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

Pacers' failure to communicate......

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

  • Pacers' failure to communicate......

    It seems once again, that Tinsley's play was explained easily.

    Some of us were wondering why he was so up and down, and though some of the grassy knoll people here are sure that Tins was pouting and not simply sick, like Fred Jones before him. This time Rick said on his show that Tins got a groin injury since the Cavs game and should not have played.

    Now we all know, though hardly every ackowledge, how much of a warrior Tins is when it comes to playing with pain, I remember to well and vividly the playoff series against Detroit where he was riding a bike when not on the court to keep his muscles warm and his knee mobile.

    This is another example in my opinion of the poor communicative skills of the Pacers, despite all the modern possibilites at their disposal and the great website they have (which is kept better uptodate and has more interesting stuff then most sites out there)

    They do however the players and the fans a disservice by not simply reporting these injuries, no matter how small, list a player as probable but hurting, do I care how they announce it, but at least it will change our view of the player in question.
    Now we come out in force to rip 'm a new one, and propose the most silly trades because (fillinwhateveryouwanttocomeupwithhere)

    I agree that certain things are privy to the team only, but information like this which creates perception of the team and the circumstances they work under is important enough to be relayed to a fanbase, no matter how small.

    Other examples of plainly poor communications on these matters are:

    Foster's injuries
    Bender injuries
    Tinsley injuries
    JO injuries
    Ron injuries

    I can probably make this list a page long, but what it boils down to is my advice to the Pacers: improve communications on injuries, small or big.
    We would like to know what is wrong without details that would create legal difficulties, this can be done, other teams seems to succeed at it, why not we?

    How important is this?

    Ok let's take the example of the last occassion, i.e. now with Tinsley.

    Can you tell me you would have been as harsh on him as some were/are knowing he is playing with an injury?
    Can you tell me your conclusion (if you reached that one) that either we get rid of him or the conclusion that Saras will take his spot (other then through injury and temp) would be less easily made if you knew that Rick obviously wants him on the floor so bad that he is asked to play with an injury?
    Don't those things all tell a story? Therefore is it important Pacers are more open.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  • #2
    Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

    Now that i was not harsh on Tinsley, i feel free to discuss this. The things told in a RC show didn't explained me that happened at all (some of it i put in other thread, but i think this is more relevant):

    1) What Carlisle is thinking about during game!?
    1.1) First - it hurts Tinsley twice as he must be very upset after such a play.
    1.2) It hurts also a team - knowing that You are losing without one of the key players is not as hard as playing knowing (and seeing) that You can't trust him, coz he is injured.
    2) How You can play an injured player at all? (are these games as important?)
    3) Why Rick wants him on the floor so bad that he is asked to play with an injury seeing that he's an absolute minus? And why Rick allows JT to have a horrible game if he's his favorite player?

    Maybe Carlisle just taking blame on himself... but imho Carlisle just didn't figured it out yet, how to use the strong sides of our PG's and he's making mistakes either way.
    I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

      Hey Able,

      Why don't you ask Mark Boyle why they don't do this? I think it's a very valid complaint myself that Mark very well may have the inside scoop.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

        Tinsley is far from the ultimate team player. No amount of injury reports is ever going to change that. Only Tinsley can change that.

        -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


        • #5
          Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

          Originally posted by Bball
          Tinsley is far from the ultimate team player. No amount of injury reports is ever going to change that. Only Tinsley can change that.

          -Bball

          That's a scary thing to say about a starting pg. You would kinda want your pg to be a team player, when...errrrr...running a TEAM.


          Start Saras

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

            Seems to me that Tinsley cannot go more than 5 games in a row without either being sick or suffering an injury to his legs, ankles, or feet. I don't care how tough he is, I don't doubt that he is sick or that he is injured. I'm not going to question that.

            My problem is that he cannot go 5 games straight without being injured or sick.

            Isn't that a major problem for a starting point guard. I've said it before and I say it again, point guard is the most important position on any NBA team, especially if you don't have a great creating wing player (Jordan) to do some of the point guard duties.

            His tendency to get injured will only get worse has he gets older.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              Seems to me that Tinsley cannot go more than 5 games in a row without either being sick or suffering an injury to his legs, ankles, or feet. I don't care how tough he is, I don't doubt that he is sick or that he is injured. I'm not going to question that.

              My problem is that he cannot go 5 games straight without being injured or sick.

              Isn't that a major problem for a starting point guard. I've said it before and I say it again, point guard is the most important position on any NBA team, especially if you don't have a great creating wing player (Jordan) to do some of the point guard duties.

