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

An answer for Fortaz......

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

  • #91
    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Originally posted by SycamoreKen
    BUT, and this is a big but, how long do you hold the franchise hostage to the plan of rebuilding Artest? As I said before, I am aware of his history and the problems he has faced. It is also obvious that many people have used him for his skills but not really helped his personal issues, which should have been addressed before he left school.

    There comes a time though when Ron has to make the decision to help himself. Sure the team can support him, but that is not their primary responsibility. This isn't a YMCA league. The other guys on the team are playing for their pay checks and can't afford to have to baby sit Ron in order to help themselves. As talented as he is, they have to be getting tired of it.

    If Ron doesn't understand what he is doing, and I have no idea if he does or not, than he won't fix the problem. Ron remindes me of the 4th graders I teach. They know how to talk the talk about right and wrong, but keep making the same dumb choices. When I ask them why they do that, they give me a look like they have no clue. I then have to sit down with them and reteach and explain how to change their ways. I also make the point though of stressing that it is not going to change until they decide to do it. Ron is tha same way.

    I hope like heck Ron has had the light come on and can get himself together. But, as Peck stated, until he does, I just can't bring myself to trust him yet.
    if ur a teacher then i think u know that its just not as simple as the light coming on....the children that u teach just dont suddenly have an epiphany and all is well....

    at what point do u stop teaching the children, as u say? i think we continue to do these things even when, at times, it seems most of our hard work is not accomplishing much....

    as a teacher though i think u realize that its a process....and u probably werent the first to talk to these kids and probably wont be the last...

    and i really wouldnt concede to u that the rest of the students are being held hostage because u might have to deal with some more individually more often...is it ideal? hardly...but then again we usually see some sort of value attached to it and find a way to continue to do so in a manner that can hopefully be beneficial to all

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: An answer for Fortaz......

      Originally posted by foretaz
      if ur a teacher then i think u know that its just not as simple as the light coming on....the children that u teach just dont suddenly have an epiphany and all is well....

      at what point do u stop teaching the children, as u say? i think we continue to do these things even when, at times, it seems most of our hard work is not accomplishing much....

      as a teacher though i think u realize that its a process....and u probably werent the first to talk to these kids and probably wont be the last...

      and i really wouldnt concede to u that the rest of the students are being held hostage because u might have to deal with some more individually more often...is it ideal? hardly...but then again we usually see some sort of value attached to it and find a way to continue to do so in a manner that can hopefully be beneficial to all
      Actually, if I feel that a student is not benifiting from my instruction and he or she is "holding the others hostage" by not chooseing to make the right decitions then I would have them put into another class. Unfortunately, I have had to do this. It usally helps that student to be in another class. Am I happy about it? No, because I really want the student to get things straightened out. I even interact and keep in touch with the student to try to do so. That is my job, preparing students to be productive people in all parts of life. I only wish I had more time to give each student the attention they need.

      That though is not the Pacers job. While I think we all want Ron to improve and become a better person as a whole, there will come a time when a choice has to be made if Ron's behavior does not improve.

      By the way, I really have enjoyed reading this thread. All the fun threads we have besides, threads like this are what makes this forum the great place it is. A real civilized discussion!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: An answer for Fortaz......

        Originally posted by foretaz
        do you really think this sort of info would be made public??...i know u would like to know...i know many fans would like to know...though it wouldnt really accomplish much...then they would just say things that are often said regarding people who seek counseling....once again its about a mindset....

        if ur down on someone....u will use whatever happens to only further that point...in this case...those of u that have disdain for ron would only be saying something like...the guy has been going to a shrink for over a year...its obvious hes nuts....or something like that....im not saying u would personally....but i think u catch my drift-at least i hope...noone...not ron, not the pacers stands to gain anything by their being a public admission of him being in therapy....

