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 Walsh in talks to keep Pace

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

  • Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...keep_pace.html

    Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

    BY FRANK ISOLA
    DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

    Saturday, March 22nd 2008, 4:00 AM

    Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh met Friday with his team's co-owners, Herbert and Melvin Simon, to work out a deal that could keep Walsh in Indiana and prevent him from replacing Isiah Thomas in New York.

    The Simon brothers would prefer to keep Walsh and have him reassume control over personnel decisions from Pacers president Larry Bird. A person close to Walsh said the talks could drag into next week and that the longer they continue, the more likely it is that Walsh will stay in Indiana.

    Garden chairman James Dolan met with Thomas prior to the Knicks' 120-106 loss on Friday night to the awful Memphis Grizzlies at the Garden. The loss dropped the awful Knicks to 19-49 heading into Saturday night's game in Minnesota. The crowd was generously announced as a sellout, with about 5,000 of those on hand there to see and chant for Spanish guard Juan Carlos Navarro, who had 17 points off the bench as Memphis snapped its 18-game road losing streak.

    Dolan did not watch the game from his baseline seat and it is unclear if he has another meeting planned with Walsh, with whom he met last week in Indiana. If the Simon brothers work out a deal to keep Walsh in Indiana, there is no shortage of candidates to succeed Thomas as the Knicks' president. Jerry Colangelo and Jerry West reportedly are interested but it is believed neither has been contacted.

    Other candidates include Nets assistant GM Kiki Vandeweghe, former Knick players Greg Anthony and Mark Jackson, former Sixers GM Billy King, Nuggets VP of basketball operations Mark Warkentien and perhaps even former Knicks president Ernie Grunfeld, who is with Washington.

    Thomas continues to deny that he is upset over reports that he is about to be replaced.

    "Comes with the territory of losing," he said. "That's just the way it goes. When you lose you're definitely subject to speculation. ... When you're losing, this is said about you and you knuckle up and you get better. I don't talk about my job status."

    Thomas wouldn't say much about Walsh, who gave him his first head coaching job with the Pacers. The Knicks secretly negotiated with Thomas prior to firing Scott Layden. The Daily News reported on Tuesday that Dolan had met with Walsh.

    "I have great respect for Donnie," Thomas said. "He gave me my first job in terms of coaching in this league. ... I haven't heard Donnie say anything. When you talk to him and he responds to whatever it is you're writing, then I'll respond."

    DENY, DENY, DENY: Incredibly, Thomas continues to deny he attempted to trade Zach Randolph to Milwaukee even though the Bucks' owner, Sen. Herb Kohl, on Wednesday confirmed a report in The News that he had rejected a deal for Randolph and Fred Jones.

    "He's not accurate," Thomas said. "I don't know what he and his GM discussed, but I know there wasn't discussion from our end in terms of trading Zach to Milwaukee."

    Thomas could not say why Kohl would make up the trade proposal. "I can only speak from our end," he said. "I normally don't discuss trades or trade rumors, but since this was talked about by the owner of the team, maybe there was something that they were thinking about. But we never were on that path." Asked if he were upset with Kohl, Thomas added: "Highly unusual for an owner to speak that way."

  • #2
    Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

    Why on earth does the New York media get the scoop on this stuff before our local media does?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

      Lots of papers, lots of reporters, lots of MSG snitches...er...contacts.
      Read my Pacers blog:
      8points9seconds.com

      Follow my twitter:

      @8pts9secs

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

        The Simons do realize that Donnie can't be here forever, right?

        What are they planning on doing after he's gone? Clones? Techno-organic constructs? Brain implant?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

          We desperately need new vision. I think it's time to let Donnie go (won't happen though, the Simons will try to keep him at any cost).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            The Simons do realize that Donnie can't be here forever, right?

            What are they planning on doing after he's gone? Clones? Techno-organic constructs? Brain implant?
            Booking him a space next to Ted Williams?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              The Simons do realize that Donnie can't be here forever, right?

              What are they planning on doing after he's gone? Clones? Techno-organic constructs? Brain implant?
              It's better than leaving Larry in charge by himself.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                Why don't the Simons have the balls to get rid of both of them and start fresh?

                OTOH, this whole thing is interesing. For all our "who did what" debates, it seems the Simons blame Larry for our ills. Maybe they're right, maybe not, but one would think they'd know better than anyone.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                  We have three choices.

                  1) Let Bird be in complete control

                  2) Donnie be in complete control

                  3) Let them both go and bring in someone new


                  I don't want number 1......I would be fine with number 2.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                    Why was Bird even brought in if he was never going to get complete control or Donnie Walsh was never going to leave?

                    Why spend that money? Why waste all this time?

                    -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


                    • #11
                      Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                      I read something somewhere (forget where) yesterday where a
                      'friend of Walsh's' was quoted saying that there were 'conflicts'
                      on personnel decisions between LB and DW this past year and
                      that it's been an uncomfortable situation.

                      No clue if that's accurate or not or if so, where specifically there
                      may have been a difference of opinion.

                      However, while it's water long since over the dam, I'll always be
                      curious who wanted to do what with L.A. this past Summer and
                      who was really available/discussed between the respective FO's.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                        I'm gonna guess that Walsh is playing both sides to get more $$$. I don't see how Dolan can't give full control to Walsh....just like the Simons would.

                        Interestingly though, there doesn't appear to be a shortage of top tier GMs that would be interested in the Knicks top job.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I'm gonna guess that Walsh is playing both sides to get more $$$. I don't see how Dolan can't give full control to Walsh....just like the Simons would.

                          Interestingly though, there doesn't appear to be a shortage of top tier GMs that would be interested in the Knicks top job.


                          I read somewhere that Donnie's wife did not want to move to New York. That could play a role in any mans decession making process. Personally I would like to see some new blood in the FO or if Larry has not had control let him try.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                            I would be willing to give bird a chance, but If Donnie is taking sole control I would be 100% fine with that. The man has a pretty nice track record all in all, mistakes have been made... but "new blood" could turn out pretty badly as well, its not like top tier GMs are gonna be knocking down the door to get this job.

                            either way I'm finished with the ******* two-headed monster.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Donnie Walsh in talks to keep Pace

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              Why was Bird even brought in if he was never going to get complete control or Donnie Walsh was never going to leave?

                              Why spend that money? Why waste all this time?

                              -Bball
                              Because at the time they thought Donnie would retire and they felt Larry had the ability to replace him. In time they learned neither was true.
                              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X