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

Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

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

  • #91
    Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

    Originally posted by MikeDC View Post
    It sounds to me like what happened is the Pacers medical staff screwed up repeatedly.

    Dec 22 he likely suffered a concussion that wasn't properly diagnosed as a concussion.

    One of the things that frequently leads to PCS problems is from repeated trauma. Like, if you have a mild concussion and wait a week for everything to heal, you're generally fine. But if you follow up the mild concussion more getting your head banged around, you have a much higher risk incurring long-lasting injury.

    This sounds like exactly what happened. Tyler suffered a concussion but was allowed to go out and play with it (and practice, I'd assume) the next couple of games. This likely exacerbated the problem.

    Then, they misdiagnosed the problem as an inner ear infection because it produces similar symptoms and often doesn't show any outward evidence.
    I'm with you until the last paragraph. I actually suspect he did have some kind of an ear infection, it just isn't the cause of the long-term symptoms.
    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


    • #92
      Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

      Originally posted by Putnam View Post
      EDIT: If anybody on the forum happens to be a medical professional and a genuine expert on ear infections and would identify himself as such, I'd be happy to read his opinions. If such a person exists, he ought to be able to end the debate with a real diagnosis.
      We don't know on any occasion if they are telling us everything they know, but we DO know that they are never under no obligation to do so. If they tell us a player is not going to play because of (something) , then we can believe the player won't play. The team is under no obligation to tell us a complete diagnosis, and probably has a moral obligation not to tell us everything. All we are entitled to know is that the player is out for medical reasons.

      But the rest of us ought to recognize how bogus our amateur diagnoses are.
      .
      No one amateur or professional can make a diagnosis without examining the patient and that can't happen.. However, i think honesty is always the best course of action especially to a public whose goodwill you depend upon as the pacers like any team requires support.



      For what it's worth:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-concussion_syndrome

      The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) and the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders have set out criteria for PCS and postconcussional disorder (PCD), respectively.
      The ICD-10 established a set of diagnostic criteria for PCS in 1992.[37] In order to meet these criteria, a patient must have had a head injury with loss of consciousness[22] and develop at least three of the eight symptoms marked with a check mark in the table at right under "ICD-10" within four weeks.[37][38] About 38% of people who suffer a head injury with symptoms of concussion and no radiological evidence of brain lesions meet these criteria.[39] In addition to these symptoms, people that meet the ICD-10 criteria for PCS may fear that they will have permanent brain damage, which may worsen the original symptoms.[3] Preoccupation with the injury may be accompanied by the assumption of a "sick role" and hypochondriasis.[34] The criteria focus on subjective symptoms and mention that neuropsychological evidence of significant impairment are not present.[30] With their focus on psychological factors, the ICD-10 criteria support the idea that the cause of PCS is functional.[22] Like the ICD-10, the ICD-9-CM defines PCS in terms of subjective symptoms and discusses the greater frequency of PCS in people with histories of mental disorders or a financial incentive for a diagnosis.[30]
      The DSM-IV lists criteria for diagnosis of PCD in people who suffered a head trauma with persistent post-traumatic amnesia, loss of consciousness, or post-traumatic seizures.[22] In addition, for a diagnosis of PCD, patients must have neuropsychological impairment as well as at least three of the symptoms marked with a check mark in the table at right under "DSM-IV".[22] These symptoms must be present for three months after the injury and must have been absent or less severe before the injury.[6] In addition, the patient must experience social problems as a result, and must not meet criteria for another disorder that explains the symptoms better.[6]
      Neuropsychological tests exist to measure deficits in cognitive functioning that can result from PCS.[4][25] The Stroop Color Test and the 2&7 Processing Speed Test (which both detect deficits in speed of mental processing) can predict the development of cognitive problems from PCS.[4] A test called the Rivermead Postconcussion Symptoms Questionnaire, a set of questions that measure the severity of 16 different post-concussion symptoms, can be self-administered or administered by an interviewer.[3] Other tests that can predict the development of PCS include the Hopkins Verbal Learning A test (HVLA) and the Digit Span Forward examination.[4] The HVLA tests verbal learning and memory by presenting a series of words and assigning points based on the number recalled,[40] and digit span measures attention efficiency by asking the examinee to repeat back digits spoken by the tester in the same order as they are presented.[41] In addition, neuropsychological tests may be performed to detect malingering.[13]
      [edit]Differential diagnosis
      PCS, which shares symptoms with a variety of other conditions, is highly likely to be misdiagnosed in people with these conditions.[42] Cognitive and affective symptoms that occur following a traumatic injury may be attributed to MTBI, but in fact be due to another factor such as post-traumatic stress disorder,[33] which is easily misdiagnosed as PCS and vice versa.[42] Affective disorders such as depression have some symptoms that can mimic those of PCS and lead to a wrongful diagnosis of the latter; these include problems with concentration, emotional lability, anxiety, and sleep problems.[4] Depression, which is highly common in persistent PCS, can worsen other PCS symptoms, such as headaches and problems with concentration, memory, and sleep.[43] PCS also shares symptoms with chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and exposure to certain toxins.[18] Traumatic brain injury may cause damage to the hypothalamus or the pituitary gland, and deficiencies of pituitary hormones (hypopituitarism) can cause similar symptoms to post-concussion syndrome; in these cases, symptoms can be treated by replacing any hormone deficiencies.
      Last edited by speakout4; 03-06-2010, 08:10 PM.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