        some of u like to say the smokescreen bird uses to keep his trade value up...what the hell do u think would happen to that, let alone his reputation in the league if it were all over the papers he was in treatment...seriously? this is a very private matter that is noones business....except those that are very, very close to the situation....and by that i mean, even his fellow players would not be atune to this...but if u look at his behavior in the 'better season' 03-04...and are somewhat familiar with some psychological profiling...it becomes apparent that there was something definitely going on....that nite of the brawl, it was very very evident that there were things at work, believe it or not....this doesnt mean that everything is fixed once u start....its something that is a neverending process in a lot of ways....however progress definitely takes place....its unbelievable how penal the nite of nov 19 ended up being....noone could ever dream that a 'relapse' could be so penal....as i said earlier...its kinda ironic that 2 or 3 years ago ron would have just gotten into a fight with ben....and the repercussions would have been far less severe...but sometimes progress can work out to be disadvantageous....
        I don't buy for a second that there was any real progress shown in 2003-04. There are plenty of threads in our archives about Ron's disruptions, concerns about our chemistry, etc. The only difference was that, for most of the season, we were winning and things were easy for him. When things got tough, and we went 7-7 in December, there was the benching for "onduct detrimental to winning". When things got tough, and we were in some intense playoff battles, there was the meltdown. It seems that every time he was faced with a challenge, he failed.

        Well, the purpose of this thread was to get you up to speed with why some of us felt it was the last straw at least a year ago (if not even earlier). Everything he's ever going to do in the future is just prove that we were right all along. So I'm tired of talking about him and I'm checking out of this thread.
        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


        • #94
          Re: An answer for Fortaz......

          Originally posted by Peck
          Issue # 4

          He's a great player however he is not the single best player to ever play kind of player. Yea, I know this should go under issue # 1 again but I'm gonna put it here.
          ok...ill agree...if theres gonna be a single greatest player to ever play hes probably not it...not sure what that means..or the relevance....been alot of teams that have won titles without jordan-if that would happen to be ur choice...pick whomever...

          Ron Artest can contribute to a title or to a great team, but he is not the end all be all of a team. If we cannot win a title without Ron Artest then there are serious flaws to our team. As has been pointed out by other posters, teams have won titles without Ron Artest being a member of that team.
          this one uve received quite a bit of flack for...and i understand why...not sure this is really how u feel or if ur just trying to devalue ron in ur minds and others so as to be able to somehow prepare urself for moving on....also if u dont want him on the team and feel he should be traded im not sure that u could do that knowing or saying that u couldnt win a title without him....

          however the premise of this is probably a bit flawed....hes one of ur two best players....most everyone that ive ever seen , read, talked to or whatever believed that our title chances were officially eliminated when he was banished for the season....

          now u might argue that we could never win with him as long as hes a distraction....that i might buy...and yes u dont have to have ron artest to win a title....however....though u might disagree because of this personal dislike, the odds of winning a title for the pacers with ron artest are astronomically better than without him....and thats really what it comes down to....now...do the odds increase dramatically if hes somehow able to play without the behavior issues???? it would seem so...and thats ultimately what is strived for....

          i almost hate saying this....but remember...the bulls won championships with dennis rodman....and without dennis rodman....when they won he was still being dennis....and providing distractions and disruptions was a common place thing with dennis....in some ways the two are remarkably similar...and in others they are worlds apart....dennis was and is what he is....and had zero desire to be anything different....in fact he saw nothing wrong with how he was....ron appears to be different from that...he realizes how he is in some ways and its not too hard to believe he wants to get better....however doing it is much more difficult than saying it....but it is worth something...

          in short hes a top 15 player in this league...the best defensive player in this league...arguably an overall top 5 talent....and from the business side a steal of a contract....theres a whole lotta reasons u have for wanting him on ur team....any team with that caliber of player stands a much better chance of winning a title than without


          Issue # 5

          This is an on the court issue btw, but in tense games when discipline is called for I don't trust him. I don't for a min. beleive he won't break a play & call his own # when the play is clearly called for someone else.

          If a player out plays him I am always afraid how he will react & I don't mean physical either. I'm talking about shooting dumber shots or making worse choices. Take last seasons game 6 vs. the Pistons. Ron just was being abused by Prince yet he kept forcing it. Eventually as the game ran down he totally abandoned the play sets & ran whatever he wanted to.
          when u dont like someone...u dont give them the benefit of the doubt...u have preconceived notions...as u have clearly defined....its almost like u want to say i told u so....though im really not sure how anyone can derive much satisfaction from that....

          if he breaks the play and calls his own number he will be the first player in the history of the nba to do that.... cmon....i know what u mean...but once again...if u wanna make it clear u dont like the guy , u have...but really...what allstar doesnt do this??? hell what non allstar doesnt do this...i will say this...as ron gets better...everything about him will get better....

          once ron and his teammates learn to trust one another, they will all get monumentally better...reggie said as much...and ron and jo have a ways to go in this department....maturing to the point where u understand u can help ur team by not doing everything sometimes is a tough one to learn...he is far from the first one to have to learn that lesson...and far from the first to have a tough time doing it.....one need look no further than michael jordan for a primo example of this....its a great players mentality that they can win it on their own when the chips are down....hell aj tries doing it...and hes no jordan or artest....its almost a given mentality at that level....the ones that mature thru that process almost always find greatness...

          is ron guilty as charged here? of course...why single him out? i know..i know...u dont like him..

