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

Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

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

  • Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/s...a-sports-front

    SKOLNICK: Riley needs to put out the fire he started

    Ethan J. Skolnick

    July 13, 2005

    If Pat Riley really did not recognize the flammability of a semi-provocative statement during a slow sports time, at least the Heat president has considerable experience extinguishing such fires.

    So why hasn't he?

    This is a man so word-conscious that, a decade after saying he "envisioned" a parade, he reminded a reporter that he had never actually "promised" one.

    So why hasn't he clearly, definitively, angrily, and -- here's the key -- publicly said that Stan Van Gundy is the Heat coach for the foreseeable future? Why hasn't he listed reasons for that decision, however obvious: Van Gundy winning 101 games with two different rosters and styles, preparing his team exhaustively, rarely slipping against underdogs, and rising within a rib strain and thigh bruise of the NBA Finals? Why was Van Gundy vague about his status Monday? Why did Van Gundy's brother, Jeff, recently say strange things on WFAN, like "Stan deserves an answer" and should be given time to "hook on with another team" if the Heat doesn't want him?

    At first, this controversy appeared short on credence. Even after Riley suggested June 17 he might take a more "active participation" while again speaking wistfully of coaching, the frenzied reaction seemed just a time-killing, logic-twisting, mind-numbing media obsession borne of summer boredom. "Active participation," after all, could have simply and innocuously meant serving as a sounding board for players and coaches. As such, you could understand Riley's refusal to grant subsequent sensational inquiries the dignity of thorough on-the-record responses. Further, you could understand why he wouldn't rule out any option, to avoid being accused of breaking his word if unforeseen circumstances someday warranted sideline change.

    Mostly, you had to assume Riley had reassured his protégé in private.

    Now we're weeks past "at first."

    So is this, at last, resolved?

    If Van Gundy is vague about his status? If Alonzo Mourning is saying on 760-AM Tuesday that he didn't know who would coach, but that the Heat couldn't go wrong with either?

    Shouldn't they be clear, even if we're not?

    While Riley's handling has been vexing, the public has responded predictably to the obvious question:

    Would it be reasonable and forgivable for Riley to shove his long-time loyalist aside, now that the roster is more attractive than when he quit in October of 2003?

    Of course it wouldn't be. It would be ego-driven treachery of the greatest degree. But fans and media usually side with the bigger name, so many have found a convenient rationalization to answer that question affirmatively: "Riley, as team president, must do whatever he deems in the best interests of the franchise."

    Yet, why are they so certain it is in the franchise's best interests for Riley to coach?

    Could there be wisdom in the current structure, with Riley focusing on supporting and equipping Van Gundy?

    Could Van Gundy actually be the better coaching choice for this team at this time?

    Yes, he could. Forget the pedigrees and the presentation, and consider that.

    Van Gundy lost Game 7 on his home floor. Still, no one called for change when Riley lost deciding games at home in 1998, 1999 and 2000. While those Heat rosters were not as talented, Riley wasn't coaching against defending champions.

    Van Gundy has made some curious in-game decisions and does not claim the strategic and motivational expertise of his master mentor. This, however, is about a process, not a single game. The locker room is far looser now, for the better. The young, athletic, quicker-paced players get more rope. Many have questioned why Van Gundy sat Dwyane Wade for the final minute of the 2004 postseason. Ask this instead: would the rookie Wade, with his defensive deficiencies, have played enough under Riley for the Heat to get that far? Would Riley have allowed go-go guards Rafer Alston and Keyon Dooling to fill critical roles? And, with a need for more athleticism in support of Shaquille O'Neal, would Riley be sufficiently patient with Qyntel Woods and Dorell Wright now?

    Van Gundy's "pedal to the metal" philosophy can exasperate, such as when Wade gets garbage minutes in winter blowouts of the Clippers. This season, when the Heat clinches its soft division, it would be best if he let O'Neal escape to some remote island, far from stray knees. But who set the organizational agenda? You know who.

    Van Gundy, a screamer, could channel more criticism toward his stars (as Spurs coach Gregg Popovich does) rather than role guys such as Udonis Haslem and Rasual Butler. But this controversy has only served to undermine the authority required to do that.

    The story, strangely, still breathes, feeds, burns.

    Extinguish it, Pat Riley.

    Unless you'd rather not.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  • #2
    Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

    They talked about this on Cold Pizza this morning, and Woody Paige, I thought it was, said he thinks Riley will be the coach of the Heat next year.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

      The guy isn't that great of a coach IMO.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

        [Hubie] You have to love that the two teams in the East that may be better than us have a little bit of coaching turmoil. [/Hubie]
        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

          Originally posted by Moses
          The guy isn't that great of a coach IMO.
          Code:
                              Reg Season      Playoffs   
           Year  Tm   Lg      W    L  WPct    W   L  WPct 
          +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+
           1982  LAL  NBA    50   21  .704   12   2  .857
           1983  LAL  NBA    58   24  .707    8   7  .533
           1984  LAL  NBA    54   28  .659   14   7  .667
           1985  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756   15   4  .789
           1986  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756    8   6  .571
           1987  LAL  NBA    65   17  .793   15   3  .833
           1988  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756   15   9  .625
           1989  LAL  NBA    57   25  .695   11   4  .733
           1990  LAL  NBA    63   19  .768    4   5  .444
           1992  NYK  NBA    51   31  .622    6   6  .500
           1993  NYK  NBA    60   22  .732    9   6  .600
           1994  NYK  NBA    57   25  .695   14  11  .560
           1995  NYK  NBA    55   27  .671    6   5  .545
           1996  MIA  NBA    42   40  .512    0   3  .000
           1997  MIA  NBA    61   21  .744    8   9  .471
           1998  MIA  NBA    55   27  .671    2   3  .400
           1999  MIA  NBA    33   17  .660    2   3  .400
           2000  MIA  NBA    52   30  .634    6   4  .600
           2001  MIA  NBA    50   32  .610    0   3  .000
           2002  MIA  NBA    36   46  .439
           2003  MIA  NBA    25   57  .305
          +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+
           21 Seasons      1110  569  .661  155 100  .608
          +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

