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

The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 69
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 17 57 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 template Next
  • #991
    Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

    They finished the season strong to squeak into the playoffs.
    I don't understand how this helps your point.

    A team a bit over .500 and in the playoffs goes sailing badly out of it with literally 1 loss away from having the worst record in the final 3 months. The other team goes from under .500 and out of the playoffs, loses their star starting PG AFTER the trade for more games than before it and manages to have one of the top records to finish the season and rise up into the playoffs.

    If any trade ever could be evaluated in more succinct, clearer terms than the dramatic change in both teams involved here I simply can't imagine it. If the 3 months after the GS/IND trade don't give us a pretty good view of how the deal went then just WTF does?

    I always thought the bottom line was W-L, then maybe some number to go with it. Jack shot the 3 better than Dun, Al shot the 3 better than Troy, the team gave up more points after the deal, the Warriors defense improved after the deal, the W-L records went in polar opposite directions and that was with Baron out to start so save the Quis defense.



    BTW, Nellie, the guy that ripped on Dun and Troy for being backup players getting paid starter money after the trade, went on JIM ROME today and said literally that Jackson is one of the FINEST PEOPLE he's ever known. He raved on the guy over and over, centered fully around his CHARACTER.

    He didn't hype his talent, he said he wasn't as talented as a guy like Baron for example. He didn't deny that he loses control of his emotions either.

    He just said that if he had to be in a foxhole with a guy, Jack is the one he'd want it to be. He feels that kind of bond with him and that kind of faith in him as a friend and ally.

    He was very candid about the good and bad on every issue they discussed, including the fact that he and Ewing didn't get along in the least. This wasn't just "I love everyone, especially my current team".


    Pair that kind of talk from Nellie with Rick and Jackson HUGGING for several seconds when GS came back to Indy and Jack lit them up. That's two coaches that seem very fond of Jackson.

    I'm betting they are just a tad more familiar with him than any fan is, and somehow they really like him. Not for his talent because no one portrays him as a superstar, but for his personality and character.

    As I mentioned elsewhere one of Jack's neighbors has nothing but great things to say about him as a person, that he was always a terrific neighbor and remained as such post-trade.


    So that bugs me too, the idea that some aspects get harped on, turned into a characterization rather than the more complicated honest picture of a person, and then it's all over and judgment is passed incorrectly. Because basically everyone with close contact to Jack has nothing but great things to say about him.

    With Ron you get Bibby questioning his weirdness, for example. You don't hear JRich or Ellis or even JO saying "that Jack, WTF was with him?"

    There is a massive disconnect between the fan image of Jack the Devil and the Nellie version of Jack the Nicest Guy You Could Know. And if that Devil image is wrong, then how in the heck is it "worth it" to take a loss just to get rid of him?


    They were trying to get better by subtracting HIM from the equation.
    Isn't this "showing him" that he was the problem? How's that math working out so far?

    Hey, so far it only required one coaching change, and we still don't have any positive results yet. And of course it's "not enough time"...because so far no results close to matching the "team wrecker" image have come about. Spurs won it all despite him getting solid PT. Atlanta stunk, but got no better when he left. Pacers won more games with him than without him. Golden St did as well.

    Plus I strongly suspect that had GS stunk and the Pacers taken off it "miraculously" would have been enough time to evaluate the trade. Why? Because people just want to count the results when they match their view, rather than letting the results shape their view.

    See I saw how things went and based my view on that. It got dark, I said "it must be night". I'm not the one saying "not enough evidence, it's day but you just don't realize it yet".

    If GS had imploded and the Pacers had gotten even just a tad better, you know what my view on Jackson and the GS deal would be right now? Pacers won that deal, Jack does hurt teams, addition by subtraction, salary cap hit was worth it.

    See there how I let the facts and results determine my POV. Groundbreaking I realize. All Jack has to do to get me to agree with you guys is actually make his coaches and teammates hate him and make the teams he's on win fewer games than when he's not around.

    Right now most of PD thinks that's too much for me to ask. I obviously find that annoying to no end. It's not rational. You might as well be telling me that Tinsley is as great a 3pt shooter as Reggie Miller. He is, we just haven't had enough time to evaluate that either.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 10-06-2007, 12:26 AM.