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: An answer for Fortaz......

            Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
            Ben Wallace's mother died a couple years ago. I don't remember him threatening retirement. Tinsley's mom died a couple years ago, I dont remember him threatening retirement either.

            Players that are 25 don't threaten retirement unless they have some loose screws.
            Reggie's house burned down, and he threatened retirement. Is he crazy?
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: An answer for Fortaz......

              Originally posted by SycamoreKen
              Actually, if I feel that a student is not benifiting from my instruction and he or she is "holding the others hostage" by not chooseing to make the right decitions then I would have them put into another class. Unfortunately, I have had to do this. It usally helps that student to be in another class. Am I happy about it? No, because I really want the student to get things straightened out. I even interact and keep in touch with the student to try to do so. That is my job, preparing students to be productive people in all parts of life. I only wish I had more time to give each student the attention they need.

              That though is not the Pacers job. While I think we all want Ron to improve and become a better person as a whole, there will come a time when a choice has to be made if Ron's behavior does not improve.

              By the way, I really have enjoyed reading this thread. All the fun threads we have besides, threads like this are what makes this forum the great place it is. A real civilized discussion!

              and i think this is probably where the fact that the pacers franchise is a business and the school is not becomes a difference....it definitely becomes in the pacers best interests to insure he gets better....they have a tremendous investment and are trying to win a title and more than likely feel that rons improving improves their franchise and their business as well as their chances to win that title-which is really the main goal...

              ive said it before...and ill probably say it again....a managements responsibility is to identify and maximize an employees strong points...while identifying and improving his liabilities....

              only when u dont feel like the potential is there do u just cast off the project...i dont think its so hard to determine why the pacers feel hes worth the added effort...i also feel like the pacers are a special organization-meaning id like to think my hometown team has a special place in its heart for one of its own that they can help...while its no charity case-they stand to gain tremendously by doing so-i like the idea that theyre not so quick to pass him off just because its a difficult and involved process to better ron as well as the organization...

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                You keep on believing that, and I'll keep calling you "ostrich"



                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                  I don't buy for a second that there was any real progress shown in 2003-04. There are plenty of threads in our archives about Ron's disruptions, concerns about our chemistry, etc. The only difference was that, for most of the season, we were winning and things were easy for him. When things got tough, and we went 7-7 in December, there was the benching for "onduct detrimental to winning". When things got tough, and we were in some intense playoff battles, there was the meltdown. It seems that every time he was faced with a challenge, he failed.

                  Well, the purpose of this thread was to get you up to speed with why some of us felt it was the last straw at least a year ago (if not even earlier). Everything he's ever going to do in the future is just prove that we were right all along. So I'm tired of talking about him and I'm checking out of this thread.
                  by your own words u said that u thought he had gotten better in 2003-04...if ud like ill dig them up...u just said them a bit earlier....nevertheless...

                  i disagree with u on the purpose of the thread...i had asked peck why it seemed he was so out of character when discussing artest...why he appeared to have such a deep seated disdain for ron....

                  to say that what he does in the future makes u right...is a very telling statement...

                  personally, since hes a member of the pacers, i would hope that even if u feel the way that u do...that u would at least u would hope that u would be wrong....but it doesnt appear by that statement that that is the case...sorry to hear that...

                  personally, id always prefer things work out the best for people...even if i have my doubts....especially when the people involved obviously have deep seated troubling issues....

                  but i wish u luck and appreciate u taking the time to offer ur contributions...they were well stated and well thought out...thx

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                    I don't buy for a second that there was any real progress shown in 2003-04. There are plenty of threads in our archives about Ron's disruptions, concerns about our chemistry, etc. The only difference was that, for most of the season, we were winning and things were easy for him. When things got tough, and we went 7-7 in December, there was the benching for "onduct detrimental to winning". When things got tough, and we were in some intense playoff battles, there was the meltdown. It seems that every time he was faced with a challenge, he failed.

