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

Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

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

  • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

    Here's the ESPN article on the Hue Hollins comments:


    Report: Ex-ref Hollins says he was interviewed by feds


    ESPN.com news services (Chris Sheridan contributed to this report.)

    ESPN.com



    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3439554&campaign=rss&source=NBAHeadlines>>

    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
      The Times just did a pretty in-depth story on this whole thing.

      It's pretty long, so I'll bold the highlights.



      The Gravity of Donaghy’s Accusations Is Unclear

      Howard Beck
      New York Times

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/sp...pagewanted=all



      Also, according to Hue Hollins, the FBI clearly has been investigating around.

      Like I said at the very beginning of this thread, the FBI has already investigated this **** already, and if they found something, we'd know about it.

      I guess we should still be taking Donaghy seriously, though.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

        Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
        The Times just did a pretty in-depth story on this whole thing.

        It's pretty long, so I'll bold the highlights.



        The Gravity of Donaghy’s Accusations Is Unclear

        Howard Beck
        New York Times

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/sp...pagewanted=all




        The Pollard quote at the end pretty much tells me that he was joking around in signature Pollard style when he was quoted previously after hearing about the allegations as saying something like [paraphrasing] "I knew something was up."

        Also, according to Hue Hollins, the FBI clearly has been investigating around.


        Wow that is a good article, even better when highlighted. Seems familar though. LOL


        You know Donaghy's allegations would carry more weight if he suggested a much lesser known game was fixed. But he picked the one game that has caused the most controvery, a rather obvious choice, any really, really casual fan would have picked that same game.

        Has anyone checked out Kingsfanforum.com - I haven't yet, I'm a little afraid to. But I think I will - yeah I just checked out out - they are more likely to believe it. I wish Donaghy would have picked the LJ 4 point play game or game 6 of that series. Infact he should have just said thatthe whole 1999 ECF between the Pacers and Knicks was fixed - everyonbe knew the pacers were the best team and had it not been for Stern the pacers would have won 4 or 5 titles. Yes that is what Donaghy should have alleged
        Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-12-2008, 03:33 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

          This is a great thread and I hope it continues all summer.

          First we had Donaghy's allegations. Now we've got Scot Pollard's legal opinions
          Last edited by Putnam; 06-12-2008, 03:34 PM.
          And I won't be here to see the day
          It all dries up and blows away
          I'd hang around just to see
          But they never had much use for me
          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

          Comment


          • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

            Kstat can't prove that all NBA refs are saints and no one else can prove they have been fixing games (other than Donaghy). So this argument could go on forever.

            What I find funny is Kstat, a Pistons fan, is trying to convince Pacer fans that Stern didn't go overboard when punishing the Pacers for the brawl. We may be biased in our opinions but his opinion isn't clear of bias either.

            Brawl Suspensions levied to Pacers
            Artest - 86 games
            Jackson - 30 games
            Oneal - 25 games (reduced to 15)
            Johnson - 5 games

            BIggest Suspensions not in the brawl
            Sprewell - 68 games for physically assualting his coach during practice
            Kermit Washington - 26 games for punching another player
            Carmelo Anthony - 15 games for punching another player
            (Rodman kicking a cameraman in the nuts doesn't even make the list of long suspensions)

            Ok, so Stern claims the length of suspension was due to entering the stands...

            Antonio Davis suspended for 5 games for confronting a fan in the stands during a game. Yes you read that right, 5 games (not even close to 86)

            Notable: Rasheed Wallace goes after fan on Dec 20th, 2002 for throwing something at him - fined but not suspended.

            I guess it's alright when some players go into stands or go after fans for getting something thrown at them but the Pacers needed to learn a lesson because of a fight that got out of fan which was provoked by Ben Wallace and piston fans.

            Artest and Jackson messed up and were in the wrong but the length of suspension was so far overboard it's not even close. Combine that with the fact that Ben Wallace gets off extremely light for starting the whole thing and you can understand why people here wish Stern the worst.

            Comment


            • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

              Originally posted by Swingman View Post

              What I find funny is Kstat, a Pistons fan, is trying to convince Pacer fans that Stern didn't go overboard when punishing the Pacers for the brawl. We may be biased in our opinions but his opinion isn't clear of bias either.
              Really? Point out to me where I EVER MENTIONED THE BRAWL, aside from saying it is NOT RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD.

              Please, tell me where I tried to convince someone here that the Pistons didn't get off light, and I'll happily agree with you.

              Ask anybody that's been here since 2005 if I ever brought up the brawl since the incident itself. Please. You're three years late to a discussion that I'm not even having.

              Brawl Suspensions levied to Pacers
              Artest - 86 games
              Jackson - 30 games
              Oneal - 25 games (reduced to 15)
              Johnson - 5 games
              ...you....

              BIggest Suspensions not in the brawl
              Sprewell - 68 games for physically assualting his coach during practice
              Kermit Washington - 26 games for punching another player
              Carmelo Anthony - 15 games for punching another player
              ...are....

              Ok, so Stern claims the length of suspension was due to entering the stands...

              Antonio Davis suspended for 5 games for confronting a fan in the stands during a game. Yes you read that right, 5 games (not even close to 86)

              Notable: Rasheed Wallace goes after fan on Dec 20th, 2002 for throwing something at him - fined but not suspended.

              ...arguing....

              I guess it's alright when some players go into stands or go after fans for getting something thrown at them but the Pacers needed to learn a lesson because of a fight that got out of fan which was provoked by Ben Wallace and piston fans.
              ....with...

