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

Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

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

  • #61
    Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

    Maybe his teammates really don't care because they themselves agree it's just a business. As soon as I see some restructuring of contracts (maybe not even possible?) then I'll be a little more concerned that Sarunas thinks the NBA is all about money.

    STill not as controversial as Austin blowing off about Artest last year.
    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

      Originally posted by RWB
      STill not as controversial as Austin blowing off about Artest last year.
      Or JO calling the age limit racist.

      Or Jax calling the dress code racist.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

        Originally posted by Since86
        Or JO calling the age limit racist.

        Or Jax calling the dress code racist.
        Agreed here.

        As far as Austin goes...

        Well isn't Austin considered to be an off-court team captain? I mean wasn't he second only to Reggie in "company man" status? Remember it was him and Reg that they brought to the press post-brawl.

        Croshere has, IMO, the responsibility to speak out. Assuming he accepts a leadership role.

        Plus when it comes to Artest, anyone including a rookie, could have said that and it would have been fine.
        House Name: Pacers

        House Sigil:



        House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

          Originally posted by Julius Sour
          maybe my Lithuanian commrades could correct me on translation... I think it is prety accurate.
          yes, I think your translation was totally incorrect (or rather you got it incorrectly in Lithuanian ). and you also made up some words. besides, that was a dumbass Lithuanian kid (a.k.a. a very young journalist) asking him those questions, so he felt relaxed treating him like that. I remember when that interview was shown live and it was obvious that the journalist has cooked it, he was just plain pathetic..

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

            Originally posted by Peck
            While I have no qualms with his on court play, I don't see him as anything special but I do think he is a good player, I can not stand the way the guy runs his mouth.

            STFU & play the game.

            Every single time I see some interview with him from anywhere but here it is about how he thinks this is wrong with the NBA or that is wrong with the NBA. Nobody held a gun to his head & made him sign a contract. Nobody will hold a gun to his head if he decides tonight to just leave his contract & go a back over seas. I'm sure there are plenty of teams that would gladly take him & pay him more money than he gets here.

            I know I am about to be attacked by our friends from across the pond so in advance let me say I'm sorry for offending you. But this guy talks way to much for a rookie for my taste.
            I think the NBA is very disappointing to him. He probably came into
            the league expecting passionate talented players and what he got was
            unmotivated, money hunger selfish players. I mean to a guy who
            always looked at the NBA with wonder and amazement to find
            out that its money first and play second must be very disappointing.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

              Originally posted by Julius Sour
              I'll Show You guys how Saras can talk to Euro journalists... That's still blossoms he's given to Your press. Video with transcription.

              Js

              Transcription
              Journalist: What You could say to those people that think that You [LTU NT] have played badly at the Olympic tournament and will not come to the Cathedral square to celebrate [4th place at the Olympics 2004] this achievement with the team?
              Saras: We've played bad...?!
              J: No it was not bad... but what You would say to those fans that think that it was not good enough?
              S:I do not no. I do always say, that it is as it is. It is realy hard to say something.
              J: ... but those people whos say that You [Saras] haven't given Your 100% on the floor...?
              S: I'd say that there is much more dumbass journalists like You, than there are people who talk like You,
              understand?
              J: No... I'm just saying...
              S:No... I do think that there is much more journalists LIKE YOU, than people who think and talk like that...
              As I talk to my friends or people I know in Lithuania, we come up with the opinion that there is more journalists thinking like You, than simple people thinking this way.
              J: Here everybody is to welcome You friendly and with respect ...
              S: So, why You are asking me this?
              J: I am just provocating...
              S: Oh, You're provocating? If Your're provocating, than GOOD BYE.
              J: I just want to hear Your opinion...................

              LINK http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyNWy...arch=lithuania maybe my Lithuanian commrades could correct me on translation... I think it is prety accurate.
              I doubt there was anything like "dumbass", because I don't hear any censorship sounds in it

              In any case, some journalists are crazy... Imagine a happy Duncan coming with a championship ring to San Antonio, surrounded by a crowd of fans, and in front of a journalist who simultaneously repeats a question "You know, what would you say to someone who would say that you were lazy during those finals?" Duncan: "Does anybody say that?" Journalist: "No, nobody ever said that. But lets imagine. I'm provoking you". Is there anything more stupid to ask a man who just came back from his best championship, is happy and surrounded by thousands of fans and is already dreaming about meeting his family?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                Originally posted by SwissExpress
                I doubt there was anything like "dumbass", because I don't hear any censorship sounds in it

