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

I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

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

  • #31
    Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

    O'Brien was hired May 31st, 2007

    Donnie Walsh resigned effective at the end of the 07-08 season.

    I don't want to open old debates here I just mention this for reference.

    The roster the first year under O'Brien was:

    Marquis Daniels
    Travis Diener
    Ike Diogu
    Mike Dunleavy
    Jeff Foster
    Stephen Graham
    Danny Granger
    David Harrison
    Troy Murphy
    Ronald Murray
    Jermaine O'Neal
    Andre Owen
    Kareem Rush
    Courtney Sims
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Shawne Williams

    Here's my basic theroy on Bird bringing in O'Brien. Bird was looking to completely remake the roster. Of the group above only Dunleavy, Granger & Foster are still here. Dunleavy will most likely be gone after this season & Foster is right at the end of his career, so only Granger is the only core member of the 07-08 roster that matters after this season.

    Bird knew of O'Brien's way of doing things. How he ran his camps, his practice methods, what he expected from his players, what he demanded of them & what he would refuse to put up with from them.

    O'Brien was brought in to instill hard work & team building in the players Bird would piece together over the course of several seasons that it would take Bird to rid the roster of the players Bird didn't want here & bring in the type of players he desired.

    Bird wanted the Pacers to win but that was not the top priority. Get the right guys in here, instill in them the right mind set & down the road you will reap the rewards of winning.

    I believe Bird was fully aware of O'Brien's limits as a couch but also knew that O'Brien was the exactly the right guy to bring in during the re-tooling of the roster. O'Brien gets the guys to play hard, that is a skill that will remain with them for the remainder of their careers.

    I think Bird has pretty much collected the talented core he was looking for. With the key members of the team in place, attractive ending contracts to use at the trade deadline & big money coming off the books after this season I feel Bird has postioned himself to add the final touches to his team. A key trade or two & a wise free agent signing will fill in the gaps of the roster & then, with the right coach to lead them, we can watch tis team grow as a unit & finally win.

    O'Brien has done just what Bird hired him to do. Help build the players that will help the Pacers win, after he is gone.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        It's like what happened on "Airplane" ( the movie ). If the Captain and Co-Pilot of the plane is incapable of landing the plane....then it's up to the crew to see if there is anyone else on the plane that can land a plane.
        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        Always good to see rich cultural references from PD members, steeped in the classics.
        Anyone remember the movie Eddie where the Knicks took a fan out of the stands to coach the team? I'm all for it as long as it's not Whoopi Goldberg.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

          Jose, if you look back at the Pacers roster for the past couple of years, I think you'll find a whole laundry list of 1-2 year rentals.

          The Pacers roster has been being turned over for so long, I've lost track of who was a Pacer at one time, and who wasn't.

          Here's the roster the last year RC was here. (Highlited are players that didn't make it as a Pacer the next season, the one you listed)

          Darrell Armstrong
          Maceo Baston
          Maquis Daniels
          Ike Diogu
          Mike Dunleavy
          Jeff Foster
          Danny Granger
          Oriene Greene
          Al Harrington
          David Harrison
          Stephen Jackson
          Sarunas Jasikevicius
          Rawle Marshall
          Keith McLeod
          Troy Murphy
          Jermaine O'Neal
          Josh Powell
          Jamaal Tinsley
          Shawne Williams

          (My God, they had 19 players under contract that year. 9 of them didn't make it to Jim)

          And it's the same as the year before that. I won't list the names but 9 more players wore Pacer uniforms that year, that isn't on the list that I just provided.

          The Pacers have went though players like underwear.


          That was a huge reason why I didn't want the team to get rid of Rick, because the job he did with the instability of rotation players and having a "core" of knuckleheads was mission impossible.

          But regardless, Jim hasn't built anything. He routinely sat down Roy in favor of Rasho, Josh still doesn't see playing time, AJ sat behind TJ until 3 games ago, Tyler was racking up DNP-CD until 12 games ago, etc.


          That's why I've been so pissed off the past 3 years. Instead of actually building a team, Jim has decided to play his 1-2 year rentals heavy minutes, in favor of his young players.

