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

Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

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

  • Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

    If you have never read the Toronto papers than you might not know, they are as critical if not more critical than anything you'll see from New York, Philadelphia or Boston. These articles aren't, but they are really critical most of the time.



    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=970081562040



    An odd couple of friends


    DAVE FESCHUK

    As a testament to his obsessive devotion to the hardwood's art, Raptors coach Kevin O'Neill has often boasted that he partakes in no hobbies.

    So Rick Carlisle, O'Neill's best friend and the coach of the Indiana Pacers, appears a veritable renaissance man by comparison. Not only does Carlisle own an NBA championship ring from his turn on the bench with the 1986 Boston Celtics, he's also an accomplished pianist, a bowler of sufficient repute to own a monogrammed bag and shoes, and a scratch golfer with enough of an appreciation for the game's history to name one of his dogs after Canadian ball-striking wizard Moe Norman.

    So when they spend time together in the summer, as these two natives of upstate New York say they often do, the well-rounded Carlisle sometimes tries to remove the blinders from the single-minded O'Neill. The results, so far, have been unsurprisingly futile.

    "(Carlisle) took a whole year to get me to take up golf and we'd play every time we were together," said O'Neill last night, before his Raptors lost 83-77 to his pal's Pacers at the Air Canada Centre. "I'd end up pissed, throwing clubs, whooping it up and he'd be like, `You can't act like that out here.' Bulls--- I can't."

    Such is the fun when the odd couple of the NBA bench share a holiday. O'Neill's the public potty mouth, the hot-blooded diet Coke addict who'll subdue himself, one assumes, when he's dead. Carlisle's the relative mute, the 2002 coach of the year who was run out of Detroit in 2003 after complaints within the organization that he was too cold in his dealings with colleagues and the media alike.

    Last night the coaches squared off in an intriguing sideline chess match. It was only last season that O'Neill was Carlisle's lead assistant in Detroit; the systems their respective teams now employ are strikingly similar. So every time the Pacers took possession, O'Neill would glance down the sideline at his old buddy, who'd be holding up a hand signal that O'Neill clearly recognized. And as O'Neill shouted the name of the Pacers' pending play to his troops, Carlisle would bark counter orders to his.

    But it wasn't a fair fight. The Pacers have been one of the best teams in the league this season; the under-manned Raptors are over-achieving at a couple of games under .500. And while Carlisle, who'll be the Eastern Conference coach at next weekend's NBA All-Star Game, got big-time performances from the pair of Pacers who'll be on the all-star roster — 27 points from Ron Artest and 20 points and 12 rebounds from Jermaine O'Neal — the Raptors were let down by the sulky work of hometown all-star Vince Carter, who was held to 18 points by a combination of Artest's relentless defence and Carter's own apparent indifference.

    O'Neill slammed the scorer's table early and often. "Guard your (expletive) man!" he yelled after Artest scored yet again.

    And though the Raptors rallied late — coming back from a deficit as big as 15 to cut the gap to two — their out-of-control antics, a Milt Palacio turnover here, a couple of Carter-forced clanks there, quieted the Air Canada Centre before the buzzer sounded.

    "Run the (expletive) play," O'Neill hollered in the midst of that fizzling surge.

    Meanwhile down the floor, the seemingly unflappable Carlisle watched the action like a researcher observing his lab rats.

    Said O'Neill of his friend: "I always say that I'd like to be him for a day, he might like to be me for a day, but he would enjoy being me so (expletive) much that he wouldn't go back to being him. I have a lot more fun than that guy does, I'll tell you that right now."

    With the exception of game nights, he's right.

  • #2
    Re: Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=970081562040



    JENNIFER QUINN
    SPORTS REPORTER

    In their last five games, the Raptors have won two and lost three. The defeats are more important than the wins, and the losses say more about the team than the victories.

    With an 83-77 loss at the hands of the Indiana Pacers last night, the Raptors have now been bested over that span by three of the league's better teams — Indiana, Detroit and the Los Angeles Lakers. Their wins have come against Philadelphia and Orlando, two squads that are floundering.

    They're squarely in the middle of the NBA pack, an Eastern Conference playoff spot not certain, and it's a place where no one seems comfortable, or happy.

    "We've had three of these against quality teams at home in the last two weeks where we've had chances to win the game but we don't make enough plays," head coach Kevin O'Neill said. "We have to get over that hump and start making those plays against quality teams."

    Despite a fourth quarter that saw them make a real run at Indiana, the Raptors shot the ball horribly for three frames, got poor production from their backcourt and saw Vince Carter, their leading scorer, held to just seven field goals by all-star Ron Artest.

    "They want to lean on you the whole time and try and wear you down," said Jalen Rose, a former Pacer. He also had a bad night, making just four of 15 shots and finishing with 11 points. "We just didn't get enough multiple efforts from guys, myself included, in order to get us over the hump. And that's the frustrating part."

    In contrast, the Pacers sent the ball to Artest with regularity — he made 10 of his 15 shots to lead all scorers with 27 points — and into the post for another all-star, Jermaine O'Neal, who finished with 20 points and 14 rebounds. Al Harrington came off the bench to score 19 points and Jamaal Tinsley had 11, including a 25-foot three-pointer that effectively sealed the game.