                    Well, the purpose of this thread was to get you up to speed with why some of us felt it was the last straw at least a year ago (if not even earlier). Everything he's ever going to do in the future is just prove that we were right all along. So I'm tired of talking about him and I'm checking out of this thread.
                    I don't know about offcourt issues, but as far as on the court is concerned, there was a definite improvement with Ron. I thought he did a terrific job keeping himself under control for the year, and he got I think 2 suspensions, both of which were both terrible calls. Flagrants were down, and there were no horrendous outbursts like the camera. The Rip Hamilton stuff in the last game was a great act by Rip, and because it was Ron, he got the foul. But he definitely improved on the court.
                    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                    Comment


                    • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                      Originally posted by Suaveness
                      I don't know about offcourt issues, but as far as on the court is concerned, there was a definite improvement with Ron. I thought he did a terrific job keeping himself under control for the year, and he got I think 2 suspensions, both of which were both terrible calls. Flagrants were down, and there were no horrendous outbursts like the camera. The Rip Hamilton stuff in the last game was a great act by Rip, and because it was Ron, he got the foul. But he definitely improved on the court.
                      the improvement issue is very simple and defined....but there is an obvious attitude that we see that doesnt really want to acknowledge this because as we have seen it would mean that they might have to admit they were a bit wrong....to me , i dont really understand this logic...if im a pacers fan, id like to see signs of improvement from ron....and if i was wrong about missing it, that would be a good thing...but thts just me....which ultimately is what i keep getting to but am not getting a very accurate response...why do we want to see this guy fail???? why do we want to not like him??? it seems it should be the opposite...but i dunno...

                      ur true..his on court control was better in 03-04...less incidents...fewer flagrants...etc...

                      but now heres the real difference...and one which is really noticeable from a psychological profiling standpoint....

                      the physical confrontations disappeared....which is almost always the first thing u try to eliminate....realizing theres a better way than to handle things in a physical manner...
                      there was a dramatic turnaround here....and thats why the brawl situation was even more interesting....

                      noone wouldve ever believed that ron artest would have not involved himself in a fight when physically attacked by ben wallace....noone...not only did he do that but the year prior he avoided all of those as well....

                      its always easy to not see something that disappears....and therefore easy to not give the credit where its due....this is also an obvious sign that he was receiving counseling and therapy....

                      its simple really...the ron artest from 2002 gets into a huge fight with ben wallace when jacked in the throat....the 2004 ron didnt....those that dont want to give ron the proper credit will try to discredit this i suppose, or follow it up with he went in the stands....but in therapy its all about steps and progress....what happened afterwards inexcusable...but it doesnt take away from what happened prior either....from a therapy standpoint they were two different situations....
                      the other thing is going into the stands was not acceptable...and rons temperature was running high....but going and grabbing someone and asking him did u do it is still a bit of an improvement over decking the guy...albeit still physical and definitely a relapse

                      Comment


                      • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                        Originally posted by Since86
                        Yes, you're right. He wanted to retire to become a rap star.

                        How can you talk like this, when you don't even know what you're really talking about? He did not release an album, a women trio that is under his label released an album......

                        I'd just like to know how facts always seem to get twisted. It's just a big pet peeve of mine as reporters recalling the brawl as Ron going into the stands swining on people, it's just not accurate. How do you think Ron's conversation with whoever went?

                        Ron: "I've been thinking. I'm a good really album producer, so I'm going to retire to devote all my energy on that.

                        Pacers brass: "We don't think you should retire, to become a rap star..
                        Ron: "No, not a...."
                        Pacers brass: "So we'll give you two games to sit on the bench to work out some lyrics...
                        Ron: "but I don't need lyrics.."
                        Pacers brass: "and if you don't come up with anything good, you can come back and play."
                        Ron: "but...."
                        Pacers Brass: "okay, that's settled. Now what were you saying about some nagging injuries and that your grandmother dying?"

                        I should have implied better that I was being sarcastic.

                        Comment


                        • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                          Originally posted by Kegboy
                          Reggie's house burned down, and he threatened retirement. Is he crazy?

                          Ok, that's a valid point. Players relatives die all the time, and you don't ever see a player threatening to retire because of that. Most players would use basketball as a way to get their mind off of it(Maybe Ron is different)

                          I just saw Ron's threatening to retire another bump in a long road of "conduct detrimental to winning"

                          Comment


                          • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                            Originally posted by Peck
                            Issue # 6

                            This one is controversial & I know that there are going to be some who come shouting at me on this one, but I'll say it anyway.

