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

Reggie to the Celtics?

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

  • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

    Originally posted by Jay View Post
    The Knicks immedetialy signed Allan Houston as soon as the annual summer moratrioum was lifted, but it did take Reggie and the Pacers all summer to work out a deal even though there weren't any other legit choices (except perhaps Denver, and that's why we looked into bringing in Stith in the first place.)

    http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...er%2c%20Reggie

    http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...er%2c%20Reggie

    And on a side note, I personally think that in 2003 that if we wouldn't have offered him such a nice contract and would have offered what Los Angeles or New Jersey would have offerd, that he would have thought long and hard about going to either of those teams.

    Just my opinion, of course.

    Comment


    • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

      I would be outraged beyond words...Apart of idolizing Reggie as a kid was that he was a Pacer his whole career...I dunno what to think at this point.

      Comment


      • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

        He'll lose the majority of the respect I have for him.

        Comment


        • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

          Opinions are going to be all across the board on this.

          I am happy for Reggie and want him to come back...in green or whatever color he wants. Reggie has earned whatever he wants to do as long as it's legal. He paid his dues to the franchise unlike many of the clowns who have worn the uni over the last 5 years.

          I am a little surprised he did not contact Walsh, however. Nevertheless, I don't blame him for choosing a different team. Who would want to join this mess?

          This might be about him wanting a championship, but it's also about him having some fun playing basketball with other great veterans IMO. The Celtics will be getting a lot of attention.

          ...and it's gotta be better than sitting across from that other guy who doesn't have any hardware (Sir Charles).

          Comment


          • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

            Originally posted by MSA2CF View Post
            Maybe it's because I haven't been on Pacersdigest since April and I'm all disconnected from the community here, but I really thought there'd be more outrage on PD.
            We're all pretty much outraged-out.

            Comment


            • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              Reggie has earned whatever he wants to do as long as it's legal. He paid his dues to the franchise unlike many of the clowns who have worn the uni over the last 5 years.

              I am a little surprised he did not contact Walsh, however. Nevertheless, I don't blame him for choosing a different team. Who would want to join this mess?
              Pretty much how I feel about it.
              Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

              Comment


              • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                Originally posted by TheSauceMaster View Post
                Pretty much how I feel about it.
                I will be rooting for the Celtics this coming season if Miller is a Celtic, except when we play them.

                Comment


                • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                  this can't happen.....can it?
                  "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                  Comment


                  • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                    Geez, everytime I think the Celts can't possibly generate more press this off-season than they have in the past 15 years they go and pull this one out of nowhere! Reggie a potential Celtic? I wouldn't have been more surprised if they had said they asked Bird to come out of coaching retirement to coach Boston.

                    I gotta believe that deep down, as much as Reggie wants a ring he really does value the fact that he played his whole career with one team, and that ultimately will be the factor that leads to the "I was flattered to be asked, but after thinking it over..." speech to say thanks, but no thanks. I just can't imagine him in another uniform other than Pacer Blue and Gold; I wonder if he can truly imagine it at this point.

                    I need to call SuperReggie to see if she's heard the rumor - she's gonna flip out!
                    Your horse is dead, get off it already...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                      Originally posted by MSA2CF View Post
                      Maybe it's because I haven't been on Pacersdigest since April and I'm all disconnected from the community here, but I really thought there'd be more outrage on PD. Well, if anyone cares what I think, I hope Reggie takes a solid amount of time to think about this and doesn't rush into it. It would be so easy for him to say, "Ooh! Ooh! More money & maybe a ring!" and then jump right in without considering how us fans feel. Maybe deep down inside he doesn't actually care what his legacy is, and then that's just the way it is. But, I have to think that, after calling himself a Hoosier for life or something like that, that he'd be respectful to us Pacers fans. Then again, I don't know the guy one bit personally. I guess my personal feelings would be that he'd diminish himself in my eyes by leaving for another team; that's how I felt about both Jordan and Malone. I have a great deal of respect for guys who stay loyal. I'd lose some of that for Reggie.

                      Now, if he came back to the Pacers, that's pretty different. I still would cringe every time he would take a shot, but I did that for the last two years he played because I never thought it would go in...but it usually did. If I were Reggie's daddy, I'd suggest he be content with not winning a championship as a player. There are bigger things in life.
                      Well, I don't think that its about the money for Reg with his TNT gig and a few of his other endorsements. Its clearly about his love and passion for the game and the fact he loves to compete and be an underdog.

