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

IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

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

  • IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

    Flawed conclusion
    Last summer, Johnson foresaw being traded, but not recently

    By Mike Wells
    mike.wells@indystar.com


    Anthony Johnson saw this coming last summer.

    Johnson was just a couple of months removed from playing a key role in the Indiana Pacers' playoff run when the team signed point guard Sarunas Jasikevicius. Johnson quickly surmised he could be the odd man out, demoted to third string behind starter Jamaal Tinsley and Jasikevicius.


    "The thought was in my head," Johnson said in a phone interview Tuesday. "They signed Sarunas, then they hyped him up with his jersey hanging in the store and doing other promotions about him. I knew they wouldn't be able to keep three guys that want to play major minutes."


    Johnson, traded to the Dallas Mavericks on Monday, changed his mind somewhat after he stepped in for the injured Tinsley again and put up career numbers, including walking off the Conseco Fieldhouse court to a standing ovation following a 40-point performance in a Game 6 loss to the New Jersey Nets in the playoffs.


    That notion vanished Saturday when Johnson learned the Pacers agreed to trade him for Darrell Armstrong, Josh Powell and Rawle Marshall because they wanted to avoid a point guard controversy and poor chemistry this season.


    "I'm a little surprised," said Johnson, who avoided most phone calls for several days. "I was tripping because (the Pacers) wouldn't take my agent's calls to tell him what was going on. They told me why they did it after the deal became official.


    "At the same time, I felt like I was one of the most reliable players on the team. I always took pride in being ready when guys were out of the lineup. I felt like I cemented a spot as one of the guys they would build around."


    Johnson started 89 games the past two seasons. His contract and reliability made him easier to trade. The Pacers think Tinsley gives them the better chance to win, but they also thought it would be tougher to move an injury-prone player who is signed through 2010-11.


    Then there was the issue of whether Johnson would accept being Tinsley's backup again next season.


    "If Jamaal came in in great shape and played the way he's capable of playing, I wouldn't have had no problem with that," Johnson said. "At the same time, though, if there's a competition and I'm playing the best, I feel like I should play the most. I just know the best guy should play and that's how I feel about that."


    Johnson got people's attention when he said the team's "culture has to change" at the end of their 41-41 season.


    "It's no secret they have issues," he said. "You can talk about injures, but you also have to talk about professionalism and being ready to play when the ball goes up. We didn't have the ship pointed in the right direction as far as being rested, being ready to play and playing with pure heart.


    "I wasn't afraid to say the culture has to change because it does. It's not the front office; it's the players and the coaches. I respect (CEO) Donnie (Walsh) and (president) Larry (Bird); they're doing what's best for the franchise. I feel like I earned (coach) Rick Carlisle's respect with the way I played. I thank them for sending me to a team like Dallas."

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...607260411/1088

  • #2
    Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

    so he was blackballed?
    STARBURY

    08 and Beyond

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

      Says all the right things, but we knew he'd do that much.

      Smooth sailing, A.J.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

        Originally posted by Anthony Johnson
        I wasn't afraid to say the culture has to change because it does. It's not the front office; it's the players and the coaches. I respect (CEO) Donnie (Walsh) and (president) Larry (Bird); they're doing what's best for the franchise.
        I think we need to pay attention to what he said, especially this.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

          I'm glad for both he and Cro that they are going to a decent franchise. It's too bad for AJ his salary was so low, which made it almost too easy to trade him.

          Good luck in Dallas AJ, say hi to Cro for me.
          :thepacers
          No Linking to your own site if it sells something.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

            AJ is a very smart and honest man.
            STARBURY

            08 and Beyond

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: IS: {Flawed conclusion}

              Originally posted by Hicks
              I think we need to pay attention to what he said, especially this.
              Sure, but, he may be the player to which he unwittingly refers!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                I found it interesting that he blamed the coaches as well as the players for the culture but then commended himself for earning Rick's respect. Does that mean that Rick was never the problem? Could someone like Kevin O'Neill and the fact that there was no players' coach there ala Mike Brown have affected this team more than we originally thought?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                  I'm positive O'Neill was part of the problem, at least. Rick's not exactly a social dynamite either.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                    "If Jamaal came in in great shape and played the way he's capable of playing, I wouldn't have had no problem with that," Johnson said. "At the same time, though, if there's a competition and I'm playing the best, I feel like I should play the most. I just know the best guy should play and that's how I feel about that."
                    This about says it all. "Best" can be a subjective thing in some people's minds. And it's clear he thinks he's a starting caliber PG. He would not have been happy playing behind Tinsley, if that's the plan.


