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 Gilbert Arenas and his guns thread

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

  • #16
    Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

    So what could potentially be the punishment here? A fine and 1-year suspension? Not nearly enough...too bad they can't take the millions away and send him packing.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

      A 1-year suspension to Arenas is essentially a $17 million fine in itself. It would be the most money lost to 1 incident in NBA history.

      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


      • #18
        Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

        I am quite confused. He had three guns in a locked box that were unloaded that he showed to team security. It doesn't sound like he did anything wrong? He didnt shoot up a night club am I wrong? I can probally say 90% of nba players have guns does that make them horrible?

        I doubt he gets suspended. I mean for crying out loud the cavs west got caught with three guns that were loaded with no serials and nothing happened to him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

          if you dont understand the difference between stupidly having guns on your own time and stupidly bringing them on to NBA property, there's a whole lot you don't understand about business.

          This is the last thing the NBA wants. They will throw the fear of god into any player that wants to bring a gun on to NBA property from now on.

          I don't care if they were loaded, unloaded or filled with taffy. The headline, "NBA players pull guns on each other in locker room" scares the living **** out of David Stern.
          Last edited by Kstat; 01-01-2010, 12:49 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


          • #20
            Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

            What a bone head move, what is Arenas & Critterton thinking? You get paid Millions to play a game you love, enjoy it. I understand that some players can feel the need to protect themselves, but to bring guns to the Arena, is just stupid.

            So you think Arenas & Critterton will be suspended? Certainly some kind of punishment along those lines will be in order from Stern. And Arenas's contract, wow, the Wiz got problems, and we don't need them.

            Happy New Year!
            Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

              Maybe this will help clear a bit up: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...est=latestnews

              An NBA all-star and his Washington Wizards teammate reportedly drew guns on each other in the team's locker room during a Christmas Eve fight over a gambling debt, the New York Post reports.

              Gilbert Arenas, 27, went for his gun first, the Post reported, citing unnamed inside sources. His teammate Javaris Crittenton, 22, allegedly brandished a firearm as well.

              It was unclear whether other teammates saw the standoff inside the Verizon Center in Washington, D.C., the Post reported.

              The Wizards announced on Christmas Day that Arenas had admitted to bringing guns to the locker room and had turned them over to team security. The NBA club's statement didn't disclose how Wizards officials discovered that Arenas was storing weapons on the job.

              "It's in the hands of [Washington] authorities," Wizards General Manager Ernie Grunfeld, a former star Knicks player and president, told the Post, declining to go into details. "We're going to get to the bottom of this, if there is a bottom to this."

              Washington police said they were investigating Arenas for gun-possession violations.


              And the full story here: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/nationa...DRgTSuVKDQ8XBO


              Guess they're still the Bullets at heart.

              NBA all-star Gilbert Arenas and his Washing ton Wizards teammate Javaris Crittenton drew guns on each other in the team's locker room during a Christmas Eve dispute over a gambling debt, The Post has learned.

              League sources say the pistol-packing point guards had heat ers at the ready inside the Verizon Center, the Washington, DC, home of the Wizards -- whose name was changed from the Bullets over gun- vi olence concerns.

              It was the three- time all-star Arenas, 27, who went for his gun first, sources said, draw ing on the 22-year-old Crit tenton, who quickly brandished a firearm as well.

              It was not clear whether other teammates saw the shocking standoff, which happened on a practice day.

              The duel in DC -- unprecedented in sports history -- was sparked when Critten ton became enraged at the vet eran guard for refusing to make good on a gambling debt, a source said.

              "I'm not your punk!" Crittenton shouted at Arenas, according to a league source close to the Wizards.

              That prompted Arenas to draw on Crittenton, who then also grabbed for a gun, league security sources said.

              A playground pal of Crittenton's from Atlanta, Kendrick "Bookie Ball" Long, confirmed the locker-room standoff and said he learned of it directly from the third-year player out of Georgia Tech.

              "He [Arenas] was f- - -ing with him; he [Crittenton] was just defending himself!" declared Long, who said the dispute was over money but would not elaborate.

              The Wizards announced on Christmas Day that Arenas had admitted to bringing guns to the locker room and had turned them over to team security. No ammunition was handed over.

