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

O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

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

  • O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

    O'Brien feels secure

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2008...TS04/812160358

    Mike Wells

    Pacers coach not worried about losing job despite losing record, firings of 6 coaches


    WASHINGTON -- Reggie Theus became the sixth coach without a job in the young NBA season when he was fired by the Sacramento Kings on Monday.

    Despite the quick hook from teams around the league, Indiana Pacers coach Jim O'Brien said he's not worried about his job status. The Pacers are 8-16 after Monday's 118-98 victory over the Washington Wizards..

    "Does it concern me? Frankly, it does not," O'Brien said. "When I came on board here, (Pacers president) Larry (Bird) hired me and told me the first couple of years were going to be pretty difficult."

    The Pacers, who have lost several games they were in position to win, are in a rebuilding mode. They traded Jermaine O'Neal during the summer and brought in seven new players. They're also without Mike Dunleavy (knee), have played the league's toughest schedule and lack an inside presence on offense.

    "I didn't come in here and have Larry say, 'I'm expecting you to win 50 games.' He said that we have a lot of work to do," O'Brien said. "We changed our whole team around this year and we had seven new players. We weren't sure what we had."

    O'Brien said he feels for the fired coaches, who include former IU player Randy Wittman.

    "It is disappointing," O'Brien said. "One of the things you learn as a young coach when you hire an agent is that when you get a job, you negotiate anticipating you're going to get fired. We all are aware of how fragile job security is in the NBA. . . . I hate to see it. A lot of these guys are not only acquaintances, but friends."

    Rough homecoming

    Pacers rookie center Roy Hibbert, who made his second start, didn't have a great homecoming in front of about 30 friends and family members who attended the game.

    Hibbert, who went to college at Georgetown and high school in Maryland, picked up three fouls in less than six minutes and his first shot -- a right-handed hook -- was an air ball. He finished with two points, two rebounds and a turnover in 12 minutes.

    "I think I need to do better," Hibbert said. "(My teammates) were telling me to get low. That's the main thing, to make sure I stay low to be able to move. I didn't do it today so I got those fouls."

    Ford dinged
    Point guard T.J. Ford went back to the locker room late in the fourth quarter after injuring his left groin trying to jump for a loose ball.

    "It's just a sore groin," he said after the game. "We'll see how it feels (today) and get ready for Wednesday."

    Attacking the glass
    The Pacers had 55 rebounds to Washington's 41.

    The Pacers grabbed a season-high 23 offensive boards. Jeff Foster and Marquis Daniels had seven and five offensive rebounds, respectively.

    "We take a lot of long shots and long shots rebound long," O'Brien said. "As a result, they were crashing the boards and it was bouncing over their heads. It's the way the ball bounced tonight."

  • #2
    Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

    O'Brien has nothing to worry about and he shouldn't. Unlike other insane franchises, we're going to give a guy who gives us a better chance to win every night than any other interm coach could hope for the opportunity to coach this team for a couple of seasons. Larry also understands that not even Phil Jackson could win 50 games with this team, so there's no point in holding him accountable to those kinds of statistics.

    The question with O'Brien should be "is he winning as many games as he can with the team as it is assembled now by utilizing players properly and getting the most out of his teams" rather than "can he win 50 games for us this year." Many GM's are so self-righteous that they refuse to admit they made bad trades and draft picks and hold the coach rather than themselves accountable for the bad record that follows such decisions. Blaming OB for why the Pacers are 8 games under .500 is like blaming a Kmart assistant manager for the demise of that entire company.
    Last edited by idioteque; 12-16-2008, 01:07 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

      Until we see some quote from Granger saying that he supports JO'B, he has nothing to worry about.....it seems that once the players voice their support for their head coach....the heads seem to start rolling.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

        Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
        "Does it concern me? Frankly, it does not," O'Brien said. "When I came on board here, (Pacers president) Larry (Bird) hired me and told me the first couple of years were going to be pretty difficult."

        "I didn't come in here and have Larry say, 'I'm expecting you to win 50 games.' He said that we have a lot of work to do," O'Brien said. "We changed our whole team around this year and we had seven new players. We weren't sure what we had."
        Does anybody remember the "lose 50 games" debate when Obie was hired? And how Obie and Pacers management strongly denied that such a statement had ever been made?

        Whoops.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

          This doesn't disprove that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Does anybody remember the "lose 50 games" debate when Obie was hired? And how Obie and Pacers management strongly denied that such a statement had ever been made?

            Whoops.

            Could Anthem explain? Then Pacers' management denied the likelihood of the Pacers losing, or Pacers' management's willingness for the Pacers to lose, 50 games. Now the Pacers' coach says that the Pacers' coach is not under any compulsion from Pacers' management to lead the Pacers' players to win 50. Both statements could be true at the same time. Putnam doesn't undrstand where the "whoops" comes in?
            Last edited by Putnam; 12-16-2008, 05:05 PM.
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

              Don't think the Pacers have lost 50 games in a season for a while...I'm guessing it will be a while before they do.
              Go Pacers!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                Could Anthem explain? Then Pacers' management denied the likelihood of the Pacers losing, or Pacers' management's willingness for the Pacers to lose, 50 games. Now the Pacers' coach says that the Pacers' coach is not under any compulsion from Pacers' management to lead the Pacers' players to win 50. Both statements could be true at the same time. Putnam doesn't undrstand where the "whoops" comes in?
                The original presentation tied to that "lose 50" was that it was to in no way be a "tough few years". They were going for the playoffs straight off and were not going to be satisfied with anything less.

