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

Spurs to be punished for resting players

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

  • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

    Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
    I don't believe there is anything unusual about the fine. It's Stern doing what Stern typically does - pimp the league out to the sponsors to the point the line between sport and entertainment becomes blurred. Remember him changing the freakin ball? I suppose you believe that was a good move as well because Stern decided to do it, he is all powerful, therefore it most have been right.





    First - Pop has done this before and other than some very minor grumbling, its not been a huge deal. the only reason we are still talking about this is Sterns reaction. Otherwise it would have went away pretty damn quickly - just as it had before. Second - if you want to penalize the Spurs for doing this, then just dont put them on TV in these scenarios. They have historically been a poor TV draw anyway. Most importantly - how about the league try to address the issue like the NFL is attempting to do - by adjusting the schedule? How about you work to eliminate 4 games in 5 night scenarios. Not only do you eliminate this supposed huge issue, but you lessen injury risk, and you improve play. Believe it or not, players play better when they are healthy and rested. But it's more important for Stern to be in control than it is to fix the root of the damn issue.
    You realize Stern's job is basically to make sure the league makes money right? So of course anything he does will be to that extent. As will any commisioner who comes after him. Agree or disagree with him, but he had the right to fine them based on what they did. If what Popovich does is so widely accepted, how come none of the other teams rest their players in the same manner?

    And I have to disagree with the NFL helping injuries through scheduling. They also this season added in extra Thursday night games which actually decrease time between games. So instead of 6 or 7 days teams are having to play on 3 or 4 days of rest. The NFL players hate Thursday night games. And the league management has been pushing for an extended regular season for several years now. No, the NFL is not a good model for player health.
    Time for a new sig.

    Comment


    • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

      Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
      You realize Stern's job is basically to make sure the league makes money right? So of course anything he does will be to that extent. As will any commisioner who comes after him. Agree or disagree with him, but he had the right to fine them based on what they did. If what Popovich does is so widely accepted, how come none of the other teams rest their players in the same manner?

      And I have to disagree with the NFL helping injuries through scheduling. They also this season added in extra Thursday night games which actually decrease time between games. So instead of 6 or 7 days teams are having to play on 3 or 4 days of rest. The NFL players hate Thursday night games. And the league management has been pushing for an extended regular season for several years now. No, the NFL is not a good model for player health.
      So you agree with Sterns attempt to change the ball? It was certainly about money. Is there ever a point in your mind when trying to squeeze out a few more dollars is less important than the integrity of the game? How about favoring big market, star driven teams to generate better finals ratings? Or extending series to get the critical 7th games? I suppose either of those would be fine. I mean its about maximizing dollars - period. Screw integrity! The league commissioner is telling a coach who to play when. And he's telling us that Miami is more important than Portland.The Spurs didn't get fined last year when they sat the big three against Portland.

      Many coaches rest players. Do they do it in the same manner as Pop? No. But the last time I looked, Pop is one of (if not THE) best coaches in the league. And he has a three aging stars that all also play a lot internationally. Why do you think he does it if he doesn't believe it helps his team? Do you believe he is trying to sabotage the league? The fact it occurs so rarely is another reason Stern should have kept his mouth shut and simply not scheduled the Spurs to play one of his "important games" (meaning Miami, LA, etc) as the 4th game in 5 nights on TV.

      I never compared the leagues for injuries. I compared their handling of the resting players issue. The NFL publicly stated they didn't like teams resting players towards the end of the season. Especially teams like the Colts that were doing it 3 weeks before the end of the season. But instead of fining the teams and taking personnel decisions out of the coaches hands, they simply have moved more division games into the last few weeks of the season to attempt to keep teams from clinching spots too early. It may or may not work, but the point is that the NFL is handling it in a way that doesn't involve dictating strategy and playing time decisions to teams.

