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

Vescey rips Vitale

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Vescey rips Vitale

    I found this mildly entertaining


    LOWDOWN ON DICKIE DUNCE: AWFUL, BABY!




    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    VITALE STATS:
    Dick Vitale took his act to the NBA Draft on ESPN last week — and proved he's as much an airhead talking about the pros as he is on the college beat.

    June 29, 2004 --



    FAR be it from me to segue into summer without summarily slapping someone. Today's vacuous victim is none other than Dick Vitale, whose credibility lies somewhere between Bill Clinton and Baghdad Bob.

    For reasons known only to ESPN, the cable claptrap decided Vitale's putrid presence was necessary during the NBA Draft. Evidently the network felt obliged to offer up someone with the same odious opinions (minus subtitles) as Stephen A. Smith, "Fraudulent" Fran Fraschilla and Jay Bilas, whose impropriety regarding Josh Smith (No. 17, Hawks) already was noted in this space, and whose impartiality re Kris Humphries warrants serious questioning.

    When the Jazz selected the Minnesota frosh at No. 14, Bilas savaged him and his father on what is supposed to be a joyous celebration for the draftees, their kids and their parents. What ever happened to full disclosure? Why didn't Bilas, a former Dukie, inform ESPN's audience the 6-foot-9 forward had bailed on his original commitment to play for Blue Devils? Think Bilas might have an ax to grind?



    Vitale, meanwhile, college basketball's all-time shill/sellout (Billy Packer and Digger Phelps are demanding a recount), recited from his same tired tome. It's the play-for-pay guys' fault ... from the early entrants to the lack of fundamentals to the poor quality of panty raids.

    Not to suggest Vitale isn't well-versed to warble on the pros. After impressing only himself (and fooling only Bill Davidson) at the U. of Detroit —where Terry Tyler and John Long carried him like overburdened burros — he coached (for want of a more truthful word) the Pistons when they really were the Bad Boys.

    Try Vitale's forgettable foray (34-60) in one-plus seasons. How overmatched was Dickie Dunce? The '79-'80 Pistons, an outfit he personally assembled from which he was dutifully dismissed after a dozen games (4-8), wound up 16-66, the toilet paper standard for that franchise's futility.

    The only banner that spittoon ever lifted was a white flag.

    Thus, after failing miserably on the sport's toughest terrain, Dickie Dunce was more than qualified for his next gig ... airhead of the airwaves. You know what they say: Those who can, do; those who can't, dolt.

    Upon further review, Vitale is correct.

    The NBA is the reason a guy like Bob Huggins (this generation's Bob Boozer) is allowed to run roughshod over the once-proud U. of Cincinnati program. Though give Huggins credit for one thing — he has managed not to get fired, even though his players' GPA and his own blood-alcohol level are apparently at about the same number.

    The NBA is the reason Ohio State felt compelled to expel revered Jim O'Brien. Illegal payments to student/athletes? Details, details.

    The NBA is the reason the U. of Georgia had no choice but to turn itself in. That is, after the High Holy Harricks — the father, a long-time Vitale friend, and son — turned the Bulldogs into bullspit with money transfers and "tests" that one could pass while in the womb.

    The NBA is the reason St. Bonaventure's reputation became so tainted with phony college credits from phony colleges even priests are howling.

    And on (Baylor's Dave "Ignorance Is" Bliss), and on (St. John's), and on (Missouri). I don't know how David Stern sleeps at night.

    Having Vitale expectorate about the NBA Draft is like getting Michael Moore as keynote speaker at the Republican National Convention ... 'cept Moore may actually present a substantiated fact or a valid argument or two.

    For example, Dickie V's criticism of the 76ers' choice (No. 9) of Andre Iguodala was hopelessly nearsighted and simple-minded. ("How can you pick a kid who only averaged 11 points over Luke Jackson [No. 10, Cavaliers], who's a great perimeter shooter, blah, blah, blah..." he bellowed.)

    Well, for one thing, the 76ers already flaunt a great, young 3-point shooter named Kyle Korver.

    No doubt this is news to Vitale.

    More important, Iguodala averaged 12.9 points, 8.5 rebounds and five assists for the self-sacrificing, well-balanced Arizona Wildcats, a recurrent characteristic of a Lute Olson-coached team. The 6-6 aerodynamically sophisticated soph was the first player in the school's storied history to lead the team in rebounding, assists and steals in the same season. He was also the only Pac Ten player to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists and assists-to-turnover ratio.

    Surely this is Vitale's introduction to these stats.

    More perceptively, when junior Richard Jefferson declared himself eligible for the 2000 draft (No. 13, Rockets) he'd averaged 11.3 that season (one-tenth of a point higher than his average over three years), 5.4 rebounds and 2.7 assists for the self-sacrificing, well-balanced (Gilbert Arenas, Luke Walton) Arizona Wildcats.

    Does Vitale sense something along the lines of a trend?

    Jefferson turned out to be a pretty good pro/Olympian/rising All-Star without padding his personals in college. Iguodala is expected to enjoy a similar NBA career by everyone except Dickie Dunce, who doesn't seem to grasp the draft concept of picking the best pro prospect, not the guy with the most seductive numbers.