          If there are two things I know about Jim, they are 1) Jim loves him some "stretching" of the floor and 2) Jim loves him some vets.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

            I enjoy watching Tyler and Paul play. Darren is ok but he sure turns the ball over alot when
            dribbling. That is about all I enjoy watching play in regards to the Pacers at this point.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

              If anyone remembers them from back in the day.....I have a bunch of vomit socks for sale.
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                The players don't know the offense anyway.
                I don't even know if Jim knows the offense to be honest it's so loosely based. Another thing that has always bothered me is it was said that Jim has said it takes people 3 years to learn his system or get a good grasp. So every draft we have is the start of a 3 year road to learn Jim's system? That's not even taking into account developing the player along the way that's just how long it supposedly takes to learn his system. I'm sure it's not just me but doesn't that seem staggeringly, achingly, almost awe-inspiringly retarded? I refuse to believe that Larry went "Wow! a system that takes 3 years to learn? that's gotta be some system!! can't wait to see how it works out 3 years down the road!"

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                  Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post

                  Bird knew of O'Brien's way of doing things. How he ran his camps, his practice methods, what he expected from his players, what he demanded of them & what he would refuse to put up with from them.

                  O'Brien was brought in to instill hard work & team building in the players Bird would piece together over the course of several seasons that it would take Bird to rid the roster of the players Bird didn't want here & bring in the type of players he desired.

                  Bird wanted the Pacers to win but that was not the top priority. Get the right guys in here, instill in them the right mind set & down the road you will reap the rewards of winning.

                  I believe Bird was fully aware of O'Brien's limits as a couch but also knew that O'Brien was the exactly the right guy to bring in during the re-tooling of the roster. O'Brien gets the guys to play hard, that is a skill that will remain with them for the remainder of their careers.

                  I think Bird has pretty much collected the talented core he was looking for. With the key members of the team in place, attractive ending contracts to use at the trade deadline & big money coming off the books after this season I feel Bird has postioned himself to add the final touches to his team. A key trade or two & a wise free agent signing will fill in the gaps of the roster & then, with the right coach to lead them, we can watch tis team grow as a unit & finally win.

                  O'Brien has done just what Bird hired him to do. Help build the players that will help the Pacers win, after he is gone.
                  I disagree with everything in here. From the moment Bird took over he stated that he wouldnt do this for very long, he wasnt interested in rebuilding, and he wanted to win now. This is the entire reason I've been anti LB. Nearly all of his moves have been based around trying to win now: drafting of "NBA ready" players (Rush, Hibbert, and Hans), extension of Foster instead of trading him when he had value, and the signing of D. Jones a veteran role player. Couple this with Birds comments when he initialy took over and I dont see how it can be considered part of some master plan. I never heard anything about a three year plan until it became obvious the team wasnt going anywhere.

                  As for O'brien, if Bird has brought in talent and JOB has taught them to play hard and help build them, then why does this team suck so bad? Even compared to other young teams? I dont see what JOB has built - Rush is still extremly erratic, Hibbert is in a freefall, DC was better last year playing a different scheme for a different coach, AJ and Hans only recently started getting time (based on history it likley wont last), Jones (Bird's FA pickup) never plays, and even DG seems to have regressed the last couple years. Only PG truly looks promising. Of course he's only had half a year of JOBs player building. Maybe in the second half of the season he can get trashed in the media (Hibbert, Mcroberts) or unexplicably benched after playing well (AJ). I guess you could say I'm not impressed with JOB's player or team building. Even the cleanup of the roster doesnt have anything to do with JOB IMO. It's not like he's keeping an Artest or SJax in line. The two guys that I wouldnt be surprised to have some type of issue have had them - Rush and Lance. Has JOB's tough love helped them? Rush was suspended for drug use and Lance is still a knucklehead.

