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

Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

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

  • Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/walsh_qna_040212.html

    Walsh Sizes Up Pacers
    at the NBA All-Star Break


    Feb. 13, 2004
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With the Pacers riding atop the Eastern Conference at 39-14 at the All-Star break, franchise President and CEO Donnie Walsh sat down for this exclusive question and answer session with Conrad Brunner of Pacers.com


    Q. You've said before that you've been surprised by the team's rapid progress. What is your level of gratifcation for the team's success thus far?

    A. I’m happy to see the team where they are. I think both the coaches and the team obviously came in here with the intention to go out and perform on a really high level. You can’t get this kind of record without doing that. And in the course of getting this record, you’ve got to play a lot of good teams on the road and at home and we have come through that in a great way. That doesn’t mean you don’t need to continue to improve to get to where you ultimately want to get but, from what I’ve seen so far this year, I think our team is basically very focused on being great.



    Q. Do the number of coaching changes that have transpired since the beginning of the season illustrate the scenario you and Larry Bird wanted to avoid by hiring Rick Carlisle when you did?

    A. Yes, they do. I thought by changing our coach and bringing Rick in, it would take a longer time for this team to come together and to do well. I mean, we were 13-2 in the month of November. We’ve been through some tough times; we had a tough month in December where we were on the road a lot. And yet their focus has remained the same. And that, you can’t always predict. But (the changes) pointed out what we were worried about: that if we went into the season and we weren’t sure if our team would come together again and had to fire a coach at that time, it’s not the most ideal time to do that.



    Q. Has Jermaine O'Neal progressed to the point that he should be considered a legitimate MVP candidate?

    A. Absolutely. It’s hard to say that because, as good as he is right now – which puts him on that level – you also see that this guy is going to continue to get better and better. I think it really speaks well for both the way he’s played this year and the kind of talent he is. This guy is a unique talent in this league, and I don’t think it has hit as many people as it probably should.





    Q. How do you feel about the way Ron Artest has woven himself into the fabric of the team?

    A. Ronnie is unique in his own way. I don’t think I’ve ever been around a player as unique as Ronnie, and nine-tenths of it is due to how hard he works. Obviously, he has a lot of talent. But it’s how hard he’s worked in the offseason, how much improvement he’s made since he’s been here, and how hard he’s worked to make that improvement. But I can say that for a lot of these guys on the team because they all fit a piece in the puzzle. We wouldn’t be here if we didn’t have Al Harrington, if we didn’t have the point guards we have, if we didn’t have Jeff Foster, and now Scot Pollard is coming around. A lot of things are falling in place for us.



    Q. What have you learned about Rick Carlisle since hiring him as head coach?

    A. The only things I’ve learned about Rick are head-coach things. I already knew he was a good coach. I didn’t worry about this personality issue everybody was talking about, because I knew him and (Larry) Bird knew him and there was no problem with that. What I’ve learned is mainly his bench behavior. And I think he’s been as good as anyone I’ve seen as a bench coach at sensing the other team’s run and cutting it short with timeouts, at having his team prepared for all the situations you can run into and, for the most part, calling the right shots. And he’s sticking to what he told the team before the season, that he wanted to be a defensive team because he believed that would carry you through the playoffs. Everything he said before the season he has carried out. So I think it says more about his philosophy about a coach than it does his talent as a coach, because I’ve been able to see him take his philosophy, put it in place and make it work. I already knew he was a good coach. I already knew he was a good guy. But to watch him do this as a head coach has made me more impressed with him.



    Q. Are there any other developments that have caught your eye?

    A. I’m gratified to see Austin playing the way I know Austin can play. Scot Pollard can be a very important part of this team, and lately he’s showing how. The thing I want to see happen is Jonathan Bender come back to our team because he adds a special talent and size to our team that could help us. But from one to 15, I think everybody has worked hard in the same direction.



    Q. Are you thinking about an NBA title yet?

    A. I never think that. I’m thinking about the next game. That’s the way the team’s thinking, that’s the way Rick has been thinking. Don’t worry about the record. Whatever the record is, it is. You play the game you’re playing, then you forget about that one and move on to the next one. That’s the way you should think, because you can’t get too far ahead of yourself.



