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

Should Reggie get a statue?

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

  • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

    Michael Jordan has a statue and he gambles.

    I'm glad to see you embrace the "innocent until proven guilty" theory.

    Comment


    • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

      Yes, Gretzky has a statue outside of Staples.

      And no, Gretzky does not deserve all this crap in the media. The guy has done nothing wrong, yet he's getting ripped apart in the papers and TV.

      Comment


      • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

        Are you afraid Reggie will mess up? And this whole gambling thing with the NHL is no big deal anyways, the media is making a bigger deal out of it than anybody cares about.

        Comment


        • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

          No way.

          I'm not sure as if Reggie would appreciate that of a statue out front!?

          Maybe a medium-sized staue inside the Fieldhouse concourse.

          Add with the retired number shirt in the upcourt.

          These will do fine and good enough.

          Comment


          • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

            This is a basketball player we're talking about here, not some guy who's made major discoveries in space research. I love Reggie, and I have tremendous respect for what he brought to the game of basketball, but too much is too much.

            Comment


            • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

              My god.... will this thread never die?

              Comment


              • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                No thread ever really dies unless the board crashes. Every once in a while someone has nothing better to do so they go back and dredge up old stuff. Just wait until the off season. I bet there will be another slew of "What [insert recording artist or actor/actress] song/movie best describes the Pacers" polls.

                Comment


                • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                  Originally posted by grace
                  Just wait until the off season. I bet there will be another slew of "What [insert recording artist or actor/actress] song/movie best describes the Pacers" polls.
                  The season thus far:

                  Reason to Believe
                  The Fuse
                  Trouble in Paradise
                  Wreck on the Highway
                  Long Time Comin'
                  Don't Look Back
                  Johnny Bye Bye
                  Born to Run
                  Better Days
                  PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                  Comment


                  • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                    Nobody should get a statue just for being a great basketball player.

                    I love to remember Pacers/Bulls playoff matches. But. This discussion shouldn't concentrate on statistics nor on clutch plays during playoffs. Rather, we should ask if he's become a sufficiently notable man in history of Indiana to deserve such recognition. I can see Brasilians building a statue for Shmidt or Lithuanians for Sabonis, because these people were extremely important for national conscience of respective nations. Has Miller been a man of such importance? Maybe yes, maybe not. I don't know.

                    On the other hand, it's possible to say that a statue in this situation isn't a sign of recognition of social importance. In this case, however, there's nothing to argue about. Everyone can make a statue of anyone once criteria for selection are uncertain enough.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                      Enough is enough! Give the man a Statue and be silent!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                        Originally posted by Pacesetter
                        Mark, you are way more knowledgable about this than I am. I understand why you'd put Larry Brown, based on the strides we made as a team during his 3 seasons here, but because he left us before we completed the work I don't feel he deserves a statue or any other recognition but he was huge for us. I agree with you that Reggie shouldn't get a stand alone statue. I'd like to see a statue with Reggie and Donnie together depicting Reggie's signing. My case for Reggie is simple. I think his loyalty and consistency over 18 seasons set the precedent for all future Pacers. We also might not have had as much success without Reggie, and we may not have the interest we have now from young and old if it hadn't been for Reggie. Some have used MJ's example from Chicago, and MJ obviously deserved his statue, but he was drafted to a team in one of the largest markets in the country. Reggie came to a little cornfield town. Now Indy has gotten much bigger and is much more diversified. How much he had to do with that is incalculable, but it is apparent by the international flavor the Pacers have and the comments those folks have made about Reg that he had a significant impact on the fan following the Pacers enjoy. Donnie Walsh is the greatest All Star to come from the Pacers without ever donning a uniform. He's a no-brainer, so the two together would seem appropriate considering the tie they share. The round bronze plate in the center of the rotunda would look good if it was supplanted by a life sized depiction of Reggie and Donnie at Reggie's signing! JMO.

                        Yes basketball is a team game but, if you have a squad like Kobe i'm suprised they are in the playoff hunt. Shaq,,Shaq,,Shaq what has he done in Miami? Beside skip through the police training taking another citizens job that needs employment. Shaq hasn't done **** in Miami except bring in a bunch of title seeking old guys that don't pass, and pray for a ring. Imagine if the heat didn't have Wade they would win practically no games. Kobe will have a Nba Championship in the next 5 years tops. As soon as he gets another half way decent player they will be there. Kobe has absolutely NO ONE to go to, I mean UCONN could probably come and beat the lakers if you take Kobe out. I agree though it is a team game but, Kobe was just as much part of those rings as does Shaq if not more. I bet Kobe gets another ring before Shaq does.

                        To answer the question though, I wouldn't mine Miller getting a statue he's what made the pacers what they are today. The ONLY disappointment I have had will Miller his entire carreer is I feel they forced him into retirement when he wasn't ready. The media retired Reggie and it is sad . I would think he would get a statue in Indy even with out a ring, a ring doesn't signifiy a Great its' how he held himself and his work ethic. Miller deserves it

                        Comment


                        • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                          Originally posted by beast23
                          My god.... will this thread never die?
                          Just for you Beast let's see if I can kill it.

                          This discussion probably continues for those who did not have the opportunity to see Reggie PD threads from the past. So, for those new members this is the scoop.

                          There were legit (not rumor) discussions about three years ago between TBTB in the possibility of creating a Reggie statue. Rumor has it an actual model was made.....

                          Two years ago the rumors started heating up on the radio and in the papers that Reg was going to get a statue. Of course this was denied by TPTB and in fact this was true and false at the same time. True in that a final decision had not been made (one of the principal players was ill so things were put on the backburner), and false in basically denying there was anything to it.

                          As recently as last April the discussions were still taking place and a different Reggie model was on display at Conseco. The principal movers at that time were Rick Fuson and Kathy Jordan.

                          Who made the final decision I do not know, but at the end of June begining of July there was not enough support among TPTB for the Reg statue. Sounds pretty much like the debate that went on in this thread.

                          So the bottom line is, Reg will probably never get a statue here. There truely were serious discussions from the TPTB about it. One other fact, members of PD were the only individuals to get an actual glimpse of what was under consideration besides TPTB.
                          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                          Comment


                          • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                            Originally posted by grace
                            Michael Jordan has a statue and he gambles.

                            I'm glad to see you embrace the "innocent until proven guilty" theory.

                            Jordan never gambled on sports games.

                            -A member of the 1982 NCAA Champion North Carolina Tarheels
                            -NBA Rookie of the Year (1985)
                            -Five-time NBA Most Valuable Player (1987-88, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1995-96, 1997-98)
                            -Ten-time All-NBA First Team selection (1986-87 to 1992-93, 1995-96 to 1997-98)
                            -Selected in 1996 as one of the "50 Greatest Players in NBA History"
                            -A member of six Chicago Bulls NBA championship teams (1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98)
                            -Six-time NBA Finals Most Valuable Player
                            -The 1987-88 NBA Defensive Player of the Year and record nine-time NBA All-Defensive First Team selection (1987-88 to 1992-93, 1995-96 to 1997-98)
                            -14-time All-Star and Three-time All-Star MVP (1988, '96, '98)
                            -A member of two U.S. Men's Basketball Olympic Gold Medal teams (1984, 1992)

                            Comment


                            • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                              Hopefully, he isn`t gonna die for a long long time, and i don`t think that building statues of people who are still alive is a good idea.

                              So...
                              ....No!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X