    "That was a gutsy shot and not an easy shot," Pacers head coach Rick Carlisle said of Tinsley's make that put the Pacers ahead by five points. "He came back in cold. I kept him out with four minutes to go and it was big, the shot of the game."

    Before tipoff, O'Neill, who was Carlisle's lead assistant for two years when both were in Detroit, said his team needed to shoot well to stay with Indiana because the Pacers would rely on their post strength. They did just that, outscoring the Raptors 42-32 in the paint.

    For much of the first half, Toronto shot less than 30 per cent from the floor, and that allowed Indiana to open up a 14-point lead. The second half — especially the fourth quarter — was better, with Toronto outscoring Indiana 21-16 in the final frame, but it wasn't enough.

    O'Neill blamed the loss on his team's inability to play tough. He called it playing with "force," and refused to call out any of his team. But it's clear the Raptors, particularly Carter, have to stand up to the league's tough players — players like Artest.

    "We have to play with force, all the time," O'Neill said. "It's very difficult to play with force if you don't really stand up to people and go at them. We really didn't stand up to people and go at them the way we needed to."

    Carter made just seven of his 17 field-goal attempts and only got to the free-throw line four times. He finished with 18 points, six assists and a rebound.

    "We had the opportunity to get back in the game, and we have to take advantage of that," Carter said. "We didn't take advantage of it and maybe next time we can get a win.

    "They can be beat. We can play with them. We know that. We've just got to fine-tune a couple of things and go at them again."




    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=970081562040



    Pacers pack 1-2 punch
    Artest, O'Neal hoping to lead Indiana to title Team tries hard to erase memory

    of playoff swoon


    DOUG SMITH
    SPORTS REPORTER

    It is a luxury that sets the Indiana Pacers apart from the rest of the Eastern Conference and one that may eventually allow them to play for an NBA championship.

    It is a two-headed all-star monster, one a sublime offensive player, the other a hard-nosed defender, and it was on display in all its glory at the Air Canada Centre last night.

    Jermaine O'Neal, who had a ho-hum 20-point, 14-rebound night, and Ron Artest, who defended Vince Carter as well as anyone has, were the difference as the Pacers pulled out an 83-77 win over a game, but undermanned Raptor squad.

    "We have a couple of all-star players who played great games tonight," said coach Rick Carlisle. "Artest did a great job on Vince and Jermaine just played his heart out."

    Artest harassed Carter into a 7-for-17 night from the floor and even though the Raptor all-star scored 18 points, Carter had to work for every single one of them.

    "I thought Ron Artest played a monster game at both ends of the floor," said Carlisle. "He was able to stay with Vince and make it tough on him all night long."

    Those are the two cornerstones of a team that, right now, is head and shoulders above the rest of the conference. Their 37-14 record includes a 17-9 mark on the road, tying them with Minnesota for the best road record in the league.

    "One of our goals right from the start, and we've said all along, was to be a good road team," said Carlisle.

    And the Pacers have done just that by playing controlled, and smart, down the stretch during close games in hostile environments. After giving up a 10-0 run to the Raptors that pared a 12-point lead to two with about 2 1/2 minutes to go, the Pacers simply made key plays the rest of the way. They held Toronto to one point in that span and got a couple of huge buckets.

    That kind of end-of-game execution is the big difference between this year's Indiana team and last year's.

    The Pacers are in the same situation this season they were a year ago — when they got out to a 31-14 start, led the East comfortably at the all-star break but faded badly, going 11-17 down the stretch and losing their first round playoff series to Boston in six games.

    O'Neal said yesterday morning the team learned from that collapse.

    "Last year we were in a different position," said the starting power forward for the East in next weekend's All-Star Game. "I think in my first three years I'd never been in that position, of having one of the best records in the NBA, let alone the Eastern Conference, so we didn't know what it took to maintain our record.

    "Now, there's so much talk about us and our second half that we know what we have to do, we know that we have to take one game at a time to finish the season strong.

    We have an extremely deep, talented team and there's no reason that we shouldn't keep up the pace that we're at."

    With more depth than any team in the East everyone expects the Pacers to at least make it to the Eastern final.

    "I don't think anybody on our team is worried about the (slump) we had (last season)," said O'Neal. "There's no way we can do that unless everybody gets hurt, season-ending injuries and stuff like that.''

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

      the Raptors were let down by the sulky work of hometown all-star Vince Carter, who was held to 18 points by a combination of Artest's relentless defence and Carter's own apparent indifference.
      I dont think he was indifferent at all Ron just did a gteat job on him. He was clearly very frustrated by the D. If he was so indifferent why was he so frustrated?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

        Thx for the articles! Good reades. Particularly like the first one with Rick and Kevin O'Neill.

        Regards,

        Mourning
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

          The first article shortchanged JO by two rebounds.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Couple of interesting articles out of Toronto

            Indifference is something I've always associated with Carter.

            Comment

            Working...
            X