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

Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

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

  • Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

    Don't let the Star title fool you. Read the story. -Bball

    Miller shoots down report on retirement


    The Pacers' Reggie Miller reacts to an official after being whistled for a technical foul during the first half against the Pistons. Miller also reacted after Thursday night's game -- to a report that he has told teammates that he's retiring after the season. -- Sam Riche / The Star



    By Mark Montieth
    mark.montieth@indystar.com
    January 28, 2005



    When Reggie Miller emerged from the shower Thursday night, the swarm of media members surrounding his locker took him by surprise.

    "What's going on?" he asked, with genuine bewilderment.

    It turned out TNT's Craig Sager had reported during the Indiana Pacers' game against Detroit that Miller had told his teammates Monday this would be his last season.

    That came as news both to Miller and his teammates.

    "That's absolutely false," Miller said upon dressing while looking at Sager, who was kneeled in front of him. "Once again, Craig Sager, inaccurate reporting.

    "If and when I was to say something like that, there's two people I would talk to first from TNT. Sir Charles (Barkley) and (his sister) Cheryl Miller. They would have the two exclusives. For you to report something like that is very inaccurate, Craig. I'm very disappointed."

    Miller made it clear before training camp that this likely will be his last season. He drops casual comments to his teammates on occasion about missing them next season but has made no formal statements.

    Miller said three summers ago he would not play past the age of 40, and he turns 40 in August. He has one year remaining on the contract he signed in 2003.

    Miller declined to comment on his future Thursday.

    "Right now I'm considering us getting off a three-game losing skid," he said. "Our season's been up and down all year. That's the only thing I'm focused on. I'm in the moment, and in the moment right now we have a three-game losing streak.

    "We had a very disappointing loss on national TV tonight to our archrival . . . and that's my main focus right now. I'm not retiring."

    The TNT report set off a postgame media firestorm, with reporters assuming they had a breaking story. That came as news to coach Rick Carlisle and Miller's teammates, who said they've heard no such announcement.

    Jermaine O'Neal, however, said Miller told him last summer that this would be his last season.

    "Eighteen years is a long time to play this game," O'Neal said. "Sometimes you have to find peace among yourself and say whether it's time to go or not. Maybe he's got to that point."

    Carlisle was befuddled by the report. Asked after the game about Miller's decision, he said, "What's the decision?

    "I'm not aware of that conversation," he added. "But coming into the year we all knew there was a strong possibility this could very well be his last year."

    Miller's teammates said they hope he'll return for the final season on his contract but will respect his decision.

    Miller is averaging 12.9 points in 25 games this season. He averaged 24.6 points in his first 10 games after returning from a broken left hand, but his average has slipped as his role in the offense has diminished.

    Carlisle said he believes Miller could continue to play at a high level if he returns.

    "He's obviously still a good enough player to keep playing, but that's a decision he's got to make," Carlisle said. "He's prided himself on playing at a high level every year in the league. There's nothing to say he couldn't continue to play at that same level at age 40. That's something in his mind. I don't have any knowledge of this information."

    Call Star reporter Mark Montieth at (317) 444-6406.
    http://www.indystar.com/articles/3/218079-2683-179.html
    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

  • #2
    Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

    Weird that Craig said he got his info from Donnie.... weird.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

      Originally posted by Anthem
      Weird that Craig said he got his info from Donnie.... weird.
      It's kinda like in the movie Late Shift about how Leno's manager forced NBC to nudge Carson into retirement and get him the gig...

      Actually... if anything... it would be Walsh trying to get Reggie's impending retirement in front of the public so they will clamor for "One more year"...
      IMHO

      -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


      • #4
        Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

        Notice how there's no mention of Walsh in the article...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

          Hmm I watched the after the Spurs game and Kenny Smith asked Reggie's sister to put aside that they were brother and sister and give her thoughts. She didn't come out and say it outright but she strongly hinted that she thought it was time for Reggie to retire.

          Which I agree sorry we need to move on Past Reggie Miller , I am pretty sure though this is Reggie's last year. Reggie has made several comments and even a sly one that fans should come out cause you never know , I don't think Reggie is the type of guy that will wanna announce it or want any fan fair on his exit. Reggie has always been a pretty humble guy and I don't think you'll hear him say anything til it's already a done deal.

          I respect Reggie and his being loyal to the team and stuff but I really think it's time for him and no matter what Reggie Miller is gonna be in the Hall of Fame someday.
          Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

            Someone else already said it, but I'll say it too. Reggie seemed more mad that the cat was out of the bag than rather than "false" reporting.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

              Well, if nothing else, Craig Sager accomplished what he wanted to accomplish.... everyone is talking about Craig Sager today!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                A-Train! Where ya been?
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                  I just had another thought why Walsh would leak this info. Due to the natl TV and all the exposure it could be his way of letting the fans -know- this is 'it' (even if Reggie does want it kept low key) and a way to give the team and fans and shot of adrenaline for this last push. IOW, trying to give everyone something rally around.

                  -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


                  • #10
                    Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                    Originally posted by Anthem
                    A-Train! Where ya been?
                    Wasting my time over at the Indy Star forum (what little time I've had).

                    Then, my link to this site didn't work anymore. But, I found my way back home today!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                      The Brunner QoD on Pacers.com also addressed this:
                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_050128.html

                      Q. I heard on the TNT telecast of the Pacers-Pistons game that Craig Sager, TNT's sideline reporter, said Donnie Walsh made the statement that Reggie (Miller) had announced to the team it was going to be his last year, and that Donnie has a meeting with Reggie during the All-Star break to talk him out of it. Is there any truth to it? (From Joshua in Sevierville, TN)

                      A. The truth of the matter is this: Reggie Miller has made no announcement to anyone – management, coaches, teammates, or particularly the media – about his future beyond this season. I did not see Craig Sager's report, so I am hesitant to comment on its substance, but it's clear there was a misunderstanding somewhere in the process. Reggie flatly denied the report after the game, saying it was "absolutely false," and went on to chide Sager.

                      Reggie is famous for his offhand one-liners, and it's safe to assume he's joked with his teammates about not having him around next year. But that's hardly a formal announcement of a major personal decision. Walsh has talked with Reggie about this topic before and I'm sure they'll discuss it again before the season ends but, again, that doesn't mean anyone has reached a final decision.

                      Reggie entered this season publicly non-commital about his future and has remained so. Until he says he's retiring, nothing else can be taken seriously.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                        Meanwhile, Bruner sidesteps JO's comments...

                        -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


                        • #13
                          Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                          We need something to denote Brunner....You know like A bunny with a pancake on his head......


                          I'd like to nominate this one as he seems to be dancing around everyone elses comments from last night....



                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                            I think this should be Brunner:

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Indy Star on Reggie's Retirement

                              Wasn't just a week ago the Pollard hinted at this during a post game interview? He said words to the effect.."it's going to be strange not having Reggie around anymore"....I did a post about it at the time but it was largely overlooked.
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X