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

WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

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

  • WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

    http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=7904939

    Rich Nye/Eyewitness Sports

    Bloomington - Indiana University is making plans to finish the basketball season without Kelvin Sampson. The coach of the Hoosiers is not expected to be with the team when they play at Northwestern Saturday.

    A source close to the situation tells Eyewitness Sports that officials from the IU administration have met with assistant basketball coach Dan Dakich about taking over the basketball team as interim head coach for the rest of the season.

    Dakich began this season in an administrative position with the team. He became an assistant coach when assistant coach Rob Senderoff resigned in October for his involvement in improper phone calls to recruits. Dakich is a former IU player and assistant coach under Bob Knight.

    Athletic director Rick Greenspan must make a recommendation to the president by Friday regarding Sampson's future and the NCAA allegations. The program is accused of five possible major recruiting violations, and Sampson is accused of lying to IU and the NCAA about it.

    The source says that by Friday afternoon, Sampson and the university will likely reach a financial settlement ending his employment, or Sampson will be suspended pending termination under the terms of his contract.
    The Hoosiers play at Northwestern Saturday night. IU is still contender for the Big Ten title, just a half game out of first place.

    It does not appear that Coach Sampson will finish the season with the Hoosiers.

    See the NCAA's letter to IU.

    See a complete list of allegations.

    See IU's statement on the NCAA allegations.

    See Sampson's contract.

    Read IU's statement following University President McRobbie's Feb. 15 announcement.

  • #2
    Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

    If this is official by now ignore what I'm about to say:

    Haven't we learned we really can't trust anything Channel 13 says? Maybe Rich Nye is more reliable than what's his name.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

      It's being reported by other sources as well. There have been indications of a buyout which would **** me off to no end. If a buyout is involved don't stop at Sampson as far as letting people go.
      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

        nothing official yet...

        Indiana Mulls Basketball Coach's Fate

        from The Associated Press

        BLOOMINGTON, Ind. February 21, 2008, 04:50 pm ET · Indiana could have a new head coach when the 15th-ranked Hoosiers travel to Northwestern on Saturday.

        School officials met Thursday to consider the future of embattled coach Kelvin Sampson, who has been accused by the NCAA of five major recruiting violations over improper telephone calls to high school players. The university was reviewing the allegations and had set a Friday deadline for a report and recommendation on action.

        University spokesman Larry MacIntyre and members of the board of trustees denied reports Indiana had decided Sampson's fate and would make assistant coach Dan Dakich the interim head coach.

        "I don't believe the athletic director has even given the recommendation to the president yet," said trustee Patrick Shoulders.

        Trustee Philip Eskew Jr. told The Associated Press he had been notified by e-mail that Indiana would have an announcement on Sampson's status Friday but did not have details.

        An NCAA report released last week accused Sampson of providing false and misleading information to university and NCAA investigators about the phone calls and failing to promote a high standard of honesty and an atmosphere of compliance in the program.

        Sampson has said he never intentionally provided false or misleading information to NCAA investigators.

        A report by the university in October detailed more than 100 impermissible recruiting calls, most of them by assistant coach Rob Senderoff, who has since resigned. At least 10 of them were three-way calls that Sampson had been patched into, a violation of NCAA restrictions imposed on Sampson for previous telephone improprieties while he was coach at Oklahoma.

        The university has contended the violations were secondary, not major.

        Dan Dakich, 45, a former Indiana player and assistant coach and former head coach at Bowling Green, took Senderoff's spot on the coaching staff in early November.

        Dakich, who was hired as IU's director of basketball operations in June, is subject to the same restrictions the university imposed on Senderoff, who was banned from calling recruits and making off-campus recruiting visits for one year.

        The NCAA has scheduled a May 8 hearing on the accusations. Proven major violations come with penalties that include teams being excluded from postseason tournaments.

        Following the release of the NCAA report, athletic director Rick Greenspan, university counsel Dorothy Frapwell and faculty representative Bruce Jaffee were asked to run the investigation and then recommend by Friday what steps the university should take.

        "I fully understand the desire for us, by many people, to move quickly in bringing this situation to resolution," university president Michael McRobbie said. "We intend to do just that."

