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

Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

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

  • #31
    Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

    Originally posted by LetsTalkPacers84 View Post
    Right, because the sports world just happens to be dominated by African-Americans by sheer luck. C'mon Lin!
    This is the most biased post I have ever seen on this board. Which sports do you speak of? American basketball? Certain events at track and field? The sports world is a big world...It's not that whites in America aren't good at basketball (Larry Bird?), it's that generally they pursue other sports professionally like Kstat points out because there is a conception out there that whites are no good at basketball and blacks are far superior. For every person that says blacks are better athletes because of track and field and basketball, one could point out strong man competitions and sports like hockey that are dominated by mostly whites. Tell me a professional hockey player isn't a bad *** athlete, and I will laugh at you...

    Hell even pro football isn't as dominated by blacks as some people would think...The two whitest teams met in the Super Bowl a few years back, the Patriots and the Packers. Welker ripped the white receiver stereotype to shreds how many years in a row? Regardless when my Pacers step on the floor, they are only one color, and that is blue and gold. Same thing with the Colts, one color, and that is white and blue.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

      Originally posted by LetsTalkPacers84 View Post
      No, he said it has no bearing at all. Which is simply not true. He's the exception not the rule. Heck look at Olympic basketball as a perfect measuring stick. There's a pretty obvious talent drop from team USA and China.
      2004 Argentina gold medal? Or do you think because a person comes from a Spanish speaking country then they aren't white? I've seen studies say that 97 percent of Argentina is white. Scola, Delfino, and Ginobli were all on that team and I would consider them all white...

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

        Jeremy Lin didn't get a scholarship from a major basketball college. His explanation is racism. Does anyone else have a better one? I can imagine the explanation of "he wasn't good enough to go to this top school" or "his dream school just didn't want him." But ALL of them. (I've actually read before that he didn't get ANY scholarship offers. But I can't find an article for that, so I'll stick with the major basketball schools.) I honestly can't think of one.

        The kid was proactive in college recruitment. I can tell you right now when he played Uconn (the year after Price left, so Kemba Walker and Jerome Dyson were in the roster, although it was the year before Kemba broke out) He was very clearly the best guard (best player) on the floor, for either team. And I have to think the Uconn kids got the better basketball resources. So once again, anyone else got a better explanation?

        It's also likely his explanation because he experienced racism in high school while playing.

        People just don't like hearing that reality. But quite frankly, it's pretty obvious, IMO.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
          Jeremy Lin didn't get a scholarship from a major basketball college. His explanation is racism. Does anyone else have a better one? I can imagine the explanation of "he wasn't good enough to go to this top school" or "his dream school just didn't want him." But ALL of them. (I've actually read before that he didn't get ANY scholarship offers. But I can't find an article for that, so I'll stick with the major basketball schools.) I honestly can't think of one.

          The kid was proactive in college recruitment. I can tell you right now when he played Uconn (the year after Price left, so Kemba Walker and Jerome Dyson were in the roster, although it was the year before Kemba broke out) He was very clearly the best guard (best player) on the floor, for either team. And I have to think the Uconn kids got the better basketball resources. So once again, anyone else got a better explanation?

          It's also likely his explanation because he experienced racism in high school while playing.

          People just don't like hearing that reality. But quite frankly, it's pretty obvious, IMO.
          But is it racism or just ignorance? When I think of Racism it brings an undertone of hate, as though the UCLA and Stanford coaches had something against him cause he was Asian. Which that just doesn't jive with my understanding of Los Angeles and the West Coast.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

            I only believe what he is saying if these coaches never bothered taking a look at him because of his race. If someone can hoop, people will notice. It may lead to some early snubs, but after they see you and you prove yourself (assuming he was really good in HS, Idk) then I don't believe race would be a factor. He could be right, I just don't think I really buy it. I can't imagine someone saying "This kid can ball, but his parents are Asian..."

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

              Originally posted by wooolus View Post
              Lets not pretend when we are picking teams even in the most grass root level we don't prejudice on our picks, we pick the kids that seems to be better and most times they tend to be African Americans. I am not saying race is the only thing that derailed Jeremy Lins road to Stanford, however, I think it would be completely irresponsible for us to completely overlook the fact everyone have stereotypes tha they label to an ethnic group. It is just way the it works.

              Just IMHO
              And while I believe it Could be race, I'm not too sure if I buy it because of this. When you pick people up that you don't know for a game, you at first will choose based on your on stereotypes more than likely. But after a game or so, it becomes obvious who can play and who can't. Stereotypes don't cloud vision after you see the proof.. Well maybe for some it does.. But a college coach? Maybe this is wishful thinking, but I'd imagine too much rides on your decision making to allow race to play a part, people want the best players.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                2004 Argentina gold medal? Or do you think because a person comes from a Spanish speaking country then they aren't white? I've seen studies say that 97 percent of Argentina is white. Scola, Delfino, and Ginobli were all on that team and I would consider them all white...
                No no no no. Argentinians are no more European than Mexicans. Most people who live in Central and South America are mixed. Some areas, like Peru, still have quite a few purely natives running around, but most are a mix with very few being purely European. Different regions have different mixtures, as West Mexico tends to be more Native than European, while the further east you go you start seeing more and more European genes mixed in. So while 97% of Argentinians are descendents of Europeans, 97% of Argentinians are probably also descendant of Natives. They are generally refereed to at Mestizo, which is where the name Mexico is derived from.

