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

Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

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

  • #16
    Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

    Originally posted by Peck
    We turned down Bonzi Wells??????

    I don't know if I believe this one though because I actually read a statement from West himself who said he didn't want Artest anywhere near his team. But times change.
    Last summer Sam Smith claimed West wanted Artest and was going to successfully trade for him.

    Are you saying Bonzi would be a good addition to the Pacers? I hope not. He is riskier than Ron, if you ask me. He has a history of anti social behavior and seems to cause internal problems, if things don't go his way. Racial comments reportedly have flown freely from Bonzi's potty mouth. Don't forget he was run out of Portland for a series of ill-mannered behavior. Talk to someone from Portland about him.

    True Bonzi is a good ball player, but he's not near the player Ron has become. Nor is he, from all I can tell, the quality of human being that Ron is.

    I'd run miles away from Bonzi who needs a new contract, too, by the way.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

      Bonzi is trash. I like his game well enough, but if we're trading Ron for him (or would have; guess we said no) for character/lockerroom/chemistry issues, this would be at the absolute best a lateral move. Waste of time. Do we really want a racist here? I'm typing this at BSU student center. How ironic. Well, a little.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

        How is Bonzi exactly a racist?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

          So did Walsh have Vecsey print this as a message to Ron or a message to the fans?

          -Bball
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

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

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

            "The Portland Trailblazers' Bonzi Wells will not be disciplined by the National Basketball Association for allegedly taunting white players with racial epithets during numerous games, reports WOIA radio.

            Wells was suspended for a day for spitting in the face of San Antonio's Danny Ferry during a game, but will not be punished for calling Ferry a "[blanking] honkie" during another game.

            Other opposing players have made similar charges. Golden State's Troy Murphy said Wells called him a "cracker" once, and the Mavericks' Nick Van Exel says Wells called his team "a bunch of soft-[bleep] white boys."

            NBA Vice President Stu Jackson said the charges were a "non-issue" because he had received no formal complaints."

            http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,75997,00.html

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

              Originally posted by Bball
              So did Walsh have Vecsey print this as a message to Ron or a message to the fans?

              -Bball
              I hope that it is a message to Ron - and that he hears it 'loud and clear'.

              Listen, Ron knows what the media perception of him is. Ron knows what GM's around the league think of him. Ron knows what the general public perception of him is. And I'm sure that Ron knows that many Pacer fans themselves have had it with him.

              But in my opinion, we need to give him - yes - one more chance. I know everyone is thinking "he's had so many chances...what will make this time any different?". Well, Ron's image has probably never been so low - and being the "good natured guy" we hear so much about, I wonder if he is at all concerned for his fans and his family...leading me to believe he may be enticed to pull a 180 if given the opportunity.

              The fact is, Ron has never had such a lengthy suspension. No one in the entire history of the league has! We will have suffered through the "bad" part of the suspension - which is the suspension itself...but suspensions are assigned with the intent that "good" will result. A 30-game suspension certainly served its purpose with Stephen Jackson (or so he says it did) - so we can only be lead to believe that a season long suspension will undoubtedly teach Artest.

              In my opinion, this year has been such a loss for Artest, we need to first see how he will respond next year before making any decision. Remember - suspensions are made with a purpose in mind. Let's just hope this exceeding long and harsh penalty reaches Artest. Who knows...maybe this is all he needed to reach that next level...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                As a player, I have the utmost respect for Ron and his abilities. I don't think losing him though would mean the end of their championship hopes as some people seem to think.

                But in the end this is about more than a suspension can fix. He has issues. That is appearent to everyone. Not questioning his heart, his niceness as a person or anything but he has "mental problems" that need to be sorted out.

                Speaking as someone who has had to deal with that in the past I know that it'd take more than just time off to do that.

                I know that he has sought professional therapy for this. We'll just have to wait and see the results of it because I truly think that is what will determine his performance when he comes back next year.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                  Originally posted by efx
                  -snip- I know that he has sought professional therapy for this. We'll just have to wait and see the results of it because I truly think that is what will determine his performance when he comes back next year.
                  Do we know that?

                  We've seen from a couple of sources that he's undergoing professional therapy. But we don't know if he's sought it out himself, or if he's been "forced" into it by either his employer or the league (or his family or whatever.)

                  And IMO, that's a very important distiction. If he's there voluntarily, I could understand why some of you would jump back onto the Ron Artest bandwagon.

                  But if he's there by someone else's choosing, we've seen before that it could bring temporary public improvement followed by a devastating setback/ relapse.

                  Again, I think Ron's best chance at a full recovery is to go to another team that they 'build around him.' He doesn't seem well-suited to be the second or third most important player on a team, and I don't think JO is going anywhere (Tinsley might, but I hope not.)
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                    Sorry Jay that was just my wording. I know he is "in" therapy. I guess I don't know how he got there.

                    But I think I remember seeing the article where it said he had started therapy that it was done on his own accord. But then again I'm not too sure. You make a good point though.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                      Originally posted by efx
                      Sorry Jay that was just my wording. I know he is "in" therapy. I guess I don't know how he got there.

                      But I think I remember seeing the article where it said he had started therapy that it was done on his own accord. But then again I'm not too sure. You make a good point though.
                      I hope you're right, because although I'd prefer the team move on without him, I recognize the possibility that our 'asking price' is still/ will be too high. And if we're stuck with him, I want him to have *at least* voluntarily sought professional help.
                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                        How about we do this. We give up on Ron and stop giving him one more chance right after we stop waiting on Thinder and giving him one more year to have that breakout.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                          Let's run a poll. I'm curious about who's pro-Bender and anti-Ron, or pro-Ron and anti-Bender, or pro-Ron and pro-Jon, etc.. And why / why not they are similar/ different situations.

                          I've got to run to a meeting but if nobody has started by the time I'm back, I will.
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                            anybody that's ever been to a game (other than John Green)knows that Ron is one of the nicest guys in the NBA. He alwas signs autographs no matter what the circumstances. I would be supremely dissapointed if we trade him for anybody less than Lebro-, Kob-, T-ma-, uhhh, Duncan?...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                              Do we know that?

                              We've seen from a couple of sources that he's undergoing professional therapy. But we don't know if he's sought it out himself, or if he's been "forced" into it by either his employer or the league (or his family or whatever.)

                              And IMO, that's a very important distiction. If he's there voluntarily, I could understand why some of you would jump back onto the Ron Artest bandwagon.
                              I've never understood the process by which you take in your data. You've already made up your mind, any new information lacks credibility by definition.

                              In the interim, Artest is spending much of his forced down time sharing his innermost thoughts with others in an effort to repair long-lasting loose connections. Think what you want about him for his riotous role and other alarming incidents where he went off the deep end, but there's no denying he's trying to learn how to control his emotions.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Peter Vecsey- The Ron Around

                                Originally posted by Anthem
                                I've never understood the process by which you take in your data. You've already made up your mind, any new information lacks credibility by definition.


                                Sorry Anthem, but I wouldn't exactly call citing a Peter Vescey column conclusive evidence. Now we all understand where PV get's most of his Pacer info, so, is it truthful or is it planted????
                                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X