              His tendency to get injured will only get worse has he gets older.
              I have to admit, Able's use of the word "warrior" isn't the word or phrase that comes to mind when I think of Tinsley. "Injured or sick" was closer....

              I agree with Able's premise that we don't always get enough info about player injuries tho. I don't expect the full medical report, medication chart, X-rays, etc BUT it would be nice to get the actual injury told to us up front (and all aspects of it). If someone has a broken or torn 'something' then don't tell us it is a bruise. If someone is recovering from surgery don't leave out any new problems that have arisen in rehab. If the projected return is days, weeks, or months away then don't tell us a scenario that they know is most likely not going to be met... not even close.

              Read this thread from an article I posted in 2003 with Bender's inury report and surgery and what we were told:
              http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=16386
              Not even close....

              -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


              • #8
                Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                I think we are also overlooking something.

                Keeping a bunch of guys on a basketball forum "informed" is probably the furthest thing from the Pacers minds when they have a player who has suddenly become sick or injured.

                And the opinions that we have regarding the players, whether healthy, sick or injured, is probably has less influence on the team than Bren Simon's dogs. Keeping that in mind, is it all that important to the Pacer brass that they keep us informed, or the general public for that matter.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                  Another thought, is maybe they didn't want Phoenix to know Tinsley wasn't up to par so they wouldn't plan their game around it.

                  And, if Tinsley is injured, do you think he's playing to make sure Cabbage doesn't get a chance at that starting position? I'm sure he remembers what happened with Kenny Anderson.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                    Originally posted by beast23
                    I think we are also overlooking something.

                    Keeping a bunch of guys on a basketball forum "informed" is probably the furthest thing from the Pacers minds when they have a player who has suddenly become sick or injured.

                    And the opinions that we have regarding the players, whether healthy, sick or injured, is probably has less influence on the team than Bren Simon's dogs. Keeping that in mind, is it all that important to the Pacer brass that they keep us informed, or the general public for that matter.

                    That's the very first thing I thought when I read this post. Sure it would be nice to know before the game that a player is hurting but honestly I feel like Larry Bird felt when he was the Head Coach:

                    (paraphrasing)"If you're too hurt to play good, you shouldn't play at all."

                    I remember Bird making a comment like that when he was told that Reggie kinda used his ankle injury as an excuse after the Pacers were blown out in Game 5 of the ECF against Chicago.

                    IMO, Rick did a terrible coaching job against Phoenix... and that's the first time I've ever bashed Rick for anything. I haven't lost confidence in him but I'm just calling it as I see it regarding the Phoenix game.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                      Originally posted by Gyron
                      And, if Tinsley is injured, do you think he's playing to make sure Cabbage doesn't get a chance at that starting position? I'm sure he remembers what happened with Kenny Anderson.
                      Makes sense to me.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                        Originally posted by beast23
                        Keeping a bunch of guys on a basketball forum "informed" is probably the furthest thing from the Pacers minds when they have a player who has suddenly become sick or injured.
                        I think it's reasonable to let the entire fanbase (not just we internet folk) the status of the players we invest time and money in to see and support.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                          Teams have to be careful with what medical information they make public. There are legal issues involved here. About 4 years ago laws were changed or new laws were enacted that made the relaesing of medical info even more restrictive.

                          So they cannot come out in the media with full disclosure

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck
                            Teams have to be careful with what medical information they make public. There are legal issues involved here. About 4 years ago laws were changed or new laws were enacted that made the relaesing of medical info even more restrictive.

                            So they cannot come out in the media with full disclosure
                            I don't need details, just a specific enough answer that if I go to a medical website to research I can pretty accurately predict the time the player will be out. Meaning I want to hear "moderate knee sprain" not "he hurt his knee". I don't want or need more than that.

                            Or at the very least, if the have to keep it extremely simple, at least give an accurate timeframe. Indiana press is horrible at this. According to them Jeff went from healthy, to out for the preseason, to out until Thanksgiving, to sometime in December. 4th time's the charm I guess. Bender's another horrible case.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers' failure to communicate......

                              Originally posted by Hicks

                              Or at the very least, if the(y) have to keep it extremely simple, at least give an accurate timeframe. Indiana press is horrible at this. According to them Jeff went from healthy, to out for the preseason, to out until Thanksgiving, to sometime in December. 4th time's the charm I guess. Bender's another horrible case.
                              That's all I'd ask. Something realistic about the severity of the injury (doesn't have to be detailed) with an accurate timeframe as best they understand it (or give us worst case/best case scenarios). Foster's condition this season is a perfect example of what I am talking about (as an example of a reporting problem) and you laid it out well.

                              -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

                              Working...
                              X