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

Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

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

  • Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

    Wow. Pacman got Artested.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2832015

    Goodell suspends Pacman, Henry for arrests

    ESPN.com news services





    Adam "Pacman" Jones of Tennessee was suspended Tuesday for the 2007 NFL season and Chris Henry of Cincinnati received an eight-game suspension -- both for numerous violations of the NFL's personal conduct policy.

    The two players are suspended without pay, the NFL announced. Jones will lose $1,292,500 -- his 2007 base salary -- as a result of the suspension. Henry will lose $204,705.88 in salary if the Bengals' bye week comes after Week 8. He will lose $230,294.12 if the Bengals' bye week falls in the first eight weeks of the season, meaning he will miss nine weeks of pay.
    After they serve their suspensions, each player must apply for reinstatement.


    "We must protect the integrity of the NFL," commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement. "The highest standards of conduct must be met by everyone in the NFL because it is a privilege to represent the NFL, not a right. These players, and all members of our league, have to make the right choices and decisions in their conduct on a consistent basis."


    In a letter to each player, Goodell wrote: "Your conduct has brought embarrassment and ridicule upon yourself, your club, and the NFL, and has damaged the reputation of players throughout the league. You have put in jeopardy an otherwise promising NFL career, and have risked both your own safety and the safety of others through your off-field actions. In each of these respects, you have engaged in conduct detrimental to the NFL and failed to live up to the standards expected of NFL players. Taken as a whole, this conduct warrants significant sanction."



    Jones' off-field conduct has included 10 incidents where he was interviewed by police. The most recent took place in Las Vegas during the NBA All-Star weekend. Las Vegas police have recommended felony and misdemeanor charges against Jones after a fight and shooting at a strip club that paralyzed one man.


    Henry was arrested four times in a 14-month span, resulting in two benchings by coach Marvin Lewis and a two-game league suspension. He was one of nine Bengals arrested in nine months.


    Both the Titans and the Bengals said they supported the suspensions.
    "While we regret the circumstances that called for it, it's good for both Chris and the Bengals to have the matter resolved," said Bengals coach Marvin Lewis. "Our team will move forward, and now it is up to Chris to acquire a more mature understanding of his responsibilities as a player for the Bengals and a representative of the NFL."


    The Titans released the following statement:


    "We appreciate the Commissioner's thoughtful decision today and the discipline plan imposed on Adam Jones," the Titans said. "We respect this decision and are confident this is in the best interest of the league and the team. We are hopeful that it will achieve the goals of disciplining the player and eventually enabling him to return to the field of play. Our goals for Jones are consistent with the league's in that regard."


    Jones' suspension carries the following conditions:


    ? He must have no more run-ins with law enforcement.

    ? He must comply with all required counseling, education, and treatment assigned by the NFL or the judicial system.


    ? He must obey the restrictions that have been agreed to by he and the Titans.


    ? He may not be at the Titans' facility through May 31 and may not participate in any practices or workouts during his suspension. Starting June

    1, he must visit the team facility once per week to meet with the team's player development director. Also, beginning June 1, he is permitted to spend one day a week at the team facility for conditioning, film study, and other activities.


    ? In conjunction with the Titans, Jones must develop a structured program of community service or other activity. This program must be submitted to the NFL for approval.


    Henry will be reinstated after the Bengals' eighth regular-season game if he meets the following conditions:


    ? He must have no more run-ins with law enforcement.


    ? He must comply with all required counseling, education, and treatment assigned by the NFL or the judicial system.


    ? He is allowed to be at the Bengals' facilities during the rest of the offseason and he must meet weekly with the team's player development director.


    ? If he fully complies with all conditions, he may participate in the training camp and Bengals preseason games.


    ? During the 2007 season, he must meet weekly with the team's player development director, but he may not attend or participate in practice.


    ? He must fully comply with all conditions imposed on him by any court, including requirements of community service.


    If Jones and Henry do not fully comply with these conditions, they could be permanently banished from the NFL.


    "I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," Goodell wrote to the players. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

  • #2
    Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

    Good.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

      Originally posted by Stryder View Post
      Good.
      Tragic is more appropriate. I'm glad Goodell laid down the law because he needed to and I think these suspensions are definitely just right..however, it sucks when you have players as talented as Pacman and Henry make so many mistakes off the field. I want to see these guys on the field on Sunday making an impact there. Fortunately, they are young and their careers aren't ruined yet, but I really hope both of these guys turn it around. They are too talented to let this happen to them. Just ask Onterrio "Whizkid" Smith about it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

        I see where he is going to appeal

        I suppose he should. Why should his penalty be any stiffer than any other player with 50, um, indiscretions? Besides, if you listen to him, they weren't his fault. A tune worthy of a jail cell.
        The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

          If anyone should appeal, it should be Chris Henry. He's getting sort of shafted with his suspension now that I think about it. He already was suspended last year for what he did regarding the DUI and distribution of alcohol to minors (which was dismissed anyways) and he is getting 8 games this year because of what happened regarding him driving with a suspended license.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

            Originally posted by Moses View Post
            If anyone should appeal, it should be Chris Henry. He's getting sort of shafted with his suspension now that I think about it. He already was suspended last year for what he did regarding the DUI and distribution of alcohol to minors (which was dismissed anyways) and he is getting 8 games this year because of what happened regarding him driving with a suspended license.
            First let me say that his distribution to minors wasn't dismissed.

