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

Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

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

  • #46
    Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

    my apologies if this seems negative and stuff but..........
    this is the same old s... that has been going on for what- the last 3 seasons?
    jermaine's knees will never i repeat NEVER be anywhere near 100% ever again. it was too late for that a long time ago. this is absolutely nothing new to me. this little game of playing jo for a few games and then he falls apart again will probably continue for the rest of this season and for the rest of his time here. he is paying the price for playing the game of not too injured to jog up and down the court but, too injured to be helpful. i think this has done irreversible damage and a few weeks rest will only make the situation APPEAR to be fixed but, i can all but guarantee the knees will be bugging him again and again and again.

    for the supporters of jo, i am not accusing him of being a wuss or a bum or anything like it- quite the opposite actually. but, if any of you think he can get healthy again well, i think you are in for some disappointment. this game has been played for several years now and i don't see it changing. this is what we can expect.
    i'm just getting tired of the "just wait til jo gets healthy" because it ain't gonna happen. this is what happens when you try to play through pain and injuries. sure it sounds cool and all to say stuff like "suck it up and tough it out" "real players play through pain etc." and all that stuff but, this is what usually happens when you do just that. your body is permenantly screwed up and no 2 week rest is going to fix it. if he is still with the team next season and says he feels great after a summer of rest... just wait until about 20 games or so until he needs to rest another sore knee and we can start up the just wait til stuff all over again.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

      Being the resident Jermaine hater please allow me to make a couple of observations.

      1. To compare Jermaine O'Neal to Jon Bender is a vast disservice to Jermaine. Although I do not like his game and have wanted him gone for quite a long time I have never once questioned his heart for playing the game.

      I honestly believe that if it were at all possible for J.O. to play he would and probably has done bodily damage to himself for playing before he was truely ready to play. I commend him for that part because it does show spirit and a fighting mentality.

      2. This part is going to come across as more of my "hate talk" as I was told by a poster on here about J.O. but believe it or not that is not my intention.

      For the sake of the team J.O. needs to sit and probably sit for most of the season, if not take off the entire year to heal.

      Having J.O. go in and out of the lineup kills any chance of chemistry developing with the rest of the team. Listen to this weeks coach's show and hear how he states that J.O. rarely practices and therefor other players development is being hampered by this.

      If J.O. were treated like any other player then it wouldn't be a big deal. But for whatever reason he gets special treatment (were not going to argue over if this is right or wrong here I'm just stating it as part of my observations) and does live by the rules that O'Brien imposes on everybody else. He is immeiatley placed in the starting lineup whenever he returns no matter if the team is doing great or sucks. He is given massive min. no matter what results he is getting after a few games back.

      This deeply impacts everybody else.

      Now if he were able stay on the floor the rest of the season it would not be as big of a deal. But the fact that he will set for 5 games come back for 8 games then sit for 3 games then come back for.... well you get the picture, tears the team apart in both play and overall chemistry.

      BTW, none of the above was meant to say that J.O. should sit or whatever. I just think that it would be better for a long term sabatical as opposed to hoping in and out of the lineup whenever.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

        Then the obvious strategy for JO (since he is virtually untradable) is to rest him for x period of long time and then use him off the bench when he comes back. Bite the bullet and pay him his starters salary but give him a much reduced role. Save his knees as much as possible so he can be effective while he is in there and then cut bait when his contract expires. Give him a gold watch and let him "retire" a Pacer.
        Sorry but if he can't put in starter minutes or practice with the team you have got to limit his participation.
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

          From Pacers.com
          http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/preview_080119.html

          The Pacers may be without big man Jermaine O'Neal, who missed practices Thursday and Friday after playing just 9 minutes in Wednesday's 125-117 victory over Golden State with swelling in his left knee. He's listed as doubtful. Jamaal Tinsley is expected back in the lineup after missing Wednesday's game.

          O'Neal sat out five games in a row in late November with the same problem and it was hoped that extended absence would allow the knee to heal for the long term. It hasn't worked out that way.

          "My understanding of the situation is that if we were to sit him out for an extended period of time during this season, when he came back he'd be in the same situation as he is right now – you don't know if he'd be able to practice, you don't know if he'd be able to play back-to-back games," O'Brien said. "So somebody that has more knowledge medically than I do would have to tell me there'd be a benefit to sit him out (for an extended period) and right now I'm told there is not."
          ---------------



          Like I said earlier, other Players that have gone though the same surgery as JO have told him he wouldn't be completely healthy until mid year. It's mid year so they are looking at it again. If it's just a case of JO being a slow healer, then the Pacers and JO will continue the same pattern. He'll play when he can. Maybe tonight if he practices today.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

            Either he came back too soon or
            he needs to redo the surgery or
            he needs to sit the rest of the year and come back next season or
            he'll never be right again and my previous idea of benching him is in order or
            he goes Bender and takes medical retirement.

