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

It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

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

  • #76
    Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    Why would he stay on, because he won many MANY awards for training? He could have gotten a job anywhere he wanted. After being a trainer for the Pacers for 35 freaking years, why wouldn't you want to slow down?

    I would put my money he got tired of reading comments on here talking about how the training staff sucked because Foster came down with a case of the common cold.
    I'd put my money that Bird/ Walsh got tired of reading/ hearing those comments and might have even been thinking the same sentiments themselves.

    They gave him a "graceful exit" since he wasn't ready to do so on his own. Just like when George Irvine ended up in the front office when they wanted to bring in a new, better coach. Or do you believe that Irvine was "promoted" to a meaningless front office job because of his excellent 54-130 coaching record?
    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


    • #77
      Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

      Craig was the 2003 winner of the Joe O’Toole NBA Athletic Trainer of the Year award; a 1995 inductee into the Indiana Athletic Trainers Association Hall of Fame as well as that organization’s Trainer of the Year winner in 1993; 2001 winner of the Distinguished Trainer Award from the National Athletic Trainers Association; a two-time NBA All-Star trainer and in 2004 served as a trainer for the U.S. Olympic basketball team.
      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/craig_050620.html

      Great comparison.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

        And yet he was fired, just the same. And given a consolation prize in the front office to save face, just the same.
        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


        • #79
          Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          And yet he was fired, just the same. And given a consolation prize in the front office to save face, just the same.
          Maybe it was realted to the whole Tinsley episode. Maybe he got hush money not to file suit of negligence against the Pacers

          just thinking
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
            And yet he was fired, just the same. And given a consolation prize in the front office to save face, just the same.
            Do you know he was fired?

            In Pacerland it's also possible he was thinking of retiring, cutting back, etc and instead got a position created for him where he could collect a check and not have to do a whole lot for it just as a thank you for his time with the organization.

            I have no idea. I agree in 49 states it would smell like a firing... but this Indiana.
            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


            • #81
              Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
              And yet he was fired, just the same. And given a consolation prize in the front office to save face, just the same.
              You're going to have to actually dig up some actual evidence. There actually ARE things called promotions, that don't need hidden agendas.

              You're trying to claim that a man, who was routinely getting awards in his respective field, was so bad at doing his job they wanted to get rid of him. To put it plainly, it doesn't pass the smell test.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                Yes, and moving a certified athletic trainer to the front office because they were hiring his replacement is not a promotion.

                Bball, you could be onto something. This could have been part of "his pension" - a decent-paying no-responsiblity front office job.

                I recall reading that he was tired of traveling. But he also had an assistant trainer that was replaced, too. As I recall, they dumped the entire training staff but they allowed David to stay on in the front office.

                Even the news release that Since86 referenced starts with this,

                "The Indiana Pacers announced Monday that longtime athletic trainer David Craig has been moved to the front office as assistant to the president, specializing in the medical aspects of the franchise." (Emphasis added.)

                And ends with:

                "Walsh said an announcement of the makeup of the training staff will be announced at a later date."

                http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/craig_050620.html
                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


                • #83
                  Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                  on a side note ,

                  Muggy as heck in Chitown today no?
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    You're trying to claim that a man, who was routinely getting awards in his respective field, was so bad at doing his job they wanted to get rid of him. To put it plainly, it doesn't pass the smell test.
                    That's Kegboy's point in the first place. Bird was cleaning house and brining in who he wanted.

                    I've not insinuated that he was fired for performance reasons, have I? Firing an incumbent because you want to build your own team of yes-men is a commonly accepted business practice. Not necessarily a good one, but a common one.
                    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


                    • #85
                      Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                      on a side note ,

                      Muggy as heck in Chitown today no?
                      God, yes.

                      I've got an appointment today to have my running stride videotaped - pary of my never-ending string of physical therapy (plantar faciaitiis, achilles tendonitis, IT band syndrome, etc.)

                      I'm just glad I didn't run to Grant Park at lunch time. I like hot weather, but this is way too muggy for anybody.

                      Did last weeks' storms casue any problems for you? Elmhurst got hit pretty bad, but this article cracks me up... blaming the mayor for getting 8 inches of rain in four hours is a bit silly.

                      http://triblocal.com/Elmhurst/detail/200515.html
                      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


                      • #86
                        Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        That's Kegboy's point in the first place. Bird was cleaning house and brining in who he wanted.

                        I've not insinuated that he was fired for performance reasons, have I? Firing an incumbent because you want to build your own team of yes-men is a commonly accepted business practice. Not necessarily a good one, but a common one.
                        Except the fact that Craig was moved to the front office June 20, 2005 and Larry was hired July 11, 2003.