    Q. Given what he has been through and how he has emerged from it, how do you assess Jamaal Tinsley's performance?

    A. I am really both happy for Jamaal and proud of Jamaal for what he’s done. I knew he worked very hard in the summer and that was evident in how he came into camp. But then he got hit with something he didn’t expect, and that was not playing. I felt he handled that really well in the sense that he kept working. I’m sure he was disappointed but he didn’t let it affect what he was going to do. So when he got his opportunity, I thought he was a step ahead of where he’s been before because he had some mental strength with it. And I think all those things have showed. He’s a better defender. He’s hitting threes. He’s hitting clutch shots. He’s running the team and showing that he can be a great point guard in the future. You can go down the line with all the great point guards in this league, and it took them a long time to get to the point that they were great point guards. Most of them were traded two or three times before they emerged to the stature they have now. So this speaks well for him.



    Q. The NBA Trading Deadline is less than a week away (Feb. 19 at 3 p.m.). What is the likelihood of the Pacers making a deal?

    A. I don’t think anything will get done, but I wouldn’t rule it out if we hear the right thing. We like our team. We’re not looking to change our team but, on the other hand, if somebody calls us up and offers something we have to look at, we’ll look at it. It’s not like we’re making a proclamation that we’ll never change this team. We’re saying we don’t think we have to change this team. It’s a good team. Everybody’s on the same page and doing the right things, and we have a good enough team to win with. But if something comes up, we’re open to it.



    Q. What would you identify as the team's biggest need?

    A. Shooting. That’s the only thing I can think of. And if you put Austin out there, put Jonathan out there, then even that gets better. All of our players have improved their shooting – Artest is improving, Tinsley, Anthony Johnson. But I’m talking about Reggie-type shooting. There aren’t a lot of teams that have that but at one time, we did. When we had (Chris) Mullin, Reggie, Rik (Smits), we had a lot of great shooting on that team. So we don’t have shooting like that team had but that’d be about it. We do have some advantages over that team. We’re more athletic, and we have a lot more mismatch possibilities with this team.



    Q. Why are you confident this team can avoid falling into the same downward spiral that pulled the Pacers down after the All-Star break last season?

    A. I don’t see anything that’s happened up to this point that would indicate that would happen. I think this year, we haven’t had the kind of things happen that kind of gave you some forewarning that you’ve got to be careful. Last year, the schedule was very difficult coming out of the All-Star break. This year, we don’t have the same kind of schedule and hopefully we won’t have the same kind of incidents that were beyond everyone’s control.



    Q. How has the working dynamic between you and Bird evolved?

    A. I love it. It’s everything I thought it would be. I love working with Larry. I’ve always liked that, but in this role, I value him being here because I think he’s more recent to playing days – which is an advantage – he’s got great ideas, he’s very clear about the way he thinks, he’s very focused about it. I’m looking forward to the day I can just give it to him.



    Q. What is your favorite All-Star memory?

    A. Rik Smits throwing a behind-the-back pass (during the 1998 All-Star Game). That’s it. That’s my only favorable All-Star memory.

    E

  • #2
    Re: Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

    @ the Rik Smits comments. There aren't exactly many Pacer moments in the all-star games, are there?

    Hopefully that can change this year.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

      I dont seem to remember the rik smits' all star comment..

      can some one fill me in..


      thanks..

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

        I dont seem to remember the rik smits' all star comment..

        can some one fill me in..


        thanks..


        You don't remember that? That behind-the-back pass Smits threw to uh...to...uh...you know...that guy. Classic.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Q&A with Donnie Walsh, a lot of interesting comments

          I dont seem to remember the rik smits' all star comment..

          can some one fill me in..


          thanks..


          You don't remember that? That behind-the-back pass Smits threw to uh...to...uh...you know...that guy. Classic.
          It was Jayson Williams - yes that Jayson Williams this obviously was before he retired and got in trouble with the law.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment

          Working...
          X