      And you keep saying Stern is within his rights. So? Just because Stern is all powerful when it comes to matters NBA doesn't mean he should have handled it the way he did. the league has had two very recent lockouts, a ref gambling scandal, a team that had to be owned and operated by the league, 1/2 the teams have been claiming they are losing money, players are constantly holding teams hostage to dictate their terms even while under contract, and stars are affecting competitive balance by colluding to unite in destination cities - excuse me if I don't believe that something is right just because der furher says so.

      Comment


      • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

        If I'm Peter Holt, not only would I refuse to pay the fine, I'm beginning to push for Stern to removed before his planned retirement date.
        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

        Comment


        • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

          I don't know that Stern reacted to this properly.

          But I have to say, I was a little put off by Popovich. He whines for months about the schedule, no one listens, and then he just 'happens' to pick a game where he very well knows that Stern will go nuts. Pop should limit his political activism to hack-a-shaq.

          Comment


          • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

            I read somewhere that one of the reasons why Pop rested the Geriatric 3 on Thursday against one of marquee Teams in the East ( a non-consequential game to a Western Conference Team ) was so that they would be fresh to play a far more important game today ( Saturday )....a game against their Division rival and the best Team in the West...the Grizzlies.

            Pop didn't play them to simply rest them....but...when you think of it....he did so for the long-term good of the Team.

            And guess what? The Spurs beat the Grizzlies in OT at home.

            Winning a game against a division rival that could very well be a Team that you will be fighting for Playoff positioning is way more important to the Spurs/Pop than pleasing corporate sponsors.

            It's not important to Stern...but I totally understand Pops reasoning.
            Last edited by CableKC; 12-02-2012, 05:56 AM.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

              Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
              I don't know that Stern reacted to this properly.

              But I have to say, I was a little put off by Popovich. He whines for months about the schedule, no one listens, and then he just 'happens' to pick a game where he very well knows that Stern will go nuts. Pop should limit his political activism to hack-a-shaq.
              He picked a game where his team was playing its 4th game in 5 nights against a non conference opponent. Add in that the other team was elite and very well rested (likely loss regardless who played) and the next game would be against an elite team in his own conference (game means more to the spurs for playoff seeding) and it makes perfect sense for this to be the game he chose.

              Comment


              • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                So you agree with Sterns attempt to change the ball? It was certainly about money. Is there ever a point in your mind when trying to squeeze out a few more dollars is less important than the integrity of the game? How about favoring big market, star driven teams to generate better finals ratings? Or extending series to get the critical 7th games? I suppose either of those would be fine. I mean its about maximizing dollars - period. Screw integrity! The league commissioner is telling a coach who to play when. And he's telling us that Miami is more important than Portland.The Spurs didn't get fined last year when they sat the big three against Portland.

                Many coaches rest players. Do they do it in the same manner as Pop? No. But the last time I looked, Pop is one of (if not THE) best coaches in the league. And he has a three aging stars that all also play a lot internationally. Why do you think he does it if he doesn't believe it helps his team? Do you believe he is trying to sabotage the league? The fact it occurs so rarely is another reason Stern should have kept his mouth shut and simply not scheduled the Spurs to play one of his "important games" (meaning Miami, LA, etc) as the 4th game in 5 nights on TV.

                I never compared the leagues for injuries. I compared their handling of the resting players issue. The NFL publicly stated they didn't like teams resting players towards the end of the season. Especially teams like the Colts that were doing it 3 weeks before the end of the season. But instead of fining the teams and taking personnel decisions out of the coaches hands, they simply have moved more division games into the last few weeks of the season to attempt to keep teams from clinching spots too early. It may or may not work, but the point is that the NFL is handling it in a way that doesn't involve dictating strategy and playing time decisions to teams.

                And you keep saying Stern is within his rights. So? Just because Stern is all powerful when it comes to matters NBA doesn't mean he should have handled it the way he did. the league has had two very recent lockouts, a ref gambling scandal, a team that had to be owned and operated by the league, 1/2 the teams have been claiming they are losing money, players are constantly holding teams hostage to dictate their terms even while under contract, and stars are affecting competitive balance by colluding to unite in destination cities - excuse me if I don't believe that something is right just because der furher says so.

