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

Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

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

  • Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

    Owner worked to help Artest
    Herb Simon joined other Pacers officials in their effort to get player reinstated.





    By Mark Montieth
    mark.montieth@indystar.com
    March 25, 2005


    Indiana Pacers owner Herb Simon broke his public silence on Ron Artest's seasonlong suspension Thursday.

    His primary message: His silence shouldn't be confused with agreement with NBA commissioner David Stern's penalty or lack of concern for Artest.

    Simon, contacted by The Indianapolis Star on Thursday, said that he, Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh and team president Larry Bird worked behind the scenes on a virtual daily basis to have Artest's penalty reduced for his part in the Nov. 19 brawl at Detroit.

    Stern admitted to considering a reduction in Artest's suspension that would allow the All-Star forward to play this season, but said Monday he has decided to uphold it. Artest will rejoin the Pacers for games next season, although he is currently allowed to practice with the team.

    "We tried to play this the right way," Simon said. "We're team players, we follow the rules of the league and we don't go public. But our fans and players should know that Donnie and Larry and I have been working on this thing consistently since the day of the incident."

    Simon, Walsh and Bird flew to New York to meet with Stern and other league representatives at the NBA's headquarters on Dec. 1 to make a formal appeal for a reduction in Artest's penalty. They held out hope it would happen until Stern's announcement earlier this week.

    "It's hard for me to fathom," Simon said. "In earlier meetings he gave suggestions of what Ron can do to rehabilitate himself. Ron and his people have done everything they've asked and then some.

    "The biggest problem is the misperception of Ronnie. He's given back to his community forever, has come out of a tough environment, has not messed around with drugs, has the best work ethic of anybody . . . He's not the kind of person people think. Yes, he made a mistake, but there were a lot of elements there. Even though we were responsible for part of it, the burden fell too heavily on us."

    Simon said he still wants to appeal for Artest's reinstatement this season, but admitted, "I don't know where to go from here."

    Simon, who along with his brother, Mel, bought the Pacers in 1983, said he hopes changes can be made in how major penalties such as those the Pacers received are imposed and reviewed. Currently, the commissioner has sole authority to issue suspensions and hear appeals.

    "We all have to take a step back to review the process," he said. "There's got to be a better way."

    Call Star reporter Mark Montieth at (317) 444-6406.

  • #2
    Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

    What I gathered from reading the article is that the Simons have very
    little influence. I find that amazing as they have been superb owners
    and you would think that would have some goodwill to draw upon.
    I also believe that Stern does not like the Pacers. In the last part of the
    article the simons wonder where they can go from here? I thought they could approach the other owners to intervene. This situation will only get nastier when the current agreement is re-negotiated this summer. This is looking to be a long and drawn out process. There may not be a Ron citing next year
    either. Mostly because of the massive ego that is David Stern.
    Lockout/strike here we come. Pathetic.



    owl
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

      It's hard for me to fathom," Simon said. "In earlier meetings he gave suggestions of what Ron can do to rehabilitate himself. Ron and his people have done everything they've asked and then some.

      "The biggest problem is the misperception of Ronnie. He's given back to his community forever, has come out of a tough environment, has not messed around with drugs, has the best work ethic of anybody . . . He's not the kind of person people think. Yes, he made a mistake, but there were a lot of elements there. Even though we were responsible for part of it, the burden fell too heavily on us."

      Simon said he still wants to appeal for Artest's reinstatement this season, but admitted, "I don't know where to go from here."

      __________________________________________________ __________

      I want to comment on this part. It almost seems that Stern gave the Pacers the impression that if Ron did certain things he would be reinstated, evidently Ron did those things and Stern did not reinstate him. Seems that is what has Herb Simons upset.



      Hopefully Ron is doing OK and is not too depressed, there is nothing worse than doing everything you're supposed to do and still not getting what you want.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

        Originally posted by owl
        There may not be a Ron citing next year
        either.
        I sure hope Ron doesn't get cited for anything next year. I'm crossing my fingers. I wouldn't mind a Ron Artest sighting though

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

          Originally posted by Unclebuck
          It's hard for me to fathom," Simon said. "In earlier meetings he gave suggestions of what Ron can do to rehabilitate himself. Ron and his people have done everything they've asked and then some.

          "The biggest problem is the misperception of Ronnie. He's given back to his community forever, has come out of a tough environment, has not messed around with drugs, has the best work ethic of anybody . . . He's not the kind of person people think. Yes, he made a mistake, but there were a lot of elements there. Even though we were responsible for part of it, the burden fell too heavily on us."

          Simon said he still wants to appeal for Artest's reinstatement this season, but admitted, "I don't know where to go from here."

          __________________________________________________ __________

          I want to comment on this part. It almost seems that Stern gave the Pacers the impression that if Ron did certain things he would be reinstated, evidently Ron did those things and Stern did not reinstate him. Seems that is what has Herb Simons upset.



          Hopefully Ron is doing OK and is not too depressed, there is nothing worse than doing everything you're supposed to do and still not getting what you want.

          This article indeed debunks a few myths and suppostions, 1. being that Walsh was not the one lying when he said the Pacers asked for re-instatement, that quote shows that the one lying in plain daylight is Stern, the honourable.

          In the light of that blatant lie, it also becomes clear that he has lead the Pacers organization and Ron on in a way that can only be described as "low".

