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                      Originally posted by Shade
                      Is Vecsey a reporter or a columnist?
                      He must be a columnist because I refuse to read anything he writes.


                      • #12
                        Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                        Originally posted by Shade
                        Is Vecsey a reporter or a columnist?
                        He writes for The Post - IOW, both and neither.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire


                        • #13
                          Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                          Hope you enjoyed the Larry Brown era in NY.....

                          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


                          • #14
                            Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ?

                            OK, since some of you didn't like that article here is another one on this topic


                            New York Daily News -
                            Knicks buying out Larry?
                            BY FRANK ISOLA
                            DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER
                            Sunday, May 14th, 2006

                            Garden chairman James Dolan apparently has started the process of ending Larry Brown's dream job after one season.

                            According to sources, Dolan, upset over Brown's record and the coach's public criticism of his players, is considering buying out the final four years of Brown's contract, worth at least $40 million.

                            The Knicks declined to comment, and would neither confirm nor deny one published report that already is naming Knicks president Isiah Thomas as Brown's successor. Brown has indicated that he will not resign, but if Thomas takes over, the Knicks would avoid having to pay another coach upwards of $5 million annually.

                            Thomas, who coached the Pacers from 2000-2003 but never got them out of the first round of the playoffs, is said to be amenable to coaching the Knicks, one source told the Daily News.

                            Knicks brass has not met with Brown since the end of the 23-59 season, according to sources, perhaps another indication of Dolan's dissatisfaction with the Hall of Fame coach. According to a team official, Brown has requested a meeting with Dolan but Thomas has told Brown there is no reason for him to meet with the club's owner.

                            Last month, The News reported that a majority of the players blamed the Knicks' worst season in 20 years on Brown, whose hiring last July was looked upon as a way to return the struggling franchise to prominence.

                            Brown, one of the most successful coaches in basketball history, ended the season with 1,010 NBA victories (he is fourth on the all-time list) but was never happy with the roster that the embattled Thomas had assembled. The Knicks played and acted like the league's most undisciplined team, which reflected poorly on the players and Brown. The coach talked often about a wish list of players more suited to his team-first, defense-oriented style, but sources say Brown has been told the team cannot be changed significantly.

                            After joining the Knicks following a messy divorce from the Pistons, Brown quickly reignited his feud with point guard Stephon Marbury, which began during the 2004 Olympics in Athens. Within a few months, Brown had publicly criticized several players, which was an indictment of Thomas, who put together the league's most expensive roster at $125 million.

                            According to sources, Thomas also was upset that Brown chose to publicly air his complaints about the Knicks' flawed roster. A turning point came in late February, when Dolan and Thomas joined the Knicks for a three-day road trip to San Antonio and Memphis. The News reported that during that trip, Dolan told Brown to focus on coaching the players. The following day, Dolan gave Thomas a strong endorsement, while giving Brown a lukewarm review.

                            It was during that trip that Brown entered a Memphis hospital after complaining of chest pains. Six weeks later, Brown took ill and left a game in Cleveland in the third quarter, and was later taken on a stretcher to a hospital, complaining of an acid reflux problem. He missed the next three games, but returned for the finale against the Nets at Meadowlands Arena, where he let assistant Herb Williams run the team. During his farewell address to the media after the season, Brown shocked Garden brass by saying he had been suffering from the flu and that Thomas and team doctors had advised him not to coach that game.

                            According to two player agents with clients on the Knicks, the players staged a palace coup in front of Thomas during their exit interviews. Players never blame themselves, and they weren't about to cast aspersions on Thomas, the man responsible for bringing them to New York.

                            Instead, approximately eight of the Knicks' 15 players blamed Brown for arguably the worst season in franchise history. The most common complaints were Brown's failure to define roles and his penchant for publicly criticizing his players.

                            "The Knicks are going to have to make changes because there is no way Larry can walk into the locker room with this same group," one source said then. "He lost a lot of those guys and he's not going to win them back."

                            Brown could not have been surprised by the feedback Thomas was getting. Two weeks earlier, Brown admitted that several Knicks had long since tuned him out, and said that the season had been reduced to "begging guys to play."

                            After the exit interviews, Thomas said: "We do have a group that, for everything that I've heard today, like each other, want to stay together and want to play together, and believe that they can get it done."


                            • #15
                              Re: Isiah to become Knicks coach ? Second article

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck
                              Finally, Shawn Kemp wanted me to pass along his annual Happy Mother's Day greeting. "And to those not yet blessed, be patient. The stork and I are working as fast as we can."
                              Oh, man, that's terrible.
                              This space for rent.