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

I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuries

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

  • #31
    Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Bender is a perfect example of a player whose myth has grown because he rarely saw the court.

    10 years from now people will be swearing they saw him shooting shots from half-court with dead-eye precision, claim he could dunk over 7'ers with regularity, willed the team to wins even while playing on a bad leg, and was a defensive monster who could scare opposing players into turnovers with just a glare.

    I will die believing Bender was a bust... and I'll have his career to point to as proof. ...Not some mythical games based on hope and hype and fading memories.

    -Bball

    Said the same guy who refuses to believe the guy was injured and that the injury ended his career, talent or not.

    Do you really believe that an insurance company (that paid the past 3 years of his salary) is a charity? that the NBA medics "allow" the Pacers to retire JB for "medical" reasons (so he no longer counts against the cap) if there was no truth to that ?

    Bball, I know you love theories, but this is so far overboard it isn't even funny anymore.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

      I agree. Bender was clearly dealing with major injuries. That he was forced into retirement by them so early in his career has NOT shut this theory up is amazing to me.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

        Originally posted by Eindar View Post
        DK, you must not have watched many of his games, because he had a very developed post game the last 2 seasons, and would simply destroy a 6'7" defender in the post.
        Considering he played a total of 9 games his last 2 seasons I plead guilty to not watching many of his games during that period.

        At the end of the 02-03 season he had no post game and couldn't take players off the dribble or shoot under pressure. And his defense was horrible.

        But he could dunk.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

          Originally posted by able View Post
          Said the same guy who refuses to believe the guy was injured and that the injury ended his career, talent or not.
          I never said I didn't believe he was injured.

          [b]Do you really believe that an insurance company (that paid the past 3 years of his salary) is a charity? that the NBA medics "allow" the Pacers to retire JB for "medical" reasons (so he no longer counts against the cap) if there was no truth to that ?
          Yes I do. There is no surefire test to measure pain or someone's tolerance to it. If someone says something hurts, it hurts.

          Bball, I know you love theories, but this is so far overboard it isn't even funny anymore.
          I see you skipped right over the post where I asked why, if his knees were so bad, that the Pacers kept investing time and money in him and allowed things to go on as long as they did? Or answered how it was he was able to play charity and 'for fun' basketball in the summers if his knees were so bad he risked being wheelchair bound.

          Why would someone like Dyrek waste time on a lost cause if Bender had no cartilage in his knees?

          The deterioration should've been noted plenty soon in the process. It's not like he was playing thru pain and refusing to see a doctor.

          The answer has to be because his knees weren't structurally as bad as you are willing to believe. IMO what is in question is his tolerance to pain and willingness to play thru it. And to that I have no idea how bad they hurt... but structurally he was being cleared to play... Then finally, after he claimed he couldn't play long enough, the Pacers pulled the plug.

          And I've been told that is exactly the case.

          -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


          • #35
            Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

            Bball is 100% correct in this, IMO.

            I will never ever ever forget the announcers stating during the one game during summer league play that Jon bothered to show up to his last season here, that they had never seen anyone more disinterested in a game than what Jon Bender was in that one game.

            He left the team after one game "because his knees hurt" only to go three days later to Houston to play in a game being put on by (I forget the NBA players name) for some benefit.

            Jon somehow could always manage the fortitude to invove himself in streetball games or one on one plays in the big easy, yet somehow whenever it came to organized ball with the Pacers he could never seem to get it going.

            As to the overall statement at hand, about Bender being an all-star.

            Jon Bender did not understand the game of basketball. Oh don't get me wrong he knew how to dunk, shoot the three and block monster shots. However ask him to set a pick, guard the post or do a curl cut and you might as well have been speaking in latin.

            I hate to just parrot Bball again here but I can't help it. Jon did not either undrstand the game enough or frankly didn't care enough to transition into playing a differant style other than what he knew from High School.

            You mean to tell me that Jon's knees are worse that Al's knees? You know Al's knee, the one he blew out playing against the Celtics.

            Jon has since his rookie year gone through MRI's, CAT scans, PET Scans and other diagnostic procedures.

            If at any time during any of those procedures it would have been determined that Jon was structurally unable to play basketball they would have shut him down and fast. However not once during any of those tests did anybody come to Walsh and say "hey, this guy is playing bone vs. bone so he can't play anymore".

            What it showed was scar tissue.

            Thus it falls back to one thing, Jon's ability to play with pain.

            I'm going back to Al for a min. in an interview with WTHR a few years ago he was asked if his knees bothered him. He said yes, it hurt everyday but he just had to focus past the pain and play on.

