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

Bird Threatens???

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

  • Bird Threatens???

    Interesting Bird comment at the end, sounds as tho they've had some team "discussions".
    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/601270500
    IndyStar.com Sports Pacers
    January 27, 2006

    Artest watch is over, but Pacers hit midpoint in disarray
    By Mike Wells
    mike.wells@indystar.com
    The Indiana Pacers started coming together weeks before training camp at the urging of their outspoken leader, Jermaine O'Neal.
    Ron's world
    Ron Artest was a guest on Fox Sports' "Best Damn Sports Show Period" on Wednesday night. Here are some of the things he had to say:

    "I feel blessed to be a King right now."

    Asked whether trading for him is a gamble:

    "I think given the circumstances I've been under, the things I have been through, everything I've been a part of -- yeah, that's a fair statement. I just want to prove everybody wrong and do the right thing by the Sacramento Kings. . . . It's a gamble, but at the same time, I'm going to try to prove everybody wrong, that it was a good choice. . . . At first I didn't want to prove (the media was) wrong, but it's time by now that I start proving everybody wrong."

    "I got a lot of love for Indiana still, but it's going to feel good to go to Sacramento."

    "I'm going to try to make people see a different Ron Artest. One that's less controversial, but at the same time, I'm going to be myself and have fun."

    Asked whether Kobe Bryant could score 81 points against him:

    "Why are you trying to insult me? I'll leave that for the other weak defenders in the NBA."

    Today's game
    • Who: Cavaliers (23-17) at Pacers (21-20).
    • When: 7 p.m.
    • TV: ESPN, FSN Midwest.
    • Radio: WIBC-1070 AM.

    They laughed, slapped hands, cracked jokes and talked about overtaking the Detroit Pistons in the Eastern Conference.
    Half a season later, poor team chemistry, injuries and the Ron Artest sideshow have led to a 21-20 record and derailed all talk of the Pacers winning a championship.
    The Pacers solved one problem Wednesday by trading Artest, but the outlook was gloomy again Thursday after they learned O'Neal could miss the rest of the regular season with a torn left groin. The Pacers are in seventh place in the Eastern Conference; eight teams from each conference reach the playoffs.
    "I think as far as season goals go still, I can't answer that question," forward Austin Croshere said. "Right now we're at such a low point that it's a matter of getting back to the basic elements of the game, which is playing as hard as you can, scrapping for loose balls. A lot of times when you kind of hit bottom like that, you just have to fight, scrap and claw your way out of things.
    "You really pay lip service to the idea of taking it one game at a time at a lot of points during the season when that's not always the case. But this is really one game at a time with the way we've been playing and how bad it's been. It's a matter of getting back to the basics."
    The Pacers have lost six of their past eight games, including four straight. It's the way they're losing that has team president Larry Bird wondering what's going on with the team that he and CEO Donnie Walsh thought could compete with San Antonio and Detroit for a title.
    "I never dreamed that it would be like this," Bird said. "We're very disappointed in the fact that we had the guys here to do it and to get off to the start we did is very frustrating. We've gone downhill since then. But hopefully we're back on the right track and we can move forward."
    Bird believes that the acquisition of Peja Stojakovic and the team's depth should allow them to remain in playoff contention without O'Neal. The Pacers play Cleveland tonight, but the 28-year-old Stojakovic likely won't make his debut until Tuesday night in Washington.
    "Our goal has to be that we make sure we make the playoffs and be ready to push even further when Jermaine gets back," Bird said. "His injury isn't the best thing to happen, but we have to get through it. It's good we got Peja. It's going to take him a little bit of time to get used to things, but he'll definitely be able to help out."
    The Pacers were in a similar position last season when O'Neal missed 22 games late in the season with a shoulder injury. The Pacers went 15-7 in that span, going to a more up-tempo style to offset the lack of an inside presence. They plan to resort to that style again. Stephen Jackson and Fred Jones likely will be the team's top two scoring options until Stojakovic finds his niche.
    "With the talent level we have right now, our margin of error is small," said Croshere, who will start in O'Neal's absence. "We can't get away with the same things we could have when our talent level was that much higher. We need to execute things better to make up for the talent we don't have." The Pacers have several issues that go beyond replacing O'Neal and Artest.
    Cohesiveness has been a problem. Bird has told players the effort and attitude have to improve. Coach Rick Carlisle has referred to the team as "selfish" after games on several occasions.
    "There's going to be some changes in the way they play," Bird said. "It's like they're just going through the motions out there at times. We've talked to them and expressed our frustrations, and if it continues to happen, we'll probably have to look in another direction, because one thing we're going to do is put a competitive team out on the court."
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

  • #2
    Re: Bird Threatens???

