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

NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

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

  • NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

    Nothing really new here.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/sp...gewanted=print



    Kemp Loses the Weight and Regains the Desire
    By LIZ ROBBINS
    Shawn Kemp sat in a Seattle jail cell for four hours last April. His weight had ballooned to 330 pounds and he knew he would have to explain to the Little League team he was coaching why he had been arrested.

    "When a person gets to the age of 35 and you go to jail, it either makes you or breaks you," Kemp said last week in a telephone interview. "It made me identify what I wanted. It's how you want to be remembered. Are you going to fight for it or just lay down?"

    Kemp, a five-time All-Star, retired from the N.B.A. in 2003, saddled by weight issues and three drug-related suspensions. Last April, he pleaded guilty to attempted possession of marijuana.

    He said the marijuana found in his car belonged to the friend he was with, and the court agreed. Kemp was sentenced to five days of house arrest and a year's probation, and he vowed to change his life.

    "It probably didn't happen soon enough," he said.

    Since then, Kemp has shed pounds and decided to make a comeback to the N.B.A.

    "It was important not just to lose weight but to come back and play at a high level," he said.

    His agent, Tony Dutt, said that a few teams had contacted him, and that Dallas had tried to set up a workout. As of week's end, it appeared unlikely that the Mavericks would get an injury exception to add a player for the postseason.

    The first question teams ask, Dutt said, is how much Kemp weighs.

    "I've been called so many names and been written off by so many people who just say, 'Whatever happened to this guy?' " Kemp said. "I tell my buddies, 'Never say never.' "

    Kemp is no longer the Reign Man, but the anonymous running man, logging as many as seven miles a day. With his wife, Marvena, and their three sons in Seattle, Kemp has spent weekdays in Houston for the last year, climbing the stadium stairs at Rice University and playing pickup games. He wears a 40-pound vest during workouts.

    Kemp, 36, said he jump-started his weight loss by going on a monthlong diet consisting of oatmeal three times a day.

    "I was waiting on phone calls and nobody really called," he said. "I'm so afraid of getting heavy, losing a step, so I kept running."

    At 6 feet 10 inches and now 267 pounds, Kemp said his athleticism had returned. Whether he can return to game shape and regain his rhythm after missing three seasons is another issue. He regrets not having had the same discipline when he signed a $100 million contract with Cleveland, a year after his N.B.A. finals appearance with Seattle.

    Kemp knows there will be other doubts, but he maintains that he changed his habits to concentrate on his comeback.

    "I've done drugs in the past, I've tested positive in the league," he said, acknowledging that he would have to enter an aftercare program to return to the N.B.A., as he did when he played for Orlando.

    He became infamous when a Sports Illustrated article disclosed that he had seven children with six women. "I've got some kids out there; it's no secret," he said. "I've never been late on payments. I've handled it as best as I possibly can. There's no lawsuits. I try to stay on top of it."

    Kemp said he would be willing to play in a summer league to prove to teams that he had changed. He recalled being doubted as the 17th overall pick in the 1989 draft.

    "I came into the league fighting, and it looks like I'm going to go out fighting," he said.




    Pacers Can't Even Find the Same Page

    The Pacers used to be an example of Murphy's Law. Now they are symbols of the underachieving Eastern Conference.

    Indiana, Milwaukee, Chicago and Philadelphia are jockeying for the final three playoff spots, each with a losing record, raising the question: Who wants it less?

    The Pacers lost two primary starters to injury: Jermaine O'Neal (groin) for 24 games and Jamaal Tinsley (elbow) for 26. They dealt again with the Ron Artest distraction, before and after the Pacers traded him to Sacramento in January. "Our struggles can't be pointed to Ron Artest because he has been gone a long time," O'Neal said Friday before the Pacers lost to the Knicks, their seventh straight road loss.

    O'Neal returned two weeks ago, then the Pacers lost five in a row to drop below .500.

    "Right now, it's an old song, getting everybody on the same page," he said. "We have had enough people to play, it's just been poor basketball."

    The Pacers have recently lost to Atlanta, Houston and Toronto, playing apathetic defense and losing leads. Coach Rick Carlisle, in his third season, still keeps a tight rein on the play-calling, but his players do not always respond.

    "As much as we've struggled, we're fortunate to be in a position where we can still make the playoffs," Carlisle said.

    But how will mediocrity sit with the team's ultracompetitive president, Larry Bird, and chief executive, Donnie Walsh?

    Carlisle was fired by Detroit after compiling a better record than he has with the Pacers this season, and his and his team's performance, despite the circumstances, will most likely be discussed this summer.

    "You feel bad for him because it's been a tough situation," O'Neal said. "I like him personally, but if the team doesn't do well, we all know we're accountable for these losses."

    The Pacers are inclined to re-sign Peja Stojakovic and would listen to trade offers for O'Neal.

    "Obviously, we have to make moves and, in talking to the organization, we will make moves," O'Neal said.






    Italian Coach Still Shares His Secrets

    Sandro Gamba once received a standing ovation at Madison Square Garden, an honor that translates well on a résumé that now includes the Hall of Fame. Gamba, 74, one of Europe's most noted basketball pioneers, coached the Italian national team in four Olympics.

    He remembers clearly the ovation at the 1981 National Invitation Tournament. He was announced as the coach who led Italy to an upset of the Soviet Union in the semifinals of the 1980 Olympics in Moscow.

