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

Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

    Kravitz had an article in the Star this morning that had an interesting tidbit to it aside from the subject of the article. I've bolded it below.

    Bob Kravitz
    The Indianapolis Star

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2011...an-improvement

    Relevant? That's an improvement

    A strange thing happened at the United Center with 24 seconds left in Game 2 of the Pacers-Bulls series.

    A chant went up.

    "Granger (stinks)! Granger (stinks)!"

    Sam Smith, the veteran Chicago basketball writer best known for his book "The Jordan Rules," turned to me on press row.

    "Forty eight hours ago, most of these people didn't know Indiana still had an NBA franchise," he said. "And they definitely didn't know who Danny Granger was."

    Back in the day of my old radio show, we asked ESPN national hoops writer Chris Broussard what he viewed as the national perception of the Indiana Pacers.

    "There is no national perception," he said.

    He was right.

    Shoot, there was hardly a local perception. People went from hating the home team to simply not caring. This year, the Pacers finished last in the league in attendance, a tough pill to swallow in a region where basketball is religion.

    The Pacers were the most anonymous, nondescript team in the NBA, bereft of stars, lacking any real identity as a basketball team.

    Now, though, that's changing. Or it's starting to change. It's hardly a paradigm shift nationally or locally, but with the Pacers playing the Bulls tough the first two games in Chicago, and returning home tonight for Game 3 at Conseco Fieldhouse, there's a growing sense that the Pacers have begun to matter again.

    And in a good way.

    "I walk around in the mall now or drive around, I definitely see more Pacers hats and jackets and shirts," Roy Hibbert said. "That wasn't the case when I got here. My rookie year, the team was trying to change its image. I had old women stop me in the street and say, 'You guys have got to stop acting like hoodlums.' "

    He laughed.

    "I was like, I wasn't even here, I was in college when all that stuff happened," Hibbert said. "But I knew what they were saying."

    Sure enough, the Pacers are very fortunate to be in the Eastern Conference; in the West, they wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs with 37 victories. But it's what you do with the opportunity when you get there, kind of the VCU Effect. And the Pacers have seized this opportunity and not only taken the Bulls to the limit, but reminded people nationally and locally that they do, in fact, exist.

    You think prospective free agents haven't noticed that Indiana is building an interesting, young team with massive potential? Suddenly, Indy doesn't look like hoops purgatory.

    I'm not going to get all dramatic and say this is the series that turns it all around for this franchise. They still finished last in the league in attendance. They still might not sell out Game 3. And there's a pretty good chance Chicago fans will turn portions of the fieldhouse into the United Center South. (Quick request: Can they bring the Luv-a-Bulls along?)

    It's unfair to expect some kind of Pavlovian response from local fans who've spent the last eight years either disgusted or bored by this franchise. It takes a lot more than 40 games of good basketball to make fans buy tickets.

    But it's changing.

    People are feeling good about this franchise, even invested.

    It is impossible, at this point, to give interim coach Frank Vogel too much credit. He has done an astonishing job, putting his imprint on this team emotionally and strategically. When he took over, this group was dispirited by years under Jim O'Brien, and was playing a style of basketball that favored early, quick 3-point shots. Vogel made this team feel good about itself, and altered the team's style, making it a more physical outfit, doing so without the benefit of an offseason.

    I'm just not ready to rip off the interim tag, not until the season is completely done. There are still too many questions:

    Will Larry Bird return and be the one making the call?

    How much money will owner Herb Simon be willing to spend on a head coach?

    In the long term, do you want a young coach leading a young team, or do you need a veteran with more experience and cachet?

    At this point, the Pacers players don't quite know whether Vogel is the easy-going Mr. Positive they sometimes walked over the first months of his tenure, or the increasingly tough taskmaster they've seen the past few weeks. Vogel raised eyebrows at a recent practice when he went verbally toe-to-toe with veteran James Posey.

    "As he's gone along, he's gotten more comfortable and figured out what his coaching style is," Pacers veteran Mike Dunleavy said. "At the beginning, he wanted to be overly positive, and that was a good thing. Now he's gotten to the point where he's raising his voice a little bit and cracking the whip a little bit recently."

    What's interesting is, there's a local debate over Vogel's future. Look at the message boards, listen to radio . . . they're talking about it. The noxious cloud of apathy is starting to lift.