            Now as to why the Pacers are saying how bad his knees are now? Simple, they got out of paying his salary. They couldn't very well file insurance and then go around saying "well he could play but he just can't tolerate the pain".

            In fact Walsh almost said that in one of his last interviews about Jon as he retired.

            Walsh was very lawyer like in his response when he said that Jon said he couldn't play anymore. Notice not once did Walsh ever say that the Doctors said Jon couldn't play anymore.

            Sorry guys, I know everybody wants to throw Bball under the bus but in this case where there is smoke there is fire.


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

              I think the most important thing we have to remember here is that we can always judge the heart and character of a player from snippits of half recalled articles and games. No one here was in the doctors office or training room so why should we take the Bender's, organization's, league's and insurance company's word for it that Bender couldn't play. That's just kool-aid drinking naivity. Players don't fail for any other reason besides their moral failings.
              "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

              "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

                Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                I think the most important thing we have to remember here is that we can always judge the heart and character of a player from snippits of half recalled articles and games. No one here was in the doctors office or training room so why should we take the Bender's, organization's, league's and insurance company's word for it that Bender couldn't play. That's just kool-aid drinking naivity. Players don't fail for any other reason besides their moral failings.
                Such as Williams (I believe that's his name, right?) of the Bulls when he got that motorbike accident?

                I'm taking it to the extreme here, but I'm doing that on purpose, because I read your last lines above as a 100%-rule, which is something I definitely don't believe in in these sorts of cases.
                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

                  Sorry, I was being sarcastic. Maybe not the best route everytime.
                  "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                  "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    You mean to tell me that Jon's knees are worse that Al's knees? You know Al's knee, the one he blew out playing against the Celtics.
                    I've never personally saw Bender's knee, nor his test results, but the damage they say he has, and the damage that Al went through are completely opposite.

                    If you tear your PCL, LCL, ACL, or MCL, they will remove another ligament in a different area of your body where it's not really needed, mostly from the anterior side of your forearm. You don't regrow the ligament, they dont staple/stitch it together, they phsyically remove it and attach a new one.

                    I have several friends who have torn up each knee several times, and are still able to play. One of my friends has been told if she tears it again, they don't have any more ligaments to replace it with and she would be done playing and time would be the only thing that could heal it.

                    If Bender is missing his menisci, they don't have anything to replace that with. They tell us they've been experimenting with pig menisci, but their typically smaller and problems pop up.

                    Either way, tearing up your ACL, LCL, MCL, and PCL is much different than not having anything between your femur and tibia/fibia.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      I've never personally saw Bender's knee, nor his test results, but the damage they say he has, and the damage that Al went through are completely opposite.

                      If you tear your PCL, LCL, ACL, or MCL, they will remove another ligament in a different area of your body where it's not really needed, mostly from the anterior side of your forearm. You don't regrow the ligament, they dont staple/stitch it together, they phsyically remove it and attach a new one.

                      I have several friends who have torn up each knee several times, and are still able to play. One of my friends has been told if she tears it again, they don't have any more ligaments to replace it with and she would be done playing and time would be the only thing that could heal it.

                      If Bender is missing his menisci, they don't have anything to replace that with. They tell us they've been experimenting with pig menisci, but their typically smaller and problems pop up.

                      Either way, tearing up your ACL, LCL, MCL, and PCL is much different than not having anything between your femur and tibia/fibia.

                      I don't dispute any of that. I'm just pointing out that for Bender's alleged diagnosis to be true it would certainly leave a trail of questions about how it took so long to reach that conclusion. Especially considering surgery, tests, etc all being performed during his time here.

                      -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


                      • #41
                        Re: I will always believe that Bender would have been a real player if not for injuri

                        Which is why I said that I've never personally seen his knee or his results.

                        I have no clue how serious his injuries are. I do think that it's impossible for him to play professional basketball.

                        Playing a charity game, or a pickup game once or twice a week, isn't anywhere near the ballpark of playing 82games a season while practicing, while traveling so much.

                        Resting at home, with your feet up, is going to work so much better than resting while on a plane, (no matter how nice it is.)

                        For a medical company to pick up that big of a check, he had to be done in the NBA. Now as to not having any padding in his knees, I have no clue. But it really doesn't matter.

                        He's done, and he's never going to play again. End of story for all I'm concerned. Just like Brad Miller, Ron, Saras, and Jax. They're all gone and it's tiring to keep reading/rehashing the same things over and over.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X