    Gamba also led his team to a European championship in 1983 and won five Italian league championships.

    "The best thing I've done was to coach Bill Bradley," he said last week from Milan, where he is recovering from hip replacement surgery. "He won the Rhodes scholarship to Oxford, and he came to Milan to play three days a week from London. He was like a little kid, very coachable. He always told me: 'Correct my moves. How is my shooting?' "

    One of Gamba's most famous students is Mike D'Antoni, who played at Olimpia Milan and is now coach and general manager of the Phoenix Suns.

    "He's a big brain," Gamba said. "As a point guard, he could read the situation in every part of the game. He asked me for notes on my tactics. It was his dream to be a coach."

    Gamba retired 15 years ago and teaches sports psychology at a private institute he founded in Milan.

    "I still have the fire inside me to teach," he said. "Communication is at the base of good coaching."

  • #2
    Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

    Originally posted by Unclebuck
    Nothing really new here.

    [snip]

    Carlisle was fired by Detroit after compiling a better record than he has with the Pacers this season, and his and his team's performance, despite the circumstances, will most likely be discussed this summer.

    "You feel bad for him because it's been a tough situation," O'Neal said. "I like him personally, but if the team doesn't do well, we all know we're accountable for these losses."
    Nothing new? JO's saying the team needs a new coach!

    Any time you hear "I like him personally, but" you've got to know that's not an endorsement. It's pretty easy to read that as JO saying he likes Carlisle personally, but not professionally.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

      Why? Why make that statement?

      He's been in the league a long time...he know people take things out of context and writers take quotes like that and spin 3 page analyses out of them. Couldn't he wait a couple of months before making comments about the future of the team. How about "Well, for now we're just focusing on making the play-offs, our goal is to still win the championship, etc., etc."?

      We're on a bit of a skid, Carlisel's been tuned out rumors are everywhere, Tins is off playing a martyr, it's a fragile time right now...Saras, JO, everyone, just shut up for a while!
      2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

        I'm glad JO said it. Ricky needs to go.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

          Originally posted by Anthem
          Nothing new? JO's saying the team needs a new coach!

          Any time you hear "I like him personally, but" you've got to know that's not an endorsement. It's pretty easy to read that as JO saying he likes Carlisle personally, but not professionally.
          That jumped out to me, too.

          I'm starting to think more and more that a new coach should be our #1 priority. The players never liked Rick's style, they simply tolerated it because it was bringing in wins (and Rick is Larry's buddy).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

            You guys are jumping the gun here, is J.O saying we need a new coach. I guess I don't read it that way.

            Should I change the title of the thread to "J.O. wants a new coach"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

              Originally posted by Anthem
              Nothing new? JO's saying the team needs a new coach!

              Any time you hear "I like him personally, but" you've got to know that's not an endorsement. It's pretty easy to read that as JO saying he likes Carlisle personally, but not professionally.

              It's pretty easy to read anything into anything if that's what you want to do.

              Just as easy to interpret that as just what he SAID, he likes the guy, but this IS professional sports, and you either produce or you're gone.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

                Originally posted by Anthem
                Nothing new? JO's saying the team needs a new coach!
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: NY Times article on the Pacers

                  Originally posted by PacerMan
                  Just as easy to interpret that as just what he SAID, he likes the guy, but this IS professional sports, and you either produce or you're gone.
                  That's what I thought as well. Jermaine has a legitimate point.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?????

                    Good, thats the first thing that needs to be done this offseason
                    Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/Hookjaw_Rox

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

                      If Carlisle is the only move in the offseason then the Pacers are in deep
                      trouble. I can hardly stand watching some of these players.
                      This is not a replay of the Larry Brown freeze out. This time it is more
                      players than coach.


                      owl
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

                        Originally posted by owl
                        If Carlisle is the only move in the offseason then the Pacers are in deep
                        trouble. I can hardly stand watching some of these players.
                        This is not a replay of the Larry Brown freeze out. This time it is more
                        players than coach.


                        owl
                        Completely agree. I'm fine with giving RC the boot, but these players have been, for the most part, injury prone, unprofessional losers. Bottom line.

                        We know what the initial direction the team was headed in when it was assembled. That evaporated with Artest's departure so what's there to believe that this core as it is constructed will ever work anyway?

                        Pieces don't fit, players have phased out, and so on and so forth. Time to go in a new direction.
                        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                        -Emiliano Zapata

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

                          Originally posted by D-BONE
                          Completely agree. I'm fine with giving RC the boot, but these players have been, for the most part, injury prone, unprofessional losers. Bottom line.

                          We know what the initial direction the team was headed in when it was assembled. That evaporated with Artest's departure so what's there to believe that this core as it is constructed will ever work anyway?

                          Pieces don't fit, players have phased out, and so on and so forth. Time to go in a new direction.

                          I don't think there is anyone who disagrees with that. Although there might be a few who want certain players to stay, everyone wants major player moves

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

                            Where's the article that says Rick says he wants new players? I certainly wouldn't blame him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: NY Times article: J.O. asks for a new coach?

                              Originally posted by grace
                              Where's the article that says Rick says he wants new players? I certainly wouldn't blame him.


                              He's way too classy to burn any bridges. Look how he handled the firing in Detroit, and not getting the Pacers head coaching job when Bird left in 2000

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X