              The NBA club's statement didn't disclose how Wizards officials discovered that Arenas was storing weapons on the job.

              But a league source said Arenas' weapons were uncovered only after the confrontation with Crittenton.

              Wizards General Manager Ernie Grunfeld declined to comment. "It's in the hands of [Washington] authorities," said Grunfeld, a former star Knicks player and president. "We're going to get to the bottom of this, if there is a bottom to this."

              Washington police said they were investigating Arenas for gun-possession violations. But the Wizards' gun grab has also drawn the attention of the feds.

              "We're working with the Metropolitan Police Department on the investigation. That's about all we can say at his point," said Ben Friedman, a spokesman for the US Attorney's Office in DC.

              The feds have been investigating gambling within the NBA since disgraced ex-referee Tim Donaghy admitted betting on games and feeding information to bookies. It was not clear whether the gambling debt that sparked the Arenas-Crittenton duel had anything to do with league games.

              A top players-union official said he was shocked by the allegations. "This is unprecedented in the history of sports," said Player's Association Executive Director Billy Hunter. "I've never heard of players pulling guns on each other in a locker room."

              Team owner Abe Pollin -- his sensitivity heightened by the fatal shooting of his good friend Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 -- changed the club from the Bullets to the Wizards in 1997 because he didn't like the violent overtones of the original name. Pollin died in November.

              Arenas, who has three kids, reportedly told team officials he brought guns to his Verizon Center locker so they wouldn't be close to his newborn at their home in Great Falls, Va.

              He denied pulling a gun on Crittenton and even mocked the suggestion he would ever point a weapon at a teammate.

              "You guys, I wanted to go rob banks, I wanted to be a bank robber on the weekends," Arenas said sarcastically after a game this week.

              Firearm laws in Washington are among the nation's strictest. Until a recent US Supreme Court ruling, private ownership of guns was illegal in the nation's capital.

              As it stands now, gun owners are allowed to transport firearms only within DC under very limited circumstances -- such as taking the weapon to be registered or to a practice range. There's no provision under current DC law for a private citizen to have a gun at work.

              In 2003, Arenas pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of carrying a concealed weapon in San Francisco.

              Arenas claimed the gun was legally registered in Arizona -- where he was star player for the University of Arizona Wildcats -- and said he forgot he needed California authorization to carry it there.

              Crittenton hasn't played a minute this season for the Wizards and has struggled to overcome a bone bruise and strained tendons.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                Gilbert and JC should be suspended for the rest of the year for this. What astounds me more is that the Wizards allow Gilbert to keep a unloaded weapon the locker room. That is just trouble waiting to happen. . . .
                PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                  Now the second article makes more sense. I did not know where they got the headline that they pulled guns on each other. It simply said he had guns in a locked box that team security knew about. It also said the guns were unloaded so I didnt see the problem with that.

                  He in texas you can carry firearms with you if you have your permit so sorry if my knowledge of gun laws in washington are not up to par.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                    JOB is a silly man

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                      If Artest gets suspended for the season for throwing a punch, Arenas suspension has to be greater than a year with pulling a gun on a teammate on NBA property. If not, then Stern shafted the Pacers in the brawl.... well, we already knew it, but it will be so obvious there will be no defense for the NBA redarding it now.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                        Boy could things get ugly for the next CBA debate, not just this but the Tins and Marbury situations. Owners have to be fed up with no recourse for ridiculous behavior.

                        But naturally the players are going to push back. I don't think they want to fight for "guns", but they will fight the ability of owners to break contracts off and stop paying players for any reason.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                          Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post


                          He in texas you can carry firearms with you if you have your permit

                          Same here in Indiana. I hear Indiana also issues life time gun permits.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                            How is the headline misleading? The article flat-out says Arenas drew on JCrit, who drew as well. Loaded or not, JCrit's wasn't in a locked box if he could grab it while Arenas was pointing a gun at him.

                            That's some craziness.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                              I wonder if Arenas will be suspended or not? Regardless, incredible bonehead move. It is no wonder organizations like San Antonio, who value character, have been ahead of the curve for 20 years now.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Gilbert Arenas & Javaris Critterton drew guns on each other

                                The part that I don't get is the whole "bet" thing.

                                If they didn't like each other, why on earth would they wager any money at all?
                                “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                                “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X