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

5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

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

  • #61
    Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

    Originally posted by quinnthology View Post


    This was 3 months ago. Michael Jordan doesn't display positive emotion for anyone.
    Not liking someone doesn't mean you can't have a positive moment with them.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

      Originally posted by dohman View Post
      Everything Jordan did lebron is doing at a higher level.
      Passing, transition defense, and post defense are the only things that LeBron is doing better than Jordan. And the passing gap is much smaller than you think. This is just wrong.

      I also don't get the people who don't take the playoffs and rings argument seriously. The NBA Playoffs are not the NCAA tourney, when you get there the best team wins the majority of the time. How the hell else can you objectively assess teams' and players' abilities?
      Last edited by judicata; 05-28-2011, 02:55 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

        Originally posted by judicata View Post
        I also don't get the people who don't take the playoffs and rings argument seriously.
        Because people abuse it. The way people say it makes it sound like it's the only stat that matters when comparing players, as if Mark Madsen is better than Reggie Miller. It just doesn't work that way, because if you put Lebron with those Bulls teams, are you going to deny they still win 6 titles?

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

          Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
          And for those of you that hold weight to what Scottie said, he and Jordan don't even get along. And how would Pippen try to push Jordan's buttons? Just like this.
          Didn't Jordan introduce Pippen at his Hall of Fame induction? And if you read any of the books about their championship runs, Pippen was one of the few guys in the locker room that Jordan did get along with.

          This is not about Pippen having some younger brother complex. People have this insane obsessiveness about Jordan's greatness but the truth is LeBron isn't that far away from him in terms of ability and he's actually better in some ways.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

            Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
            Not liking someone doesn't mean you can't have a positive moment with them.
            That is a little bit more than a positive moment. That is almost a full on hug. To say the MJ and Pippen aren't best friends off the court I can see, but not liking each other I do not see at all. I imagine what happened is something was reported about MJ and Pippen having a disagreement, or that they aren't friends off the court that got turned into MJ and Pippen don't get along and disliking each other. When the truth is they just aren't good friends, but still respect each other.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
              Because people abuse it. The way people say it makes it sound like it's the only stat that matters when comparing players, as if Mark Madsen is better than Reggie Miller. It just doesn't work that way, because if you put Lebron with those Bulls teams, are you going to deny they still win 6 titles?
              I would deny they would win 6 titles. Outside of Rodman, Grant, and Pippen there is absolutely nothing impressive at all about who Jordan had on his teams, especially with the last 3 championships. If there is one case where the championships do matter it is with Jordan because I don't believe there has ever been any other wing player that could have won championships with those teams. Put a dominate center on those teams and they will win championships. Put Kobe, Lebron, Bird, Magic, etc. on that team and I doubt they get to the finals more than once or twice.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                It's not merely a matter of saying Jordan lost before. That fed into what made him great. Jordan is just all around a better player than James. I disagree with the 'watered down period' statement.
                Jordan losing before didin't make him great. It was just the natural evolution of how some great players have to lose to other great teams before they win. Jordan losing to the Celts/Pistons before he won, the Pistons losing to the Celts/Lakers before they won, etc...

                Same thing will most likely be true of Lebron and Durant.

                As far as being an all around player, Lebron is a better passer, rebounder and he can defend more positions. I think it's arguable about who was better "all around." Jordan's biggest knock before he won a title was that he was the most selfish player in the league. Some people are just forgetting completely about the 1st half of Jordan's career.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  If you want to talk about a watered down period talk about the NBA from 2000 until now. Not 95 to 98. If anything the 90's was the most talented era of basketball, and had no watered down point. The talent may have been on the down side of their careers, but they were still highly talented. I would expect Rik Smits to be considered one of the best centers in the league if he played today in his prime.
                  The most watered down period of the NBA was from 95'-98' and here's why:

                  -The league just had two expansion teams in Vancouver and Toronto during the beginning of this period.

                  -When this expansion occurred, the huge influx of European/International talent had yet to occur. This influx of talent from overseas helped plug up diluted talent over the years, but it didn't happen immediately.

                  -Look at who Jordan beat during this time:

                  The Magic lead Lakers on their last legs. That was it for them.

                  The Pistons on their last legs. They did not rebuild for about another 12 years.

                  The powerhouse Celtics easily had their worst stretch post Bill Russell. Much the same way the 80's were horrible for the Yankees. They were a total non-factor in the 90s.

                  He beat Stockton and Malone for his last two titles. Now look at those Jazz teams with Stock/Malone. Those two guys regularly got their butts kicked in the playoffs by the Rockets, Sonics, Blazers, etc... They never made it to the Finals. The teams that regularly beat them got old and their windows closed while Stockton and Malone had a couple years left in their prime, and they finally got by them.

                  There was a period when the main thing Jordan had to worry about was an Ewing led Knick team with no real second option. Consider the fact that those Knicks just barely got by a Jordan-less Bulls teams in 94'. Could have gone the other way with that controversial foul in Game 7. Reggie and the Pacers gave them one good scare in 98' and if Jordan stuck around for another year, it wouldn't have surprised me to see the Pacers beat them. I would argue that the Spurs/Kings/Blazers teams that Kobe beat for titles were better than any competition Jordan beat in the playoffs.