    Thanks Larry!!!!!!!

    Either the players come to play EVERY MINUTE of EVERY NIGHT or trade their sorry a**es to Atlanta or Toronto. I think this team will respond without O'Neal. They seem like a more cohesive team when he's out for some reason.
    "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bird Threatens???

      Saying something and doing something are two different things. We'll see...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bird Threatens???

        Sure wish we'd be able to pry Al from Atlanta now......

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bird Threatens???

          Larry has proven beyond any doubt he can be patient with players. I believed he would come in and shake things up but he really hasn't done that. He gave Ron plenty of flexibility, even posed on the cover of SI. Now though I think it's time for Larry to roll his sleeves up and do what he needs to do to get this team going.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bird Threatens???

            bout damn time.
            http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bird Threatens???

              Talk is cheap.......I will believe it when I see it. Larry is way to forgiving of the players (as is Donnie) so I don't see anything changing unless someone forces his hand ala Artest.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bird Threatens???

                Everybody here makes alot of assumptions about things they accept as fact. I am realistic enough to realize that I have no idea what Larry and Donnie planned on doing with Ron. Many think they were trying to polish up Ron and ship him out after he had some decent trade value. Did they or were they waiting on him? One thing is for certain, after the brawl his trade value went way down and waiting did seem to bring it up some.

                Larry made some tough decisions as a coach and I'm sure he'll do the same in management. He had to sit his friend Chris Mullin down when it became apparent that Rose had eclipsed him as a better player. So, I have no reservations that Bird will ship off whomever he deems expendable, but I laugh at the folks who minimize how complicated a trade is. And he was anything but patient with guys like Rik Smits. He would just stare at him sometimes.

                Even if he is going to blow up the team, he could be doing trades for the next year. Most of the changes would probably happen in the summer.
                “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                Reggie Miller

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bird Threatens???

                  Don't think many here can possibly have any idea what it's like to deal with professional athletes. These guys have been coddled since grade school. We aren't dealing with normal people here. Heck, they have CLASSES for rookies on stuff like paying your bills, etc
                  Did they let it go on way to long. Yep
                  Is there a reason for it. Yep

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bird Threatens???

                    Originally posted by fwpacerfan
                    Thanks Larry!!!!!!!

                    Either the players come to play EVERY MINUTE of EVERY NIGHT or trade their sorry a**es to Atlanta or Toronto. I think this team will respond without O'Neal. They seem like a more cohesive team when he's out for some reason.

                    Oh they are. It's easier to move the ball around when you don't have to play the "dump and watch" game that we play when JO is in there. A LOT more ball movement.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bird Threatens???

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bird Threatens???

                        While I like Bird's comment I still have to wonder if TPTB are all on the same page or not. That means are Bird, Walsh, and Carlisle talking the talk and walking the walk in perfect harmony and do they have the Simons' blessings to make it happen?

                        It sure doesn't appear that way... From style of play Carlisle seems to be coaching to roster moves (or lack of moves)... 4 PG's...still??? JO Isoball every play?

                        -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


                        • #13
                          Re: Bird Threatens???

                          I believe Larry,he's not gonna mess around.He didnt like losing as a player or as a coach.Why would that change now?.
                          LoneGranger33 said
                          Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Bird Threatens???

                            Originally posted by Bball
                            While I like Bird's comment I still have to wonder if TPTB are all on the same page or not. That means are Bird, Walsh, and Carlisle talking the talk and walking the walk in perfect harmony and do they have the Simons' blessings to make it happen?

                            It sure doesn't appear that way... From style of play Carlisle seems to be coaching to roster moves (or lack of moves)... 4 PG's...still??? JO Isoball every play?

                            -Bball
                            I understand what your saying bball, and it does make ya think, but ...

                            Could it be, that when a team goes through something like the Pacers have gone through with Ron Artest & injury proned JB, that it can start to begin the process of collapsing from within? In all honesty I believe that Ron's situation has caused 99% of what has happened to this team from top to bottom, coaching staff, players, management, et al. The whole enchilada has suffered and the doubting Thomas' have run amok. It's entirely understandable, but that doesn't mean our whole system is flawed or even other parts of our system. It requires a wait and see approach before going crazy with trades and firings.

                            IMO, this whole thing is going to snap back into place and when it finally does everyone who enjoys this fanchise will sense a tremendous amount of relief, AND the greatest thing in my mind is this organization will be much better than it was before. They'll come back as true contenders without all the cracks! I just sense this is what's going to happen.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X