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

Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

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

  • Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

    On my way home from a meeting in Atlanta, I bumped into Brandon Rush in the security line. For the first time, I was thankful for how long it took to to get through the security process at Hartsfield. I walked up to him, and called his name, telling him I was from Indy. He went out of his way to wait up for me after that and was a lot more engaging and intelligent that I imagined he would be. For a while we thought we'd be taking the same flight to Indy, but he was on Airtran and I was on Delta. Regardless, I was able to talk with him for about 20 minutes, and it was surprising how much candor he had with me and the tons of questions I had for him.

    For example, we talked a fair bit of time about his time with JOB. I told him how psyched I was to see him driving to the hoop at the beginning of last season. He told me that his doing that was because JOB specifically allowed him to have more scoring opportunities. When he messed up a couple of times into the year, he got relegated to "the corner". I found it fascinating that he saw himself naturally as someone who drove to the hoop, and from his perspective, was precluded for being able to do this. I've always thought he was passive. But he said that a players relationship was very hot and cold with JOB. In his case, JOB planned over the offseason to give Rush a bigger scoring role, and Rush felt if he was on his "good list", he could play as he traditionally liked to. If he screwed up, he wouldn't be allowed to have offensive opportunities and he was specifically told to sit out at the 3pt line.

    He gave lots of other examples of this: "man, TJ got screwed by JOB. He should have easily started over AJ Price. AJ is a good guy and all, but he's no TJ on the court". "McRoberts, after the year he was having? Man." "The team never knew where they stood with JOB, it was hard to deal with."

    I asked him if he thought that Vogel would be better in this regard. Surprisingly, he thought that things wouldn't change very much, given that he had all of his training from JOB. "He's a better communicator, the guys like him better." "I don't think the offensive system will change very much." I thought this was an odd thing to say, b/c the offense felt different once he took over last year.

    I asked him about almost every player at some point, but here are the highlights:

    He thinks that Paul George has a lot of skill, but he "doesn't have the killer instinct that you need to be an all-star". "Paul's more concerned with everyone liking him and getting along with people". I asked him if this could change, and he said probably. I then asked him if he thought that Granger was kicking his a** and he said "oh hell yeah, he's all over PG this summer. Granger kicked my *** last year big time. People think that Granger is all soft and holding back, but just wait and see… Granger is an amazing player, one of the best"

    I asked him: "so what's going on with Stephenson… is he going to get his head right?" He said, after hesitating: "Naw, I really don't think so. He didn't listen to anyone, took offense to the players, and felt he was better than everyone else." I wondered whether he thought the summer in Indy is doing anything to get him right, and he said that he hadn't been in touch with him since the end of the season. "It's a shame because he has a lot of game"

    "What do you think of George Hill?" "I've never talked to him before, but seems like he'll be a good player"

    Collison: "man, I don't like playing with Collison." "He's too focused on getting his own shot, he's not a pass first point guard, and that's not fun to play with."

    I got up the nerve to ask him about the evolving backcourt depth, and what he thinks that'll mean for his future in Indy. His response: "honestly, I'd like to be traded this offseason." When I poked at that a little more and asked him where, he said Chicago. "They need a 2 there, and their existing guys are getting older. I like the city, and I think I'd fit well with the team" "This is the offseason when I need to be traded in order for things to work out the best"

    I asked him what he thought about the lockout negotiations. He said "I've been hearing good vibes over the past couple of days. It's very frustrating to deal with, as we all want to play. Did you know we're getting ready to start a league in the next week in Vegas? Me, Dahntay, and Paul George are going to play on a team with a couple of guys from New York" "All pro, it's going to be fun". He asked me what I thought of the lockout circumstance, and I told him that I could see points on both sides of the argument, but that they would be idiots if they couldn't figure out a way to keep up the momentum and not lose games. He agreed, reiterating that there's a lot of player movement that he believes will happen once things open up, and that he's been strategizing with his agent a lot.