          Setting goals is one thing, but if someone accomplishes those goals ("and then some" is the real quote and this is not the first time I read this) and you do not keep your end of the bargain, it makes you "scum of the earth" if you are in a position to do what you promised to begin with.

          What has become blatantly clear is that Stern lost his "friend" the Simons.
          What that is going to do for the CBA negotitions, where now most likely the owners will side with the PA for a reform on Stern's power in these matters is unclear but what I wrote in my opinions on the process and due process earlier has now become blatantly clear.

          Stern not keeping his promise (which is what clearly is stated here) is something that is incomprehensible in the light of the fact that the owners still pay his salary. I can see people like Cuban jumping on any action to curtail him sufficiently.
          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

            I find it amazing that the Simon's thought Stern would treat Artest fairly. Stern doesn't seem to have any rhyme or reason to his suspensions. Look at Marbury - Rodman got 10 games for EXACTLY the same thing. The difference is Stern didn't like Rodman and Rodman didn't play for the Knicks. Stern doesn't like Artest and there was no way he was going to reinstate him.

            I agree w/UB - it appears Stern gave them a list of things Ron needed to do to be reinstated - he did them and still Stern says "ahhh - I don't think so."

            I personally think Stern is making a mistake PR-wise. He should've allowed Ron back with about 10 games to go. All of the media would have swarmed and over-analyzed Artest before the playoffs start. Then you have the playoffs and the summer free agent period to let the story die down. As it stands now this is going to be discussed Ad Nauseum for the whole month of October and November and the evils of the NBA will be on Sportscenter every day. This is a poor decision by Stern.
            "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
            - Benjamin Franklin

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

              "Citing" =====duuhhhh

              "Sighting"=====good



              owl
              {o,o}
              |)__)
              -"-"-

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                What did Marbury do? And what did Rodman get 10 games for?

                It sounds like you're referring to Steve Francis of the getting 3 games to Rodman's 11 for kicking a cameraman...?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                  Originally posted by Hicks
                  What did Marbury do? And what did Rodman get 10 games for?

                  It sounds like you're referring to Steve Francis of the getting 3 games to Rodman's 11 for kicking a cameraman...?

                  My bad - I was referring to Francis. The only reason I could see for the discrepancy was this "prior history" thing Stern uses. I still contend the league would take less of a PR hit by getting it over with but I'm not the Czar of the NBA - Stern is.
                  "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                    Well maybe this article will shut up some of our posters that seem to think the Pacers did nothing to get Ron reinstated since they didn't make it public knowledge as they were doing it.

                    Maybe we will all finally get the fact that the Pacers and other NBA teams don't put their day to day operating details out for public consumption for a reason. I am guessing it is easier to negotiate behind the scenes without public opinion swaying one side or the other.

                    I for one say good job Pacers Front Office. They did their best and from what the article says they were lead along, I am sure someone will claim they should have seen this coming, but the fact of the matter is they did go to bat for their guy and struck out. Can't fault them, blame Stern. He is really playing with fire, especially with the negotiations of a new CBA coming up. I agree this does not bode well for a possible lockout/strike next season. Players and owners may agree that Artest should serve his time for his crime, but I think you will be hard pressed to find a player or union head that doesn't believe the punishment was excessive. I wouldn't be suprised that a major problem addressed in the new CBA is a limit on suspension time/Stern's say in those suspensions. I think you will see some sort of Player/Owner appeal system in place, much like in baseball. I think if the union doesn't get this, they will likely walk away from the table.

                    MarcD
                    "Because clever got me this far, then tricky got me in..."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                      According to Mark Montieth, several of the owners were not pleased with the length of Artest's suspension. I've read MM say this and I've heard him on local and national radio shows say this.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                        Wow, that's some major spinning/ damage control.

                        Who really knows what to believe anymore?

                        These guys should all be in politics.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                          The suspension was over the top as far as length and precedent is concerned. Of course the general public always wants to crucify the wrong doer and felt that it was a fair suspension. Of course if it had been them they would have been singing a different tune. Stern is just bowing to public
                          opinion and Ron is the whipping boy for all that is wrong with the NBA.
                          I hope we get to see a season and Ron next year.



                          owl
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                            Wow, that's some major spinning/ damage control.

                            Who really knows what to believe anymore?

                            These guys should all be in politics.
                            How is this spin control? Not once since he has owned the Pacers have I heard either of the Simon's speak out to a media source. To me, this is a calculated way for the the Simon's to speak out against what they see is a snub from David Stern. They've supported Stern from the beginning, and from all accounts are friends, and this shows that they are willing to disprove theories like yours, that Artest is reviled by teammates and the front-office alike simply because you don't like him. I think it's pretty low to call out the Simon's integrity ("Who really knows what to believe anymore?") because you happen to have a different point of view.

                            They obviously believed he was going to be reinstated, and feel jilted when Stern went public the other day upholding the ban.

                            It may be a calculated statement - definitely one of displeasure, but nothing about it speaks of political spin.

                            I do see a major conflict in collective bargaining brewing however!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Simons go to bat for Artest. A few myths are de-bunked

                              I'm not sure it would require the CBA to change this. Couldn't the owners redefine the office of the commisioner and his job description? He is their employee afterall. I really wonder how many are upset with Der Fuhrer...he IS making them a ton of money.
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X