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

No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

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

  • No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/v-...p-344401c.html


    New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
    No one listens to Larry & Rick

    Friday, April 7th, 2006

    If they were buddies, Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle would undoubtedly make it a point to meet at the Garden tonight and compare notes on a dangerous problem they share. They're both coaching players who have tuned them out. You can imagine the conversation:
    Brown: I got this kid Robinson, and I know he's trying, but the other night I had to get on him 'cause Iverson busts him for 47 and the kid is out there showboating. So what does he do? He pulls a Steph on me. Our next game, he takes one shot. You know me. I need veteran guys who want to be coached and want to win. That's not this group. So I'm thinkin', why even stick around?

    Carlisle: You think you've got problems, Lar? My guys haven't been listening to me for weeks. If the East weren't so bad, we'd be out of the playoffs. I just wish I still had Mike Brown on my staff to ride herd on these guys. Because I just can't get through to 'em.


    We know, that conversation could never, ever happen. If Brown and Carlisle pass each other in the hallway and make eye contact, it's an upset. They're tried-and-true adversaries, stemming from Carlisle's removal in Detroit after the 2003 season. Carlisle has always suspected that while he was still coaching Detroit, the Pistons and Brown were busy cutting a deal.

    But even those differences aside, Brown and Carlisle share the one problem coaches wouldn't wish on their worst enemies. When players turn a deaf ear to coaches in practice, film sessions and games, the pink slip usually is not far off.

    The way Brown talked the other night, it almost sounded as if he wouldn't mind that happening. Yes, he made sure to say, "I'm not jumping ship here," which was a funny line from one of the great ship-jumpers in coaching annals. But more importantly, he did not deny the growing speculation around the league that he will throw up his hands, say no mas, and skip town. Maybe sooner than later.

    "You've got to always examine that," he said.

    By making that statement, Brown could be planting the seeds on two fronts for his departure. One, it could get James Dolan and Isiah Thomas to bite and get rid of him. If the Garden's boss and the Knicks' team president think after one season that hiring Brown was a mistake, then you can also see, on a second front, why Brown is openly thinking of an exit strategy. That way, teams that already know they'll be making changes in the offseason have been alerted.

    It's like he's saying, Don't go filling those vacancies so fast.

    One of those teams could be Indiana, where Brown once coached. As successful as Carlisle has been in his three seasons with the Pacers, even putting up with Ron Artest, injuries to Jermaine O'Neal and the riot in Auburn Hills and all its fallout, it's not like he hasn't had players tune him out before. He's never been a people person. To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

    Since March 1, the Pacers have fallen from fifth in the East, at 29-25, to 36-38 and only 1-1/2 games ahead of eighth-place Chicago and two games in front on ninth-place Philly. The knock on Carlisle is that he's too soft on his players, who are seen as some of the toughest guys in the league to manage.

    But they're always toughest to deal with when they've stopped listening.

  • #2
    Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

    Crappy article. Pure speculation.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

      Interesting read considering it's not the Star. Disregarding all the Brown comments, I have to say that I agree with a lot of the things said...even if I think Carlisle is a great coach. Maybe it's just time.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

        -snip-
        The knock on Carlisle is that he's too soft on his players, who are seen as some of the toughest guys in the league to manage.

        But they're always toughest to deal with when they've stopped listening.
        Right on.

        He's coddled these guys way too much since the brawl; yet they've still tuned him out.

        If TPTB don't make significant overhauls of both the coaching staff and player personnel, they've greatly underestimated the problem.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
          Right on.

          He's coddled these guys way too much since the brawl; yet they've still tuned him out.

          If TPTB don't make significant overhauls of both the coaching staff and player personnel, they've greatly underestimated the problem.
          The sad part is how much he's stuck up for the guys who have seemed to quit on him the most: he defended Jax when people were critiscizing him, always gave Tins the starting job, he put Sarunas on the bench (when I'm sure there was management pressure to play him just cause of the hype), etc.
          2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

            Originally posted by Shade
            Crappy article. Pure speculation.
            Not so fast, Shade... The coverage in The Star is so bad, that I will almost believe speculation in another paper over the Pacer's PR droppings that are in The Star.

            Funny thing...After Mike Wells (scoop) broke several stories that put the Organization in a questionable light, we have not heard much of anything from him. Did the Pacers flex their muscles? I would have guessed scoop would be all over the team tuning Carlisle out and the Star would have something worth reading. I guess Wells was fitted for a muzzle after the Artest situation and is wearing it now!
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

              Originally posted by Shade
              Crappy article. Pure speculation.
              You said it.

              Maybe I've missed something, but I've never seen any animosity between Rick and Larry.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome
                Not so fast, Shade... The coverage in The Star is so bad, that I will almost believe speculation in another paper over the Pacer's PR droppings that are in The Star.