                    "At the same time, I felt like I was one of the most reliable players on the team. I always took pride in being ready when guys were out of the lineup. I felt like I cemented a spot as one of the guys they would build around."
                    I feel for AJ because he must have felt he had a career season and that his days as a back-up PG were over.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                      Originally posted by bulletproof
                      This about says it all. "Best" can be a subjective thing in some people's minds. And it's clear he thinks he's a starting caliber PG. He would not have been happy playing behind Tinsley, if that's the plan.

                      I feel for AJ because he must have felt he had a career season and that his days as a back-up PG were over.
                      I agree with all of this. Unfortunately, AJ is a career "starter on a bad team, back-up on a good team" and if we want to be a good team, he can't be our starting PG permanently. That's all there is to it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                        Unfortunately, AJ != Cro. I miss him now even more.
                        I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                          "I'm a little surprised," said Johnson, who avoided most phone calls for several days. "I was tripping because (the Pacers) wouldn't take my agent's calls to tell him what was going on. They told me why they did it after the deal became official.
                          So what was the reason

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                            In the first part of the interview, you clearly sent the jealousy Anthony Johnson feels towards other players such as Saras; he always thought that he doesn't get enough respect for what he does, and that results in a chronical state of frustration.
                            It is possible that the Pacers realized they wouldn't be able to give Johnson what he wants and preferred to move him on instead of keeping an incontent player.

                            I wasn't afraid to say the culture has to change because it does. It's not the front office; it's the players and the coaches. I respect (CEO) Donnie (Walsh) and (president) Larry (Bird); they're doing what's best for the franchise.
                            I believe that he is indeed critizising Carlisle here. Yes, Carlisle liked him and gave him a lot of chances. But I think he, as a guy who has gotten to where he is with hard work, hates to see how some people on this team can do whatever they want and get away with it, because Carlisle surely won't intervene. AJ has seen all the bad character stuff Tinsley has pulled & and all the pseudo-injuries, & still, once he feels like coming back to play, he is per definitionem the starter, no matter how much he actually sucks.

                            Now, just let me get to one more point, that I hope all of you will adress!
                            I think that it is more than shameful to see how players are treated by the clubs and by the trade modus in the NBA. You just lost one player who gave his best for this club for 3 years, you lost another player, who played for the Pacers for, oh I don't know, almost a decade?
                            Where are these players now? They are just gone, and you didn't give them a proper departure at all, did you? No official goodbye ceremony, no thank you from the fans, nothing?
                            Many of you often say that Indiana has the best basketball fans in the world, probably the best sports fans in the whole world. If that is the case, how come there is no salute, no nothing to two players that loyally played for the Pacers for over 10 years combined? I even completely forgot about Fred Jones, who was thrown away without a word from one day to the other, without the fans organizing anything for him.

                            In Europe, fans say goodbye to their players in an appropriate way, especially the ones that have given the fans and the club a lot. I think it is unbelievable that a guy like Austin Croshere is just dropped without a word from the fans. It looks to me like the only players that get a decent farewell from their clubs and most of all fans, are the few ones, who get their jersey retired, which happens once in 10 years.

                            When Saras left Maccabi Tel Aviv after only two seasons, the Maccabi fan clubs made approximately 10 different homage videos for him, and he was heavily celebrated with standing ovations with one of those videos being played for him on the bigscreen. So was Anthony Parker when he left.
                            Have a look, this is what fans that care for their players do:
                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hteh7...h=jasikevicius

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: IndyStar} Flawed conclusion

                              How did the Bayern faithful treat Michael Ballack?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X