            This is strictly media-created crap. Between this and The Hateable Dan LeBatard starting that "Nash won MVP because he's white" bull****, I'd have to say their local media is pretty irresponsible.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

              Well, yesterday on ESPN Jack Ramsey said he'd heard through his sources that Riley would be back on the bench. Of course Jack is older than snot and most probably more than a little senile.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                If Jack has sources anywhere, I would think they'd be in Miami.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                  Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                  Code:
                                      Reg Season      Playoffs   
                   Year  Tm   Lg      W    L  WPct    W   L  WPct 
                  +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+
                   1982  LAL  NBA    50   21  .704   12   2  .857
                   1983  LAL  NBA    58   24  .707    8   7  .533
                   1984  LAL  NBA    54   28  .659   14   7  .667
                   1985  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756   15   4  .789
                   1986  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756    8   6  .571
                   1987  LAL  NBA    65   17  .793   15   3  .833
                   1988  LAL  NBA    62   20  .756   15   9  .625
                   1989  LAL  NBA    57   25  .695   11   4  .733
                   1990  LAL  NBA    63   19  .768    4   5  .444
                   1992  NYK  NBA    51   31  .622    6   6  .500
                   1993  NYK  NBA    60   22  .732    9   6  .600
                   1994  NYK  NBA    57   25  .695   14  11  .560
                   1995  NYK  NBA    55   27  .671    6   5  .545
                   1996  MIA  NBA    42   40  .512    0   3  .000
                   1997  MIA  NBA    61   21  .744    8   9  .471
                   1998  MIA  NBA    55   27  .671    2   3  .400
                   1999  MIA  NBA    33   17  .660    2   3  .400
                   2000  MIA  NBA    52   30  .634    6   4  .600
                   2001  MIA  NBA    50   32  .610    0   3  .000
                   2002  MIA  NBA    36   46  .439
                   2003  MIA  NBA    25   57  .305
                  +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+
                   21 Seasons      1110  569  .661  155 100  .608
                  +--------------+-----+----+-----+----+---+-----+
                  Firstly, I think he was referring to SVG.

                  Secondly, all you have to look at there is Riley's last two seasons. 61-103, with no playoff appearances? Yikes.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                    Originally posted by Kegboy
                    This is strictly media-created crap. Between this and The Hateable Dan LeBatard starting that "Nash won MVP because he's white" bull****, I'd have to say their local media is pretty irresponsible.
                    You can call them irresponsible if you want but at least they aren't rabbits w/pancakes on their collective heads. Riley himself is the one that started this whole mess so if the media is being irresponsible why doesn't Riley come out and say publicly and unequivically that he was misquoted and that he will not coach and that SVG will?

                    BTW I agree that Lebatard can be a jerk, mainly because he's non-conforming and always willing to ask questions just to get a rise out of people, but his radio show is hilarious. Check out 790 AM The Ticket M-F from 4-7 ET.
                    http://www.790theticket.com/main.cfm...on&item=events

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                      Is it sick that I enjoy it when our rivals become mired in controversy and distraction?

                      Neither the Pistons nor the Heat know who's going to coach them, and I have a spring in my step.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                        Originally posted by Los Angeles
                        Is it sick that I enjoy it when our rivals become mired in controversy and distraction?

                        Neither the Pistons nor the Heat know who's going to coach them, and I have a spring in my step.
                        Easy there Riverdance.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles
                          Is it sick that I enjoy it when our rivals become mired in controversy and distraction?

                          Neither the Pistons nor the Heat know who's going to coach them, and I have a spring in my step.
                          do u notice a common denominator in all this???

                          arrogance...ego...from ownership and/or top brass....

                          riley and his ego has created the drama in miami....

                          davidson, wilson and company's arrogance and ego has created the problem in detroit...

                          we are very very fortunate to have simons as the owners and donnie and larry driving our ship....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                            Originally posted by foretaz
                            do u notice a common denominator in all this???

                            arrogance...ego...from ownership and/or top brass....

                            riley and his ego has created the drama in miami....

                            davidson, wilson and company's arrogance and ego has created the problem in detroit...

                            we are very very fortunate to have simons as the owners and donnie and larry driving our ship....
                            AMEN!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Apparently, the Heat don't want the Pistons to hog all the fun...

                              Originally posted by foretaz
                              do u notice a common denominator in all this???

                              arrogance...ego...from ownership and/or top brass....

                              riley and his ego has created the drama in miami....

                              davidson, wilson and company's arrogance and ego has created the problem in detroit...

                              we are very very fortunate to have simons as the owners and donnie and larry driving our ship....
                              Yes, because the Pistons have just gone down the toilet under Davidson

                              I pray every night that Davidson sells the team, so we don't have to put up with these putried championship seasons ever again. I mean, when you keep reaching the finals, it gets boring.....

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X