                Tossed into this was that the hint was that SVG didn't want to come into a tough situation and wanted to go to a playoffs now team, but this couldn't be true of the Pacers truly were telling him that it wasn't going to be tough and that they were in a win now mode.


                Turns out it was a lie or truth stretching at least, just like many of us figured. Any sane person knew the team was in trouble, that not nearly enough was different to start winning and that just maybe it wasn't the coaching of Rick that was the problem at all, implying that bringing in a new coach wasn't going to solve anything.


                And yet here are a string of posters happy to say "let JOB have a chance while they fix the roster" and "JOB is just stuck dealing with bad management work", even though a lot of those same people are more than happy to say that it was time for Rick to go because the players were burned out on him - all 3 of them that had been with him more than 2 years (JO, Tins, Foster).

                Frankly you dump JOB now for the same reasoning you dumped Rick - you ignore the massive roster problems and the track record of the coach.



                BTW, I was against dumping Rick (duh) and am for keeping JOB for now at least. I just am sick of having the PR smoke up my rear, though this article isn't really part of that problem. The smoke blowing was done by Bird up until this season when he finally seemed to back off.

                JOB isn't in trouble because the team showed signs of playing better and still seems happy enough in interviews (with the coach, teammates).

                HOWEVER - there is no way JOB can survive something like a 25-30 win season either. The roster is better than last year, certainly more balanced, and should be expected to at least get back to the mid-30s in wins.

                If he gets in at that level he'll also need to see a real pick up next year to make it through that season. And honestly if he's a good coach then he will meet both those goals.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  The original presentation tied to that "lose 50" was that it was to in no way be a "tough few years". They were going for the playoffs straight off and were not going to be satisfied with anything less.
                  Why are these always mutually exclusive? The GOAL has always been to make the playoffs, and the season won't be considered a success unless they do. The CIRCUMSTANCES will make it a tough goal to reach, and it might not be reached, and people will be raked over the coals if it isn't reached.

                  How the hell does this equate in people's minds to be the extremes of "It's OK to lose 50 games" and "setting the playoffs as a goal is a lie to the fans"?
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    Could Anthem explain? Then Pacers' management denied the likelihood of the Pacers losing, or Pacers' management's willingness for the Pacers to lose, 50 games.
                    Supposedly, one of the Pacers criteria for coaches was that the coach would have to be willing to lose 50 games. IE the roster's a mess and we're not going to fix it this year, so do the best with what you've got because no help is coming through the door. When that came out the Pacers brass and Obie went STRONG against it, saying that they considered the team to be a playoff team and the year was going to be a successful year etc.

                    I can't find the link... apparently the forum upgrade has messed with Google's index. Can anybody help me with that? Surely I'm not the only one who remembers this.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      How the hell does this equate in people's minds to be the extremes of "It's OK to lose 50 games" and "setting the playoffs as a goal is a lie to the fans"?
                      Hold off on the anger until we find the quotes, please.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                        Bill, as Anthem said it's not US saying it's one or the other. We are talking about a STRONG STANCE the team took rather than soft playing the issue by acknowledging the tough situation.

                        It's exactly the same as getting one of the top 3Pt shooters in the NBA and getting in the draft...to get Stanko in round 2. Bird had a nasty habit of really overselling crap in the press and trying to force unrealistic ideas down our throats.

                        As I admit, NOW this isn't what's being done. You have JOB being his typical, honest self. The problem is just ACCOUNTABILITY, that's all. Back then it was talk not unlike what JOB is saying now that was really being slammed by TPTB. It was the idea that the coach had to be prepared for some lean years as part of the job requirements was what they slammed as being untrue.

                        Don't be so hung up on the "50" part. That was just a tangible figure on the general sentiment of "tough times" that a candidate was expected to face, but which TPTB said was in no way acknowledged nor expected. Playoffs baby, even when a lot of us said "WTF?".

                        Again, just like the "best 3pt shooter" and "reminds me of Mark Price". You can play the semantics game but let's be mature here and acknowledge that there are implications tied to all statements that you know the audience is going to pick up on (wink wink).

                        "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" - all you have to do is fudge the definitions and you were being totally honest. Anthem and I call BS on that.



                        The LIE/FUDGE is that they said they never acknowledged that a candidate was in for a rough ride and had to be prepared for that. What makes it a stupid fudge is that it was painfully obvious to most fans that it would be rough and that playoffs weren't a reasonable goal. Somehow Bird or whomever thought they were protecting ticket sales by denying that rumor so strongly, rather than simply correcting it.

                        If they had said your thing Bill, that it would be tough and perhaps unlikely but that ultimately you always shoot for the playoffs then it would have been fine. But you know as well as I do what word Larry was terrified to utter even as the elephant stood firmly in the center of the room - REBUILD.
                        Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 12-16-2008, 06:38 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                          Putnam understands now, and thanks Anthem and Seth for their explanations.
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Anthem and I call BS on that.
                            And just to be clear... I'm not mad about it. It strikes me as humorous, is all. Like you said, the coach is practically coming out and saying exactly what he slammed the press for saying 18 months ago.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: O'Brien Not Phased by NBA Firing Spree

                              I would give Obie until the allstar break to pass judgement him. Only because the schedule has been brutal. But, if they continue to lose to sub-par teams, that's not progress.I do think Eddie Jordan and Sam Mitchell are good coaches and could do well with the Pacers, if Obie is replaced next year.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X