                In any case, some journalists are crazy... Imagine a happy Duncan coming with a championship ring to San Antonio, surrounded by a crowd of fans, and in front of a journalist who simultaneously repeats a question "You know, what would you say to someone who would say that you were lazy during those finals?" Duncan: "Does anybody say that?" Journalist: "No, nobody ever said that. But lets imagine. I'm provoking you". Is there anything more stupid to ask a man who just came back from his best championship, is happy and surrounded by thousands of fans and is already dreaming about meeting his family?
                Believe me, most Lithuanians' mood was depressive after the surprise in semi-final.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                  Originally posted by Kestas
                  yes, I think your translation was totally incorrect (or rather you got it incorrectly in Lithuanian ). and you also made up some words. besides, that was a dumbass Lithuanian kid (a.k.a. a very young journalist) asking him those questions, so he felt relaxed treating him like that. I remember when that interview was shown live and it was obvious that the journalist has cooked it, he was just plain pathetic..

                  Do the transcript better please. i was asking commrades to correct me, not to tell me that I'm wrong in one or other case. Thanks and Respecta, Yo!

                  Special K.

                  Js
                  Wait a minute, whoa! Whoa! You don’t actually believe this crap! Do you? Dummy! Brain washed alien souls? E-meter and thetan levels? Those people out there buy that crap. But I thought you were smart enough to see what’s really going on!
                  What's better than telling people a stupid story and having them believe you? Having them pay you for it, stupid!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                    Originally posted by Rytas_Jega
                    Believe me, most Lithuanians' mood was depressive after the surprise in semi-final.
                    I'm sure. I was expecting Lithuania-Argentina final to be a match of a decade. Instead there was a terribly dissapointing Lithuania-Italy match and a later blowout of Italy by Argentina.

                    Still, I can't imagine anyone saying that Lithuania wasn't great in the Olympics or that Saras did not give his 100% percent during games. Such questions/speculations by a journalist in that airport were very misplaced. Even more so if there was a certain amount of sadness among players.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                      Originally posted by Diamond Dave


                      As if it matters what board its said on. Adam Jones is a worthless DB no matter where its said.

                      Oh, and I'm not sure if my father shares the same opinion on that, as he may not even know who Adam Jones is, nor should he. Just in case you were wondering.
                      You dont know jack **** about corners or football, you ever put some pads on and play? Bet not. Pacman has more talent in his foot then the whole Colts secondary does together.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                        Originally posted by Jermaniac
                        You dont know jack **** about corners or football, you ever put some pads on and play? Bet not. Pacman has more talent in his foot then the whole Colts secondary does together.
                        Just like a marionette.
                        House Name: Pacers

                        House Sigil:



                        House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                          Originally posted by Julius Sour
                          Do the transcript better please. i was asking commrades to correct me, not to tell me that I'm wrong in one or other case. Thanks and Respecta, Yo!

                          Special K.

                          Js
                          what for? why should anyone care about that interview?

                          however, first of all he did not mention "dumbass" or any other word for that matter in that space. secondly he ment to say that he believes most people think like the journalist in the positive way. he told him he believes people think like him (the journalist) - that is positively. you interpreted it completely the other way imo.
                          all in all I don't think there's anything shocking about how he responded to that journalist. walking away wasn't very polite, but the journalist was the one who started it

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                            Ha, it seems it's a good thread that I've started NBA has to change, and that's a fact. But Saras has to change too. That's a fact too.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                              good point.

                              If I were his teammate, I'd probably smack him. His generalizations are actually worse than if he'd come out and say something like, "JO spends more time on endorsements than basketball, and we can't ever get Croshere to hang up on his broker when its time to scrimmage." Now he's just vaguely insinuating things.

                              But perhaps, behind closed doors, he's explained himself.
                              Maybe I need to re-read the article. I didn't take it so much as a personal swipe at players or particularly teammates... I was thinking more along the lines of agents and then also management having to deal with salary caps and luxury tax issues.... the CBA itself and the dealings of union/management/NBA...

                              That kind of thing. Yes, the players figure into but more because it is the nature of the beast that has been built and become a necessary evil.

                              Maybe I'm a Sarunas apologist? Maybe I am misreading some things? Maybe I agree with what he says?

                              -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


                              • #75
                                Re: Reuters}Jasikevicius laments league's business-oriented attitude

                                Originally posted by MagicRat
                                Unfortunately for whoever signed him, Kenny's been done for years.....

                                “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                                motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                                Reggie Miller

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X