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

We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

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

  • We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

    I had heard this before but couldn't talk about it.

    Ok, let's cut right to the chase. The sources that told me this (& BTW it was more than one) told me right up front that this was not a little incident. Bird say's in the star that he doesn't care, from what I've heard the same cannot be said for Walsh.

    From what I was told not only did Artest not show up for the meeting, he refused to return phone calls to the team. But yet he could make a radio interview.

    Remember all of that talk of behind the scenes stuff, this is some of it. BTW, it's not all of it.

    I know a lot of you love Ron, but I think you might want to prepare yourself.

    This is partially why I've been trying to make ideas where Al didn't leave, because I'm not 100% sure he will be gone. I'm not saying he won't be, but then again....

    Here is the part from the star article today.

    Artest skips meeting

    Ron Artest skipped his postseason meeting with Bird, drawing a fine from the team.

    Artest said he didn't consider the conversation necessary.

    "There was nothing to talk about," he said. "We lost."

    Bird said at least one other player failed to meet with him.

    "There were a couple of guys who didn't show up," he said, declining to reveal identities. "It don't bother me. People handle things differently. If guys don't do what they're supposed to do, they get fined."

    Artest spent Monday in New York, conducting a round of radio and television interviews and an online chat with ESPN. He also planned to complete a compact disc he is producing by the three-woman singing group Allure.

    He said it is scheduled for release in September.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

    First we can assume the other player was Kenny Anderson, or at least I can. Secondly, we can assume ROn is frustrated with the offense. Third we can assume Ron is gone. Period. You don't blow-off Larry Bird. SOme of his comment of late made it sound like he fully expected to be back next year. So I am guessing that this is just some of that immaturity thingie he has a "problem" with. Well, sorry but I think the Pacer brass has a thingie about whho is in charge.


    Say good-bye to Ron.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

      I also believe that Bird willl have little patience for this type of bahavior. I also think Ron will be traded. I have been thinking this for some time. I also wonder if the Artest's migraines may have been a smokescreen for other personal issues.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

        I'm predicting right now that if we lose Ron we will be giving up too many points next year.

        We'll be the Lakers of the East, decent scoring except when we're defended strongly and an inability to prevent scoring by other teams.

        Perfect way to design a team to lose to this year's champions.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

          I'm saying this now. We lose Ron, we won't go to the finals. With or without Tracy.
          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

            it really sucks that ron has to be a dumbass every now and then

            i absolutely love the guy....great heart...great effort...great talent
            he is my favorite player in the entire NBA....
            obviously we do not know what is going on behind the scenes....but it appeared to everyone that his behavior improved 100% from the year before....

            im hoping there is a way to patch up this latest incident (missing the exit interview)...and keep ron on the team

            his play elevates the play of the others on the court....something that very few people are capable of doing.....


            im hoping LB and DW will find a way to motivate him to behave and go to the damn team meetings like everyone else

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

              I have to admit Ron's actions the past month have been troublesome.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                Well I hope we don't trade him just for this. Is this a big deal. In and of itself, no, I think Shaq has missed the final meeting for 7 straight years.

                Add this in to the missed practices in the Pistons series and some other things, well, not sure what is going on with Ron

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                  Definitely dissapointing news to say the least.

                  Ron is my favourite player as well because I love his intensity and work-ethic...but when he does stupid things like this I just want to be able to find him and say "You play in the NBA!!! This is a dream come true for most people - take advantage of the moment - don't screw thing up. You have all the talent in the world".

                  I am just hoping that Larry & Donnie continue to look at Ron as a project in terms of his behaviour, because skill-wise, he will only continue to get better. He is an integral part of this team's make-up, and if he were to leave - I have to agree with what others have said...there will be no Finals appearance by the Pacers.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                    Well I hope we don't trade him just for this. Is this a big deal. In and of itself, no, I think Shaq has missed the final meeting for 7 straight years.
                    Yes, we don't trade him for this. I really don't think so should trade him period.
                    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                      Well I hope we don't trade him just for this. Is this a big deal. In and of itself, no, I think Shaq has missed the final meeting for 7 straight years.
                      Yes, we don't trade him for this. I really don't think so should trade him period.
                      You guys don't listen, do you? :shakehead:

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                        It's becoming more evident that Ron still has issues. Like anything else, you minimize your losses and move on. Almost every NBA coach/GM thinks that HE can be the one to control <insert trouble child here>. Migraines, home issues, jacking up an ugly 3 completely out of the offense, flipping people off, pulling down an opponents shorts (WTF ??). I wouldn't miss that. His value is high right now. Take advantage of it.

                        The Pacers have a history for greasing the squeeky wheel. And in the past, the have rewarded such behaivor by shipping the malcontent to a rather ****ty situation. I would say Orlando qualifies for that. And if a 3rd team gets involved - Chicago isn't contending anytime soon either. They ask - the Pacers oblige.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                          Like we talked about last week, its his pattern of selfish or immature behavior. Its not one individual incident. Each incident adds up, but some of you can't see the forest because you're so busy making excuses for all the trees that are in the way.

                          Keep making excuses for him... and you'll get to keep making excuses for him.

                          I'm saying this now. We lose Ron, we won't go to the finals. With or without Tracy.
                          It makes just as much sense to say that if Ron is on the Pacers next season, we won't go to The Finals, regardless of who else is on the roster.

                          Its not beyond the range of reasonableness that he's just as disruptive to the Pacers behind the scenes as he is to an opponent on the court.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                            Tens of teams have won NBA championships without Ron Artest on the roster and others will do so in the future. This team is bigger than one player.

                            If we wind up with a quality player in his own right when we lose Ron, so be it. I'll defer to the judgement of the Pacers brass on this one. They know much better than we do what is going on.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: We can talk about Artest not showing up for the exit interview now....

                              <nasty horrible words I'm too much of a midwest boy to bring myself to say in mixed company>!

                              You guys don't expect much, do you?

                              Take a player who was the poster boy for problems for a full year.
                              The next year that player cleans up the on-court act but still has issues that need to be worked out.

                              I guess the only solution would be to dump ... Rasheed Wallace, who was the linchpin of the Pistons' success.

                              On a scale from 1 to Kobe, these issues with Ron rate about a 3.

                              The prospect of having JO, Ron, and T-Mac on the floor next year makes me need to take a cold shower.

                              The prospect of JO and T-Mac without Ron (or an equivalent defender like Bowen, I'll give in that much) makes me want to bang my head against a Lakers poster.

                              Did ANYONE not just finish watching a 2-superstar-with-no-supporting-cast-and-no-defense-team get mutilated?
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X