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

Star: O'Brien's job is secure

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

  • #61
    Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

    I agree this sounds more as a warning to O'Brien than to the players. I wouldn't be surprised if JOB was allowed to know that he's a deadline to put up a better product on the floor.

    However, I disagree with most (all?) of you in one aspect: personally, I don't see definitive signs that the coach has lost the team. There's still plenty of defensive hustle and ball-sharing. Making body language readings is always problematic, but in the Miami game I noticed that players like Hansbrough, Murphy and Dahntay Jones were clearly bothered and unhappy with what was going on. It seems to me that will that the bricks they're throwing, they've been trying to get to the rim more than usual.

    Every team goes through rough stretches. If they last for too long, then eventually the coach will lose the players as they'll just stop trusting whatever he's trying to do and not even try to do it.

    Then again, I don't see those typical signs of a team that has tuned out the coac - selfish play, lack of effort and hustle, fastbreak points allowed.. they're still clearing the defensive glass more or less decently, which is no small feat for a team with a single above-average rebounder for his position in the entire roster; they're 5th in the league in eFG% allowed and 11th in def. efficiency, which is very good for a team marching out there with a Murphy/Hibbert combo for so many minutes (and rank 9th in fastbreak points pg allowed); they're 9th in FTA per FGA, which shows they're trying to attack the rim and draw fouls instead of just lazily settling for the jumper. The biggest problem, it seems to me, is that they haven't been hitting shots, as simplistic as this may sound. In the last 2 seasons the Pacers were one of the best teams in the league with the long-shot, this season they're probably one of the worst.

    I understand that 2 consecutive blow-out losses makes one wonder, but I'd wait before jumping to conclusions. When one is seeing a team whose players run away from physical contact in screens, as "screeners" or "screeneds", or jogging half-heartedly running back to the defensive end, then it's safe to assume that the coach isn't able to make the players believe enough to at least try. But I've yet to see that happening.

    Of course, that never stopped a GM from firing a coach (the Nets with Frank are a the very last example of that, I thought they were playing very decently for their level of talent when they decided to release him), but if I were Bird I'd try everything to stick with O'Brien for at least as long as it'd take me to get rid of this bunch of veterans. It may take more than 1 year, are they going to go with an interim coach for so long? Nah, unless the teams stops trying I'd just endure the frustration and wait.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      (...)
      The Houston Rockets called and told JOB and Bird to freaking man up already. The Pacers have about as much input from Yao and TMac this year as the Rockets do. Houston is flipping 18-13 right now with guys like Brooks, Scola, Ariza, and Battier...oh, and somehow they find a way to get low draft picks like Landry and Budinger significant playing time without losing as well.
      Yeah, but aren't those guys way more talented than the Pacers role-players? In my view they certainly are. I mean, with Yao and McGrady the Rockets would be contenders and certainly a top-6 team in the league. With Granger and Dunleavy, the Pacers would have a chance of fighting for the playoffs, but by no means they'd be a shoe in. Without their top 2 players, the Rockets can still make the playoffs but they have no chance of making a run; the Pacers become a bottom dweller.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        You might like rooting for a horible team, but most of us do not.

        I have disliked the hiring of JOb since the very first time it was announced he was the HC. I ranted and raved about his offensive system, and tried to tell everyone who would listen about how his defensive....well whatever it is, wouldn't work either.

        Everything that has happened wasn't about "if" it was about "when." There isn't an angry mob having knee-jerk reactions. Those supposedly happpened three weeks ago.

        For some of us, those reactions have been "knee-jerk" for well over two years now.
        I think the coaching staff did an excellent job the past two sesons getting this team to win 36 games and generally be in every game. So if JOB is fired tomorrow, I'll say he did a very nice job for two seasons

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
          Screw it,

          Lets all march to Conseco like the old days!!!

          I've got the pitch fork. Who has the tar n feathers?

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
            the players are the ones that are probably going to leave.
            Is that a promise?
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

              Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
              http://www.hoopsworld.com/Chat.asp?CHAT_TOPICS_ID=677

              Pierre in Indy, IN:
              Are the Pacers just going to let this season crumble to the ground, or will they make a trade, or fire Jim O'Brien.. or both?

              Alex Kennedy:

              The general consensus in Indiana is that they're still a good team, they've just been plagued with injuries that have slowed them down. I can't see Jim O'Brien going anywhere, he's done his best without a full deck of cards and the management seems to trust him. They'll likely shop around but I can't see them making a huge trade. They want to see how they're team performs when healthy.

