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

Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

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

  • Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

    I don't normally read Bob Kravitz. I've read maybe three articles in the past year and I only read them because they were posted here. Todays article wasn't posted on here, (at least I haven't seen it) rather I found out about it from an email.

    Of course he's stiring the pot as usual, but I think he's writing what most of us are thinking.

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../1088/SPORTS04

    March 31, 2006

    bob kravitz
    Here are more Pacers to retire

    Have they ever missed Reggie Miller more than they do now? Who would have thought the Indiana Pacers, once mentioned as a bona fide title contender, would so desperately need this old man, with his spindly legs and his professionalism and his huge heart?

    At this time last season, when the post-brawl madness had this franchise reeling, Miller put the Pacers on his back and willed them into the NBA playoffs. Now, with the Pacers falling to the ranks of the sub-mediocre, with Jermaine O'Neal hurt again and Jamaal Tinsley intent on playing his way out of Indianapolis, the only place to find Miller's jersey was high in the rare air of the Conseco Fieldhouse rafters.

    From Boom-Baby to Boo-Baby.

    A shame, really.

    The least these Pacers could have done on Reggie's night was honor him by playing like they still cared. Instead, they looked like what they've become over time: a bored, boring team that has become as unlikable as last year's overachievers were inspiring.

    About a half-hour before the game, Miller was asked, "What do you think of this (Pacers) team?''

    He paused. A pregnant pause. An eight-months' pregnant kind of pause. Then he smiled.

    "It's hard to figure out,'' he said delicately. "You really can't tell. Until everybody is healthy and plays a certain amount of games together . . . I mean, Jermaine (O'Neal) is hurt, Jamaal (Tinsley) has been hurt, Freddie (Jones) has been out for a while. Until they get their core group of guys together and get some practice time, which is going to be tough with the playoffs coming up, I think it remains to be seen.''

    That's when Cheryl, Reggie's sister and a former hoops legend, did some translation.

    "That's a nice way of saying they suck,'' she said loudly.
    Then she covered her mouth with her hands.

    "That's why she gets paid the big bucks,'' Reggie said.
    "My bad,'' Cheryl said.

    "I was trying to be politically correct here,'' Reggie said. Then, referring to the bombastic Charles Barkley, he turned to his sister. "C'mon, Charles.''
    At least someone was speaking the truth.

    It would have been a wonderful, beautiful night, if only they had dispensed with actually playing the game. Miller joined the Pacers' ABA greats, Roger Brown, Mel Daniels, Bobby Leonard and George McGinnis, becoming the first NBA Pacer to earn the franchise's honor. Then his old teammates went out and stunk up the joint.

    Again.

    Against a Phoenix team that had lost its two previous games by a combined 60 points.

    By early in the fourth quarter, there was an unusual sight to behold: empty seats, hundreds of them, even thousands, fans having long ago given up on this game and this team.

    Could you blame them?

    When Miller left here one season ago, this seemed like a franchise with a glimmer of a future. Granted, the hope was tenuous, left in the unsteady hands of the wrong man, the dearly departed Ron Artest. Now, with Artest gone and several players looking as if they've cashed it in, the Pacers have reached the point where unless they have a miracle renaissance these final weeks, they need to retire a couple of other jerseys.

    Start, please, with Tinsley's No. 11. He's never been healthy and he's never going to stay healthy. And even when he's fully ambulatory, his shooting and decision-making are atrocious. The next time he stops an opponent's dribble penetration, it will be the first.

    He would have been dealt long ago, except he was a base-year compensation player, meaning the Pacers would get only 50 percent value in return. That won't be an issue for Larry Bird and Donnie Walsh this summer.
    They need to retire Stephen Jackson's No. 1 jersey.

    Jackson isn't completely deserving of all the scorn he has received from Indiana fans. The fact is, he has continued to play -- a novelty on this roster -- and he has never had the chance to do the job he was brought here to do: play the two-guard and work as the Pacers' third scoring option.
    Still, he's too inconsistent, too volcanic, yapping at officials while his opponent roams unguarded.

    They need to think, hard, about retiring Jermaine O'Neal's No. 7 -- assuming they can get some value in return.

    He has played -- and not played -- his way out of untouchable status. O'Neal says all the right things, but he doesn't always follow those compelling words with deeds. He may have become the face of the franchise after Miller left, but he's a long way from being its heart.