                            Ron Artest is a typical bully, IMO.

                            Have you ever seen Ron Artest do somthing to somebody who was his own size or someone who would go back at him? If your gonna say Ben Wallace your gonna have to guess again. He had a chance at Big Ben & he chose a differant path.

                            Now I don't want this to break down into a whole brawl debate again, I just am pointing out that once again when Ron raised a fist it was over a person who was really smaller than him.

                            I will always go back to the Derrik Coleman issue. If Ron ever had justification to get up & take out somebody it was when Coleman litterally knocked out Ron's front teeth. But all he did was hold his mouth.

                            However little Quinten Richardson offends him by dunking on him he gets an elbow to the face.

                            Yes, yes I know he did the right thing with Ben. I'm not denying that, it's just funny that everytime I see him going after a fan in the stands it is to scare them into what? I guess into being better fans or something.


                            Now to wrap this up let me say this.

                            By all rights this guy should be my favorite Pacer, hell maybe of all-time. However I just can't get past the crap to apprecaite the talent he has all of the time.

                            Now also having said all of that I want it known that I know he will be here next year & so whether I like it or not I have no choice but to root for him to do good.

                            Ok, I'm prepared for the flaming I'm about to receive, so have at it.


                            actually...mel daniels is bigger than he is.....but i dont think thats what u mean...

                            this pretty much sums it up for me....and i truly hope u will really reflect on this last issue...

                            you have effectively said that it doesnt matter what ron does he cant win with u.....if he backs away from ben wallace its because hes a bully and has nothing to do with him trying to do the right thing....and if he had went after ben, what would u have said-same ole ron more distractions, hasnt changed...

                            peck...and i mean this with all due respect....u ve made it obvious that u dont like him....i would propose or at least hope, that everything u outlined to me in this very well thought out post doesnt say that....what it has said is u truly dont like rons behavior at times....that u find it totally uncacceptable....u havent really told me or described to me how u dont like him....in fact by your own words he should be ur favorite....this is very telling....

                            because ur basically saying i dont like the way ron responds or exercises judgement in certain scenarios....thats really what i take from all this...and its a far cry from not liking the guy...IN FACT
                            what u have really done is identify whats truly the issue....

                            U DO LIKE THE GUY...U LOVE THE GUY...HE SHOULD BE UR FAVORITE...but u cant allow urself to have a favorite that has behaved the way he has....and i understand that....i really really do....its like u have built this defense mechanism to keep from being hurt by ron any more...

                            u quit giving him a chance a long time ago...u just couldnt risk it....cause u knew he would break ur heart...i mean he always does....and every thing that happens u just say to anyone that listens...'see, i told u so' i was right...wanting that validation that the decision u made was the right one-even though somewhere inside its not the one u want....

                            i dont want to make this too deep....but at the same time, it seems very clear to me....i just couldnt understand and still cant understand how it is possible to have such disdain/hate for a basketball player even if they are guilty of inappropriate responses and poor judgement....

                            but now we see its really not about that...its about putting our trust in someone and then having them let us down....and that can cause the venom to spew....

                            so i would say this....and i began to touch on it in a post on this thread earlier...

                            i understand how all of the events u described are uncacceptable...with most of them i agreed....however, i try to really understand why people do what they do...not just what they do....because peoples responses and reactions are very telling....

                            some people are just a$$holes and d!cks....i really dont think ron falls in that category...and i dont think u think he does either...its very apparent that ron has deepseated emotional issues with regarding response mechanisms that come from way way back....its also pretty apparent that he needs to continue to get the help that he obviously has been getting since larry bird came on board....these issues arent easily resolved and definitely take some time....but if u look very very closely, and are truly objective...he has made progress...he really has....is he better?? hardly....will he have relapses? certainly....so that means more risks for those that choose to put a certain amount of faith in him...but really....is he a bad guy? no...you cant help but like tons of things about him...u know thats true....its called managed expectations....its about understanding all thats really goiing on...so u can better deal with it...not just us as fans but the players and organization as well.....
                            having a proper understanding of what problems are go along way to helping deal with the ebbs and flows that they can create....being a fan and not having any idea at times, can be even more difficult...and i truly understand why people would simply not risk trusting him....