    Comment

    • #992
      Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      ....
      I left it all out for ease of reading.

      I don't feel like the rest of the season, post-trade, is enough to judge anything on. You can attempt to speak for me all you want, but I can tell you that since I know "me" better than you do, I have a pretty good idea of how I feel or would feel depending on how last season panned out.

      It would be difficult to not feel like we got the better end of the trade had we soared to new heights and GS crashed and burned, but I would STILL think it was too soon to make a solid judgment. Everything you blathered on about is still missing the point of a honeymoon period for GS, and the players we got coming in to a franchise in tatters from the last three years of drama. Spout whatever you want, but that is the truth. Sometimes the results don't tell the whole story. Given the situations in both places, with GS feeling happy to be rid of players that even the coach publicly stated he didn't like or respect, and the rallying around the players they got (Jackson in particular), who wouldn't expect that they would play nice in the first two months and show the world a thing or two? Face it, even the seven strangers on 'The Real World" were fast friends until the luster wore off and people started getting real. Same scenario.

      I'm not saying that GS will now crash and burn. They are an athletic team being led by a coach who has proven he knows what he is doing. Like I have stated, ad nauseum, there hasn't been enough basketball to judge it yet. They may well turn into a very good, close knit team that has a coach who they respect and can relate to, they may mesh perfectly and be very competitive...I DON'T KNOW...The same could be said for the Pacers. Now that they have a new coach and a new season, and the new players have a chance to go through a training camp together and bond in practice and on the road, THEY may turn into a competitive team that shows people they may have judged a bit too quickly...

      While it is wonderful that Nellie is swinging off Jackson's scrotum right now, I seem to recall him being less than thrilled with him when he was showing the 'other' Jackson several times in the playoffs. I attribute his statements to the same ego stroking, head case coddling he used in making Jackson a captain. A very good explanation was made that Nellie is playing it smart by publicly putting some faith in Jackson and giving him the opportunity to step in to a role he is probably capable of filling. Let's look past the point that he hasn't ever stepped in to that role in his career so far. It is a new season and a fresh start (still) in California, so give the guy a chance...I'm fine with that. That is the logical thing to do, especially with someone who needs to be handled with velvet gloves. I HOPE he can finally take advantage of his situation and use this as a catalyst to change his life for the better.

      The Nellie statement about being in a foxhole is perfect. That statement speaks volumes to me. I agree with him. If I was in an unreal situation where people were killing each other with every manner of weapon, even hand-to-hand combat, I would absolutely want someone with a proven ability to put all logic aside and just "snap" right next to me. I would much rather have that kind of person than someone sane, who would be scared to death and either cowering in a corner or just doing whatever it took to not get killed. I would want the guy who would dive out of the foxhole while firing his rifle one handed and chucking grenades with the other, not worrying about the hail of bullets coming his way. Unfortunately, we are talking about normal life, and the NBA. I'm in no way belittling anyone in the military, or saying that someone in that situation wouldn't be considered a hero. They would (and do) have my respect for what they are able to do in the face of danger. It is kind of a bad analogy, but seeing past the literal, I can see that point being made was that the person being talked about could win the CMH and save the entire platoon, or they could get the entire platoon killed. It is probably going to end up being feast or famine. While I love the feast, the famine could be a little difficult to live with.

      All that aside, please don't preach to me about the litany of people stepping up to praise Jackson's character. Face it, if his character wasn't in question, people wouldn't have to stand up for the guy like they were testifying at his parole hearing (which they likely could've ACTUALLY been doing if things had played out a little differently....). I'm sure Jackson is a popular player with plenty of casual friends. His personality all but guarantees it. I saw that while he was here and have never denied it. I have never stated that I think he is like Artest. I think the two can be a lot alike, but amazingly, there is someone out there in the NBA who actually has less self-control than Jackson.

      There are so many more things I could say, but I again find myself wishing I hadn't ripped the scab off of this argument. I have as hard a time controlling my ability to live with the fact that I think someone has a dumb opinion as apparently you do. I'm fine with that also. How could I fault you for blathering on to me about how you feel about all this when I keep doing the same thing too?