    Optimally, it would have been nice to see how the "normal'' starting five -- Tinsley, Jackson, Jeff Foster, Peja Stojakovic and O'Neal -- could have operated together. Now, with only 11 regular-season games left and very few chances to practice, it looks like Bird and Walsh will never really have a complete picture. You get the sense, though, the brain trust has seen quite enough.

    What was Cheryl Miller saying?

    Uncle Reggie isn't coming back to save the day. Not anymore.

  • #2
    Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

    This may be the first time I have to say I completely agree with Kravitz.

    Now I know things are getting really bad.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

      I gave up criticizing the guy long ago. I find myself agreeing with him all too often to say he's wrong.

      Besides, the last columnist I can remember liking was Bob Collins and I don't wanna remember how long ago that was.



      BK makes excellent points.
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

        Leave it to Krappitz to take what is supposed to be a positive event and turn it into another hate-filled rant.

        You don't like Indiana, Bob. We get it. If you hate our teams so much, then by all means, PLEASE LEAVE. I'll be glad to retire your number.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

          Shade,

          With all due respect, calling today's Kravitz column a "hate filled rant" is a bit over the top.

          The points in the column could certainly be debated, but none of them are exactly novel, and I would wager that all of them have been made on this board at one time or another. While you may feel that writing anything other than a glowing tribute to Reggie is out of line given the feel good nature of the night, I think it's unfair to label today's column in such a perjorative manner.

          MJB

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

            Originally posted by mboyle1313
            Shade,

            With all due respect, calling today's Kravitz column a "hate filled rant" is a bit over the top.

            The points in the column could certainly be debated, but none of them are exactly novel, and I would wager that all of them have been made on this board at one time or another. While you may feel that writing anything other than a glowing tribute to Reggie is out of line given the feel good nature of the night, I think it's unfair to label today's column in such a perjorative manner.

            MJB
            Yes. I agree that it wasn't hate-filled. I read nothing hateful in it. The only thing that might have been differently would have been to save the last part for a separate column a day or two later. He could still have tied in the "retiring the numbers" theme.

            I happen to agree that all three of those players should be moved, but deciding that will be the easy part. Finding another team who wants them, and is willing to give something valuable for them will be the hard part.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

              Originally posted by mboyle1313
              MJB
              Oops, MJB, I forgot to mention that I thought you did a nice job last night.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                He may have become the face of the franchise after Miller left, but he's a long way from being its heart.

                That line speaks volumes... I may have to use it myself. It's perfect.

                -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


                • #9
                  Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                  Did anybody else read the article and think that Bob's been lurking again? Sure sounded like a lot of what I've read on here lately.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                    Originally posted by grace
                    Did anybody else read the article and think that Bob's been lurking again? Sure sounded like a lot of what I've read on here lately.
                    I think he just paid an intern to write it for him. The intern said, "Well, I don't know what to write", and told him to just go read the internet.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                      Originally posted by Kegboy
                      I think he just paid an intern to write it for him. The intern said, "Well, I don't know what to write", and told him to just go read the internet.
                      He could have gotten much better internet related advice from this thread, too bad:

                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=20252

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                          I used to think it was odd reading columnist whose thoughts sounded like they came from PD until I spoke to my dad. He doesn't read the forum and I swear he could be Bball based on his opinions. Maybe there aren't that many novel ideas.
                          "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


                          • #14
                            Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                            Wow, I actually agree with Krapitz on this one. I generally don't like his writing because he does it just to get attention, and to be difficult - whether it's what he said last week or not. This, however, makes a whole lot of sense and I can't help but agree.
                            It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Bob Kravitz} Here are more Pacers to retire

                              I disagree more often with Kravitz' opinions than I will ever agree.

                              However, I thought this column was spot on. He nailed it.

                              I especially liked his inclusion of Reggie and Cheryl's opinons and how they were brought into the "story".

                              And as far as Kravitz ruining what should have been a great night, I think you need to separate the night into two distinct entertainment events. The halftime was exceptional, even though it didn't have the emotion that all of us felt the night of Reggie's last game.

                              As for the other event, I personally believe that the performance and lack of focus by a few of our team's players ruined the evening for me far more than Kravitz' words ever could.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X