                The beauty about the Spurs' situation is that it was both an issue of integrity and one with monetary value. And please stop putting words in my mouth to formulate your arguments; I did not say that the NBA should base all of its decisions on whether or not it makes money. And I very much doubt changing the ball had to do with money.

                Just because Popovich likes to rest his players differently than other coaches doesn't mean he's right. He already knew it chafed the league; last season they made a statement that they would be allowing him to send home players that way because it was a unique season. You want to talk about integrity of the game? How about playing in a front of a sold-out crowd when the four healthy players who play the most minutes aren't even in the building. Take into account that Kawhi Leonard was injured too, and their entire starting 5 was not playing.

                Yes, that sounds like a contest to me. For all your talk of integrity of the game, you would think it would upset you when a team decides a game isn't worth winning. I understand it's more fun to scapegoat Stern for his anger, the scheduling, the conspiracy theory that he hates Spurs, and everything else. But this is the NBA, where there are 82 games in a season. And they just took 1 of their premier matchups off so they could rest.

                Some people have talked about slippery slopes of the league fining teams for lots of things, but there is one year. And it's just as plausible for the other. Would you really like to watch the NBA as much if every team rested their best players every time they had a harsh run of games? That would happen at least 2-3 times a year for clubs. So you're looking at 60-90 games that could be affected, and that doesn't even consider the games where injured players are out. Yeah, it would probably never happen like that. But it's just as likely as the league fining teams constantly for minor infractions.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                  Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                  He picked a game where his team was playing its 4th game in 5 nights against a non conference opponent. Add in that the other team was elite and very well rested (likely loss regardless who played) and the next game would be against an elite team in his own conference (game means more to the spurs for playoff seeding) and it makes perfect sense for this to be the game he chose.
                  yeah, well, i don't even know what sucks more - Popovich trying to stick it to Stern and NBA scheduling people the way he did, or teams openly sitting their stars based on the line of thinking "oh well, we'll probably lose anyway, so lets just rest".

                  There's been a bit of power struggle going on for a while on this issue and Stern has discussed it with owners. There's no way Pop wasn't aware of this or forgot this, and no way he didn't anticipate that he will put Stern into berserker mode. He probably didn't anticipate the fine, that's all.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                    Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                    Would you really like to watch the NBA as much if every team rested their best players every time they had a harsh run of games?
                    I think all the contenders should rest in games vs. other contenders. Keep the fun for the playoffs!
                    The NBA will lose some billions in their next TV deal, and we will have another lockout, but who cares.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                      Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                      I think all the contenders should rest in games vs. other contenders. Keep the fun for the playoffs!
                      The NBA will lose some billions in their next TV deal, and we will have another lockout, but who cares.
                      Nah, it's better for the commissioner to manage playing times for teams.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                        Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                        Nah, it's better for the commissioner to manage playing times for teams.
                        Yes, because that's clearly what happened.
                        Time for a new sig.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                          Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                          Yes, because that's clearly what happened.
                          It isn't? The coach felt it was in his teams best interest to rest several players. Stern disagreed and fined them $250k. Are teams going to take that in to consideration in the future? You betcha. Stern is influenceing coaching decisions - period. I don't see how that it debatable. If he isn't then what the **** is he doing?

                          Although my post was somewhat tongue in cheek to the ridiculous statement that teams should stop playing other good teams. Like that is what stern is protecting against.

                          I'm done with this thread. We disagree - so be it. I like and played Basketball, but I don't have a huge love of the NBA largely because of Sterns philosophy. I'm someone the NBA has mostly lost to the NFL and NCAAB. I'm over it.
                          Last edited by rm1369; 12-02-2012, 08:55 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                            Is this same rule gonna be taken into consideration at the end of the year when the dominant teams are resting their players?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X