      Please, exercise your right to continue commenting on this issue if you must, and I probably will too if you do, but know that I would rather stop talking about it. Like I stated already, it is obvious we aren't going to convince each other to change opinions. I don't have anything against you personally, I just don't agree with you and like to argue as much as you do...



      RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

      Comment

      • #993
        Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

        Why couldn't you people let this thread die the horrible death it deserved? I know its summer and things are a little slow, but there are other threads out there you could have resurrected.

        Take the Luther Head thread for example...

        Comment

        • #994
          Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

          Originally posted by Mr.ThunderMakeR View Post
          Why couldn't you people let this thread die the horrible death it deserved? I know its summer and things are a little slow, but there are other threads out there you could have resurrected.

          Take the Luther Head thread for example...
          One could argue that candidly discussing Mr. Jackson's finer points isn't any larger waste of time than plenty of other things going on around here...

          Nobody made you read it.



          RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

          Comment

          • #995
            Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

            To any and all who hate this thread or what's said inside it:

            Reminder that we have an "Ignore Thread" feature.

            Once inside a thread, go to Thread Tools, then click Ignore this Thread. Now it won't show up for you. If you want to undo the damage, check around in your User CP.

            Comment

            • #996
              Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

              Originally posted by Mr.ThunderMakeR View Post
              there are other threads out there you could have resurrected.

              Take the Luther Head thread for example...
              Best advice I've heard in months.
              Read my Pacers blog:
              8points9seconds.com

              Follow my twitter:
              @8pts9secs

              Comment

              • #997
                Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                I don't understand how this helps your point.

                A team a bit over .500 and in the playoffs goes sailing badly out of it with literally 1 loss away from having the worst record in the final 3 months. The other team goes from under .500 and out of the playoffs, loses their star starting PG AFTER the trade for more games than before it and manages to have one of the top records to finish the season and rise up into the playoffs.

                If any trade ever could be evaluated in more succinct, clearer terms than the dramatic change in both teams involved here I simply can't imagine it. If the 3 months after the GS/IND trade don't give us a pretty good view of how the deal went then just WTF does?

                I always thought the bottom line was W-L, then maybe some number to go with it. Jack shot the 3 better than Dun, Al shot the 3 better than Troy, the team gave up more points after the deal, the Warriors defense improved after the deal, the W-L records went in polar opposite directions and that was with Baron out to start so save the Quis defense.



                BTW, Nellie, the guy that ripped on Dun and Troy for being backup players getting paid starter money after the trade, went on JIM ROME today and said literally that Jackson is one of the FINEST PEOPLE he's ever known. He raved on the guy over and over, centered fully around his CHARACTER.

                He didn't hype his talent, he said he wasn't as talented as a guy like Baron for example. He didn't deny that he loses control of his emotions either.

                He just said that if he had to be in a foxhole with a guy, Jack is the one he'd want it to be. He feels that kind of bond with him and that kind of faith in him as a friend and ally.

                He was very candid about the good and bad on every issue they discussed, including the fact that he and Ewing didn't get along in the least. This wasn't just "I love everyone, especially my current team".


                Pair that kind of talk from Nellie with Rick and Jackson HUGGING for several seconds when GS came back to Indy and Jack lit them up. That's two coaches that seem very fond of Jackson.

                I'm betting they are just a tad more familiar with him than any fan is, and somehow they really like him. Not for his talent because no one portrays him as a superstar, but for his personality and character.

                As I mentioned elsewhere one of Jack's neighbors has nothing but great things to say about him as a person, that he was always a terrific neighbor and remained as such post-trade.


                So that bugs me too, the idea that some aspects get harped on, turned into a characterization rather than the more complicated honest picture of a person, and then it's all over and judgment is passed incorrectly. Because basically everyone with close contact to Jack has nothing but great things to say about him.

                With Ron you get Bibby questioning his weirdness, for example. You don't hear JRich or Ellis or even JO saying "that Jack, WTF was with him?"

