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

Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

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

  • Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

    Ok, I'm all for it.

    What am I talking about???

    During the second quarter David Harrison set a moving pick, clearly an offensive foul on him. David, as he is want to do, stood & looked at the ref & then proceded to complain about the call.

    In a loud & clear voice that we could hear over Al Alberts headseat you could hear Rick Carlisle yell "SHUT UP"!!! To which David looked stunned then turned around & ran down the court.

    David did not get off of the bench in the second half.

    I'm a David Harrison fan, but I'm all for it.

    I'm all for it as long as this is across the board & everybody is held to the same standard.

    No, really, I'm not kidding. I'm not saying that to be a smart @ss or anything. I want Rick to take this team by the horns & smack the crap out of them.

    That means the next time he see's Jackson go at a ref. he needs to yell "shut up". He see's J.O. or Tins. or A.J. or anybody he needs to do the same thing.

    I'll go one better, Bird & Walsh should not only encourage this & support him they need to call J.O. into the office & lay it on the line with him about this. I'm not picking on J.O. but since he is the team Captain he would be the one to help enforce this amongst the players. Also he would need to set the example & unfortunately over the years he has set the wrong example, however I don't know if he ever had a good example set for him so he probably can't help it.

    I don't have much to say about the game because IMO the Pacers are going to finish out the rest of the year seeing where they are with players they think should be out there, not with players who have proven themselves to be out there.

    In other words we are trying to fit square pegs into round holes & IMO if it works at all it will be a miracle.

    We are the Indy .500% now & I'm just not sure why some of the things are the way they are.

    I still hope for the playoffs but I'll be honest I think a trip to the playoffs right now will be just that, a trip to the playoffs nothing more.

    There is still some time to turn it around but it is getting less time each & every day.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

    I agree, but frankly, I don't think it is across the board. JO, Jax etc. have never been benched for their whining or outbursts. Nor Tinsley, except for when he was benched two years ago.

    water

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

      I also noticed about 3 minutes into the game last night after a particularly poor defensive effort, J.O. yelled at his teammates, "Come on blue"

      Too your point Peck, I don't think Rick can do that nor should he. I've seen players like AJ, Granger, Foster get upset at the refs also. I don't mind Rick telling them to shut up, but he can't take every player out of the game when they complain to a ref.

      Harrison is different (and maybe Jax is too) But usually DH has to be taken out, he gets so upset that he cannot continue, his glaring at the refs, is not helping him, in fact I would guess the refs hate DH and that hurts him a lot. What DH does and the manner he does it is the worst thing he can do to the refs. They would react better to him if they he yelled at the refs but DH's glare is a disaster

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

        Originally posted by Peck

        No, really, I'm not kidding. I'm not saying that to be a smart @ss or anything. I want Rick to take this team by the horns & smack the crap out of them.
        The PAcers need to hire some adults and get this team in order now. If it takes 50 people then do it. The "They are adults so they should get it philosphy is not working". They need to take JO's mentor ad too heart and apply that to this team.

        There has been no leadership since the finals team.
        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


        • #5
          Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

          From listening to Slick the last several games, I think he's ready to loan Rick his hockey stick.....

          Mark: I just can't figure this team out. Can you?

          Slick: Yeah, I've got 'em figured out.
          PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

            I've said that I believe Rick took the Detroit criticism a bit too personally and has been too passive. This year especially, at the beginning of the season he seemed to be walking on egg shells, surely because of Ron and Jack, and Mike being gone. But sometimes you just have to say "screw it." Enough hand holding, it's time to push these guys and see what they're made of.

            And for those not seeing the forest for the trees, I'm not talking about benching a guy everytime he gets into it with the refs. This issue is much, much bigger than that.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

              This teams biggest problem is it's immaturity, and lack of professionalism. Thus it's not fun to watch and it's not a team that is liked.

              So it's good to hear Carlisle spoke up, but unless he will jerk everyone up short it won't do any good.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                Rick talked about this problem on the last show and he said they are constantly addressing the problem, in the games, before the games, in practice... but also that this is an emotional game and things happen in the heat of the moment, it is difficult to completely get rid of this type of stuff.

                As far as disciplining all the guys the same, we have to remember that different players react differently to correction. This is a very volitale group, it must be a nightmare to try and motivate them and yet keep them in check. Rick has to look at the overall picture and do what is going to help us win the most games. That is not easy. If he treated JO, Jax, Tins. like rookies in the way he corrects them, he would lose this team completely. These are men, and they have huge egos, they are not going to respond to being beaten down by their coach. DH is young, and can take this kind of correction, the vets. cannot. As much as we say it should be the same for all, its not and can't be.

                I really think Reggies loss has had a much bigger effect on our team then we were ready for. JO tries to be the leader, but he's just not as effective. This is the hand Rick has been dealt, he didn't put this roster together, he has never comlpained about what he has been given and he has tried to coach this dysfunctional team and bring them up a level. I think it is too easy to blame the coach for things that aren't really his fault.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                  Originally posted by Indyfan
                  If he treated JO, Jax, Tins. like rookies in the way he corrects them, he would lose this team completely. These are men, and they have huge egos, they are not going to respond to being beaten down by their coach. DH is young, and can take this kind of correction, the vets. cannot. As much as we say it should be the same for all, its not and can't be.
                  I believe you are correct and I agree with you, but what a bunch of crap.
                  They are men, but they have egos, they can't take criticism. Wow. And that's essentially what's wrong here.
                  Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                    I think you have to make the players accountable... to a point. I think that it depends on how and when the compaint is made.

                    How many times through the years have we seen one of our players gripe about a call, not get back on defense, and his man scores at the other end of the court? Or the team scores at the other end of the court because we were short a man and our opponent was able to swing the ball to the open man for the easy shot?

                    Heck, I think b!tching was a primary component of Jalen Rose's offensive repertoire so that he wouldn't have to expend and precious energy playing defense.

                    It absolutely p!ssed me off then, and this habit still p!sses me off today.

                    And, quite frankly, I think that half the time the player is dead wrong in his perception about the call that was made.

                    So, from my perspective, if a complaint is being made that prevents the player from getting back on defense, then I think that Carlisle should immediately yank the player and slap him with a $500 fine. After all, hasn't the player just engaged in "conduct detrimental to the team"?

                    As far as I'm concerned, there is one person and one person only who has a right to make an *** out of himself. And that's the coach. When Carlisle sees multiple errors by one official or he sees his players being fouled consistently, then he should address it. Not the players. The only person who should ever be tossed for disputing calls is the coach.

                    And for what it's worth, I view posing as a similar action. It's meant to taunt the opposing players and/or their fans, and it also involves a lack of focus by the player who is taunting. It can also result in the opposition having a numbers advantage on their offensive end of the floor.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                      Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior
                      They are men . . . they can't take criticism.
                      An oxymoron, IMO.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                        I'm glad they have egos. I just don't want to see it. Just shut the **** up and play. That's all. You get paid millions of dollars to play games, so just shut the **** up. Seriously. It certainly cannot be hard for 20 and 30 year olds to act mature. It really isn't that hard.

                        So yes, I am all for Rick yelling. Please, by all means, continue.
                        Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                          I think it was Tom Coughlin who stated that, as a coach, you can start out extremely strict and then ease off over time, but it is very difficult to do it the other way and have players react well to it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Carlisle the disciplinarian.....

                            I wish just one time Rick would tell JO,Jack to shut up, or tell them to sit their *** down on the bench after a T. I still beleive that he gives them more freedom then any of the players on our team.

                            But telling Stephen Jackson to shut up, would probably result in Jack trying to fight Rick.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X