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

Donnie has earned some trust

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

  • Donnie has earned some trust

    For Walsh, Controversy
    Has Bred Success
    By Conrad Brunner
    Aug. 10, 2006


    Transition is rarely painless but, as Donnie Walsh has demonstrated throughout his career at the helm of the Pacers' front office, it is occasionally necessary and ultimately successful.
    As popular players depart and unfamiliar faces arrive, there is an inevitable sense of anxiety within the fan base. Controversies often arise as judgments are passed – often before the new acquisitions have stepped on the floor. Such is the case this summer as the Pacers are in the process of a dramatic shift both in the makeup of the roster but the philosophy of the coaching staff. Walsh and President of Basketball Operations Larry Bird already have acquired eight new players, dealing away popular veterans Peja Stojakovic, Austin Croshere and Anthony Johnson in the process. This, of course, has created quite a bit of consternation in Pacers Nation.

    Walsh and Bird have never shied from a controversial move, presuming they felt it was right.

    Far more often than not, it was.

    Walsh's first draft pick was the result of carefully created deception, and caused quite a stir throughout the league, particularly in New York. With the fourth pick in 1986, Walsh let everyone know the Pacers needed a big man and could be expected to take the best available from what appeared to be a deep crop of prospects. Rather than taking William Bedford or Roy Tarpley, he stunned the league with the selection of Auburn forward Chuck Person. The Knicks, who desperately needed a small forward and were already counting on Person, who would go on to win NBA Rookie of the Year honors, had to scramble for a Plan B and settled for Kenny Walker of Kentucky.

    His second made a few waves, as well, when in 1987 he bypassed local legend Steve Alford for Reggie Miller. Other than a mention, this one doesn't need revisiting.



    Smits

    The next year, he drafted unknown Dutchman Rik Smits from tiny Marist College when the consensus of draft analysts was Syracuse's Rony Seikaly was the better center prospect. While Smits struggled to adapt to his force-fed role in the NBA, Walsh stood behind his center in the face of increasing public criticism. Ultimately, Smits turned into an All-Star and vital cog in the team that rose to the Eastern Conference elite for most of the 1990s.

    Walsh has raised eyebrows with his trades, as well, but perhaps none more than the 1993 deal sending two-time NBA Sixth Man of the Year Detlef Schrempf to Seattle for the enigmatic Derrick McKey. The decision was made that the team had gone as far as it would go with Schrempf, despite is obvious talent. McKey, though far less productive, statistically, turned out to be another crucial piece of the puzzle who helped lift the Pacers to an entirely new level of success.

    True, he did trade away Mark Jackson to acquire Jalen Rose from Denver in 1996, but he re-acquired Jackson a few months later. He dealt Erick Dampier, a promising young center, to Golden State for Chris Mullin, a veteran with only a few years left.

    Put them all together, and the common thread was that Walsh often traded away individual talent to build a dynamic team that reached the Eastern Conference Finals five times in seven years with two very different head coaches, Brown and Larry Bird.



    O'Neal


    Then came the summer after the Pacers peaked with their first-ever NBA Finals appearance, losing to the Lakers in six games in 2000. Jackson left via free agency. Mullin was waived. Smits retired on the eve of training camp. Clearly, the team had to change on the fly. So Walsh dealt one of the most popular veterans in franchise history, Dale Davis, to Portland for the completely unknown Jermaine O'Neal, a wildly unpopular move that turned out to be a master stroke.

    Two years later, Rose and another local favorite, Travis Best, were dealt to Chicago in a seven-player trade that brought Brad Miller and Ron Artest in return. The ex-Bulls played vital roles on the 2003-04 team that won 61 games and returned to the conference finals.

    Of course, events of the past two years have led Walsh and Bird into their current stance, which is to reshape the roster in a leaner, more athletic, more versatile image. The changes to this point have been multiple but largely surrounding the core players. The idea, as it always has been, is not to stockpile talent, but to build a team.

    The Pacers have been re-invented almost entirely twice before under Walsh's guidance, missing the playoffs just once in that 17-year span.

    The point being, next time you feel the urge to join the rush to judgment, step back, look at the big picture, and have a little faith. You'd think, by now, it's been earned.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

  • #2
    Re: Donnie has earned some trust

    Before somebody yells at you:

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/06081...ntroversy.html
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Donnie has earned some trust

      NOW everyone will call him PR mouth piece again, but I totally agree with him and it's pretty impressive when you look at the whole body of work.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Donnie has earned some trust

        Originally posted by Conrad View Post
        The point being, next time you feel the urge to join the rush to judgment, step back, look at the big picture, and have a little faith. You'd think, by now, it's been earned.
        Okay, I'm struggling not to go into full Bball rant mode here. One "you fans should know better" article is enough, two in as many days is pushing it. I can't believe he's arguing that we should have faith in TPTB that let the Artest bomb go off in their face over and over and over and over again.



        [edit] And, once again, why is he extolling the virtues of Donnie when Larry's supposed to be doing everything.
        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Donnie has earned some trust

          I'm with DW on this one. While the Ron saga was horrible to watch, it is the exception rather than the rule. Go Pacers.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Donnie has earned some trust

            I like Donnie and Larry. I trust them. I think the Pacers have been blessed to have had Donnie for so long. I just don't have faith in TPTB doing the right thing for next year, which, to me, is rebuilding.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Donnie has earned some trust

              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
              Okay, I'm struggling not to go into full Bball rant mode here. One "you fans should know better" article is enough, two in as many days is pushing it. I can't believe he's arguing that we should have faith in TPTB that let the Artest bomb go off in their face over and over and over and over again.



