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

JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

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

  • #16
    Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

    Originally posted by JBones19 View Post
    There was a shot near the end of the game where the camera panned across the Pacer's bench and Jack was joking and laughing with the guy (Danny?) to his left and JO was on the other side of Jack with a look of disgust on his face.

    This is one of my biggest pet peeves. JBones, I don't mean to pick on you, but when people see a 2 second snippet of the bench and extrapulate what they see into something of meaning it makes me mad. Do we know what Jax was doing right before the camera showed him, he might have been crying, he might have been so mad his eyes were bugging out of his head.

    If I was at a funeral of a very good and close friend of mine and they were shooting a video tape of it and a two second snippet showed me smiling or laughing, does that mean I don't care about my best friend dying. Does that mean I wasn't crying the other 99% percent of the time. Well of course not, but you are doing the same thing by taking a 2 second snippet and acting like it was 35 minutes long

    Jax is a guy who I believe really wants to win, he's very competitive - but the point is, we have no idea what was going on there, the camera showed 2 or 3 seconds of what you are talking about.

    For the record, there were other shots of Jax looking very disgusted and upset.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

      I think many of us are getting way too far ahead of our analysis of how things are going. Did anyone honestly expect a team that has experienced as much change as the Pacers to burst out of the gate and set the league on fire? I personally just want to see progress from one week to another. You can't make a judgement from game to game, because they are going to stumble now and then.

      We are .500 and with lots of season left. I think we need to be encouraged by the fact that a "discussion" occurred. It's obvious there are issues with how we are playing that need to be addressed...lets give them the opportunity to do so. It's too early at this point.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

        Patience, my friends.

        This is going to be a long, bumpy ride.

        I can't fault JO's effort. 12 boards, four assists, four blocks. He just couldn't hit shots. You certainly can't say that JO let the rest of his game suffer because he wasn't hitting shots.

        Our backcourt still needs a lot of help.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

          I like that JO stormed in and had a heated discussion. If nothing else it shows that there is the kind of passion for winning (or at least hatred of being embarassed) that we want to see from a team leader. This could have been just a vent session (something one should be able to do with one's boss), it could have been about something specific, but either way the number of good things it could be about far outweighs the number of bad things it could be about. Let's see what is done before we jump to conclusions.

          Remember, a lot of folks had the Pacers at around .400 after the first 20 or so games because of the need to get settled in, the schedule timing, and the number of road games. Let's not let the fact that they looked very good in some wins lead us to believe that they won't be inconsistent and get frustrated about it.

          I really think of this team something like the 93-94 team, which looked awful at times until after the All-Star break. This does NOT mean that I think the team as is will make it to the ECF, but it DOES mean that I think we need to be patient before making final judgements.

          Now, let the world come to a peaceful end since I've once again agreed with Jay
          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


          • #20
            Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

            Does Bird even watch the games. In his postgame comments he claimed that Sarunas is the first guy off the bench. I'm pretty sure Quis, Foster, Rawle and Armstrong all get in before Sarunas

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

              Originally posted by Rinuven View Post
              I think many of us are getting way too far ahead of our analysis of how things are going. Did anyone honestly expect a team that has experienced as much change as the Pacers to burst out of the gate and set the league on fire? I personally just want to see progress from one week to another. You can't make a judgement from game to game, because they are going to stumble now and then.

              We are .500 and with lots of season left. I think we need to be encouraged by the fact that a "discussion" occurred. It's obvious there are issues with how we are playing that need to be addressed...lets give them the opportunity to do so. It's too early at this point.

              Yes, I agree, I wouldbe happy with .500 through the first 19 games, then we'll see where they are and headed from there, this basically a whole new team in my eyes.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                Unfortunately, everytime I hear "lineup shuffle" I know it means Granger gets benched and Foster comes in. I also thought it was a bit more than coincidence that Larry Bird was quoted as saying he really likes several of the Celtics young players, "without getting specific."

                It's well known he likes Gerald Green, and GG is a franchise type of player, but the team is overrun with wing players, so I have to believe he is looking at Delonte West, who is inexplicably having his playing time reduced this year. He's smart, plays hard and he's a lights out shooter.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                  I find it interesting that we all think it was JO who stormed in and was upset about things. What if Rick and Larry were upset and wanted to talk to the "leader" of the team privately. Maybe it was Rick and Larry who did all the yelling.

                  Just something to consider.


                  I hope we do see a lineup change - but I hope it is in the backcourt.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    This is one of my biggest pet peeves. JBones, I don't mean to pick on you, but when people see a 2 second snippet of the bench and extrapulate what they see into something of meaning it makes me mad. Do we know what Jax was doing right before the camera showed him, he might have been crying, he might have been so mad his eyes were bugging out of his head.

                    If I was at a funeral of a very good and close friend of mine and they were shooting a video tape of it and a two second snippet showed me smiling or laughing, does that mean I don't care about my best friend dying. Does that mean I wasn't crying the other 99% percent of the time. Well of course not, but you are doing the same thing by taking a 2 second snippet and acting like it was 35 minutes long

                    Jax is a guy who I believe really wants to win, he's very competitive - but the point is, we have no idea what was going on there, the camera showed 2 or 3 seconds of what you are talking about.

                    For the record, there were other shots of Jax looking very disgusted and upset.
                    I understand what you're saying and agree. It was just something I noticed at the end of the game that kinda rubbed me the wrong way and then pacertom brought up that it may have been a reason JO was peeved. Of course, it's all speculation.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                      Is it sacrilege to say I miss the way that Artest would OWN Paul Pierce and really get into his head?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                        Originally posted by Lamar Mundane View Post
                        Is it sacrilege to say I miss the way that Artest would OWN Paul Pierce and really get into his head?

