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

Mark Montieth: Pacers Q&A, July 15, 2005

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

  • Mark Montieth: Pacers Q&A, July 15, 2005

    http://www2.indystar.com/articles/8/...-4458-116.html

    Mark Montieth: Pacers Q&A
    July 15, 2005


    Question: What's Reggie been up to since the season has ended? Any news on what he may be doing next season? I hope he will be on either TNT or ESPN. Also-Just thought I would give you a Haywoode Workman update. I remember reading a story in the Star a few years ago about him trying to become a NBA referee. He is a referee in the NBDL right now. He was with a group of 10 NBDL referees the NBA brought out to work the National Pro AM Tournament in Las Vegas in April.

    Answer: Reggie's been involved with the movie his company is co-producing (Beautiful Ohio), but other than that hasn't been up to much as far as I know. I heard him on Dan Patrick's radio show on ESPN this week, and I'm sure he'll pop up on radio or television from time to time. He would like to be involved in TNT or ESPN broadcast's next season, and I expect that he will. He told me he's most interested in studio work with TNT, doing what Charles Barkley does -- talking trash to the whole league. (Tim from Falls Church, Va.)

    It's good to hear that Workman is still trying to become a referee. The more ex-players working as referees the better as far as I'm concerned. There aren't many, though, in either college or the NBA. Former Purdue guard Tony Jones is refereeing small college games and wants to work in the Big Ten, but I'm not aware of other recent major college players doing the same.



    Question: This is a "life of the reporter" question rather than strictly basketball-related. When I read Bob Kravitz's consistent demand that Ron Artest be traded, I always wonder what it is like personally with regard to the players and the press. I would think it would be really hard to write a column saying, essentially, that a player is a net negative for the franchise, and then go look him in the eye the same day. Similarly, if I were in Artests's position, I would not be terribly well-disposed toward answering any of Kravitz's questions when I saw him. Though Kravitz's columns are an extreme example, in general a columnist or reporter is only doing his/her job in occasionally criticizing, even harshly, a player. My question, then, is about interpersonal tension between players and the press. Does it exist at all, or does everyone understand that its "just part of the game?" (Mike from Austin, Tex.)

    Answer: It varies, depending on the players or coaches involved and the degree of criticism. Artest, for example, has never reacted harshly to criticism. He answers every question from every reporter. I know he reads the paper based on my previous conversations with him, but he takes a mature attitude toward it. I've never heard him complain about something that was written or said about him. He's even been cooperative with ESPN, which once published a bogus rumor that he had gotten into a fight at the All-Star game in Atlanta three seasons ago, and has published and broadcast plenty of negative commentary -- some of which has contained inaccuracies.

    Others are thin-skinned, and react to the slightest hint of criticism. In those cases a player might refuse to answers questions from a particular reporter. In extreme examples they will refuse all contact with the media. In my nine years covering the Pacers, however, that's rarely happened. Reggie Miller often tried to avoid reporters after practices last season, but that wasn't in response to anything written or said about him. Derrick McKey went through stretches where he didn't want to talk with reporters, and others have done the same thing briefly. Sometimes guys just don't like to be interviewed, particularly after a frustrating game.

    Generally, NBA athletes and coaches maintain a professional approach to the media. They understand criticism is part of the game, and they've heard and read so much of it regarding other people while growing up that it doesn't faze them much. The league sets up guidelines for them to be available at certain times, and only "star" players such as Miller are given consistent exemptions from them.

    Larry Bird, on the other hand, welcomed criticism while he coached the Pacers. He thought criticism helped prevent the players from becoming complacent, and kept them on edge a little bit. He even encouraged media members to go after him. That was hard to do, however, given the team's success during his three-year run.



    Question: With Artest back in the news, I was wondering if you saw this article from the Detroit News after one of the Pacers/Pistons playoff games and why it didn't receive local coverage?


    "Weird scene"

    "The Pistons were still shaking their heads at what happened Thursday night as they were on their bus inside the loading-dock area of Conseco Fieldhouse.

    "It was between 11:30 and midnight and the Pistons' bus was about to leave the arena for the airport.

    "Suddenly, a dark Escalade roared into the loading dock, nearly hitting several people.

    "Out jumped Ron Artest, the Pacers forward who got a season long suspension for his part in the Nov. 19 brawl.

    "According to Pistons players on the bus, Artest was wearing an old (and short) pair of shorts. He had no shoes on and, upon getting out of the vehicle, he tore off his T-shirt.

