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

IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

    Pacers think big as they hit camp

    By Mark Montieth
    mark.montieth@indystar.com
    October 3, 2004


    The 61 victories and the trip to the Eastern Conference finals gave them credibility.

    A major offseason trade might have improved their roster.

    A summer of work and rest has improved their bodies.

    But the most valuable asset the Indiana Pacers can take into the start of training camp Tuesday is a good collective memory. Their six-game playoff loss to Detroit brought an unhappy ending to the most successful regular season in franchise history, but it had its potential benefits. It was instructive and humbling, and could be the prelude to a longer postseason run if they apply the lessons learned.

    Although Detroit was healthier than the Pacers, it also sustained its teamwork and intensity longer. It had gained from losing in the conference finals the previous season, providing a template for the Pacers to follow.

    "The major emphasis for us is to continue to stress . . . growth as a team," said Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who had coached the Pistons in the conference finals two seasons ago. "It was pretty clear the best 'team' won the championship. Detroit was the most together, the most unselfish. You see it time and time again in sport. You have to have that element completely intact to compete at the highest level."

    That usually comes from experience, something the Pacers now have in greater quantity and quality. Of the 10 players with more than 50 minutes in the Detroit series, only three -- Reggie Miller, Austin Croshere and Anthony Johnson -- had played significant minutes on teams that had advanced past the first round. So by the time the Pacers had swept Boston and disposed of Miami in six games, most of them were running on fumes while learning the hard lessons of playoff basketball.

    Pacers president Larry Bird knows them, having played on three title teams with Boston. He could only warn players about how the pressure and intensity escalate each round. They had to experience it for themselves.

    "I told them, 'What did you think, they give away these championships?' " Bird said.

    "You have to be focused. You have to be together as a team. It's tough."

    Faulty finish

    The Pacers were hardly dysfunctional last season while winning three more games than any team in the franchise's NBA history. Their chemistry was good. But they discovered it needs to be great in the playoffs.

    They shot just 35 percent against the Pistons, and only one player, Fred Jones, had a better shooting percentage in that series than he had in the regular season.

    While everyone had their difficult moments, Ron Artest seemed to embody the team's playoff demise. His scoring average, 18.3 points in the regular season, dropped to 14.5 in the conference finals. His shooting percentage dropped from .421 to .298. He also missed a few practices and a team flight because of what he called a migraine headache.

    He expects to be better prepared physically and mentally next time.

    "You have to be a close-knit team," Artest said. "You just have to go into the games wanting to win. You can't have any other agendas. You have to be able to step your game up. That was the biggest thing I learned in the playoffs."

    He said he also learned not to fight the system as often.

    "Last year I didn't give coach Carlisle a chance," he said. "I was down on the offense, but we won 61 games. I wanted to play more, but we still won 61. That brought me back to reality and made me think about things. We really do have a good team and I should keep my mouth shut a little bit."

    The encouraging news for the Pacers is that aside from Miller, time is on their side. The starters on the first team Bird coached, which won a then-club record 58 games and reached the conference finals in 1998, had an average age of 31.8. Dale Davis, at 29, was the youngest. The starters on last season's team averaged 28 years, a median distorted by Miller, who was 38. The other starters were 27 or younger.

    The discouraging news is that Detroit's starters all return and are even younger, with an average age of 27.6. The Pistons also made some offseason moves that could bring further improvement, such as signing Antonio McDyess and 2003 first-round draft pick Carlos Delfino, who played in Italy last season.

    Improvement won't be a luxury for the Pacers, it will be a necessity. And it will have to come in several small ways.

    So far so good

    Stephen Jackson, acquired in a trade for Al Harrington, should strengthen the backcourt. He enters camp as a backup but probably will play more minutes than the starter, Miller.

    Harrington's absence should open more playing time for Jonathan Bender and Austin Croshere, both of whom have received rave reviews for their summer work. Bender, according to the coaches who watched him work with trainer Macki Shillstone in New Orleans, has gained 15-20 pounds and has a stronger lower body. Croshere, who returned to Indianapolis early in September, also is stronger.

    "He's looking great," Artest said. "He's going to have a nice year."

    Jermaine O'Neal, meanwhile, ended his offseason in Los Angeles under the guidance of a strength coach and has been phoning in similar reports of improvement in his body.

    Jamaal Tinsley, who worked out in Atlanta, reportedly has kept his weight down and continued to improve his shot. He also has been dramatically more communicative than last summer, when he rarely returned calls to the team.

    All in all, it appears nobody will bring a negative vibe to camp. That's soothing for Bird and Carlisle, who say they are comfortable coming back with a team closely resembling the one that lost to Detroit.

    "I like our roster, I really do," Bird said. "We just have to come together as team."

    CEO Donnie Walsh built the teams that reached the conference finals five times between 1994 and 2000, and then rebuilt the team that did so last season before handing over personnel matters to Bird. He has seen growing pains before, and from teams older than last season's group.