            Offenses always accumulate, and make you get a stiffer penalty. It's like that with substance abuse, and should be like that with off-field problems as well. Just because you take your suspension from one incident and another pops up, the first should be looked at again. It shows a pattern of getting in trouble.

            His slate shouldn't be swiped clean after every time he's punished.

            Chris has also had more incidents than two, which you listed:
            - On December 15, 2005 he was pulled over in Northern Kentucky for speeding and marijuana was found in his shoes. He was also driving without a valid driver's license, and without auto insurance.

            - On January 30, 2006, he was arrested in Orlando for multiple gun charges including concealment and aggravated assault with a firearm.

            - On June 3, 2006 Chris Henry was pulled over outside on Interstate 275 at 1:18 a.m by Ohio Highway Trooper Michael Shimko. At 2:06 a.m. Henry voluntarily submitted to a breathalyzer test at Milford Police Department and registered a .092 blood-alcohol level, .012 above the level permitted by Ohio law

            - On January 25, 2007, Henry pleaded guilty to charges of providing alcohol to minors, an incident that occurred at a hotel in the spring on 2006.

            - It wasn't an actual incident, but he was benched by the Bengals and then suspended by the league for being a passenger in the vehicle of a teammate who was arrested/charged for a DUI, for violating the league's personal conduct and substance abuse policies. That occured Sept 25, 2006.

            For those keeping count, that's five offenses since Dec. '05.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Henry#Controversy
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              First let me say that his distribution to minors wasn't dismissed.

              Offenses always accumulate, and make you get a stiffer penalty. It's like that with substance abuse, and should be like that with off-field problems as well. Just because you take your suspension from one incident and another pops up, the first should be looked at again. It shows a pattern of getting in trouble.

              His slate shouldn't be swiped clean after every time he's punished.

              Chris has also had more incidents than two, which you listed:
              - On December 15, 2005 he was pulled over in Northern Kentucky for speeding and marijuana was found in his shoes. He was also driving without a valid driver's license, and without auto insurance.

              - On January 30, 2006, he was arrested in Orlando for multiple gun charges including concealment and aggravated assault with a firearm.

              - On June 3, 2006 Chris Henry was pulled over outside on Interstate 275 at 1:18 a.m by Ohio Highway Trooper Michael Shimko. At 2:06 a.m. Henry voluntarily submitted to a breathalyzer test at Milford Police Department and registered a .092 blood-alcohol level, .012 above the level permitted by Ohio law

              - On January 25, 2007, Henry pleaded guilty to charges of providing alcohol to minors, an incident that occurred at a hotel in the spring on 2006.

              - It wasn't an actual incident, but he was benched by the Bengals and then suspended by the league for being a passenger in the vehicle of a teammate who was arrested/charged for a DUI, for violating the league's personal conduct and substance abuse policies. That occured Sept 25, 2006.

              For those keeping count, that's five offenses since Dec. '05.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Henry#Controversy
              Wasn't he suspended each time one of those things happened though? I remember him being suspended by the team and the NFL before.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                NFL rules - Get convicted of a crime go to jail for a few months. Get half a season.

                Get accused of crimes dont get convicted of any of them and never spend any time in jail, get suspended for the season.

                So kids what you need to do so you dont get punished by your bosses is when you make a mistake go to jail that way your punishment will be less harsh.

                Roger Goodell is one dumb son of a *****.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                  So Pacman had no record before this incident, and it makes no sense to punish a repeat offender/troublemaker?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                    I didnt say he shouldnt have been punished. If he got the same amount of games as Henry or Tank Johnson or whatever the hell his name is, I would have been fine with it. Getting double the games that Henry and Tank got was just stupid.

                    So if a player gets convicted for raping a women, and another player gets in trouble 10 times but never goes to jail. Does the guy that went to jail look better in the eyes of the NFL commissioner?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                      Yes, because rape and a gun possession charge are on the same level.....

                      I seriously doubt someone convicted of rape would be playing in the NFL, not only because they'd be in jail for 5+yrs but also because they'd be banned.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                        I wont even waste my time arguing with you, you should just skedaddle.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                          I'll "skedaddle" when you start comparing relative charges, instead of gun possession charges to rape. If you're that blind to the difference, then that's on you.

                          I have just as much right to post my thoughts on this board, as you do, so I'll post what I want, when I want.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                            I've heard that the bouncer that was shot in Vegas won't have his paralysis go into effect until after all the court cases. So I guess if Pacman and his crew are found innocent by a judge and jury, then the guy will walk again...
                            Edit Signature

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacman Jones suspended for the season; Chris Henry suspended 8 games

                              Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
                              I've heard that the bouncer that was shot in Vegas won't have his paralysis go into effect until after all the court cases. So I guess if Pacman and his crew are found innocent by a judge and jury, then the guy will walk again...
                              Say word?

                              And you was right there with Pacman and Nelly and you know everything that went down.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X