                      I do agree with you that I hope Reg takes some time to think this over, its a big decision. I would say about 95% of players coming out of retirement never return to their old glory, especially at 42.

                      Contrary to popular current opinion about the Celtics, they haven't proven anything yet - its not like they are coming back from an almost good team. There coming back from the lottery. There are a lot of unknowns with the Celts actually. Chemistry? So-far, everything is only on paper. If Reg was trying to get a ring for the sole purpose of getting a ring, he would have accepted Mark Cuban's offer last year to come back with the Mavs, or called up the Spurs like BigSmooth mentioned.

                      I also don't think he would come back to the Pacers. His legacy as a Pacer is from 1987-2005. However, that would be one of only a few ways he could ruin his Pacer legacy IMO. I previously stated some other reasons - that being if he came back as a Piston, Knick, Laker, or a Bull. The 4 teams that the Pacer nation love to hate. I could see Reg in any other NBA uniform actually, and I would root for his team when they came to Conseco (well actually just Reg). Reggie would still be a "Hoosier for life" in that case, but if he came back to any of those previous 4 teams, he would then have ruined his legacy and never be a hoosier for life (or Pacer for life).

                      And the other thing i was thinking about on the way home from work is that Reg didn't make the call, Ainge did. So its definitely not like he is out campaining for a comeback.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                        Maybe Reggie is trying to test the waters to see how many teams would be intrested.

                        Maybe Reggie has talked to Walsh about this and he gave his approval ? I don't think Walsh would discourage Reggie not to do what he feels is right.
                        Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                          This might be about him wanting a championship, but it's also about him having some fun playing basketball with other great veterans IMO. The Celtics will be getting a lot of attention.
                          You make a great point! Like I said, its definitely NOT about the money, or not even necessarily about the ring. Its about competing for Reg. But I cant see him sitting and playing only 15 minutes a game. Like Slick would say, hes a competitor baby!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            I am a little surprised he did not contact Walsh, however. Nevertheless, I don't blame him for choosing a different team. Who would want to join this mess?
                            Why would he contact Walsh? From everything I've read it was the Celtics who contacted Reggie. It's not like Reggie has been actively contacting teams looking for a roster spot.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                              I think he gave the same statement he did about the Mavs offer last year...with the twist of thinking more about it than he did the Mavs offer because of the new Celtics lineup.

                              I don't think he is seriously considering it; he was clearly just getting by when he retired and he is now two years removed. Even considering how he keeps himself in great shape, there is no way he is in NBA shape and it would take too much work to try and get back his game legs and lungs.

                              He may be just far enough removed from the game and the lifestyle to finally start to have legitimate thoughts of missing it all, but I can't see Reggie wanting to win a ring that way. Regardless of what anyone may say along the lines of "a ring is a ring, regardless", that just isn't so.

                              I played competitively for many years in many different sports (not that it compares in any way to Reggie's mindset) and I know how I would feel about it. I would feel great about the ring he would've won when they got to the finals in 2000, or any of the years we lost to the Bulls or Knicks. I would've felt great about a ring the year of the brawl. Had I been Reggie and went to the Heat for one year and won a ring, I wouldn't have felt nearly a part of that team as any Pacers team he was a part of. I have to believe it would feel like it had an asterisk beside it for all eternity, and I would have to believe that a ring with Boston (which is in no way guaranteed or even highly likely) would feel the same way. Especially having retired, gone through all the ceremony that he did....It just wouldn't feel right.

                              It would be along the lines of Stephen Jackson giving Reggie his ring or Reggie getting a "because we love you" ring had they won the year after he retired....He was too much a competitor for too long at the highest level to not know the difference between a ring earned and a ring like he would get if he came back with anyone for a year.

                              I firmly believe that he has the right to do whatever he wants, regardless of what he has or hasn't done and accomplished as a Pacer. Doesn't mean I will like it...

                              Until I hear more from him than the statement he has made so far, I will withhold further comment.



                              RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                              Comment


                              • Re: Reggie to the Celtics?

                                I don't think I would be angry if Reggie did this, but I'd be very, very hurt. And I'd definitely lose a good deal of respect for him for it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X