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

Should Reggie get a statue?

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

  • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

    Originally posted by Pacesetter
    Mark I still believe a bronze statue of Donnie and Reggie together depicting Reggie's signing would be awesome, but knowing you do NOT feel that a 'basketball player' is so deserving, what do you think about a bust of him, and start a Pacers hall of fame at conseco?
    Sorry if this is off topic, but this reminded me of a project I did last year in art class and thought I would share...

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...m/DSCF0837.jpg
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...m/DSCF0838.jpg

    Comment


    • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

      Originally posted by Pacesetter
      Mark I still believe a bronze statue of Donnie and Reggie together depicting Reggie's signing would be awesome, but knowing you do NOT feel that a 'basketball player' is so deserving, what do you think about a bust of him, and start a Pacers hall of fame at conseco?
      Wasn't there a Pacer "Hall of Fame" at MSA? I seem to remember it had all kinds of plaques for the retired numbers plus people like David Craig. I don't remember for sure that it was called the "Hall of Fame" (might have been the "Wall of Fame" ) but did it get moved to the Fieldhouse?

      Even if this exists or is started, I would still feel like a reasonable statue of Reggie would be an addition to the atmosphere of the Fieldhouse and an appropriate honor for the man who, more than just his accomplishments, represents the Indiana Pacers to an entire generation of basketball fans.

      If it is in front and someone else comes along who then represents the Pacers to the city and the country at the level Reggie has, move Reggie's inside and put the new one out front.

      I say this - as a day-one Pacer fan who also wants to see Rajah, Big Mac, Mel, and Slick so honored, I have absolutely no problem with Reggie being the first and I don't think any of the other number-retirees would, either. Heck, we can ask all of them but Roger. I know Mel and Slick consider Reggie to be the most recognized Pacer in the franchise history.
      BillS

      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

      Comment


      • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

        Originally posted by jrm7one
        Sorry if this is off topic, but this reminded me of a project I did last year in art class and thought I would share...

        http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...m/DSCF0837.jpg
        http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...m/DSCF0838.jpg
        Wow, that seems eerily familiar to the Reggie Superman that popped in on one of the Boston games I was at. In fact, I think Reggie even did a double take of the thing. lol.

        Good work though, I was thinking along the lines of something a little more mobile in size.

        Comment


        • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

          Originally posted by BillS
          Wasn't there a Pacer "Hall of Fame" at MSA? I seem to remember it had all kinds of plaques for the retired numbers plus people like David Craig. I don't remember for sure that it was called the "Hall of Fame" (might have been the "Wall of Fame" ) but did it get moved to the Fieldhouse?

          Even if this exists or is started, I would still feel like a reasonable statue of Reggie would be an addition to the atmosphere of the Fieldhouse and an appropriate honor for the man who, more than just his accomplishments, represents the Indiana Pacers to an entire generation of basketball fans.

          If it is in front and someone else comes along who then represents the Pacers to the city and the country at the level Reggie has, move Reggie's inside and put the new one out front.

          I say this - as a day-one Pacer fan who also wants to see Rajah, Big Mac, Mel, and Slick so honored, I have absolutely no problem with Reggie being the first and I don't think any of the other number-retirees would, either. Heck, we can ask all of them but Roger. I know Mel and Slick consider Reggie to be the most recognized Pacer in the franchise history.
          Good points.

          Someone else deserving of the Indiana Pacer's highest honor would be no other than Clark Kelogg. I'm convinced he's part angel! I've listened to countless broadcasts with him in the mix, and I appreciate his love for this game, and his ability to convey a positive message to the audiences he serves. He may have been one of the Pacer's greatest ever and would have definitely given Reggie a hand if he hadn't banged up his knees so early.

          Clark is one of the good guys!

          Comment


          • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

            Here's the way I look at it:

            Reggie is to the Pacers

            as

            Ernie Banks is to the Cubs


            I know the Cubs put a statue of harry Carey outside Wrigley. What did they do for Ernie?
            You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
            All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

            - Jimmy Buffett

            Comment


            • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

              Originally posted by Pacesetter
              Wow, that seems eerily familiar to the Reggie Superman that popped in on one of the Boston games I was at. In fact, I think Reggie even did a double take of the thing. lol.
              I dont think ive ever heard of this? Sounds interesting though, what was it?

              Originally posted by Pacesetter
              Good work though, I was thinking along the lines of something a little more mobile in size.
              I'm not sure what you mean by mobile. It's really not that big (see picture below). Not too professional either, just something I did for fun in art class my senior year of high school.

              Comment


              • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?



                Sorry, looking at the above photo I thought the thing was massive. What I saw at Conseco looked like this face in a superman's outfit. The head size on the one I saw at Conseco was probably 4 or 5' in circumference.

                The one you have on your mantel is about the right size!

