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

  • #61
    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
    UncleBuck, Suaveness,

    How do I say this...

    Some of these guys do criminal things, or they take drugs, or they are punks. I don't like it but it happens and fortunately the Simons and DW have not subjected us to very many of these punks. But I don't know any of these guys personally so I don't care what they do to make a mess out of thier own personal life. What I care about is "the Pacers" and I do get pissed off when they make a mess out of their team.

    Said another way,

    When a guy that breaks the trust of his team... that really bothers me because basketball is about the best *team*, not the best collection of individual players.

    From a "what's bad for society" viewpoint, clearly those things are worse. From a "what's bad for the Pacers" viewpoint, I think Ron's crap is worse.

    I guess we just disagree, but I could never see how doing those things like drugs etc are not worse than what Ron does. Sure, it has to do with the personal life, but you can't say that it doesn't affect the team in some way. The other players on the team have to feel as though their teammate does some pretty bad things, and for me, that is worse than the on court "issues" Ron has.

    Ron's problem is that he is so much into the game. He gets carried away sometimes, and those outbursts result in the various things he has done. But he does it in the spirit of the game, not because he had been "doping up" the night before. Ron, from what we've heard, is a likeable guy, but his reputation is tarnished from the stuff we hear about. I have more assurances a guy like Ron can change than a person who does illegal things. I would like to think that Ron can become or is a great teammate, rather than someone who threatens to kill someone or chokes a coach etc.

    I believe that the "what's bad for society" stuff presides over anything else
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: An answer for Fortaz......

      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
      Well, Spree may have been suspended by the Wolves, I guess I should've disclaimed that I was referring to his time with the Knicks. He also had the goofy "drive across the country to training camp" incident but for some reason that didn't really bother JVG or his teammates, and I'll admit that one would've bothered me.

      As for 'Sheed, I stopped watching the Blazers as much after we moved to Chicago in 2000. Since I now TiVo all the Pacers games and watch them later in the evening, I don't watch anywhere near as many WC games as I used to. So perhaps he was suspended for conduct detrimental to winning.

      Anyway, even if you take that point out of my post, it doesn't weaken my position.
      hmmm....interesting...

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: An answer for Fortaz......

        Originally posted by Suaveness
        I guess we just disagree, but I could never see how doing those things like drugs etc are not worse than what Ron does. Sure, it has to do with the personal life, but you can't say that it doesn't affect the team in some way. The other players on the team have to feel as though their teammate does some pretty bad things, and for me, that is worse than the on court "issues" Ron has.

        Ron's problem is that he is so much into the game. He gets carried away sometimes, and those outbursts result in the various things he has done. But he does it in the spirit of the game, not because he had been "doping up" the night before. Ron, from what we've heard, is a likeable guy, but his reputation is tarnished from the stuff we hear about. I have more assurances a guy like Ron can change than a person who does illegal things. I would like to think that Ron can become or is a great teammate, rather than someone who threatens to kill someone or chokes a coach etc.

        I believe that the "what's bad for society" stuff presides over anything else
        i strongly agree with ur first paragraph....my personal views on drugs and what have u dictate that their is no comparison to a person doing drugs versus breaking a play in a game...though i do understand jay and wouldnt disagree with him in the context of which might be worse from a winning standpoint.

        however i strongly, and i do mean strongly, disagree with ur second paragraph here...and i think, from what im gather from peck, that this might be one of the things that so infuriates these guys that have such disdain for artest....its basically offering up the excuse that ron does these things because hes so competitive and wants to win so badly....

        i say Bull$**** to that...and i like artest(shhhh...dont tell anyone)....his actions are inexcusable...and the reason he does them has nothing to do with what u mention....the things u say about him are true....they just are totally irrelevant when it comes to why he 'misbehaves' shall we say....

        to misunderstand the problem will only further the problem....please...if u like ron...dont say that...it does him, his detractors, his fans, and his team no good...it really doesnt....

        once someone gets a really good understanding of to why he does what he does then they might be alot closer to ron realizing his phenomenal talent...and im drawing closer to getting into that in my responses to pecks post

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: An answer for Fortaz......

          Originally posted by Suaveness
          I guess we just disagree, but I could never see how doing those things like drugs etc are not worse than what Ron does. Sure, it has to do with the personal life, but you can't say that it doesn't affect the team in some way. The other players on the team have to feel as though their teammate does some pretty bad things, and for me, that is worse than the on court "issues" Ron has.