    "Given the history between Artest and the Pistons, the team's security officials were on high alert. But Artest made no motion "toward the bus. He simply walked, bare-chested and bare-footed, into the building, presumably for a midnight workout.

    " "There's something going on there," Ben Wallace said, not wanting to comment further. " (Tim from Indianapolis)

    Answer: We were well aware of that, and checked into it. We spoke with a reporter from the Detroit News, who indicated he had been in the area and saw nothing unusual. We also asked Artest and Pacers officials about it, and received no indication anything newsworthy had happened. Artest was asked about it again on Monday, when he met with the Indianapolis media, and said nothing had happened.

    He was indeed returning to the fieldhouse as the Pistons were boarding their bus after the final game, to meet with the players and to work out. The report is awfully second- and third-hand to be reported responsibly, and doesn't include anything of real news value. Who cares what he was wearing? And somebody would need to go on record as saying he was driving irresponsibly before it could be reported. All in all it didn't seem like a big deal.



    Question: If a restricted free agent gets an offer from another organization and his team doesn't match the offer, does his team get any type of compensation for their loss after the time and money they have invested in him? If the compensation is in the form of a draft pick, my thinking is James Jones was a 2nd round pick who never took full advantage of his playing opportunity last year. If this is the case, it would seem prudent to take the future draft pick, and free up JJ's future salary with the Pacers having Granger to replace him. They can always pick up someone that is cut later if necessary. (Jake from Greenwood, Ind.)

    Answer: No, teams do not receive compensation if they let a restricted free agent get away.



    Question: How is it that the Lakers get to draft a 17 year old? (Ted from Murfreesboro, Tenn.)

    Answer: The new rule stating players much be 19 and at least one year removed from high school doesn't apply to this year's draft. It goes into effect next year.



    Question: Have you heard anything on Fred Hoiberg's heart condition? I hope he is doing well and is able to return to the NBA as soon as possible. (Bob from Indianapolis)

    Answer: I just read a story in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune (Thursday's edition) about it. Fred had a press conference on Wednesday to discuss it. That was quite a scary thing, and hard to believe. Apparently Fred had the same condition that killed the actor John Ritter. Hoiberg passed out and fell after returning home from the hospital, but seems to be doing all right now. Doctors talk as if he can play again next year, but it's too early for Hoiberg to make that decision. He has one year left on his contract and will be paid whether he plays or not. He also wants to become a coach. Right now it looks as if it might be a good time to play it safe and start preparing for a new career.



    Question: I read that Danny Granger is not participating in any contact drills because of his knees. Do you know what has happened to his knees? Did Pacers know about the problem when they drafted him? Are we looking at another Jonathan Bender, somebody with a lot of potential, but often too injured to show it? (Reza from Scottsdale, Ariz.)

    Answer: I was imagining how fans would react when they heard of Granger's knee issue. Given all the injuries the Pacers had last season, I guess you can say he's a good fit for this team, huh?

    His knee injury doesn't appear to be anything serious. He had surgery during his senior season at New Mexico and supposedly returned too soon, and it never had a chance to fully heal. Watching him work with coach Rick Carlisle after summer league practices, though, you don't notice any problems, and he wasn't wearing a brace. He also had some impressive workouts heading into the draft, including a legendary one-on-one battle with Hakim Warrick in Chicago that wowed the scouts, so at this point there's no reason to be too concerned.



    Question: Are the Pacers going to make ANY moves this summer? Other teams have been adding players and making deals, while the Pacers just stand pat. (Michele from Denver)

    Answer: Technically, nobody has made a deal yet. There have only been verbal agreements, with nothing becoming official until July 22.

    The Pacers don't have the salary cap room to sign a major free agent, but that doesn't mean they haven't been active in conversation about using their mid-level exception. They've also been involved in trade talks, but if anything happens there it won't be announced until the 22nd.

    Still, it's possible they will stand pat, other than re-signing Dale Davis and James Jones. One could argue that's the best approach given last season's success and the anticipated return of Ron Artest and Jonathan Bender and the addition of Danny Granger. They have never made trades for the sake of making trades. And if they make no trades this summer, one would have to know what deals they turned down to judge their decisions.

  • #2
    Re: Mark Montieth: Pacers Q&A, July 15, 2005

    Interesting about the Artest-bus thing.

    Otherwise...

    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    Working...
    X