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

Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

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

  • #16
    Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

    Unless he has some priors, this seems a bit harsh. Maybe the judge is "anti-celebrity". When I lived in Indy, I knew several people with multiple DUI's that only spent one night in jail for each arrest. And that was the night that they were arrested.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      DISCLAIMER: I'm not trying to mount a pro-DUI argument here but.....

      The law used to be .1 in order to be a DUI. Did more/better research come out and show that the difference between the levels is so great that the laws needed to be changed for safety purposes? Or was the law changed to try and grab more revenue from it?

      Honestly, I don't know the answer. But I bet money had alteast a small part in the decision making.

      Also, I haven't read the article, so Jalen might have tested out at 0.11 anyways, which renders the argument moot. I'm just providing a different way at looking at the situation.
      Men typically have had to have drunk at least 5 drinks in a span of two hours to have a .08 level. And I'd wager Jalen had significantly more than that, seeing as he's bigger than the average man.

      The reason it's at that level is because, at that level of "drunk" a lot of people think they are fine, but they aren't. And shouldn't be driving. All 50 states have made the law .08. And I'm sorry, anyone who has had 5 drinks (at least) in two hours, shouldn't be driving. Remember, Jalen was caught because Jalen crashed his car..

      That doesn't make him a bad person. It means he made a mistake. He made a really REALLY stupid and selfish decision. And yea, he gets punished for it. A year is excessive. 20 days...he'll probably be out in 3. Not really excessive. And I bet he won't do it again.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

        Wow, I'm a pretty open minded, forgiving and empathetic person but...

        HOW THE **** DOES SOMEONE WITH THAT MUCH MONEY GET A DUI???

        Seriously, I've just never understood this. Why don't you have a paid guy on standby to drive you around when you need it? Are these people that stupid? I mean you really gotta be dumb to get a dui when you could easily afford an alternative to driving yourself. What the hell is wrong with people man, I swear.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

          Originally posted by Haywoode Workman View Post
          Wow, I'm a pretty open minded, forgiving and empathetic person but...

          HOW THE **** DOES SOMEONE WITH THAT MUCH MONEY GET A DUI???

          Seriously, I've just never understood this. Why don't you have a paid guy on standby to drive you around when you need it? Are these people that stupid? I mean you really gotta be dumb to get a dui when you could easily afford an alternative to driving yourself. What the hell is wrong with people man, I swear.
          Liquid courage bro
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            Men typically have had to have drunk at least 5 drinks in a span of two hours to have a .08 level. And I'd wager Jalen had significantly more than that, seeing as he's bigger than the average man.
            Just to clarify, in the article it states Mr. Rose had consumed six martinis prior to his accident.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

              Originally posted by mb221 View Post
              Just to clarify, in the article it states Mr. Rose had consumed six martinis prior to his accident.
              As I believe I've stated before, you would think that Jalen would know that 5 is Fab, but Six is just dumb...
              "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
              (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                For whatever reason, this judge is too biased to be handling DUI cases.

                "There is no reason for a lawyer to be there because no matter how strong you advocate, regardless of the facts of your case, they're still going to jail," Hall said. "I'm not going to take a client's money when I know I can't help."
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                  Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                  20 days...he'll probably be out in 3. Not really excessive. And I bet he won't do it again.
                  Technically he was sentenced to 93 days (the max).
                  Rose's actual sentence is 92 days in jail and one year's probation, but Small suspended 72 days of the sentence. The maximum penalty for the charge is 93 days, but Rose received credit for the night he spent in jail after the crash.
                  How does this even make sense?
                  Small, who is known for coming down hard on drunken drivers, lectured the former University of Michigan star for 15 minutes before delivering her sentence.
                  "I don't think you have an alcohol problem, and I sincerely believe you when you say this will not happen again," she said. "But there are issues of punishment and deterrence. The one thing that people never want -- that they will hire expensive lawyers to avoid -- is jail time. That's why I believe it is the right punishment."
                  She believes he doesn't have an alcohol problem and this won't happen again so he deserves a sentence higher than she normally hands out... when she normally hands out some of the harshest sentences in the country to first time offenders??
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                    Yeah, it doesn't make sense. He shouldn't be in a jail cell at all for this.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                      I am in no way shape or form saying drunk driving is not serious, but either is this judge. Jalen has been a prime exmple of someone who had a very difficult upbringing but has made not only a solid citizen, but given to others time and time again

                      The fact that he didnt hurt anyone, he was barely over the limit and had no prior dui conviction makes it ludicris what this judge did

                      shame on her
                      Wrong. If you get behind the wheel after six drinks, you deserve jail time. It doesn't matter what his role in society is. A terrible decision is a terrible decision and the punishment fits the crime.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                        20 days in jail, huh?? Well, he is going to be serving time and paying for this mistake whether justifiable or not. Not so sure why it had to make news in the Indy Star sports section though.

                        Jalen is still gonna remain one of my favorite Pacers of all time. He played 13 seasons in the NBA, 6 of them with us. Being someone who watched him in college with the rest of the Fab 5, it was pretty cool to watch him blossom into a great NBA player and tap into the vast amount of potential he had as a ball player. He was a vital cog to some of the best teams the Pacers have ever fielded. I really do miss that automatic, silky mid range jumper.

                        From what i can gather, it sounds like the Jalen Rose i know. Stand up guy and more than willing to accept responsibility for his actions.
                        Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/Hookjaw_Rox

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                          Originally posted by Ant View Post
                          Not so sure why it had to make news in the Indy Star sports section though.
                          Because the whole "thugs and crooks" angle was dying down and someone needed to fan the flames while there was a lockout and therefore no way for the current players to shine in order to keep it from flying.
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                            I dont feel sorry for Rose @ all. Several men, who have less money and talent get 20 years for selling cocaine or meth. IF YOU WANT JUSTICE STAY OUT OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                              Originally posted by GizzyStardust View Post
                              Wrong. If you get behind the wheel after six drinks, you deserve jail time. It doesn't matter what his role in society is. A terrible decision is a terrible decision and the punishment fits the crime.
                              You cant use the word wrong when you are talking about something subjective. Hundreds of thoiusands of people have commited DUI before and got less than probation

                              I dont undertand this whole "make an example out of him" thinking. Do you think someone would be drunk, get behind the wheel of a car, then suddenly think "Gee , I remember what happened to Jalen, beeter not drive"

                              The judge is abusing her power. I also pray she gets arrested for dui, then maybe she can spend 3 weeks in jail
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Jalen Rose Sentences to 20 Days in Jail for Drunk Driving

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                Because the whole "thugs and crooks" angle was dying down and someone needed to fan the flames while there was a lockout and therefore no way for the current players to shine in order to keep it from flying.
                                Thanks x1000
                                Sittin on top of the world!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X