    Finally, after all these lost years, Indiana Pacers basketball has begun to matter again.
    Really glad to hear Frank is finding his path as far as what type of authoritarian he needs to be. For the players to really respect him and want to play hard for him 100% of the time they need to know he's not just a pushover. Just like the potential all our young players have, Frank is improving as well and showing he has just as much potential as them. While I think the front office does need to do a thorough search for our next coach and wait several weeks after our season is over to allow biased (good) emotions to subside that cloud the perception of Vogel, I can't help but be excited like many of you at the thought of Vogel and this team both growing together in the future.
    Last edited by Phree Refill; 04-21-2011, 06:54 AM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

    one might presume that in addition to growing into the job, the front office might be giving vogel permission to "crack the whip" a bit, signs to me that they are exhibiting confidence in him.

    just a theory.
    "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

      why is Posey going toe-to-toe with Vogel?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

        See that was my first impression of Vogel and one reason why I wasn't on board until these playoffs. I thought at times it appeared the players did walk all over him and that he was too positive and too nice - that was my impression and educated guess.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

          Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
          why is Posey going toe-to-toe with Vogel?
          Its not as bad as that sounds. He was just wants to test the waters and see how much he can get away with.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

            Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
            why is Posey going toe-to-toe with Vogel?
            Maybe Posey is just a dick. Who knows?

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

              Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
              Maybe Posey is just a dick. Who knows?
              I always thought he was, he had issues with his coach before.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                Originally posted by Future_NBA_Player View Post
                Its not as bad as that sounds. He was just wants to test the waters and see how much he can get away with.
                I think the question was more about why it was Posey? A guy who hasn't seen playing time for awhile, and probably won't. What did he have to argue about so adamantly? And wasn't he supposed to be a veteran presence, an example to the young guys?

                Maybe we're trying to make too much of the incident, but it does seem strange.

                Good for Vogel, though, that he's taking off the training wheels a little bit.
                It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                  I would think Posey's just mad he's not playing. One thing in the regular season, but this is the playoffs.

                  Changing topics, I want to point out something:

                  Originally posted by Kravitz
                  Look at the message boards, listen to radio...
                  I thought Bob didn't know what a message board was? I mean, he just got on twitter, right?

                  Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                    The point isn't why was it Posey, or what is wrong with Posey, the point has nothing to do with Posey, the point is that Vogel stood up to him or anyone.

                    If we want to put a list together of NBA players who have gone toe-to-toe with their coach, the list would last forever
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-21-2011, 09:23 AM.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                      Vogel's stock just went up, again, with me.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                        Posey is typically a very vocal player in terms of calling out weaknesses in other teams, telling other players where they need to be, etc. He was always the guy in the huddle saying things like that with JOB. Maybe Posey said something the coach didn't agree with and they had a discussion. Discussions in basketball are often full of energy and emotion from being so worked up physically. It is not a big deal.

                        I would love to keep Vogel around, but he may be better as a lead assistant at this point.
                        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                          I must have been too focused on what was happening on the floor, but I never heard them say "Granger Sucks", I heard them say "Pacers Suck" - what was going on when they were calling out Granger?
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            I must have been too focused on what was happening on the floor, but I never heard them say "Granger Sucks", I heard them say "Pacers Suck" - what was going on when they were calling out Granger?
                            Pacers Suck - Granger Sucks.... sound very similar when yelling in a crowd. Could be either. I'm not sure which one they said. I thought at that point in the game Granger Sucks didn't make sense because it wasn't like Danny had done anything to warrant that chant. He wasn't playing out of his mind, and he wasn't stinking it up out there either.

                            I hope the whole Fieldhouse chants SATs when Rose gets to the line.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers "Relevant" again and Vogel starting to stand up to players.

                              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                              Pacers Suck - Granger Sucks.... sound very similar when yelling in a crowd. Could be either. I'm not sure which one they said. I thought at that point in the game Granger Sucks didn't make sense because it wasn't like Danny had done anything to warrant that chant. He wasn't playing out of his mind, and he wasn't stinking it up out there either.

                              I hope the whole Fieldhouse chants SATs when Rose gets to the line.
                              We have done the SAT chant at least the last two times Rose has been here and it's hard to tell over all the MVP chants from the Bulls "fans." Maybe we'll have better luck tonight.
                              Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X