    He expects to see fewer of them this season.

    "In most cases, you find the teams that end up winning championships have had to go through a process to understand how more intense it gets at each level," Walsh said. "You just keep going up levels of intensity. For a young team like we had, if you haven't gone through it, you don't understand what it's really like. You think if you play good you win, but it's not that simple.

    "Detroit knew what they were into and our guys didn't know. Now they know."

    Now it's a matter of what they can do about it.

    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

    Nice article. the most surprising bit:


    "Last year I didn't give coach Carlisle a chance," he said. "I was down on the offense, but we won 61 games. I wanted to play more, but we still won 61. That brought me back to reality and made me think about things. We really do have a good team and I should keep my mouth shut a little bit."


    Who is this guy and what has he done with Ron Artest? Nice to see some maturation though. I don't expect him to be a saint, but if he keeps showing gradual improvement temperament wise, I'm going to have to join the "Trade Artest over my dead body." camp.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

      That's all I'm asking for from Artest. Not an immediate change into a recipient of the NBA Nice Guy award, but a continual move in the right direction.

      He's a smart guy. He's going to figure it out.
      This space for rent.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

        Originally posted by Anthem
        That's all I'm asking for from Artest. Not an immediate change into a recipient of the NBA Nice Guy award, but a continual move in the right direction.

        He's a smart guy. He's going to figure it out.
        Yeah, I totally agree... Artest will never be an overly warm and kind individual... his game thrives due to frustration and anger... as long as he continues to learn to harness his passion, he will become a better basketball player and team player.
        Here, everyone have a : on me

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

          He's said 'the right thing' many times before. Does anyone dispute that he can be 'charming', if not absoluetely fascinating, when talking to the press?

          He's getting closer and closer to doing the right thing consistently when everything is going 'his way.' And considering where we've been, that's progress.

          I actually hope we get off to a rocky start this season so we can decide earlier, rather than later, if he's making any progress when the pressure is on. The regular season, as we saw last year, is a worthless measuring stick.

          Besides, the facts also indicate that when we went 7-8 during December last season, he got himself benched for 'conduct detrimental to winning' (Rick's words, not mine), so its not like he responded well to that pressure, either.

          I certainly agree that he's a smart guy, on the marketing side. He's taken a bunch of "Pacers" fans and turned them into Ron Artest fans - to the point where they actually believe the TEAM's fortunes are all wrapped up in one 'irreplaceable' player. :shakehead:
          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

          • #6
            Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

            Like I always say I never pay any attention to what Artest says, good or bad.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

              Jay, I wrote a post disagreeing with every point you made. I decided not to post it, because I respect you a lot and I'm not (yet) ready to get in a pissing contest. But intentionally or not, your post looks like troll bait. Your last paragraph, especially, was just plain offensive.

              Instead, here's a quote from a great book: The Skeptical Environmentalist. If you think any of the points in your previous post are worth discussing, let me know and I'll be glad to oblige.

              Mankind's lot has actually improved in terms of practically every measurable indicator.

              But note carefully what I am saying here that by far the majority of the indicators show that mankind's lot has vastly improved. This does not, however, mean that everything is good enough. The first statement refers to what the world looks like whereas the second refers to what it ought to look like.

              While on lecture tours I have discussed how vital it is to emphasize this distinction. Many people believe they can prove me wrong , for example by pointing out that a lot of people are still starving: "How can you say that things are continuing to improve when 18 percent of all people in the developing world are still starving?

              The point is that ever fewer people in the world are starving. In 1970, 35 percent of all people in developing countries were starving. In 1996 the figure was 18 percent and the UN expects that the figure will have fallen to 12 percent by 2010. This is remarkable progress; 237 fewer people starving. Till today, more than 2000 million more people are geting enough to eat.

              The food situation has vastly improved, but in 2010 there will still be 680 million people starving, which is obviously not good enough. This distinction is essential; when things are not going well enough we can sketch out a vision: fewer people must starve. This is our political aim.

              But when things are improving we know we are on the right track. Although perhaps not at the right speed. Maybe we can do even more to improve the situation, but the basic approach is not wrong.
              This space for rent.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

                I guess I was a bit crabby yesterday.

                Anyway, summer is over. You've probably seen this but here's the link: http://www.pacersdigest.com/cgi-bin/...d=1;gtid=96297

                Although your post probably set me off, I was trying (albeit poorly), to express my frustration with certain posters - not you, not UB - that seem to be more interested in "whether Ron is still on the Pacers?" and not "what's best for the Pacers?"

                He's here, training camp is starting, as long as he doesn't do anything new to undermine the team's progress then I don't have much more to say on the topic.
                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

                • #9
                  Re: IndyStar> Pacers think big as they hit camp

                  I got ya man.

                  I didn't think that sounded like a typical post from you.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment

                  Previous template Next
                  Working...
                  X