          Ron's problem is that he is so much into the game. He gets carried away sometimes, and those outbursts result in the various things he has done. But he does it in the spirit of the game, not because he had been "doping up" the night before. Ron, from what we've heard, is a likeable guy, but his reputation is tarnished from the stuff we hear about. I have more assurances a guy like Ron can change than a person who does illegal things. I would like to think that Ron can become or is a great teammate, rather than someone who threatens to kill someone or chokes a coach etc.

          I believe that the "what's bad for society" stuff presides over anything else
          But we all work with/ know people that make a mess out of thier personal lives. Some of them can 'leave it at the door', others can't. The guy next to me can drink shots until 2am and still be at work by 8:30am, ready to add value to his consulting clients. I can't... but that's a different story altogether.

          I'm not saying those things are acceptable, because they aren't. And I would ***** about them it if those were Pacers players. But I think what Ron does - and the fact that he does it on an unpredictable yet recurring basis - is at least as bad or worse.


          EDIT - It like we've just read Inferno and we're in English class debating which level of Hell we'd prefer. Its all HELL!! I don't want any part of any of it!!
          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


          • #65
            Re: An answer for Fortaz......

            Originally posted by foretaz
            i strongly agree with ur first paragraph....my personal views on drugs and what have u dictate that their is no comparison to a person doing drugs versus breaking a play in a game...though i do understand jay and wouldnt disagree with him in the context of which might be worse from a winning standpoint.

            however i strongly, and i do mean strongly, disagree with ur second paragraph here...and i think, from what im gather from peck, that this might be one of the things that so infuriates these guys that have such disdain for artest....its basically offering up the excuse that ron does these things because hes so competitive and wants to win so badly....

            i say Bull$**** to that...and i like artest(shhhh...dont tell anyone)....his actions are inexcusable...and the reason he does them has nothing to do with what u mention....the things u say about him are true....they just are totally irrelevant when it comes to why he 'misbehaves' shall we say....

            to misunderstand the problem will only further the problem....please...if u like ron...dont say that...it does him, his detractors, his fans, and his team no good...it really doesnt....

            once someone gets a really good understanding of to why he does what he does then they might be alot closer to ron realizing his phenomenal talent...and im drawing closer to getting into that in my responses to pecks post
            Don't get me wrong, I in no way endorse what Ron did, nor am I saying that what he did was right or excusable. He was wrong, and he did something really stupid this year.

            But I don't believe him to be this crazed lunatic that many think he is. I think what he does is correctable, and though he did something stupid, I think that he is fully capable of coming back next year and performing like an allstar. What kind of excuse can you give for the way he acts on the court? Stupid? Crazed? Mentally incapable? Who knows, because honestly none of us have a clue. But I believe that the he gets lost in the game sometimes, and because he doesn't know where not to cross the line sometimes, it results in smashed cameras and going into the stands.
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: An answer for Fortaz......

              Originally posted by Suaveness
              Don't get me wrong, I in no way endorse what Ron did, nor am I saying that what he did was right or excusable. He was wrong, and he did something really stupid this year.

              But I don't believe him to be this crazed lunatic that many think he is. I think what he does is correctable, and though he did something stupid, I think that he is fully capable of coming back next year and performing like an allstar. What kind of excuse can you give for the way he acts on the court? Stupid? Crazed? Mentally incapable? Who knows, because honestly none of us have a clue. But I believe that the he gets lost in the game sometimes, and because he doesn't know where not to cross the line sometimes, it results in smashed cameras and going into the stands.
              He did two really stupid things this year. But you usually pretend the behind-the-scenes stuff isn't real.

              FWIW, I don't care about the brawl anymore. And most of the other on-court stuff is not all that big of a deal in comparison to what the rest of us are all talking about - "Conduct detrimental to winning," which is far more than just Ron's history of temper tantrums.
              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


              • #67
                Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                He did two really stupid things this year. But you usually pretend the behind-the-scenes stuff isn't real.