        Indiana did not practice Thursday.

        Players attended a regularly scheduled NCAA compliance meeting but declined to comment as they left Assembly Hall.

        According to the contract signed in April 2006, Indiana pays Sampson an annual base salary of $500,000. The contract runs through the next five seasons.

        Sampson's deal includes termination clauses for violations of university or NCAA rules that eliminate the payments.

        http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=19098931
        This is the darkest timeline.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

          A damn shame. Such a waste, but Sampson can blame nobody but himself.

          If there was any doubt that this was EJ's only season, there isn't any longer.

          So, will Dakich have any assistants under him, or is pretty much the entire rest of the coaching staff gone?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

            Why a buy out? He broke his contract by cheating.

            Shouldn't that void his contract and IU owe him nothing but a don't let the door hit you in the @ss?
            "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

              I wonder of Ray McCallum will be staying on or not. He is not named in the NCAA list of allegations, but has been a Sampson assistant for years.

              I know this has been brought up on other boards, but is there any chance Scott Skiles would come on staff as an assistant this year?
              Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                Scott has a home in Bloomington I hear but isn't he a bit harsh for today's college kid?

                Now if we are going to stay with IU guys as coach candidates, there's this guy that was an IU assistant under Knight and has coaching experience. His name is Kyzhechevski or some such. Coaches on the east coast somewhere.
                I think we should go after him. Afterall, it IS IU and he did coach here........
                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                  Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                  Scott has a home in Bloomington I hear but isn't he a bit harsh for today's college kid?

                  Now if we are going to stay with IU guys as coach candidates, there's this guy that was an IU assistant under Knight and has coaching experience. His name is Kyzhechevski or some such. Coaches on the east coast somewhere.
                  I think we should go after him. Afterall, it IS IU and he did coach here........
                  Coach K was a player and assistant to Knight at Army. Plus I doubt he thinks to highly of us as an institution after what we did to his mentor.

                  Make no mistake, Dakich will have the interim coach title, but his job is basically just going to be to get the hell out of the way and let the team play the same way they have been all season.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                    All I know is that even after IU official's denials, Nye was standing by his story. He only said on air that his source was someone that "would definitely know." I think McCallum will stay on because he wasn't named in any of the infractions, but Mayer is probably gone.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                      Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                      Scott has a home in Bloomington I hear but isn't he a bit harsh for today's college kid?

                      Now if we are going to stay with IU guys as coach candidates, there's this guy that was an IU assistant under Knight and has coaching experience. His name is Kyzhechevski or some such. Coaches on the east coast somewhere.
                      I think we should go after him. Afterall, it IS IU and he did coach here........

                      I heard on the radio that someone said that Scott wouldn't want to be a year round coach and he wouldn't want to recruit. True or not I have no idea.

                      As for that Coach K guy he's got that other gig that's going to play some game in China. If I was an IU fan I wouldn't want someone with a second job.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                        CBS: Players will walk
                        • By Chris | Friday, February 22, 2008 at 3:40 am | No Comments »

                        Gary Parrish, the college basketball writer for CBSsports.com is reporting that several Indiana players threatened to quit the team during their meeting with Rick Greenspan Thursday night.

                        I’m going to go through the motions and tell you that we have been unable to confirm this report, and that it does not jibe with what we heard about the meeting in Greenspan’s office, which took place shortly after 7 p.m. and last about a half hour.

                        We have been told that the players were informed by Greenspan that no final decision on Sampson’s future had been made. The players then, in turn, shared their belief that Sampson should be allowed to coach the remainder of the season.

                        While our sources might have different takes on what happened, I cannot imagine that Parrish is throwing this out there unless he has it from a solid, trusted source.

                        Parrish also reports that his source told him that the university asked Sampson to resign Thursday night and that he declined and is “daring” the university to fire him.

                        heraldtimesonline
                        http://blogs.heraldtimesonline.com/iusp/
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: WTHR reporting Sampson out, Dakich in at IU

                          More on the threatened player walkout in it's own thread:
                          http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=37168

                          There have been some reports indicating Sampson might NOT be gone afterall... This certainly would explain the sudden about face and indecision.

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X