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

Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

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

  • Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

    THIS GUY!

    Sorry, had to gloat a bit.
    Mine's the 4th e-mail down, Justin from Indy, about the Pacers (duh)

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...x?name=simmons

  • #2
    Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

    HOLY ****!!!!

    It's cool you got into his blog, but I'm actually impressed that there's some kind of video footage showing a rigged draft.....
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

      I saw that and wondered if it was anyone from the board. Cool.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

        Who cares about that we have a conspiracy theory...

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TgJE7C5wiU

        have breaking news: After 22 years of jokes, we now have indisputable video evidence that something fishy happened with the 1985 NBA Lottery. David Stern thought all videotapes of the event had been destroyed ... but no!!!!!!!!!!!! You can find the entire 10-minute lottery on YouTube.

        ESPN RADIO

        The Pulse on ESPN Radio: Bill Simmons explains why there should be an announcer bullpen and who should win the NBA MVP.


        Just in case they pull down the clip between the time we post this blog and the time you read this, here's what happens: when an accountant from Ernst & Whinney throws the seven envelopes into the glass drum, he bangs the fourth one against the side of the drum to create a creased corner (we'll explain why this is relevant in a second). Then he pulls a handle and turns the drum around a couple of times to "mix" the envelopes up. At the 5:23 mark of the clip, Stern heads over to the drum, unlocks it and awkwardly reaches inside for the first envelope (the No. 1 pick). He grabs three envelopes that are bunched together, pretends not to look (although he does) and flips the three envelopes so the one on the bottom ends up in his hand. Then he pulls that envelope out at the 5:32 mark ... and, of course, it's the Knicks envelope.
        Now ...
        A reader named Greg K. from Fair Lawn, N.J. (I'd give you his whole name, but I don't want him to be randomly found dead in his bathtub tonight), pointed this out to me: If you look closely right at the 5:31 mark, right as the commish yanks that Knicks envelope out, there's a noticeable crease in the corner of the envelope. You can see it for a split-second -- as he pulls the envelope up, it's on the corner that's pointing toward the bottom of the jar.
        There's a giant crease! It's right there! The same one the accountant created as he was throwing the envelopes into the drum!
        So you're telling me that, out of the seven envelopes in that glass drum, during a lottery when the NBA desperately needed the most ballyhooed college center in 15 years to save the league's marquee franchise, the commissioner coincidentally pulled out the envelope with a giant crease in the corner that happened to have the Knicks logo in it? This is the Zapruder film of sports tapes, isn't it? Where's Oliver Stone? Can we pull him out of the editing room for the "Alexander: The Really, REALLY Long Director's Cut" DVD?
        Three other things kill me about this tape: First, the host was Pat O'Brien, who's now relegated to stories like "Are Paris and Nicole feuding again? We'll have the story next!" Second, as Pat is pumping up Ewing's pro potential, he passes along a quote from a scouting director who said, "'We've had the Mikan era, the Russell era, the Kareem era ... now we'll have the Ewing era,' and he added, he doesn't see another era on the horizon." Good call, scouting director! And third, as the envelopes get counted down, it's legitimately exciting -- you could even call it the most exciting random sports moment ever. At least until May 22, 2007. Anyway, the weekly batch of links needs some sort of catchy hook, so here's what I came up with: "The Weekly Links." Now that's genius. You have to hand it to me. I didn't have time for additional commentary because I'm working on a column for Friday, so I'm turning everything over to you guys. As always, thanks for taking the time. Here's what you came up with:

        -----------from the article above

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

          Just watched the clip. Maybe I need someone to point it out, but I didn't see anything obviously fishy going on. I thought one or two of the envelopes banged the plastic before landing at the bottom of the ball.

          I felt bad watching Herb Simon at the last moment.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

            Originally posted by Mal View Post
            Just watched the clip. Maybe I need someone to point it out, but I didn't see anything obviously fishy going on. I thought one or two of the envelopes banged the plastic before landing at the bottom of the ball.

            I felt bad watching Herb Simon at the last moment.
            NOOOO its a conspiracy

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

              Congrats on the email JB. I'm sure it feels kinda cool.

              I sent an email to Dan Patrick once. He was complaining because the dude who won "Dream Job" (the ESPN voting show that picked the next talking head) got a contract for more money then some of the less known mainstays at Sportcenter ($90K). He was being all obstinate about how his job takes skill and dedication and made some terrible analogy about how people wouldn't want firefighters and doctors chosen by a voting show. My email said something to the effect that has-been athletes walk into his job rather than face the real world and that he needs to check his ego the next time he ever wants to compare reading teleprompters to doing real things like saving lives and healing people.

              He wasn't too happy about the email when he "came back from the break" and spent the next segment talking about how he wasn't trying to compare his work to that of doctors and firefighters while still trying to justify his analogy.

              It felt kinda cool.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                Originally posted by Mal View Post
                Just watched the clip. Maybe I need someone to point it out, but I didn't see anything obviously fishy going on. I thought one or two of the envelopes banged the plastic before landing at the bottom of the ball.

                I felt bad watching Herb Simon at the last moment.
                That and when he spun them they were all getting smacked around.

                Personally, I think he was able to find the Knicks envelope because of the hunk of flesh that was frozen to it from when some poor guy pulled it out of the freezer ...

                Or maybe someone was dared to lick it.
                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                  I don't see it. I'd love to believe it was rigged, but I don't see it.

                  Hey Stern, please do us a favor and rig it this year! We could use the pick!
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                    Originally posted by Fool View Post
                    Congrats on the email JB. I'm sure it feels kinda cool.