                FWIW, I don't care about the brawl anymore. And most of the other on-court stuff is not all that big of a deal in comparison to what the rest of us are all talking about - "Conduct detrimental to winning," which is far more than just Ron's history of temper tantrums.
                I don't worry about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff because it isn't something that they have said publically. I'm just hearing that from so called sources, and I'd rather be skeptical about such things.
                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                  FWIW, I don't care about the brawl anymore. And most of the other on-court stuff is not all that big of a deal in comparison to what the rest of us are all talking about - "Conduct detrimental to winning," which is far more than just Ron's history of temper tantrums.
                  I agree with you, IF we know all the details. It's paraded around that he wanted to retire, but I have a really really really hard time seeing how someone can say they want to completely retire, but be okay to only sit out two games. We don't have the priveledge to be a fly on the wall in the Pacers' org. so to say that just how bad his conduct is with out all the facts isn't quite fair to anyone involved.

                  Especially seeing how this year's postseason panned out with Jax. Ron wasn't around, so he couldn't be the common denominator, and Stephen wasn't here last year, so he couldn't be either.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                    Originally posted by Suaveness
                    I don't worry about the "behind-the-scenes" stuff because it isn't something that they have said publically. I'm just hearing that from so called sources, and I'd rather be skeptical about such things.
                    Okay.

                    Bury your head in the sand

                    Meaning
                    Refuse to confront or acknowledge a problem.

                    Origin

                    Comes from the supposed habit of ostriches when faced with attack by predators. Ostriches don't really do this, they just lower their heads to the ground.

                    http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/80800.html
                    You'd think, with as many sources reporting so many various problems, that you'd be skeptical of the "everything's hunkey-dorey" spin the Pacers and IndyStar put on the situation. But whatever floats your boat...

                    Never mind the fact that if the Pacers really wanted to trade Ron because he was such a disruption, the absolute last thing they'd ever tell anyone is, "Man, this guys is a real headache behind the scenes. Austin was spot-on in his comments to The Times. We don't want this idiot to ever set foot in our lockerroom again." Wow, the offers would just come pouring in after that announcement.
                    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


                    • #70
                      Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                      Originally posted by Peck

                      Which bring me to issue # 2.

                      There is a segment of us out there that turned against Ron a long time ago. The brawl in the Palace was not a suprise to many of us, it was fullfilment of prophecy that some of us had been saying for a long time.

                      (in fairness I will admit that none of us would have ever dreamed possible the amount of damage that he was able to do to the franchise on that night but just weeks before it happened both Jay & myself were saying that he was going to tear the entire franchise down & boy did he ever)

                      You see a lot of people are at the stage with Ron now that they say "well let's give him one more chance & if he screws up again I'm done with him". To me, I was at that over a year ago. So last season wasn't a "one more chance issue" it was just "one more thing".

                      I'm pretty sure it was two seasons ago that I started getting to the point where I didn't care for him. When he hit AK47 that pretty much disgusted me but didn't put me over the edge, however I was very leary of him from that point on. But when I saw Mel Daniels litterally pushing & shoving him into the locker room after that loss in Boston I knew I was done with him. That was the second time I had seen him go after a fan, the first was at the fieldhouse when he went after our famos blond lady from the front row when he was with the Bulls.

                      Ok, again I've gone off-track let me see if I can put this together.

                      I was against Ron long before the brawl, in fact I spent the entire last summer doing two things.

                      1. B*tching that Brad Miller was traded.
                      2. B*tching that Ron Artest was not.

                      I guess I just want you to know that because I don't want you to think I'm just pileing on after a bad incident.

                      this issue im not so sure about....i think it might be redundant , by in large, but the message i think im getting is that u didnt start disliking ron today or yesterday but some time ago....

                      which tells me u then might possibly hold certain resentments because others didnt agree with u to the point that they didnt get rid of artest last summer....if so , hypothetically speaking the inference is the brawl wouldnt have happened and therefore the franchise wouldnt have been 'taken down'....

                      im not really sure how u can say the franchise has been taken down...i do feel it definitely was jolted...and some damage was definitely done....i also feel like that is hardly all rons fault and it appears the owners of that franchise as well as the management of that franchise at least partially share that same viewpoint....however ron certainly qualifies for an easy whipping boy when it comes to finding someone to blame for anything that doesnt go right for teh pacers...whether its last years playoff loss in game 6 or the brawl or whatever it might be....hes one of the best players on the team with obvious issues -hes an easy target....which means very easy to dislike....

                      so yes...u keep up bringing more reasons u dont like ron...and yes...as ive said with regards to the others....i agree one hundred percent that the sort of behavior that u describe is detestable...going after fans is never a good thing...getting into it with mel isnt a good thing....though most of these things u mention u also mention that they just reconfirmed what u already believed....which is another way of saying u didnt like him....cause as weve said...once u dont like someone...u will always be able to find reasons to dislike them...and ur viewing of him will always be from that context and mindset.....

                      but i get it...u dont like ron....and u havent for quite some time now....thats the overall gist of this issue...and everything that happens once u made this conscious decision to not like him because of his behavior has reconfirmed that.....