    Then again, Vitale is correct in one regard: The sanctity of college basketball. Over the past 25 years, not one institution has sunk to hiring him.






    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Vescey rips Vitale

    (somebody didn't get hired to be an analyst)


    I'm reminded of the saying..."pot meet kettle"...although I can't say I'm too dismayed to see them at each others throat.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Vescey rips Vitale

      Originally posted by indygeezer
      (somebody didn't get hired to be an analyst)


      I'm reminded of the saying..."pot meet kettle"...although I can't say I'm too dismayed to see them at each others throat.

      That is EXACTLY what I was going to say!! I'll take Vitale's knowledge over Vecsy ANY day.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Vescey rips Vitale

        I'd take UB's over either of them frankly. to UB.
        Play Mafia!
        Twitter

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Vescey rips Vitale

          I don't listen to either guy's talk.

          I was outraged with Dick at the draft. He brought up the Carmelo thing in the middle of the draft. What was he thinking? I hope he doesn't do that ever again.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Vescey rips Vitale

            I thought the entire setup was a little low class on the part of ESPN; Vitale was just icing on the cake.

            In the past when Hubie would make comments about the prospects he would almost never slam a kid he would just mention his weaknesses and areas he needed to improve. You would never hear Hubie say a kid has a great chance of being a bust; he has too much class to say something like that about a young talented kid. Also TNT was always in the studio away from the action letting the kids have their moment of glory. For ESPN to have that cast of characters hooked up so everybody in the arena could hear their commentary talking about kids being busts etc.,, while they were walking to the podium just wasn't right IMO. I hope next year they put the commentators back in the booth away from the event.
            [edit=73=1088525781][/edit]

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Vescey rips Vitale

              Originally posted by MSA2CF
              I don't listen to either guy's talk.

              I was outraged with Dick at the draft. He brought up the Carmelo thing in the middle of the draft. What was he thinking? I hope he doesn't do that ever again.
              Yeah that was dumb.

              I remember UB was mad before the draft when he found out this fool would be on the show, I said he wasn't that bad but now I see what everyone means.

              I think the draft should start at 10pm from now on.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                ESPN, the National Inquirer of sports media.

                Peter Vescey, who makes his living running other people down.

                Dick Vitale, a shrill loudmouth know it all.

                Jay Bilas, a man who's own agenda includes ruining other peoples day.

                The media ripping the media, and now we are talking about it, and paying attention to them, which is what they want. Controversy sells, think Madonna, think Rodman.

                King Solomon once said they is nothing new under the sun.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                  Vescey is a blowhard but he did make some good points. Especially about the 76ers not drafting Jackson and the Ricard Jefferson comparison.

                  I don't like that Vitale seemed to come to the draft with an agenda. He is the voice of college basketball and he obviously doesn't like it when High Schoolers go straight to the pros. The person I was most upset with is Bilas. When he voiced his issues with Josh Smith over the PA at the event I thought that was uncalled for. The kid could hear everything he said and I believe Smith even glared at Bilas.
                  "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                    I apparently missed what Bilas said/ did.

                    Can somebody give me the whole story or if it was discussed already, just point me to it.
                    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

                    • #11
                      Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                      Originally posted by Will
                      ESPN, the National Inquirer of sports media.

                      Peter Vescey, who makes his living running other people down.

                      Dick Vitale, a shrill loudmouth know it all.

                      Jay Bilas, a man who's own agenda includes ruining other peoples day.

                      The media ripping the media, and now we are talking about it, and paying attention to them, which is what they want. Controversy sells, think Madonna, think Rodman.

                      King Solomon once said they is nothing new under the sun.
                      Totally agree.

                      Let's face facts, ESPN's draft coverage is putrid compared to TNT, just like their game and studio coverage.

                      Dick Vitale's act can get old mighty quick, but I'll tell you one thing, he still has more basketball knowledge in his big toenail than Vecsey can ever hope to have.
                      ---
                      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section222
                        I apparently missed what Bilas said/ did.

                        Can somebody give me the whole story or if it was discussed already, just point me to it.
                        When Josh Smith was walking to the podium Bilas said, "Out of this draft, he is the most likely to be a bust." Everybody in the arena heard it including Smith.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                          ESPN has not been worth a flying #%&* since the mid 90's. TNT just has it going on from their game coverage to their draft coverage. Too bad this contract is going to wear on us all.
                          ...Still "flying casual"
                          @roaminggnome74

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Vescey rips Vitale

                            Originally posted by Roaming
                            ESPN has not been worth a flying #%&* since the mid 90's. TNT just has it going on from their game coverage to their draft coverage. Too bad this contract is going to wear on us all.
                            You mean you don't think Stuart Scott is a serious sports journalist?

                            ESPN and SportsCenter has been **** since Keith and Dan were so popular - everyone tried to be them, and no one was. So what we are left with is everyone with crappy catch phrases and nothing that funny.

                            Vitale's act is tired - he is a moron - I am not a Vescey fan, but he has it right here. Watch a Vitale game - then watch one a week later. A year later. 10 years later. Notice what he says, because it is always the same - and never about the game on the court.
                            [edit=401=1088555894][/edit]
                            Heywoode says... work hard man.

                            Comment

                            Previous template Next
                            Working...
                            X