                  The only way this team grows and truly starts to win is if Bird is able to add an all star player and a compitent coach. Congratulations - we are in the same position as nearly every other mediocre / bad team in the league. At least Bird has mostly maintained our salary cap flexibility. Of course his talk about wanting to trade our draft pick for a vetern concerns me - there is still time for him to screw up more.
                  Last edited by rm1369; 01-25-2011, 04:24 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                    Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                    I do not recall at anytime in my life, seeing a head coach so counterproductive, who's record is so poor and shows regression, yet manages to not only hold onto his job, but keep it.
                    First the word Regression doesn't mean what you think it means.

                    Second, this organization has nothing to gain by making JOB look bad. As much as you may have a personal desire to see him suffer, this is entirely about the organization for Larry Bird. Unless the replacement is ready and has a desire to take over now, there really is no logical reason for management not to wait until the end of the season to let Obriens contract expire.

                    Its good to show respect for your current employees, especially if you want quality people to come work for you in the future.
                    Last edited by spazzxb; 01-25-2011, 04:28 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                      So pissing off your players is better than pissing off your coach?

                      The NBA is a PLAYERS league. Franchises choose the players, over the coach, almost exclusively.

                      The Pacers did it 4 years ago when they choose a group of knuckleheads over a COY candidate in previous seasons, with multiple teams, and who continues to show that he's a great HC in the league in Dallas.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        I know that he said he wouldn't do it....but if the FO doesn't like what JO'B is doing, there is no one on the current Coaching Staff that can fill that role, but the FO recognizes that SOMETHING must be done in order to save the season, yet there is someone that is capable of TEMPORARILY filling that role....then the answer is clear to me.....Bird should be that guy for 4 months.

                        He's the only person in the Organization with any Coaching Experience that can do it without costing the Organization an additional cent.
                        He's been traveling with the team on the road anyway this month. He could man up and do it another 3 months. He would be able to analyze the assistant staff and players directly, would increase the accountability before the season ends.

                        Having Larry coach the team on an interim basis would also put some more butts back in the Conseco Fieldhouse seats too. There might even be a honeymoon period where the team wins 4 or 5 games in-a-row as a result.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          So pissing off your players is better than pissing off your coach?

                          The NBA is a PLAYERS league. Franchises choose the players, over the coach, almost exclusively.

                          The Pacers did it 4 years ago when they choose a group of knuckleheads over a COY candidate in previous seasons, with multiple teams, and who continues to show that he's a great HC in the league in Dallas.
                          I'm still not sure that Carlisle didn't ask to be fired. I think he wanted out as much as the players wanted him out.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                            Where is any proof that the players are angry that Jim hasn't been fired?

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            So pissing off your players is better than pissing off your coach?

                            The NBA is a PLAYERS league. Franchises choose the players, over the coach, almost exclusively.

                            The Pacers did it 4 years ago when they choose a group of knuckleheads over a COY candidate in previous seasons, with multiple teams, and who continues to show that he's a great HC in the league in Dallas.
                            The fans and players both turned on Carlisle. The players (Artest, JO, ?) made him there excuse/crutch, the fans their scapegoat. It never had anything to do with his abilities as a coach.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                              Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                              Where is any proof that the players are angry that Jim hasn't been fired?



                              The fans and players both turned on Carlisle. The players (Artest, JO, ?) made him there excuse/crutch, the fans their scapegoat. It never had anything to do with his abilities as a coach.
                              I don't remember the fans turning on Carlisle as much as it was thought that he had lost the players. I think there was more outcry from the fans to get rid of Jackson and Tinsley than there was to get rid of the coach.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: I just threw up!! Man this is depressing!

                                Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                                I don't remember the fans turning on Carlisle as much as it was thought that he had lost the players. I think there was more outcry from the fans to get rid of Jackson and Tinsley than there was to get rid of the coach.
                                I remember alot of people making fun of the card he carried around. Many complained that he called to many plays and was a mechanical slave to that card.

                                I notice that you didn't mention JO, and his domination. I feel Jo's contract and the years we spent waiting for him to dominate hurt this franchise more than Tinsley or Jackson did. Jackson was better than Dunleavy and would have expired a couple years ago. Obviously we are still paying Tinsley, but we are still paying the higher priced Ford(JO leftover or the cost of Roy) to be our third string PG.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X