                Funny thing...After Mike Wells (scoop) broke several stories that put the Organization in a questionable light, we have not heard much of anything from him. Did the Pacers flex their muscles? I would have guessed scoop would be all over the team tuning Carlisle out and the Star would have something worth reading. I guess Wells was fitted for a muzzle after the Artest situation and is wearing it now!
                I wonder if it has to do with the fact that Wells doesn't write columns. In other words it's not his job, but rather Kravitz's who has had a couple fairly critical ones of the team.

                This makes sense in as much as Wells's big scoop could be included in the more "newsy", reporting-type articles or Pacer notes sections he tends to do b/c Artest came directly to him offering quotes. In order to get something into his sports section articles, he'd need somebody on the team or close to it to communicate it to him in a more direct fashion that RC had lost them.

                Also, in his game write-ups and Q&A on the web, while he doesn't come straight out and blast the team, his leads frequently have a bit of negativity or some little jab. However, it is subtle. Definitely not confiedent and straightforward.

                I'm not defending Wells or the quality of the Star's Pacer coverage. He's certainly not letting the Pacers have it, but I do detect some between the lines digs, although mainly at their on-court performance.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                  Originally posted by D-BONE
                  I wonder if it has to do with the fact that Wells doesn't write columns. In other words it's not his job, but rather Kravitz's who has had a couple fairly critical ones of the team.

                  This makes sense in as much as Wells's big scoop could be included in the more "newsy", reporting-type articles or Pacer notes sections he tends to do b/c Artest came directly to him offering quotes. In order to get something into his sports section articles, he'd need somebody on the team or close to it to communicate it to him in a more direct fashion that RC had lost them.

                  Also, in his game write-ups and Q&A on the web, while he doesn't come straight out and blast the team, his leads frequently have a bit of negativity or some little jab. However, it is subtle. Definitely not confiedent and straightforward.

                  I'm not defending Wells or the quality of the Star's Pacer coverage. He's certainly not letting the Pacers have it, but I do detect some between the lines digs, although mainly at their on-court performance.
                  I was afraid when I wrote my comments about M. Wells (Scoop) that they would be taken as if I were referring to him as if he were a columnist. That was not my intention, but on a side note, The Star needs another columnist IN ADDITION to Kravitz. What I was getting at was him talking to the players and working for a story. Has the team shut him down, has he been told to stop digging...by his editors, or did he get a lot of flack for his work on the Artest deal? IMHO, certain players will tell you what is going on, and if the players tell you, it is not a column, but a news story.

                  I guess I'm just tired of reading between the lines when it comes to coverage of the Pacers. Many of markets don't have to do this, why do I have to do that in this market. I hate the way Kravitz waits till something is blatenly obvious in Pacer-ville before he comments on it, but at least he is making a comment, no matter how much it is to just stir the pot.

                  Hey, Indy Star...Go get a story for once!
                  ...Still "flying casual"
                  @roaminggnome74

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                    This article is nothing more than the writer pounding the same nails that get pounded here. What happens is someone on PD gets an idea, right or wrong, and expounds on it on here until other members pick it up and then the beat writers around the NBA start writing about it. The idea doesn't have to be right, just plausible.

                    I've maintained for sometime that some of the writers on here are as good as guys doing the same thing for a living. Also as bad in some cases.

                    And like here, some things he said don't even make sense. For instance; To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                      Originally posted by Will Galen
                      And like here, some things he said don't even make sense. For instance; To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.
                      Makes sense to me.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                        Originally posted by Roaming Gnome
                        I guess I'm just tired of reading between the lines when it comes to coverage of the Pacers. Many of markets don't have to do this, why do I have to do that in this market. I hate the way Kravitz waits till something is blatenly obvious in Pacer-ville before he comments on it, but at least he is making a comment, no matter how much it is to just stir the pot.

                        Hey, Indy Star...Go get a story for once!
                        Reading between the lines? The game is on television, there are recaps of the game, there are box scores, and extensive quotes.

                        I don't know what it is with fans today that believe they should read all the Pacers dirty laundry in the local newspapers. Not when said dirty laundry can hurt the team they root for. Theres distinctions of course when players get caught breaking the law, etc.

                        However, it seems to me what you and others are wanting and advocating is exactly what will lower a players trade value and thus hurt the Pacers.

                        I completely disagree with your position!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                          Originally posted by Anthem
                          Makes sense to me.

                          How so? This would have been Larry's 3rd season, not 2004. They won their championship in 2004 with Brown as coach. Read the paragraph again, it doesn't make sense.

                          I believe there would have probably been a mutiny this year, but I'm not giving them the championship this year until they earn it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                            They're talking about RICK's third season (or what would have been his third season).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: No one listens to Larry & Rick - article out of NY

                              Lets do this again.

                              This statement doesn't make sense. "To this day, Pistons execs privately insist that if they had kept him on for a third season, there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship."

                              This is the 3rd season they are referring to. It doesn't make sense that if Detroit would have kept Larry Brown this year there would have been a mutiny in 2004 instead of a championship.

                              Yes there could have been a mutiny this year but it couldn't have effected 2004.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X