        Don't forget, guys, that he saw a specialist in New England (Boston? New York?) about a month ago. So this isn't just a Pacers staff issue, this is a "He's seen everyone in Indianapolis and now is going out of state" issue.

        I'm not knocking the staff for the diagnosis. On the other hand, this means they've known about the PCS diagnosis for over a month and this is the first time it's come out.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          The concussion may have happened Dec 22
          I deleted my Boston game, but that might be it. Someone who has it should check the 4th quarter.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Don't forget, guys, that he saw a specialist in New England (Boston? New York?) about a month ago. So this isn't just a Pacers staff issue, this is a "He's seen everyone in Indianapolis and now is going out of state" issue.

            I'm not knocking the staff for the diagnosis. On the other hand, this means they've known about the PCS diagnosis for over a month and this is the first time it's come out.
            Did I miss something? Was the specialist a PCS specialist and not an Ear specialist?
            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


            • #96
              Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Did I miss something? Was the specialist a PCS specialist and not an Ear specialist?
              Maybe he went to an ear specialist, and the specialist went "there shouldn't be anything wrong with him" so they looked for another cause.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Did I miss something? Was the specialist a PCS specialist and not an Ear specialist?
                My main point was that as much as it's a knee-jerk reaction to blame the Pacers medical staff for a missed diagnosis, he's seen plenty of other doctors.

                We don't know who the specialist was or what they specialized in, but I find it hard to believe that he'd miss the diagnosis of "not an ear infection" if it's not an ear infection.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  My main point was that as much as it's a knee-jerk reaction to blame the Pacers medical staff for a missed diagnosis, he's seen plenty of other doctors.

                  We don't know who the specialist was or what they specialized in, but I find it hard to believe that he'd miss the diagnosis of "not an ear infection" if it's not an ear infection.
                  I'm thinking after the initial doctor said "Maybe this isn't an ear infection" then that is when the other specialist(s) came into play....
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    I'm thinking after the initial doctor said "Maybe this isn't an ear infection" then that is when the other specialist(s) came into play....
                    Sure, could be. I'm just saying that was a while ago.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

                      "It'll be like having another rookie year next season," O'Brien said about Hansbrough.
                      Hooray! Exactly what you want to hear about your #13 picked 24-year-old rookie.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Jim O'Brien confirms that Tyler has post concussion syndrome

                        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                        Hooray! Exactly what you want to hear about your #13 picked 24-year-old rookie.
                        I'll be thrilled if next season is a true rookie season. That would mean that the ear issues are cleared up.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X