                  Jordan still G.O.A.T in my book, but I'm not totally blind by his myth to not even look at the context in which he won.
                  Last edited by d_c; 05-28-2011, 08:37 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                    Originally posted by judicata View Post
                    Jordan was better. Who cares if he struggled in his early career like James has? He was much more dominant during that period, and its the stuff that came after that really names him the GOAT.
                    I wouldn't necessarily say so. Lebron with a worst supporting cast won more games and got a worse franchise deeper into the playoffs and closer to winning a title than the pre-Phil Jackson Jordan.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                      [QUOTE=d_c;1242847]-Look at who Jordan beat during this time:


                      He beat Stockton and Malone for his last two titles. Now look at those Jazz teams with Stock/Malone. Those two guys regularly got their butts kicked in the playoffs by the Rockets, Sonics, Blazers, etc... They never made it to the Finals. The teams that regularly beat them got old and their windows closed while Stockton and Malone had a couple years left in their prime, and they finally got by them.
                      QUOTE]


                      I think the Stockton and Malone Jazz teams you mention would have easily won the title this year over Lebron's Heat. Malone averaged over 27 ppg during that era and won the mvp in 97 & 99. 2 of the top 50 players in league history on the same team, that's real competition. Granted their were some weak teams in that era but overall a much higher level of competition then today. I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                        [QUOTE=Pacerized;1242850]
                        Originally posted by d_c View Post
                        -Look at who Jordan beat during this time:


                        He beat Stockton and Malone for his last two titles. Now look at those Jazz teams with Stock/Malone. Those two guys regularly got their butts kicked in the playoffs by the Rockets, Sonics, Blazers, etc... They never made it to the Finals. The teams that regularly beat them got old and their windows closed while Stockton and Malone had a couple years left in their prime, and they finally got by them.
                        QUOTE]


                        I think the Stockton and Malone Jazz teams you mention would have easily won the title this year over Lebron's Heat. Malone averaged over 27 ppg during that era and won the mvp in 97 & 99. 2 of the top 50 players in league history on the same team, that's real competition. Granted their were some weak teams in that era but overall a much higher level of competition then today. I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.
                        As I said, as good as Stock and Malone were, they were regularly getting bounced in the Western Conference playoffs year after year during the PRIME YEARS of their careers

                        They had to wait until teams that were beating them got old and had their windows close to eventually advance, when they still happened to have some gas left in their tanks. Basically, they had to wait for Hakeem and Clyde to get old and for Magic to retire. They weren't any better those two years they got to the finals than they were in their primes. They stuck around long enough and waited it out.
                        Last edited by d_c; 05-28-2011, 09:00 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                          Based on following the stories that always came out in Chicago about their relationship, Scottie never said anything nice about Michael, and had quotes such as "I don't even have his phone number" and that they weren't friends, but Michael was always PC about the relationship. I remember reading last year that the two of them had gotten together several times last summer around the city and had started to rekindle a friendship. Who knows what has happened since.

                          I think it is silly to compare Michael to LeBron before Bron wins a ring. It is very likely this conversation could make a lot more sense in two or three years, but Michael with this team the Heat have would have never lost to this Mavs team. In fact, I say Michael sweeps them. LeBron has the skill, absolutely, but does he have MJ's killer attitude in the playoffs? We haven't seen that yet.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                            Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                            Based on following the stories that always came out in Chicago about their relationship, Scottie never said anything nice about Michael, and had quotes such as "I don't even have his phone number" and that they weren't friends, but Michael was always PC about the relationship. I remember reading last year that the two of them had gotten together several times last summer around the city and had started to rekindle a friendship. Who knows what has happened since.

                            I think it is silly to compare Michael to LeBron before Bron wins a ring. It is very likely this conversation could make a lot more sense in two or three years, but Michael with this team the Heat have would have never lost to this Mavs team. In fact, I say Michael sweeps them. LeBron has the skill, absolutely, but does he have MJ's killer attitude in the playoffs? We haven't seen that yet.
                            I agree with you dude! But i think its all a moot point until he has 6 rings!!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                              Originally posted by panthro_1 View Post
                              I agree with you dude! But i think its all a moot point until he has 6 rings!!
                              Jordan's 6 rings are a moot point until he wins 7 like Robert Horry.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: 5/27/11: Scottie Pippen on "Mike and Mike in the Morning"

                                Originally posted by ndcoltsnpacers View Post
                                Jordan's 6 rings are a moot point until he wins 7 like Robert Horry.
                                Come on. Obviously Jordan's titles and LeBron's (subjunctive) titles were won mostly be LeBron and Jordan. You can't say the same for Horry. I hate that argument that titles are irrelevant to the comparison of all time greats. Michael was great because you always knew his team would win. If LeBron can't get past Dallas with Wade and Bosh on his team there is no way you can compare the two!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X