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

The Bear: 10/21/05

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    The Bear: 10/21/05

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...S0404/51007007

    Answers Posted October 21, 2005
    Question: Well Mike I would have to say I respectfully disagree on your answer to the question about the favorites in the East. Particularly in the point of team chemistry. Shouldn't the Pacers be fully united and have a chip on their shoulder while Miami has added guys in Walker, Williams, and Payton that have all been shown as selfish players at times throughout their careers. So my question would be why do you expect the Pacers to have team chemistry problems, but not the Miami Heat? (Joe from Carmel, Ind.)

    Answer: Joe, you’re not the first person to disagree with me, and you definitely won’t be the last. The East is a three-team race between the Pacers, Heat and Pistons. All three teams have the ability to win the conference and all three have questions that could cause them to have problems. The Pacers have shown signs of how good of a team they can be in the preseason. It’s a matter of getting everybody healthy so Carlisle can use all his options. On paper, the Pacers are the deepest, and possibly the most talented, of three teams. The concern with them is how guys will deal having their minutes reduced and taking fewer shots. The Pacers will be better if they have three or four players average about 15 points a game instead of one superstar scoring most of the points. The Pacers will be fine if they can keep their egos in check and put their personal agendas aside. I talked about the Pistons and Heat in last week’s questions.


    Question: Should the Pacers do as well as some project and as well as Jermaine suggests would make their season a success and they actually win the NBA title, would Reggie Miller get a ring... or does the fact that he was actually waived by the team place him on the outside looking in? I would imagine fans (me included) would all but demand he get something! (Brian from Arlington, Tex.)

    Answer: It wouldn’t be surprising if the Pacers did offer Miller a championship ring if they won the title this season. Several Pacers, in particular Stephen Jackson, took it personal that Miller retired without winning a championship. Whether Miller would accept the ring is unknown since he didn’t play on the team.


    Question: I liked Samaki Walker when he was with the Lakers. Do you think he'll make the Pacer squad and, if so, do you see him being a major contributor deep into the season? (Brian from Arlington, Tex.)

    Answer: As of right now, I’d say Walker has the inside track on the final roster spot because of the number of injures the Pacers are dealing with in the frontcourt. Scot Pollard and Jeff Foster aren’t expected to be ready for the start of the season Nov. 2. It’s unknown if David Harrison will be ready for the opener at Orlando. You can never have too many big bodies.


    Question:     When are the Pacers players who were involved in the Detroit brawl going to do their community service? Will this be a distraction to the team and the Pacers' season? (Sam from Sydney, Australia)

    Answer: The Pacers can do their community service whenever they want. I don’t think it will be a distraction considering everything they’ve been through in the past year. Many of them already do community service, like visiting schools, in the Indianapolis area. The players have to do half their community service in Michigan, but they’ll probably make sure it doesn’t interfere with what they’re trying to do on the basketball court.


    Question: What in the world are the Pacers thinking, talking about bringing Artest off the bench? Is this a long term plan to test Granger as a possible replacement for Artest in the future? What do you think if they decide to do this? (Anthony from Indianapolis)

    Answer: I would be surprised if coach Rick Carlisle brought Artest off the bench in the regular season. It would seem like a good idea from the standpoint that Artest would bring an added scoring punch off the bench and he doesn’t mind playing with the second unit. At the same time, though, you’re bringing a player off the bench that plays hard at both ends of the court, which doesn’t happen as much in the NBA anymore, and he’s an All-Star player.


    Question: I attended the Minnesota game and lo and behold, Jonathan Bender was already in street clothes resting his knee. For all the reports out of the Pacers, Bender has always looked soooooo good in practice. But when it comes to game time, he's out and healing. Can you find out the real story about his knee? Are the Pacers just stuck with a player who'll never play? (David from Indianapolis)

    Answer: To say the Pacers are being overly cautious with Bender would be an understatement. That’s understandable since you’re talking about a player that has spent the past three seasons watching games from the bench in street clothes because of injuries. Bender has said he’s being careful with his knee, which means its probably not 100 percent healthy, to avoid a setback in resurrecting his career. Bender has shown what he can do in the preseason. He’s got a quick drive to the basket and he tries to tear down the rim every time he goes up for a dunk. Pacer fans are going to have to hope Bender can be a contributor this season because he’s under contract for the next two seasons.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

    I love it how he doesn't actually whats the word ANSWER the questions. Namely the first one. Instead of making an argument as to why the Pacers are different he just mutters the same stuff again.