                Comment


                • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                  [Peck]Guys, can we just drop this Reggie statue business. Let's stop all the arguing and do something we can agree on. Let's build a statue for Dale! [/Peck]

                  -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


                  • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                    Originally posted by Bball
                    [Peck]Guys, can we just drop this Reggie statue business. Let's stop all the arguing and do something we can agree on. Let's build a statue for Dale! [/Peck]

                    -Bball
                    Will he be wearing the pink Pistons hat?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                      Would dale be wearing a dress?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                        While I was at Conseco today I made a special effort to stop outside and try to visualize a Reggie in bronze somewhere around there. I like the idea. I think it would give the building a little more class.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                          The pink was to help cancer patients guys.
                          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                            I have no problem with a statue.

                            I think the point that Scott and Mark Boyle and others are missing is that with Reggie, it is so much more than rings or his lack of them. Reggie had an intangible almost magical affect on all of us in Pacer nation. He made us happy to be Pacer fans and excited about following them. He made us a national team and gave the team and the city a face. He came of age as the downtown did. And his flair for the dramatic made him one of the more intriguing and exciting players in the HISTORY OF THE LEAGUE.

                            Almost more imporantantly, he captured the fans' love more than almost any player in any city in any sport. His charisma and relationship with the fans was the stuff of legends. His final year, and final months, and final run, and final game only added to that legend.

                            I don't think Donnie Walsh and certainly Larry Brown are even close to Reggie when you consider all the factors in play. Reggie was the Pacers. And the others, Mark and Rik and Detlef and Jalen and Jermaine and Ron had never, and will never, even with a ring, ever reach the level of popularity that 31 had.

                            He deserves it.
                            sigpic
                            "It's a league game, Smokey"

                            Comment


                            • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                              Originally posted by abington
                              I have no problem with a statue.

                              I think the point that Scott and Mark Boyle and others are missing is that with Reggie, it is so much more than rings or his lack of them. Reggie had an intangible almost magical affect on all of us in Pacer nation. He made us happy to be Pacer fans and excited about following them. He made us a national team and gave the team and the city a face. He came of age as the downtown did. And his flair for the dramatic made him one of the more intriguing and exciting players in the HISTORY OF THE LEAGUE.

                              Almost more imporantantly, he captured the fans' love more than almost any player in any city in any sport. His charisma and relationship with the fans was the stuff of legends. His final year, and final months, and final run, and final game only added to that legend.

                              I don't think Donnie Walsh and certainly Larry Brown are even close to Reggie when you consider all the factors in play. Reggie was the Pacers. And the others, Mark and Rik and Detlef and Jalen and Jermaine and Ron had never, and will never, even with a ring, ever reach the level of popularity that 31 had.

                              He deserves it.
                              See....THIS is what I was trying to say!

                              I agree with this post.



                              RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                              Comment


                              • Re: Should Reggie get a statue?

                                Many interesting thoughts in this thread. I voted yes. To me what Reggie brought to the Pacers as a player should not be the only consideration. What Reggie symbolizes in relation to the franchise is what sways me. I completely buy the argument that Donnie has done "more" than Reggie in terms of making the franchise a perennial contender. I'll also admit that LB was instrumental in the getting the Pacers over the first few hurdles towards becoming a contender. Of course, the Simons are of the utmost importance (since they don't have numbers can we hang a jersey from the rafters of Conseco w/ Mel & Herb's names and a '$' as the number?). You can also say that the team had begun the transition from laughingstock to respectability before Reggie arrived, sure, I'm with ya there too.

                                In my mind though, the name/face/person that most will associate (now and in the future) with the turnaround of the franchise will be Reggie. He was the public face and media focal point of the Pacers for a majority of the last 20 years and that _mostly_ conincides with the rise of the Pacers from the gutter to the penthouse. Symbolically, he is who we (generally speaking) "see" when we think of those Pacer teams that have made us proud to be fans of this organization and have given us so many memories (of which he personally gave us a quite a few; and i'm sure i'm not the only one who still finds a couple of those quite astonishing). To me, he symbolizes the rise of the Pacers although i understand that he may not have been the most important or instrumental person (on an individual level) in the turnaround of the franchise.

                                You could throw up a statue of the Simons and 80-90% of people heading to a game at Conseco wouldn't know who 'those guys' were until being told (some discerning PD posters might but I don't think we truly fit into the "average fan" box and that's where I'm coming from at the moment). Maybe this is a poor example but say you show a basketball fan in Croatia or France a picture of Donnie and a picture of Reggie see who is recognized first. My somewhat long winded point is that it is Reggie who is identified as Mr. Pacer, Thee Pacer. If you're going to put a statue up, who better (at this point in time anyway)?

                                As an aside... Ken made a very good point about how the Celtics don't put up statues but after thinking about that for a couple of minutes it occurred to me that some of those statues would be awfully damn ugly (DJ, McHale, Parrish were names that immediately came to mind) and might actually have the effect of scaring fans away from the Fleet Center! I'm positive that the Celtics management has considered this from all angles and have reached the conclusion that it's just not worth the potental risk of frightening the fans.

                                EDIT - abington makes the point nicely a couple posts above, it's not just about Reggie the player.
                                Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X