              Probably the most deliusional outlook I have ever heard
              Ha I forgot I asked that question last night for today's chat! Thanks for the reminder

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I think the coaching staff did an excellent job the past two sesons getting this team to win 36 games and generally be in every game. So if JOB is fired tomorrow, I'll say he did a very nice job for two seasons

                What about the 29 games played this season?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  What about the 29 games played this season?
                  This years team is a complete mess, that is rather obvious. I would probably give O'Brien a B+ two years ago, an A- last season and a D this season

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    This years team is a complete mess, that is rather obvious. I would probably give O'Brien a B+ two years ago, an A- last season and a D this season
                    Yeah, he would earn a B so far this year, but has failed to find his best rotation. We have turned it around defensively from the previous years. Sadly, he has lost the offense somewhere along the way, so D it is.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                      I'm guessing that there are things that Bird and the FO sees and is privy to when it comes to the Team during Practice and off-court activities that the Public and the Press is not aware of.......so there may be others reasons as to why Bird said what he said. So, I can agree with Bird that some blame can be placed on the Players themselves for where we stand.

                      However, I refuse to believe that the Coaching Staff does not share ANY blame at all for where we are right now. What amount of blame falls on the Coach and how much falls on the Players....I do not know.....but I do feel that there is a certain amount of inflexibility and rigidness with in-game decision making that has affected how the Team performs along with a lack of consistency that is preached by the Coaching Staff to some players but not all.

                      I do see a lack of effort on the part of Players.....so, I'm not going to ignore that the notion that Players should not share any blame in this ( I've seen more effort and a "never say die" attitude from a much younger and less experienced Team like the Kings ).....but for Bird to ignore that there may not be other factors that could explain where we are now is simply burying your Head in the sand. Maybe this is part of the way that Bird operates.....maybe he has a belief that the FO must ALWAYS back the Coach no matter what....or worse, maybe there is an unwillingness to acknowledge that they may have made a mistake in extending JO'B.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        The Houston Rockets called and told JOB and Bird to freaking man up already. The Pacers have about as much input from Yao and TMac this year as the Rockets do. Houston is flipping 18-13 right now with guys like Brooks, Scola, Ariza, and Battier...oh, and somehow they find a way to get low draft picks like Landry and Budinger significant playing time without losing as well.
                        Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                        Yeah, but aren't those guys way more talented than the Pacers role-players? In my view they certainly are. I mean, with Yao and McGrady the Rockets would be contenders and certainly a top-6 team in the league. With Granger and Dunleavy, the Pacers would have a chance of fighting for the playoffs, but by no means they'd be a shoe in. Without their top 2 players, the Rockets can still make the playoffs but they have no chance of making a run; the Pacers become a bottom dweller.
                        If not the Rockets....then consider the Kings. They have shown more effort and teamwork with their Team under a New Coach ( minus their best Player in KMart ) then the Pacers have....and have done it with 5 more wins under their belt and have shown that they have far more promise then the Pacers at this point.

                        Of course, having who many consider to be a leading ROY candidate on your roster helps....but ( based off of what I have heard from Kings Radio) having a Coach that is willing to making minor adjustments to his Offense/Defense based off of what he has seen from his Players probably has helped.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 12-29-2009, 03:51 AM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Here's Bird's real dilemma:

                          He brought in both this coach and nearly all these players. There is debate as to the GSW trade for Dun and Troy, generally it's considered a Bird deal whenever Dun or Troy play great or when Jackson acts up, otherwise it's apparently all Walsh.
                          Never never never did this deal come anywhere near Bird. It was all Walsh, not even DOCTORS were consulted. The reports have been consistent and never wavering that Walsh did this deal all by his lonesome. I don't know who's switching back and forth, but whoever it is doesn't have the facts.
                          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            I've got the pitch fork. Who has the tar n feathers?
                            We can get that from one of brothers that lives in a rual area
                            Sittin on top of the world!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                              Ha I forgot I asked that question last night for today's chat! Thanks for the reminder
                              What I find the most disheartening is that the majority of the other writers/experts in other areas all see the dysfunction that is the PAcers, yet Bird is defiant in saying that things are on course?

                              So I either Boird is a genius that the rest of the experts/fans cant understand

                              or he is lost in his job
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Star: O'Brien's job is secure

                                Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                                Never never never did this deal come anywhere near Bird. It was all Walsh, not even DOCTORS were consulted. The reports have been consistent and never wavering that Walsh did this deal all by his lonesome. I don't know who's switching back and forth, but whoever it is doesn't have the facts.
                                LA,

                                I dont have any quote or story to back this up but even if Walsh was the deciding vote, I have a very hard time beleiving that Bird was unaware of the trade. In fact, I think he was a driving force behind it

                                Again thats speculation on my part but I go off Birds track record like drafting Crosher and then giving him an absurd contract based off of one playoff
                                Sittin on top of the world!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X