              Artest and Jackson messed up and were in the wrong but the length of suspension was so far overboard it's not even close. Combine that with the fact that Ben Wallace gets off extremely light for starting the whole thing and you can understand why people here wish Stern the worst.
              ...yourself.....

              For the love of god, please involve yourself in the argument at hand, not the one you wish we were having.
              Last edited by Kstat; 06-12-2008, 03:46 PM.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                Originally posted by Swingman View Post
                Kstat can't prove that all NBA refs are saints and no one else can prove they have been fixing games (other than Donaghy). So this argument could go on forever.

                What I find funny is Kstat, a Pistons fan, is trying to convince Pacer fans that Stern didn't go overboard when punishing the Pacers for the brawl. We may be biased in our opinions but his opinion isn't clear of bias either.

                Brawl Suspensions levied to Pacers
                Artest - 86 games
                Jackson - 30 games
                Oneal - 25 games (reduced to 15)
                Johnson - 5 games

                BIggest Suspensions not in the brawl
                Sprewell - 68 games for physically assualting his coach during practice
                Kermit Washington - 26 games for punching another player
                Carmelo Anthony - 15 games for punching another player
                (Rodman kicking a cameraman in the nuts doesn't even make the list of long suspensions)

                Ok, so Stern claims the length of suspension was due to entering the stands...

                Antonio Davis suspended for 5 games for confronting a fan in the stands during a game. Yes you read that right, 5 games (not even close to 86)

                Notable: Rasheed Wallace goes after fan on Dec 20th, 2002 for throwing something at him - fined but not suspended.

                I guess it's alright when some players go into stands or go after fans for getting something thrown at them but the Pacers needed to learn a lesson because of a fight that got out of fan which was provoked by Ben Wallace and piston fans.

                Artest and Jackson messed up and were in the wrong but the length of suspension was so far overboard it's not even close. Combine that with the fact that Ben Wallace gets off extremely light for starting the whole thing and you can understand why people here wish Stern the worst.

                I certainly don't wish Stern the worst but I did think his treatment of the pacers was a little excessive. But that doesn't lead me down a path of some anti-Stern rant and about how much he hates the pacers - I just don't buy that. I was mainly mad that the Pistons organization didn't get a huge fine and I was upset that Ronnie Garretson wasn't thrown out of the league for his actions.

                Comment


                • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                  You cant fix a game that way. If the other team is committing fouls, there is nothing to keep the third ref from calling them.
                  Right. But the third ref is the minority to the two other ref's when it comes to calling phantom calls on the other team(Kings).
                  "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                    Originally posted by rock747 View Post
                    Right. But the third ref is the minority to the two other ref's when it comes to calling phantom calls on the other team(Kings).
                    Point is, you can't only control half the game and fix the outcome. It's stupidity to only include two out of three refs for the sake of deniability.

                    If they wanted to fix the game, they would not have sent a freaking undercover cop to referee it.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                      It looks like is the main guy the feds are looking at right now. Can't say this surprises me at all.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                        Another angle that is rarely brought up is this. what is really the upside of fixing games to assure the Lakers vs Kings go to a 7th game. (I believe by then the new contract with ESPN/ABC had already been signed) 1 extra game is worth risking your $10 M a year job over. 1 extra game is worth putting the NBA out of business, it is worth costing the owners billions of dollars, it is worth your entire reputation.

                        The upsode of fixing games just isn't worth the possible downside. And no one has ever come close to providing a decent argument otherwise.
                        Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-12-2008, 03:56 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                          Originally posted by Shade View Post
                          It looks like is the main guy the feds are looking at right now. Can't say this surprises me at all.
                          And yet if you ask the current coaches and current and former players to name the best refs - Dick is with rare exceptions always mentioned as one of the best, he is consistantly ranked as one of the best refs, by coaches, players and by the NBA's comprehensive grading system. Just heard Eddie Johnson today and Jason Terry yesterday on Cowherd mentioned Dick as one of the best,

                          personally, I think Dick calls too many travels and too many offensive fouls and generally calls the game too close for my liking. But I know I was jumping up and down for joy when I saw him refing game 3 of the 1998 ECF against the Bulls

                          Comment


                          • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                            All of the 90's generation of players swear by the guy. Barkley loves him.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                              I think that it depends on how much a fan has invested in the whole NBA experience, as to their views of this dirty ref and fixed games deal. Here you have the hard core fans, such as UB, who have devoted a great deal of their time and money in supporting the Pacers, and it is hard for them to even entertain the thought that the whole thing is not on the level. Now on the other hand, fans like myself, see it differently. I accept the NBA for what it is, highly athletic players performing at the behest of their respective team, under the guise of a level playing field. It is so easy for the refs to affect the outcome of a game without being easily detected. The NBA wants the fans to believe in the integrity of the game, while they manipulated the outcome.

                              If the NBA was for real, the Pacers would have at least a couple of championships by now, but you keep on drinking the koolaide, as it is hot out today.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Donaghy letter to court alleges refs altered games

                                Originally posted by JohnnyBGoode View Post

                                If the NBA was for real, the Pacers would have at least a couple of championships by now
                                But since they don't have a championship, you're going to take your ball and go home. Either you win, or nobody should win. Shame on the NBA for the pacers not winning a championship. It's all everyone else's fault.

                                The Pacers never actually lose games. They just get cheated. Heck of a way to live nife, not having to take responsibility for anything.
                                Last edited by Kstat; 06-12-2008, 03:59 PM.

                                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X