                        Awfully dirty house if it takes two years to clean it.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          Much to your shock and chagrin I am not only going to agree with you to a point but I will one up you in the support for Donnie in this case.
                          Hear that, Elizabeth? I'm comin' to join you, honey...
                          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


                          • #88
                            Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                            Donnie Walsh was hired by the Knicks in April of 2008. Before that time he was here in Indiana. Nobody knows who was calling the shots before that. People who hate Bird just loooove to assume, but they know nothing. However I have a hard time believing the guy who had ran this team for so long had the keys removed from his hand, and Bird was in charge since 2003 .... all while Donnie stuck around for 5 years to pretend he was doing something. Sounds rather silly, no?

                            People forget that so quickly when they want to crucify Bird for a lot of decisions he more than likely, didn't make.
                            Right, if Bird was calling all the shots since 03 he would have been let go by now. I personally think Bird has drafted very well considering Indiana has not has a top 9 pick the last few years.

                            I would like to see JOB get the ax tho....

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              God, yes.
                              I've got an appointment today to have my running stride videotaped - pary of my never-ending string of physical therapy (plantar faciaitiis, achilles tendonitis, IT band syndrome, etc.)

                              I'm just glad I didn't run to Grant Park at lunch time. I like hot weather, but this is way too muggy for anybody.

                              Did last weeks' storms casue any problems for you? Elmhurst got hit pretty bad, but this article cracks me up... blaming the mayor for getting 8 inches of raihttp://triblocal.com/Elmhurst/detail/200515.html
                              n in four hours is a bit silly.

                              Yeah our power was out for a little bit

                              On a side note I am a certified athletic trainer, PM ' me if you would like some advice on how to treat the injury
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: It took Walsh 8 years, so just maybe Bird deserves a little more time

                                Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                                cordobes - that game that I remember was sometime during the lowly days when M.L. Carr was coaching. Pre-Pitino.

                                What you have brought up in my mind is the idea of Bird/Pitino - if Bird was a proponent of Pitino, why would Pitino not have wanted to work under him? Seems that is the way things work in the businessworld - you often work for the guy who supports your hiring. The reason I am surprised about Bird supporting Pitino is from that famous presser of Pitino's --- "Larry Bird isn't walking through that door...." While the reference was related to Larry's playing days, it seemingly also cast out the idea that Larry would really be involved in the basketball operations whatsoever. I personally thought it was a bit of a diss to Larry, and am curious of how Larry took it.

                                I was thinking the Pitino connection to the Celtics wasn't Bird, it was David Gavitt, certainly a legend in the PC/Rhode Island community.
                                I think Pitino was more than pleased to have Bird lobbying for him but that he wouldn't have liked to share the stage with anyone else, especially someone with such an high profile as Bird, even if he was guaranteed the final say in every relevant decision (a sine qua non condition for him to accept the job). Heck, he went to the length of stripping Red from his President title and to kick him out of Celtics team photo, a 40 years old tradition (I recall that in year 1 they were both at the center of the photo holding the basketball together, then in year 2 Red wasn't at the center any more and in the following years he simply vanished).

                                I really don't think the rant had anything to do with this. He also talked about McHale and Parish and Bird was already the Pacers coach when Pitino delivered that tirade.

                                I don't know about Gavitt either - he was Red's most loyal soldier, the one he brought in still in the late 80s to prepare as his heir, so I don't think he'd lobby for Pitino when Red was opposed to it. I'm not really sure about this, but I think Gavitt left when Gaston bought the team and ML Carr was promoted to GM.

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                The New York Knicks when Pitino coached them were one of the hardest playing teams I have ever seen, I mean ever. he did a great job coaching that team. I was extremely impressed what he got that team to do and how hard they played.

                                In Boston it just didn't work, the players didn't buy in and he was a disaster in Boston.

                                Why this occurred and why the huge difference? I don't know, probably different type players not willing to play and buy in to his system and his approach.

                                If Pitino had never gone to the Celtics and we only had his Knicks to judge, I would be a huge fan of his too, (even if I don't think his system is best suited for the NBA) I'll repeat the Knicks were maybe the hardest playing team I've ever seen. So I wouldn't criticize Bird if he is a big fan of Pitino
                                I'd add that Pitino was, in the mid 90s, an extremely successful college coach and an incredibly charismatic figure. Plenty of NBA teams were seeking his services - Gaston gave him full-control over the franchise and one of the highest salaries in the league for a coach/executive, if not the highest. Anyway, being a fan of Pitino as a NBA coach was normal those days - he had a very good reputation. We know now that undeserved.

                                (I also think Pitino was even worse as a talent evaluator and a manager - as a conductor of NBA players - than as a coach, but this isn't a thread about the Cs so I'll shut up about this).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X