                There is a massive disconnect between the fan image of Jack the Devil and the Nellie version of Jack the Nicest Guy You Could Know. And if that Devil image is wrong, then how in the heck is it "worth it" to take a loss just to get rid of him?


                Isn't this "showing him" that he was the problem? How's that math working out so far?

                Hey, so far it only required one coaching change, and we still don't have any positive results yet. And of course it's "not enough time"...because so far no results close to matching the "team wrecker" image have come about. Spurs won it all despite him getting solid PT. Atlanta stunk, but got no better when he left. Pacers won more games with him than without him. Golden St did as well.

                Plus I strongly suspect that had GS stunk and the Pacers taken off it "miraculously" would have been enough time to evaluate the trade. Why? Because people just want to count the results when they match their view, rather than letting the results shape their view.

                See I saw how things went and based my view on that. It got dark, I said "it must be night". I'm not the one saying "not enough evidence, it's day but you just don't realize it yet".

                If GS had imploded and the Pacers had gotten even just a tad better, you know what my view on Jackson and the GS deal would be right now? Pacers won that deal, Jack does hurt teams, addition by subtraction, salary cap hit was worth it.

                See there how I let the facts and results determine my POV. Groundbreaking I realize. All Jack has to do to get me to agree with you guys is actually make his coaches and teammates hate him and make the teams he's on win fewer games than when he's not around.

                Right now most of PD thinks that's too much for me to ask. I obviously find that annoying to no end. It's not rational. You might as well be telling me that Tinsley is as great a 3pt shooter as Reggie Miller. He is, we just haven't had enough time to evaluate that either.

                For someone who asks the question" I don't understand why people think I am a big Jackson fan", this posts answers it totally.

                Yep. I don't get why people think I'm a huge Jack fan because
                Last edited by Elgin56; 10-06-2007, 03:30 PM.

                Comment

                • #998
                  Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                  Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                  I have no need to influence anyone,
                  Well keep on keeping on, then, because you're being pretty effective at not influencing anyone.

                  EDIT: You're just following Seth around and taking potshots at him. Doesn't it get boring after a while?
                  Last edited by Anthem; 10-06-2007, 03:58 PM.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment

                  • #999
                    Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Well keep on keeping on, then, because you're being pretty effective at not influencing anyone.

                    EDIT: You're just following Seth around and taking potshots at him. Doesn't it get boring after a while?

                    Potshots? Seth continues with his " you Pacer fans are idiots for getting rid of Jackson parade" and I am taking pot shots? Yes, I understand that I don't have to read his posts, but damn this is suppose to be a Pacer board, not a Dear Abbey board for exPacers, who are now playing on another team.

                    Jackson damaged the Pacers to it's core, and now we are suppose to like someone to continue to say how great he was for this team? Don't thinks so.

                    Comment

                    • #1000
                      Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                      Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                      Potshots? Seth continues with his " you Pacer fans are idiots for getting rid of Jackson parade" and I am taking pot shots?
                      Ridiculous, isn't it?
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment

                      • #1001
                        Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                        Thought I'd make the 1000th post here.

                        Good riddance, Mr. Jackson.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment

                        • #1002
                          Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Thought I'd make the 1000th post here.

                          Good riddance, Mr. Jackson.
                          You made the 1,000th reply...and post # 1001. But how can I fault you when you have such a wonderful attitude!

                          I concur, sir.



                          RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                          Comment

                          • #1003
                            Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                            http://goldenstateofmind.com/story/2007/10/12/153359/07

                            NBA.com decided to give Jack a microphone the other day at practice, there's a link to it on the site above. Dude is hilarious and finally that side of him is getting some exposure.

                            Comment

                            • #1004
                              Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                              Originally posted by ajbry View Post
                              http://goldenstateofmind.com/story/2007/10/12/153359/07

                              NBA.com decided to give Jack a microphone the other day at practice, there's a link to it on the site above. Dude is hilarious and finally that side of him is getting some exposure.
                              Ok...it wasn't THAT funny. If we're gonna rank former dysfunctional Pacers by humor, Jack is at best third behind Ron and Scot Pollard.

                              Comment

                              • #1005
                                Re: The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

                                This topic will never die....

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 17 57 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 template Next
                                Working...
                                X