                There is also Mulattos which is in reference to the mixture of European and African genes which tend to be more common in Brazil, and the Caribbean.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  No no no no. Argentinians are no more European than Mexicans. Most people who live in Central and South America are mixed. Some areas, like Peru, still have quite a few purely natives running around, but most are a mix with very few being purely European. Different regions have different mixtures, as West Mexico tends to be more Native than European, while the further east you go you start seeing more and more European genes mixed in. So while 97% of Argentinians are descendents of Europeans, 97% of Argentinians are probably also descendant of Natives. They are generally refereed to at Mestizo, which is where the name Mexico is derived from.

                  There is also Mulattos which is in reference to the mixture of European and African genes which tend to be more common in Brazil, and the Caribbean.
                  The players he's talking about are Italian-Argetinian, along with Nocioni, Progioni and Oberto and a lot of other Argentinian players. I don't want to get into a huge argument about ethnicity but these guys are for the most part 100% Italian.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                    But is it racism or just ignorance? When I think of Racism it brings an undertone of hate, as though the UCLA and Stanford coaches had something against him cause he was Asian. Which that just doesn't jive with my understanding of Los Angeles and the West Coast.
                    I suppose you could go with "ignorance." But it's still ignorance based on race. "All Asians are good at math" is a racist statement, in the sociological definition. But I agree, that I don't think there was any hate involved, just prejudices and ignorance. (And I'd wager that Jeremy Lin didn't think there was any hate involved.)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                      Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                      The players he's talking about are Italian-Argetinian, along with Nocioni, Progioni and Oberto and a lot of other Argentinian players. I don't want to get into a huge argument about ethnicity but these guys are for the most part 100% Italian.
                      I wasn't trying to make a statement about any singular person, just a general statement of the demographics of the region.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                        I suppose you could go with "ignorance." But it's still ignorance based on race. "All Asians are good at math" is a racist statement, in the sociological definition. But I agree, that I don't think there was any hate involved, just prejudices and ignorance. (And I'd wager that Jeremy Lin didn't think there was any hate involved.)
                        Unless he can show how there was racism involved, I think it is far more likely coaches just didn't think he had what it took to make it at a big school. They may have been wrong, but I highly doubt it had anything to do with race. Without evidence of stereotyping or racism it is most likely just a concoction of his mind.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          Unless he can show how there was racism involved, I think it is far more likely coaches just didn't think he had what it took to make it at a big school. They may have been wrong, but I highly doubt it had anything to do with race. Without evidence of stereotyping or racism it is most likely just a concoction of his mind.
                          If that's what they thought, then they should all be fired. Because clearly, they aren't too good at their jobs.

                          I mean seriously, how many NBA players can say that no big basketball school (and I'd imagine, "big basketball school, is any basketball school that regularly makes the tournament..so that's probably about 40 schools) didn't offer a scholarship. I don't know the answer to that, but my guess would be only one. Nevermind a legitimate NBA starter, who clearly has a lot of talent. In fact, I wonder how good he'd be..if a better basketball school had recruited him.

                          edit: Here's the article.

                          http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/sp...oked.html?_r=0

                          "No division one program offered Lin a scholarship."

                          That wasn't about his talent level. I actually even have a hard time believing it was about race..because I just can't imagine that ALL of the coaches were so blindsided by it. But I just don't know of another explanation. It's crazy to me.
                          Last edited by Sookie; 04-08-2013, 01:06 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                            If that's what they thought, then they should all be fired. Because clearly, they aren't too good at their jobs.
                            If coaches were fired because they got one player's potential wrong, there wouldn't be any coaches left to employ.

                            Didn't see Kenneth Faried turning into a rebound machine? Fired.
                            Didn't see Damian Lillard as the NBA RotY? Fired.

                            It's pretty hard to judge a 17-18yr old player and then try and accurately project where he ends up. The fact that no one saw the potential in him, tells me more about Lin than it does the people who failed to see it. He wasn't cut from multiple NBA teams because he's asian. It says a lot about his work ethic and basketball IQ to overcome some of the athletic questions he faced/faces.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              If that's what they thought, then they should all be fired. Because clearly, they aren't too good at their jobs.

                              I mean seriously, how many NBA players can say that no big basketball school (and I'd imagine, "big basketball school, is any basketball school that regularly makes the tournament..so that's probably about 40 schools) didn't offer a scholarship. I don't know the answer to that, but my guess would be only one.
                              He didn't exactly light the world on fire at Harvard either. His freshman year in 18 minutes he average 5ppg on 41.5% shooting, and .96 Ast/TO. That doesn't scream of someone who big schools are going to be interested in. It seems more like a player that still needed a lot of development. It really looks more like a kid who thought he was better than he really was, and needed a wake up call.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Jeremy Lin talks about how race led colleges, NBA to snub him on 60 Minutes

                                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                                He didn't exactly light the world on fire at Harvard either. His freshman year in 18 minutes he average 5ppg on 41.5% shooting, and .96 Ast/TO. That doesn't scream of someone who big schools are going to be interested in. It seems more like a player that still needed a lot of development. It really looks more like a kid who thought he was better than he really was, and needed a wake up call.
                                Seems like he might have been right about how good he is.

                                Lin clearly has a lot of talent. I would argue he likely had a lot of talent as a high school kid.

                                His biggest problem as a freshman was strength, which I'm sure is not unusual for freshman..and once again, something college coaches should have spotted.

                                College coaches obviously make mistakes. But all of them? It's just crazy. And he's proven there's a different explanation than basketball talent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X