            (perhaps a minor scope job could clean up whatever needs cleaning)
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
              Maybe when you were at 2 girls 1 cup?



              I heard Nevuary 7th.
              Actually, I got sources telling me Februneverary 31st.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

                Wait a second on "injury prone".

                JO got his arm ripped back to create that major injury. JO had his knee go the WRONG WAY and still played in that game/series.

                Something now has obviously happened and it's lingering badly. Maybe he won't get over it. But let's not mix situations here, the guy WAS tough previously. He had a couple of very legit moments, and suddenly he just can't get right.


                BTW, 1996 called and wants to remind most of you that you were calling for Smits to be dumped when it was "clear" his foot problem would never be right again.

                Geezer is right to say that maybe someone needs to address this more seriously and see if it can't be truly resolved. If he's gotta go out of the season to be great next year then why wouldn't you do it?

                Look, personally if I had surgery to solve a painful injury and afterward I still had that pain, I'd want my money back. That is unless I wasn't following the rehab portion correctly or I REINJURED it. But then if I did that I'd also get it RE-REPAIRED.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  Wait a second on "injury prone".

                  JO got his arm ripped back to create that major injury. JO had his knee go the WRONG WAY and still played in that game/series.

                  Something now has obviously happened and it's lingering badly. Maybe he won't get over it. But let's not mix situations here, the guy WAS tough previously. He had a couple of very legit moments, and suddenly he just can't get right.


                  BTW, 1996 called and wants to remind most of you that you were calling for Smits to be dumped when it was "clear" his foot problem would never be right again.

                  Geezer is right to say that maybe someone needs to address this more seriously and see if it can't be truly resolved. If he's gotta go out of the season to be great next year then why wouldn't you do it?
                  Look, personally if I had surgery to solve a painful injury and afterward I still had that pain, I'd want my money back. That is unless I wasn't following the rehab portion correctly or I REINJURED it. But then if I did that I'd also get it RE-REPAIRED.

                  Too bad there's not another Tim Duncan waiting to be drafted...sit DR and pick up TD====Sit JO and nah, Pacers are never that lucky.
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

                    The Rik Smits comparison is not good because that team was a contender and was getting better. This one is wondering off into nothingness. The point is, JO's presence or absence simply doesn't matter that much if you care about contending. If the team were the same one from a few years ago with Artest, Reggie, etc., I would certainly support hanging onto JO to make "the run". But there ain't no run to make.

                    Rik didn't make 20 million a year and put a major bind on the finances. Also, Rik didn't have a body that fell apart at every joint. Smits had a foot problem that came and went. Yes, it was frustrating, but it made sense to patch the guy up for the playoffs.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      The Rik Smits comparison is not good because that team was a contender and was getting better. This one is wondering off into nothingness. The point is, JO's presence or absence simply doesn't matter that much if you care about contending. If the team were the same one from a few years ago with Artest, Reggie, etc., I would certainly support hanging onto JO to make "the run". But there ain't no run to make.

                      Rik didn't make 20 million a year and put a major bind on the finances. Also, Rik didn't have a body that fell apart at every joint. Smits had a foot problem that came and went. Yes, it was frustrating, but it made sense to patch the guy up for the playoffs.
                      Rik wasn't the centerpiece and we also had the pieces to play without Rik and actually improve our defense considerably.

                      -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


                      • #56
                        Re: Knee may sideline Pacers' O'Neal

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        Rik wasn't the centerpiece and we also had the pieces to play without Rik and actually improve our defense considerably.

                        -Bball
                        Yes, defense improved with Smits off the floor. Dale Davis was more than capable of moving over to the center position. In some ways that did make Smits less important, but he was still clearly the #2 option on offense. He put a ton of pressure on the other team's defense with his excellent mid range game. He was crucial at playoff time when baskets were more difficult to convert.

                        As Smits' foot problems became an issue, he was rested more often and wheeled out for the playoffs. Then, he had Bird's doc work on his feet and he saw some improvement that lasted awhile.

                        In any event, that team had the luxury of being able to rest him for the playoffs (something not relevant to resting JO). That was possible not only due to the depth and talent level, but because of the maturity, intelligence and unselfishness of that particular team...something recent Pacer squads have been sorely lacking.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X