                    I sent an email to Dan Patrick once. He was complaining because the dude who won "Dream Job" (the ESPN voting show that picked the next talking head) got a contract for more money then some of the less known mainstays at Sportcenter ($90K). He was being all obstinate about how his job takes skill and dedication and made some terrible analogy about how people wouldn't want firefighters and doctors chosen by a voting show. My email said something to the effect that has-been athletes walk into his job rather than face the real world and that he needs to check his ego the next time he ever wants to compare reading teleprompters to doing real things like saving lives and healing people.

                    He wasn't too happy about the email when he "came back from the break" and spent the next segment talking about how he wasn't trying to compare his work to that of doctors and firefighters while still trying to justify his analogy.

                    It felt kinda cool.
                    Fool, thank you for pricking his ego. I can't stand listening to the man, even for Reggie.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      I don't see it. I'd love to believe it was rigged, but I don't see it.

                      Hey Stern, please do us a favor and rig it this year! We could use the pick!
                      Could you imagine the practice it would take?

                      Stern: Make sure you do something to the Knicks envelope so I can figure out which one it is

                      Accountant Dude: How about if I put it in the freezer?

                      Stern: Nah - I'm a lawyer. I may try to keep it short but I'll be talking a loooong time. No way it stays cold

                      Accountant Dude: How about a bent corner then?

                      Stern: That'll work - but how can we do it so nobody will see?

                      Accountant Dude: I'll just bend it after I put the logo in it

                      Stern: Are you crazy? We'll have national press, it'll be on live TV and the main reporter will be a guy who I'm confident will one day be able to tell if celebrities have underwear on when they go out for the night

                      Accountant Dude: Huh?

                      Stern: Never mind - can you bend it when you put it in?

                      Accountant Dude: (Blinks) - Not with my wife but one time there was this gymnast ...

                      Stern: Not that you idiot - the envelope

                      Accountant Dude: Oh - well, I suppose I could chuck it against the side of the drum - I'll have to practice though

                      Stern: No problem. You have a secure vault?

                      Accountant Dude: Sure.

                      Stern: We'll send you a duplicate drum and 5,000 envelopes. From now until the day of the drawing I want you to spend an hour a day practicing pitching envelopes. Don't worry - bill the league for consulting services or something.

                      Accountant Dude: I can do that.

                      Stern: And don't take any porn into the vault with you - I want the envelope bent - not sticky

                      Accountant Dude: (looks stunned at first, then contemplative)

                      Stern: Ok - together now ...

                      Stern and Accountant hold hands and chant in unison - Go New York Go New York Go New York Go!
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                        I didn't believe the hype, but now I've seen it.

                        For those that didn't see it happen, watch for these things, starting at like the 4:40 mark.

                        The only guy in the room who knows which envelopes are which walks up with all 7. He chucks the first 3 in regularly, and he bangs the 4th one against the side, bending the corner. He puts the last 3 in regularly.

                        When it is time for stern to grab an envelope, he is staring intently trying to find the envelop with the bent corner. He picks up three of them, and when he picks it up you can tell that it is the one with the bent corner. (Freezeframe)

                        Watch it as if Stern was a magician, and the other dude was his assistant, because that's what this trick is. They even seem to cue each other.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                          at Rim.
                          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                            Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                            Could you imagine the practice it would take?

                            Stern: Make sure you do something to the Knicks envelope so I can figure out which one it is

                            Accountant Dude: How about if I put it in the freezer?

                            Stern: Nah - I'm a lawyer. I may try to keep it short but I'll be talking a loooong time. No way it stays cold

                            Accountant Dude: How about a bent corner then?

                            Stern: That'll work - but how can we do it so nobody will see?

                            Accountant Dude: I'll just bend it after I put the logo in it

                            Stern: Are you crazy? We'll have national press, it'll be on live TV and the main reporter will be a guy who I'm confident will one day be able to tell if celebrities have underwear on when they go out for the night

                            Accountant Dude: Huh?

                            Stern: Never mind - can you bend it when you put it in?

                            Accountant Dude: (Blinks) - Not with my wife but one time there was this gymnast ...

                            Stern: Not that you idiot - the envelope

                            Accountant Dude: Oh - well, I suppose I could chuck it against the side of the drum - I'll have to practice though

                            Stern: No problem. You have a secure vault?

                            Accountant Dude: Sure.

                            Stern: We'll send you a duplicate drum and 5,000 envelopes. From now until the day of the drawing I want you to spend an hour a day practicing pitching envelopes. Don't worry - bill the league for consulting services or something.

                            Accountant Dude: I can do that.

                            Stern: And don't take any porn into the vault with you - I want the envelope bent - not sticky

                            Accountant Dude: (looks stunned at first, then contemplative)

                            Stern: Ok - together now ...

                            Stern and Accountant hold hands and chant in unison - Go New York Go New York Go New York Go!

                            Evidence B!!!! Where did you get that transcript?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Guess who has a blurb in Bill Simmons weekly blog??

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              Just watched the clip. Maybe I need someone to point it out, but I didn't see anything obviously fishy going on. I thought one or two of the envelopes banged the plastic before landing at the bottom of the ball.

                              I felt bad watching Herb Simon at the last moment.
                              You could discount the dented evelope and say the corner got creased as the envelope banged around inside the drum as it got turned, but you can't discount the facts:

                              1) Comm. Stern touched the first envelope w/both hands w/one hand "caressing" the dented corner. It was the only envelope he handle that way. That's significant. It was as if he purposely but oh, so casually inspected that particular envelope.

                              2) You can't prove that he didn't look inside the drum as he reached for the first envelop, but you can't prove he didn't. The camera pans to a close-up of the drum at that moment. But it's clear he didn't look inside the drum at any other pick, nor did he handle any other envelope w/both hands.

                              Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm...???"

                              Just think had the Pacers got the #1 pick in '85 they could have had Patrick Ewing and eventually Reggie Miller whom they picked 2 yrs later!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X