                            but at the very least...dont hate him...because u reallly dont...u actually like so many, many things about him...you only hate some of his behavior patterns from the past...realize why he has done those things-that hes got some very deep seated problems with the way he sometimes processes things...and take consolance that hes working on making them better...though probably will never do so as quickly as we would all like, especially ron....trust me when i tell u...as difficult as it is on the organization and us fans....there is no one its more difficult for than ron....the pacers can just trade him away....the fans just can choose to hate him....ron has to live with his life and can only choose to try and work thru all those events that took place in his childhood that caused him to think the way that he does....

                            Comment


                            • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                              Originally posted by foretaz
                              and i think this is probably where the fact that the pacers franchise is a business and the school is not becomes a difference....it definitely becomes in the pacers best interests to insure he gets better....they have a tremendous investment and are trying to win a title and more than likely feel that rons improving improves their franchise and their business as well as their chances to win that title-which is really the main goal...

                              ive said it before...and ill probably say it again....a managements responsibility is to identify and maximize an employees strong points...while identifying and improving his liabilities....

                              only when u dont feel like the potential is there do u just cast off the project...i dont think its so hard to determine why the pacers feel hes worth the added effort...i also feel like the pacers are a special organization-meaning id like to think my hometown team has a special place in its heart for one of its own that they can help...while its no charity case-they stand to gain tremendously by doing so-i like the idea that theyre not so quick to pass him off just because its a difficult and involved process to better ron as well as the organization...
                              I completely understand where you are coming from. I am not ready just to bail on Ron unless we can make the team better. I know that the team feels the same way, which is right because it is a buisness. Now, if the team wouldn't make a move because they felt some obligation to help Ron get better, then I might have a problem. As I said before, I can see where everyone is coming from on in Ron's case.

                              Comment


                              • Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                                Originally posted by foretaz
                                you need a history lesson....almost from the beginning of my coming here u have interjected ur little bs remarks and personal jabs-to which i ignored all of them for the most part-because i realized them for what they were-immature rantings-ive seen it many times on message boards before...people who are more interested in trying to interject things to simply get a response...its called trolling-posting for effect-no content-and trying to get a rise out of someone....and yes...thats exactly what uve done with nearly every post uve posted towards me....with absolutely no regard for content...

                                the mistake i made was finally responding to ur childish banter...and for that im very regretful....because since i did, uve only sought to escalate the same activity....which only stands to reason for someone whos only interested in developing some sort of rise and not interested in content....

                                go ahead...review all ur comments from my day 1 here....they all have the same common denominator...and anyone that looks at them will see them for the obvious troll they are....and ur probably most happy now, because this type of response is like nirvana for a troll....

                                and yes...i will leave u out of my discussions....and it was probably a mistake to even mention u-but instead of responding to another one of ur ridiculous troll posts just a few posts prior, i chose only to indirectly address u....yes...i was sick of ur **** then, and am sick of ur **** now...every response u make towards me is completely off topic and a personal flame....why ive even acknowledged it is beyond me-bcause i know it only flames the fire...

                                in summary...yes...this is an open forum....but if u want to be left out of my discussions there was a simple solution....STAY OUT OF THEM....keep ur bs troll posts to urself....
                                Oh, quit your silly grandstanding. If anyone is given to childish rants, it's you. My responses to you have been short and to the point. Anytime someone has politely suggested that you make your posts more legible, you've taken it as a personal affront and proceeded to tell them you don't give a crap what they think.

                                I was going to let this go, but your twisting of the truth (above) prompted me to respond. Actually, you are the one who is in need of a history lesson. You are aware that you can view old posts here. Here is my first post addressed to you:

                                Originally posted by Harmonica
                                foretaz, welcome to the board, but may I make a suggestion? I know the bold purple type represents a symbol of your individuality and your belief in personal freedom, but it is damn difficult to read. From what I can tell, you have a lot to bring to a discussion, but I can't get through your posts. Black type on a white page is the norm for a reason. It's easiest on the eyes. I'm only saying this because I want to read your posts without going half blind trying to do so.
                                To which UB responded in the very next post, "I agree, I simply can't read it."

                                Why you took that personally is beyond me. Now, if you want to keep this going and continue to resort to name-calling, we can address this with Hicks. I'm getting a little sick of your shît as well, especially when it was unwarranted in the first place.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X