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

Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

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

  • Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...TS15/10060314/

    Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world

    When it comes to marketing campaigns, the Indiana Pacers haven't gotten a lot of breaks in recent seasons.

    I can still remember 2006, when billboards went up around the city saying, "It's up to us." They weren't out there more than 10 minutes when Stephen Jackson and some other players were involved in an ugly strip-club incident that involved a bit of gunplay.
    It's up to us? Actually, it was up to the prosecutor at that point.
    So this year, the Pacers marketing folks have come up with "The Promise" -- which sounds like a Nicholas Sparks book. "Protect The Promise," they are saying, and then a handful of Pacers are telling you what those generic promises are. Although I'm concerned when they say, "We promise to play Pacers basketball," which sounds like more of a threat to me.
    Better, I guess, than, "Pacers basketball: Where mediocrity happens."
    Anyway, all of this got me to thinking about some promises I would like to see fulfilled by the Pacers, and one promise I will make to the Pacers organization:
    Promise to be relevant for the first time since The Brawl. Nobody is demanding a winning season. Nobody is saying they have to be a .500 team or even make the playoffs. Just be relevant. Just be interesting. Just be entertaining, the way they were two years ago when they competed in every game, only to lose late.
    Last year's first two home games -- losses to Miami and Denver -- were among the more depressing, dispiriting efforts I've seen in my 10 years here. And it never got any better. They were bad and boring -- at least until the last month of the season, when they blew a high lottery choice once again. People in this town are dying for a reason to return to Conseco Fieldhouse. Give them one.
    Promise to stay out of trouble. This franchise has done a great job off the court in recent years, only to suffer a setback with the Lance Stephenson mess and Brandon Rush's drug suspension. This city has had enough, and it's unfair to the majority of great guys who've done all the right things for this team.

    Promise to stop talking about defense and start playing some.

    We heard it again from coach Jim O'Brien on the eve of tonight's preseason opener at Memphis; this team still isn't dedicated to playing NBA-quality defense.
    And there's no excuse. This team has a lot better pure athletes than the team that went to the 2000 NBA Finals. But that veteran group knew how to play team defense. This group, still . . . no clue. And yes, Danny Granger, team leader, I'm looking at you.
    Promise to let Darren Collison be Darren Collison. He is one of the best pick-and-roll point guards in the league, and O'Brien must let Collison initiate the offense off the pick-and-roll. Make your coaching philosophy fit the talent, not the other way around.
    Promise to bring back Bowser. I don't think Boomer's ever gotten over it.
    Promise to give Roy Hibbert every chance to reach his potential as a top-tier center. O'Brien has said his offense will go through the leaner, meaner Hibbert this season. Let's see him remain true to his word and stay committed to that approach.
    And another thing: When the Pacers play against those Euro-centers who play on the perimeter, start and play Hibbert and make the opponent pay for the mismatch on the other end.
    Promise to hold Rush accountable for the way he plays. Kindergarten is over. It's past time worrying about his fragile confidence. Either he can cut it or he can't. He says he's ready to atone for having earned a five-game drug suspension. Fine. We're waiting.
    Promise to make the starting power forward spot Josh McRoberts' to lose. According to people who watch practice every day, McRoberts has been the team's best player. Let's see what he can do with meaningful minutes.
    Promise to let the assistant coaches coach. O'Brien says every year he will give his assistants more of a voice, and every year, his voice ends up being the only one anybody hears.
    Nobody doubts who's in charge. Tuesday, he was all over his players, taking them to task for playing soft, for taking dumb shots, for failing to execute plays.
    Players, though, get tired of hearing the same things from the same person.
    Promise to grow. This franchise has been in a holding pattern in recent years, and for very good reason: It has been locked in salary-cap purgatory, and it's only now starting to get out from under all those onerous contracts.
    It's time to start building toward something. If Indiana can establish a foundation of decent, young players, then use its coming salary-cap advantage to make more Collison-like trades or grab a free agent, the Pacers will be a playoff team down the road.
    And my promise?
    If they fulfill their promises, I promise to get off their case.
    That simple.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

  • #2
    Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

    Really good article by Kravitz.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

      Sounds like Kravitz doesn't trust JOB's coachspeak.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        Sounds like Kravitz doesn't trust JOB's coachspeak.
        Him and Mike Wells don't sound like they trust JOB.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

          Right on the money here. Well done by Kravitz, I can't say there is anything I disagree with here.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

            In 49 states it's basketball... but we've got Jim O'Brien.

            I have zero percent faith O'Brien will change anything regardless of having a new team and new season. I'd still fire him right now if it was me just because I have so little faith in him.

            "Shoot the three and forget the D"
            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


            • #7
              Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

              O'Brien knows more about basketball than Kravitz does. Ignore this fool.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                Actually, the Finals team didn't play awesome defense either. They were definitely built around O.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                  Originally posted by flox View Post
                  O'Brien knows more about basketball than Kravitz does. Ignore this fool.
                  Says the man with Flim as his sig pic.
                  I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                  Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                  Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                    Jim may be smarter and have all his sources and all that...

                    but he still has no common sense

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                      Kravitz is like the Simon Cowell of the Pacers- regardless of new "promises" and such, he steps in with a dose of reality for everyone. It's refreshing to get that reality check once in a while.

                      I really don't trust OB though- he hasn't shown himself to be able to adapt... He's so set on winning that he doesn't want to buy into LB's 3-year rebuild idea. If he wanted to develop players, Hibbert and Rush would have played every game last year (with meaningful minutes). Instead, he wasted minutes on Dahntay Jones and Troy Murphy...

                      What I'm getting at is that OB doesn't understand that he's in the position to develop players and try to win a few games, but instead, he's playing a bunch of experienced role players and failing to fix the obvious problems in his coaching philosophy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        Actually, the Finals team didn't play awesome defense either. They were definitely built around O.
                        Exactly right. if you looked at all the defensive stats, I would guess last years Pacers team and the 2000 Pacers team would be about equal. Of course I am not a stats guy and I'll fully admit that the 2000 team was probably more experienced and more capable of stepping up the defense when needed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                          Very good statements by Kravitz and I agree with him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                            .



                            Move right along. There's nothing to see here.




                            .
                            Last edited by Putnam; 10-08-2010, 08:16 AM. Reason: My original post contained incorrect data.
                            And I won't be here to see the day
                            It all dries up and blows away
                            I'd hang around just to see
                            But they never had much use for me
                            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Promise keepers? Let's hope Pacers can change their world/Bob Kravitz

                              I'm coming up with different stats, although i found something else about the 2000 season much much more interesting and revealing.

                              Stats -

                              2000
                              pts given up per game - 96.7
                              defensive FG% .446
                              3 pt FG% - .327

                              2010
                              pts given up per game - 103
                              defensive FG% - .453
                              3 pt fg% - .363

                              That really tells us nothing we need to also look into league rank. I recall Pacers league rank in 2000 was average -


                              But that is not the interesting part -

                              In 2000 the Pacers had 6 players play in 80 game or more. Another player played 79 games and Dale davis played 74 games and those 8 players were the best players on the team.

                              Compare that to 2010 - Only 2 players played more than 80 games and only 3 played more than 70 games.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X