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                        Originally posted by Since86
                        I agree with you, IF we know all the details. It's paraded around that he wanted to retire, but I have a really really really hard time seeing how someone can say they want to completely retire, but be okay to only sit out two games. We don't have the priveledge to be a fly on the wall in the Pacers' org. so to say that just how bad his conduct is with out all the facts isn't quite fair to anyone involved.

                        Especially seeing how this year's postseason panned out with Jax. Ron wasn't around, so he couldn't be the common denominator, and Stephen wasn't here last year, so he couldn't be either.
                        We know enough to know its pretty bad, even if we don't know how bad.

                        I don't understand what you are getting at in your last paragraph?
                        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


                        • #72
                          Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                          Originally posted by Suaveness
                          I guess we just disagree, but I could never see how doing those things like drugs etc are not worse than what Ron does. Sure, it has to do with the personal life, but you can't say that it doesn't affect the team in some way. The other players on the team have to feel as though their teammate does some pretty bad things, and for me, that is worse than the on court "issues" Ron has.

                          Ron's problem is that he is so much into the game. He gets carried away sometimes, and those outbursts result in the various things he has done. But he does it in the spirit of the game, not because he had been "doping up" the night before. Ron, from what we've heard, is a likeable guy, but his reputation is tarnished from the stuff we hear about. I have more assurances a guy like Ron can change than a person who does illegal things. I would like to think that Ron can become or is a great teammate, rather than someone who threatens to kill someone or chokes a coach etc.

                          I believe that the "what's bad for society" stuff presides over anything else
                          So is Ron saying he wants to retire 5 games into the season done "in the spirit of the game?"

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                            Okay.



                            You'd think, with as many sources reporting so many various problems, that you'd be skeptical of the "everything's hunkey-dorey" spin the Pacers and IndyStar put on the situation. But whatever floats your boat...

                            Never mind the fact that if the Pacers really wanted to trade Ron because he was such a disruption, the absolute last thing they'd ever tell anyone is, "Man, this guys is a real headache behind the scenes. Austin was spot-on in his comments to The Times. We don't want this idiot to ever set foot in our lockerroom again." Wow, the offers would just come pouring in after that announcement.
                            If that is how they feel, then so be it. But it isn't something that is said publically, and like I said, if I believe every behind the scenes report, I wouldn't know what to think. I'd like to believe that whatever Bird and Walsh do, it is for the benefit of the team. If Ron is in fact moved from the team, I will not question the fact that it was because he did not get along with others, especially Jermaine. But since he is still here, I can't think that way.

                            Obviously, if he is such a problem, they wouldn't say it publically. But they truly wanted to get rid of him, wouldn't they have done so already? I mean, yes they probably wouldn't get full value, but they believe he is such a detriment to this team, he would already be gone. The fact that he is still here means they still beleive in the kid, and I am willing and wanting to accept that.
                            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                              Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
                              So is Ron saying he wants to retire 5 games into the season done "in the spirit of the game?"
                              No that was stupid. But people forget that his grandmother had just died, so it wouldn't be wrong to feel that way. He just doesn't know how to say/express something without sounding as though he's gone crazy.
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                                We know enough to know its pretty bad, even if we don't know how bad.

                                I don't understand what you are getting at in your last paragraph?

                                Ron was blamed for the rift between him and JO. JO telling Ron that he(Ron) couldn't get on his(JO's) plane, and such. Jax wasn't around last year, so he couldn't be part of that problem.

                                This year, a problem arises between Jax and Mr. X, but most believe JO. Obviously Ron wasn't around, so he can't be a part of this either.

                                I'm starting to lean more towards JO just doesn't really know how to be a leader, or a teammate for that matter. To me he just seems like he has an attitude about him, and has his own layed out plans, and if you don't fall in line or fit his plan he gets verbal. That's what I'm saying without knowing all the facts. It could most definately be all Ron, but at the same time he might just be JOs scapegoat for his emotions.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X