                        Not at all Lamar, but remember Artest not only got into the other player's head but his own as well.
                        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


                        • #27
                          Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          For the record, there were other shots of Jax looking very disgusted and upset.
                          Yeah, they cut to the bench once in the 2nd half and I was actually bothered by how down he and the other guys were, comparing it to how they had been up and supportive previously. This night they looked whipped emotionally.

                          Now there was a point in the 3rd that Armstrong just refused to go quietly and when he hit the court he was forcing guys to keep the energy, like when he called for Foster to help him on a full court press. He was trying to rally their spirit and almost pulled it off.


                          And in the end what I want to see out of Jack more than any other player is the ability to laugh stuff off because his problem is 100% not a lack of caring or emotion. His problem is usually too much and letting it ruin his game when he gets frustrated. I also thought he played a little better after RC benched him for Rawle early on.

                          Our backcourt still needs a lot of help.
                          Yeah, this wasn't the finest hour for Tins, Jack and Cabbages. But on the other hand Daniels was outstanding and Armstrong gave them a spark in the 3rd.



                          Also wanted to add that I totally agree with Will's post about the Star's reporting. One part of me wondered if Mike commenting on this was necessary at all. I mean when you hear old timer stories of the locker room in any sport, stuff like this comes off as a lot more common than we realized at the time. For all we know Staubach was in Landry's office having a meltdown every other week, it just never made news.

                          Was this a special shouting match or just typical blowing off steam?

                          The only story I know for certain is that on WED night Fun was definitely not back.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                            I understand we have played only one team over .500 last year. That is no indicator for how bad we are this year.

                            Philly played well up to the game they played us (only one loss going in)

                            After that they dropped 2 before beating Seattle and ending their3 game winning streak (game was in Seattle after Seattle won 3 games in a row on the road)

                            Hornets-6-3 winning against GSW Hou and Detroit (had the best record last year so that makes then what?) Obviously this team is not the same. With Peja added and West tearing it up this team is better than what they were was last year.

                            Orlando is 6-3 with wins against Chicago, Wolves, and snapped Denver's 3 game winning streak. They are continuing the run of last year.

                            Chicago has been inconsistent but last April showed that they were better than a 41-41 team. Add Ben and role players and it is a matter of time before they get in rythmn.

                            The only proclaimed above .500 team last year (42-40) has had a tough schedule playing the Cavs and Nets (magic too) and lossing both of those closely. But they are 3-4 (thats under .500).


                            So what is my point? You can make anything look bad (or good as I pointed out) with just a few facts.

                            Like:

                            The Pacers do not play consecutive home games till December 8. Thats 20 games with having to fly home only to fly somewhere else the next game.

                            There is only one team that goes longer and that is Philly (December 11, but only 13 games played). Aside from those two teams. All other teams in the NBA have consecutive home games (whether back to back or days rested).

                            But does that matter. the Hornets really don't have a home and yet they win. I know this post is wishy washy. But we can talk up a storm about the whys and hows but it just comes down to execution and desire.
                            We have problems (rebounding, guard play to name a couple) and as fans we want the product to produce. Its time. No more excuses. Shut the Hell up and play basketball. Stop acting like its your right and start acting like its a privelege to be a Pacer.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                              The previous post edited to read better.


                              I understand we have played only one team over .500 last year. That is no indicator for how bad we are this year.

                              Philly played well up to the game they played us (only one loss going in)


                              After that they dropped 2 before beating Seattle and ending their3 game winning streak (game was in Seattle after Seattle won 3 games in a row on the road)

                              Hornets-6-3 winning against GSW Hou and Detroit (had the best record last year so that makes then what?) Obviously this team is not the same. With Peja added and West tearing it up this team is better than what they were was last year.

                              Orlando is 6-3 with wins against Chicago, Wolves, and snapped Denver's 3 game winning streak. They are continuing the run of last year.

                              Chicago has been inconsistent but last April showed that they were better than a 41-41 team. Add Ben and role players and it is a matter of time before they get in rythmn.

                              The only proclaimed above .500 team last year (42-40) has had a tough schedule playing the Cavs and Nets (magic too) and lossing both of those closely. But they are 3-4 (thats under .500).


                              So what is my point? You can make anything look bad (or good as I pointed out) with just a few facts.

                              Like:

                              The Pacers do not play consecutive home games till December 8. Thats 20 games with having to fly home only to fly somewhere else the next game.

                              There is only one team that goes longer and that is Philly (December 11, but only 13 games played). Aside from those two teams. All other teams in the NBA have consecutive home games (whether back to back or days rested).

                              But does that matter. the Hornets really don't have a home and yet they win. I know this post is wishy washy. But we can talk up a storm about the whys and hows but it just comes down to execution and desire.

                              We have problems (rebounding, guard play to name a couple) and as fans we want the product to produce. Its time. No more excuses. Shut the Hell up and play basketball. Stop acting like its your right and start acting like its a privelege to be a Pacer.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth
                                He probably wondered why a guy who inbounds the ball into the freaking backboard is getting any playing time at all.

                                He also might have wondered why most of his blocks bounced away from guys like Foster (he missed 2 of them, one right off his leg and another he was slow to chase down) aren't getting recovered by his own teammates, especially when he saves the day on a 4 on 1 break.


                                I gotta say that Al, Daniels and JO were by far the most impressive guys in terms of effort tonight.

                                Here's the key point, JO went to the office, Ron went to Mike Wells.
                                Yeah let's put the loss on Sars and Foster, your agenda is not loss on me.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X