    All in all, I thought he was a nice guy: bright and engaged, easy to talk with. The fact that he was coming to Indy was nice, but it's clear that he sees the writing on the wall, and wants to move on now before his value is killed any more than it already is. I can't think of a good 2 way trade with the Bulls that would allow him to have his wish, but perhaps he could be part of a multi-team trade? Bulls certainly need a 2, but I'd be willing to bet they're shooting higher than Rush... more like Mayo or someone like that.

    Hope this is interesting to folks.
    Last edited by docpaul; 09-10-2011, 09:33 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

    Oh, this isn't going to be an interesting thread at all. /greenfont

    Thanks Doc.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
      Oh, this isn't going to be an interesting thread at all. /greenfont

      Thanks Doc.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

        I like Rush and want to keep him.... but this sounds as though he's upset with the players and the system and he's lashing out. Maybe to force a trade.
        I'm not perfect and neither are you.

        Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
        Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

          Everything he said seems to be spot on to me.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

            Wow, lots of interesting/disappointing stuff in there.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

              Wow, really interesting stuff. I believe everything you wrote so don't take this the wrong way, but it is absolutely nuts that a player would be this upfront with a fan, from disparaging players to expressing doubts with the new coach to saying that he wanted to be traded! Wow! Unfortunately, it says something about Brandon's judgment and professionalism. And who is he to say that Paul George lacks the killer instinct to be good, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

              I think BRush will be a good player in the NBA, but likely never with Indiana. We'll all be pretty disappointed when he is a much more stellar role player for some other team. We'll never trade him to Chicago or any other division rival, I'm pretty sure of that, he can keep dreaming.
              Last edited by idioteque; 09-10-2011, 10:45 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                While divulging this information to a fan is not good for him or the team, I don't think he is demanding a trade.

                He did play the corner, and so did Paul. I don't like how this team has used the 2 guard since Carlisle. And that goes with Vogel. I would like to see more player movement on the wing and high post. I like the curls, but hate that the other wing has to sit back and watch while Dunleavy or Danny are ran off of screens. I would like to see a Flex style approach when it comes to running an offense through our wings.

                I am not mad at Rush for this. If he wasn't frustrated about his career this far, I would say that he likes the NBA life style more than being a player in the NBA.

                I hope he comes back with a fire. But he probably will not rise above the circumstances and play hard. He is docile.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                  I only hope that the talk don't go to the media.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                    Absoutley love the quote about granger. Hope people take notice of that "leadership". Also I met brush when he was drunk, had a very different conversation. Lol
                    Last edited by granger33; 09-10-2011, 11:25 AM.

                    AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                      I would've called him over by, "Bust."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                        I mean, if you're Rush how do you expect him to feel? He wasn't allowed to do anything but stand in the corner, people's main complaint with him, and now the Pacers traded for George Hill to pretty much replace him.

                        Some really interesting stuff in there, though. Looks like most people to like Lance much and Danny seems like more of a "leader" than people think.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                          Originally posted by I Love P View Post
                          I would've called him over by, "Bust."
                          This forum clearly lacks a "don't like"-button.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                            I think it's time we trade him.

                            You can tell he doesn't want to be here and we really don't want him here.

                            We always have Dahntay who can play SF behind Danny.

                            If anything, Brandon isn't going to see much time anyway. Dahntay won't either, but one of these guys will see more minutes than the other while backing up Danny as Lance and George play PG and SG. Paul starting at SG and DC at the point.

                            Here's a "what if" rotation.

                            PG DC-Hill
                            SG PG24-Lance
                            SF Danny-Dahntay
                            PF West-Hansbrough
                            C Hibbert-Foster

                            As Brandon said regarding a team like Chicago, I think he would do very well there and fill in that hole, but like idioteque said, we should avoid sending him to someone within the division even though all these teams in the Central would be great suitors for Brandon.

                            Also, like what idioteque said regarding Paul lacking a killer instinct. It really is a

                            Paul has all the potential in the world to major a killer instinct and then become a star. I haven't seen any signs of that coming from Brandon.

                            I like Brandon, but I think it's best for everyone if we part ways.
                            In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Ran into Rush at the Atlanta airport...

                              Mike wells just tweeted "rush denies saying anything negative about the team"

                              AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X