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

Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

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

  • #16
    Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

    Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post
    O'Brien never listened to his assistants?
    You should at least be fair if you're going to make a post like this. The article said that Vogel first listened to his assistants before addressing his players during long timeouts which is something that JOB did not do. They were taking a specific example using the timeouts, for all we know the only example and highlightingit. You're acting like they painted JOB with a broad brush and never listened to his assistants. That's NOT what was said. Very nice spin job though.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

      I'd just say this...of course Vogel is going to get a lot of media coverage, and of course he is going to get alot of positive spin starting out. You have to realize these last 2 days have been the most significant development in Pacers Basketball in 3 years. The media wants in on it. Hell, Kravitz, Well, and Rabjohns have had to essentially write some of same stories week after week, year after year. I'm surprised that they didn't have a standard boilerplate of phrases to work from after having to write so many articles about the Pacers and how they suck so bad.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
        But already the contract in style IS a welcome difference. Just think, Vogel actally praises a players performance during games... and after. Let's contrast that with referring to the player or his performance as "irrelevant" the next day. Positive reinforcement? I'm not sure that I've seen that associated with a player for a long time. Well... at least 3-1/2 years.
        Not sure about praise during a game. Never sat that close to know. But I think the after game stuf is overblown. Vogel last night after the game said Roy's defense wasn't very good in the first half.

        sure the irrelevant comment was made, and yes Jim said in early December this year that Roy wasn't having a very good year. but jim made a lot of positive remarks about his players after games of course those don't make the news

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

          It seems that Coach Vogel might be our Scott Brooks or Monty Williams. A guy who's been an assistant for many, many years and has worked well individually with players and will be more of a player's coach.

          The one thing I really respect about coaches like Popovich, Carlisle, and Phil Jackson is that they constantly involve their assistants during timeouts and practices.

          I remember before the season started watching the Lakers training camp on NBATV and I was really surprised at how much work Phil delegated to his assistant coaches. He would give brief instructions here and there to the team and then step back and let his assistants run and organize the drills. Phil has a commanding presence but he's not dogmatic and negative during practices.

          Hopefully, Frank Vogel will pattern himself more after these coaches and less after Jim O'Brien. So far, so good!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

            Given that Vogel was an O'Brien assistant for so long, the question of whether he'd be more of the same was obvious, as many people on this site mentioned. The media needed to address that question.

            Vogel has obviously been very different than O'Brien so far in the tone and content of his initial comments about the team and its players, and in how he used players in last night's game. His demeanor and approach to working with people appears to be quite different. For the media to report this is clearly their job and I don't see any hyperbole in the way the story in the Star is written.

            You can be sure that members of the media will question some of Vogel's decisions and capabilities sooner or later as the team's situation develops. People here will complain about that, as well.

            I give the Star high marks for its coverage of this situation. Some people here were all over Kravitz last week for his column, complaining that it didn't really say anything new. But while those people were mostly saying that there was no doubt that O'Brien would coach for the rest of the year, Bob nailed it in saying the time had come for the Pacers to make a change.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
              It seems that Coach Vogel might be our Scott Brooks or Monty Williams. A guy who's been an assistant for many, many years and has worked well individually with players and will be more of a player's coach.

              The one thing I really respect about coaches like Popovich, Carlisle, and Phil Jackson is that they constantly involve their assistants during timeouts and practices.

              I remember before the season started watching the Lakers training camp on NBATV and I was really surprised at how much work Phil delegated to his assistant coaches. He would give brief instructions here and there to the team and then step back and let his assistants run and organize the drills. Phil has a commanding presence but he's not dogmatic and negative during practices.

              Hopefully, Frank Vogel will pattern himself more after these coaches and less after Jim O'Brien. So far, so good!
              Just for balance sake. Larry Brown does almost everything himself similar to Jim O'Brien.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                Damn the more I read about the way the clown was dealing with the team the more I question Larry Birds decision making for letting this go for this long.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  Just for balance sake. Larry Brown does almost everything himself similar to Jim O'Brien.
                  You just made JOB look like a very poor coach. If what he does is similar to wht Larry Brown does, Larry Brown must do it INFINITELY more effectively.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                    The Star is still ultimately at least a part of the pr machine for the franchise. Also, the Star is interested in promoting popular viewpoints to align itself with the most potential readership to both maintain its current base as well as attract new readers. As a result, it behooves the Star to produce pieces from its staff that match the opinions of its readership, at least to an extent.