    And did anyone else notice in the old article, Wells is still under the assumption Walker is an all-star. Oh yeah by the way because its 2 people sharing power in miami, it could never end up like LA, you know that involved Kobe(1) and Shaq(2), Wait a cotton picking minute here.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

      Pacer fans are going to have to hope Bender can be a contributor this season because he’s under contract for the next two seasons
      Mr. Obvious says thanks mike for lending no insight on anything


      The Pacers will be fine if they can keep their egos in check and put their personal agendas aside. I talked about the Pistons and Heat in last week’s questions.
      Standard answer to give on alot of teams but,,,
      really if you think about it... You can call some of the players alot of things but Selfish and Ego Driven is not one.
      Short Tempered. Emotional, a little crazy sometimes but certainly not crying about not getting enought looks..? Unless he knows something we don't

      Why Not Us ?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

        That rumor has been circulating for years. There is a correlation between Ron Artest shooting three-pointers with lots of time on the shot clock and Rick benching him for "conduct detrimental to winning." Fans certainly complain about how many shots JO takes when double-teamed. Stephen Jackson's shot selection is always questionable at best, and has led to some obvious shouting matches on the bench. I know a good number of fans that were sick of the Fred Jones ballhog show from last season, and one poster even had the audacity to call Tinsley a shoot-first PG.

        So The Bear may know something you don't, but if you pay attention long enough its easy to see why so many PD regulars, and even the Chior, are concerned about this team disintegrating into "Selfish and Ego Driven".

        I try not to speak for the entire Brigade in every single post, but I thought The Bear was just pointing out the obvious here.
        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

        • #5
          Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

          I hate the name The Bear.
          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

            Not to change the subject too much but why does he get to be the bear, again?

            I must agree that he doesn't really answer any of the questions or offer any personal opinions really.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

              Originally posted by Jay@Section204
              That rumor has been circulating for years. There is a correlation between Ron Artest shooting three-pointers with lots of time on the shot clock and Rick benching him for "conduct detrimental to winning." Fans certainly complain about how many shots JO takes when double-teamed. Stephen Jackson's shot selection is always questionable at best, and has led to some obvious shouting matches on the bench. I know a good number of fans that were sick of the Fred Jones ballhog show from last season, and one poster even had the audacity to call Tinsley a shoot-first PG.

              So The Bear may know something you don't, but if you pay attention long enough its easy to see why so many PD regulars, and even the Chior, are concerned about this team disintegrating into "Selfish and Ego Driven".

              I try not to speak for the entire Brigade in every single post, but I thought The Bear was just pointing out the obvious here.
              Sorry I have not missed a game and I do not see it to the extent you are referring sure from time to time shot selections are questionable but to the point of everyone having thier own agenda and everyone turning into ball hogs to the point of breaking the team down ,call me naive ... I don't see it.

              I know it always sounds more educated and maybe more prudent and savvy to be hesitant to praise anything and everything as opposed to look on the bright side, but that's how I see this one or don't see it as the case may be.


              Perhaps I will need to look a little closer the next game to catch it.......

              Why Not Us ?

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                I'm not calling you naive.

                I'm only saying that just because you hisorically haven't thought it was a problem, in part because his predecessor was cuddly-soft about it, doesn't make his statement more or less insighful.

                Unless he knows something we don't
                Lots of us know just how bad team chemistry/ selfish ego problems have been the past few years. It makes it out publicly from time-to-time. JO is going out of his way to point out that he and Ron are just starting to build a relationship after having been teammates for several seasons.

                I'm sorry, its taken me a bazillion paragraphs to say this. Had you just said, "Unless he knows something I don't" I probably wouldn't even have touched it. But just because you see it differently, for whatever reason, doesn't mean there aren't a few of us that have seen it all along. Too many double negatives, sorry.

                Now there's one other variable - some of us have been seeing this chemistry / ego problem for so long that it will take us a while to recognize if its getting better or not.

                Unfortunately, things like Game #1 of the preseason and Ron's bizarre media circus (not his fault, but he could at least try to sound somewhat smart don'tcha think?) will only delay that process.
                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

                • #9
                  Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                  How many shots does JO take while actually double teamed. A second guy may drift over as he is in the motion of shooting, but I don't seem to remember him getting it in the post and deliberately shooting over a clearly defined double team.....
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                    I hate the name The Bear.
                    Not to change the subject too much but why does he get to be the bear, again?
                    It was all Peck's doing.

                    -Bball
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                      Ok, I see what you're saying .

                      I guess the reasons that Mike gave for the team's demise, I found odd, only due to the fact that , if this team where to falter , I would have guessed it would have been due to suspensions, injuries, the normal gammit. And not selfishness. I would have thought he would reserve that for say Miami.

                      Why Not Us ?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                        Well, don't let my crabbiness sway your opinion either way. You should call it as you see it, just like I will.

                        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

                        • #13
                          Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                          Well, don't let my crabbiness sway your opinion either way. You should call it as you see it, just like I will.

                          Oh don't worry I will.... Otherwise what fun would that be....

                          Why Not Us ?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                            Originally posted by Bball
                            It was all Peck's doing.

                            -Bball
                            I wouldn't argue with bare as in barely any new insight. People are hoping Jon will be healthy? The Pacers can play selfishly? Walker might get signed? Our centers are hurt? Reggie may get offered a ring by the team if we win this year? And he may or may not accept it?

                            I actually don't dislike Wells but the bear is a little too hero worship-ish for me.
                            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: The Bear: 10/21/05

                              I thought it was just because he wasn't soft-as-charmin on them.

                              Nobody has said he's "the fox".
                              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

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X