              [edit] And, once again, why is he extolling the virtues of Donnie when Larry's supposed to be doing everything.
              I agree that Artest had worn out his welcome with his very inappropriate comments about being traded. However I'm struggling to see where Ron bombs were going off over and over and over.

              The "time off" thing was barely a speed bump, he was benched for a couple of games and Ron quickly apologised and supported RC's decision.

              Then there is the brawl, and its been debated to death. Let's never forget a key element here, that Maxwell got 10 games for getting physical with a fan for SAYING SOMETHING to him. It was on the road in Portland and no fans rioted or joined in, and in fact they pointed the jerk out and supported Maxwell.

              Had the beer throw been handled like the Maxwell situation and the crowd behaved like that Portland crowed, this isn't even a bomb. The point being that while it was a bad night, it wasn't 70+ games bad and wasn't a case of Ron doing something wrong week after week after week. It was ONE moment.

              Then the trade demand. So they let ONE bomb go off, the brawl. That's it.

              As far as I can see before Ron's trade demand there was very little reason to expect something like that. Under RC he had seemed to be a new man, his reaction to Ben during the brawl showed this in fact, and then he got blamed for the actions of others that made things so bad.


              I'm NOT defending Ron, per se, but I am saying that if you take away the trade request, which is the point where the Pacers said "enough", you don't really have good reasons for expecting trouble from him. I mean AJ was just as likely to go nuts again, or JO who had 2 different counts against him from the brawl night, or Tinsley swinging the dustpan like a weapon, at least if we base crazy off of the actions of that night.

              Ron was quirky to be sure, but anyone who says that they saw the trade request coming is lying. More flagrant fouls, some goofball comment about how he would box Ben, some talk about moving to Tahiti to record the next Allure album, that I will believe you saw coming.

              But I'm sick of people considering the good guy approach that Bird, Rick, DW and the Simons took with Ron as some weakness or fault. Ron created one issue, and it seemed like Stern overreacted to it. There is no reason to knee jerk on that.

              If Ron had simply played the season out in Indy as he did in Sacto, if he kept any trade requests behind closed doors, then EVERY single poster on PD would consider the move to stick behind him to be very smart. It's called setting an example, and by showing a player you support them you expect to normally gain their trust and respect.

              And the fact is that Ron's behavior outside of the brawl night was dramatically improved under Rick's coaching. Ron's repeated behavior was during Isiah's final year. For RC that all went away and was long into the past by the time the brawl showed up.


              The Knicks showed that faith in Spreewell, for example, and it paid off big time for them. The Pistons did the same with Rasheed and got a title out of it, a Finals appearance, and their best regular season ever.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                Seth, I'll leave it to Jay to list the many, many issues Ron had, both those in public and those in private that leaked after the fact. He's done it so many times I'm sure he's got a template written up. I'll just say that my faith in TPTB went south when I found out at the forum party before last about JO and Ron fighting, not arguing, fighting in the locker room on multiple occasions.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                  Quirky!?!?!?! Now that was kind.

                  And I totally disagree with you - the front office and the fans stuck with Ron until enough was enough. If you think it's over - think again.
                  The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                    I love Rik as much as the next guy, but is the writer trying to imply that picking Rik over Rony Seikaly was a shrewd move? Even given that Rony was hobbled by injures just as much as Rik, he had some very good years, and was a very good defensive post player. In my opinion, DW should consider himself lucky that Rony's career was so brief, because that was a blunder, any way you slice it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                      actually the aftermath of the Artest/Miller/Mercer for Rose/Best was what made it a bad deal... the actual deal was great... jalen didn't ahve a whole lot of quality time left and we got a couple of great players that signficantly helped initially... so the actual deal wasn't terrible.

                      the bender deal could be questionable especially for the aftermath but he had some real great moments when he was healthy enough to play and had things been different could have proven to be worth it...

                      while i question the moves this offseason i don't think its because of a lack of faith in TPTB...
                      This is the darkest timeline.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                        Originally posted by Bruno
                        The ex-Bulls played vital roles on the 2003-04 team that won 61 games and returned to the conference finals.
                        Plural? Weren't the other three already gone?
                        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


                        • #13
                          Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          Seth, I'll leave it to Jay to list the many, many issues Ron had, both those in public and those in private that leaked after the fact. He's done it so many times I'm sure he's got a template written up. I'll just say that my faith in TPTB went south when I found out at the forum party before last about JO and Ron fighting, not arguing, fighting in the locker room on multiple occasions.
                          I don't really have a template. From years of bitterness and anger, I can just recite them. But not tonight. I've got an early flight to NYC tomorrow.

                          Surely somebody can just 'bump' one of my recitals. But yes, there were lots of fistfights behind closed doors. I frankly don't know how they kept from slugging each other on the court... Ron is not too bad at deceiving the public, though. Maybe he should run for office?
                          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


                          • #14
                            Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                            These articles are beginning to get on my nerves as well. Don't get me wrong, I happen to agree with most of the stuff Conrad says, however, these last couple of days are making me think that not only is he the PR mouth piece but the PR toilet paper. I hate it when writers tell fans what they should and shouldn't do. It's our right to speculate and have uncertainties, that's half of what being a fan is all about.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Donnie has earned some trust

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section204 View Post
                              Ron is not too bad at deceiving the public, though. Maybe he should run for office?
                              Ron Artest for Lt. Gov. of Alabama in '12 !

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X