                    With those things said it makes sense that, after just one game, and from a coach who has served under both Pitino and O'Brien in Vogel, that the differences are going to be highlighted. A coaching style change is what so many people have been begging to have happen for such a long time that readers will eat it up whether it ends up actually being true or not.

                    I am encouraged by what we have been reading, and some of what was seen last night, just as many others are. But, Toronto is Toronto. Cleveland is Cleveland and hopefully they won't magically catch fire against the Pacers and break their losing streak. The proof will be in watching Vogel's body of work and how the players end up being utilized in many different situations and against quality opponents, and how consistent the message from the coach ends up being vs. what actually transpires on the court. We really have no actual idea how that will end up playing out, but it will be refreshing to at least focus on a coach that is an unknown instead of a coach who was nearly metronomic in his consistency of being exactly who many of us believed him to be -- a coach who forced players to adapt to his system regardless of whether his players individually had the skills to fit their assigned slot in the system (whatever that slot happened to be at any given time) and then chastised players in the media who either 1) failed to perform to his level of expectations or 2) who happened to perform far better than expected, especially when they did so by not conforming to their respective slot, thereby in essence showing O'Brien up for the world to see, after which the inexplicable long term benchings that ended up being completely predictable occurred.

                    Regardless, at least the beginning of change has happened, and the future holds hope as a result where there has been very little for several years now. Go Pacers!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                      I really like what I saw last night.

                      This team revolves around the core guys.

                      Mike saw limited minutes and Danny didn't play to point where he was breathless.

                      I like where this half of the season is going.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                        Originally posted by travmil View Post
                        You just made JOB look like a very poor coach. If what he does is similar to wht Larry Brown does, Larry Brown must do it INFINITELY more effectively.
                        Because the Bobcats are worse now than they were at the beginning of the season?
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                          Here is confimation by one of the Pacers insiders about the Inside Information that we got two weeks ago from Mackey-Rose

                          New Pacers coach Frank Vogel also told me he wants to continue his open communication w/players and not have assistants deliver messages.
                          about 24 hours ago via web
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            It probably should be pointed out that a coach who deferred to the players' feelings and wishes was NOT what was needed when the previous coach was hired.

                            Vogel is in a position to be successful because he (so far) has players who are reasonable in their feelings and actions.

                            Other than that, I am happy to see a coach who communicates well with players. We'll see how well that translates to the Media after the honeymoon is over.
                            Bill makes an excellent point here. When O'Brien was hired, the makeup of the roster was vastly different.

                            O'Brien's style obviously didn't mesh all that well with the personalities on this team. This doesn't mean that his way of doing things is wrong, terrible, or stupid.

                            On the same wavelength, different is not always better. Vogel looks and sounds like a better fit for this roster right now, but that doesn't make him a better coach than O'Brien.

                            A change was made. Things will be different. Jim O'Brien is a good guy and a good basketball coach, but it didn't work out. I'm sure that Frank Vogel is a good guy and a good basketball coach, and I hope it works out better for the team.
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                              Originally posted by DonSwanson View Post
                              They ran with the same tired narrative about how O'Brien supposedly didn't listen to Dick Harter, without providing any context that O'Brien and Harter collaborated in the creation of a team defensive style that they used in Boston, Philly, and Indiana, a defensive system which is proven in generating overachieving outcomes. This season's Pacers are yet another example of this.
                              The Pacers part is inaccurate, according to my (and several other) sources.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Vogel quick to show he's no O'Brien clone (Indystar)

                                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                                Because the Bobcats are worse now than they were at the beginning of the season?
                                No, I'm talking about the entire body of work. I would list all of Brown's accomplishemtns and compare them to JOB, but you and I both know it would be like comparing JOB's one story ranch to Brown's Empire State Building.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X