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

Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

    Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
    Well call me a monkey riding a dog. I misread the thread title and assumed it said "pacers need bird to take action against bob kravitz." I revoke my poll choice and check No.
    Nice work, vnzla81. You can take Conrad's place.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      Nice work, vnzla81. You can take Conrad's place.
      Curses, small iPhone screen!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

        Krapvitz is an idiot, & is not even remotely interested in the Pacers or the NBA! He is constantly wrong when speaking about players (strengths/weaknesses, sometimes even their names!), contracts, drafts/signings,... He admits as much when confronted w/ facts on his show, yet he expects to be taken seriously & as one w/ knowledge when he writes an article like this. Unbelievable!!!...Unacceptable!!!
        Even the parts where he does find a valid point (thanks to two hands & Eddie holding his flashlight), he almost always contradicts or discredits the point he was making as he gets lost in the tornado of bull **** he's writing. BK is an uninformed, pot-stiring blow-hard who is clueless on anything that wears, resembles, works for, or routs for the Blue & Gold.

        As for JO'B...
        I do not see the point in firing the guy now. We have 1.5 yrs to pay the man, & I'm not sure who is out there that we can bring in worth eating that. JO'B is a compitent coach, & his style/ choices can be changed by LB pulling the trigger on a trade or two (Murph, ?) & forcing JO'B to win w/ what he's got. Change his Options, Change his Choices - no need to p*** away a few million by bring in another coach now. Wait & get who you wnt, when you want them!
        See, I don't blame JO'B. He is doing what all coaches try to do & must do to saty in the NBA, & that's win & "win now". History shows you win w/ veterans, not youth. We all here are looking 1-3 yrs down the road, but that is not what an NBA coach can afford to do, they are lucky if they can look 1-3 games ahead, unless your name is P.Jackson or J.Sloan. Besides, LB is not coming out of his office to coach this team! LB is a coach for a veteran team, not a rebuilding team. LB has health issues (back), & he would have no desire to put in the time & effort needed to coach again, IMO.
        Personally I would like to see us really look @ Mark Jackson. He is a young guy, a student of the game, a fan favotite, & a true leader. He would be great working w/ young PG's (Price, draft?) & has experience playing w/ a dominate big (Ewing, Smitts). I think MJ would welcome an up-tempo "request" from LB, but would be very comfortable running a half-court offense as well. Mark has no coaching experience, so his price tag should be in reach, & he would need a solid group of assistants, but IMO that is something LB knows a thing or two about & could help him out w/ that.
        Last edited by PacerGuy; 01-06-2010, 10:56 AM.
        "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
        (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

          Originally posted by count55 View Post
          I think if they had a do-over on Diener, they probably would have tried to get the third year to be a team option (or gone, altogether.) However, they basically got their money's worth out of him the first two years.
          You can't give a guy of Diener's talent level a player option. You just can't.

          He was a nobody coming from doing nothing and there were no other major bidders. You offer him two years. If you really like him and need to sweeten the long-term thing then you offer a team option third year as a motivational incentive for him to play well during his first 164 games.

          If he asks for a player option you laugh and hang up. You can't give a fringe D-League guy influence over your cap number 24 months after the day you make the decision to take a flier on him in the first place.

          We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant, but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.
          Last edited by JayRedd; 01-06-2010, 10:57 AM.
          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

            Originally posted by hoopsforlife View Post
            The irony of Sarunas, as I see it, is he would have fit into JOB's system extremely well. Up tempo, no apparent organization, 3 point shots and a tall active inside player is what SJ needed for success. He just didn't have it under Carlisle.

            You really must have a short memory about Cabbages. He couldn't get the ball up court, so how could he have fit well in Jimmy's system as the PG? Please don't say as a SG, we saw how that didn't work as well.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

              Where's the write-in option for Dan Burke? Shoot, he's been here long enough, might as well let him have the big chair.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Yeah on Harrison - I thought he was a wacko, but taking him at 29 was a good pick - worth a chance on a big guy who had some athleticism and some skills. So another reach there Bob
                The only mistake on Harrison was that - when he proved that he really was mentally unstable they should have released him. His talent was worth the gamble at #29. He just couldn't keep his head on straight long enough to stay on the court and demonstrate that talent.

                Just like the problem with the JO trade was not "acquiring Ford's contract" but rather holding on to Ford for too long, the same can be said for David.

                How many #29 picks are out of the league in three years? A: Most of them.

                I agree with Bob overall (I wonder where Bob got the idea? let's check the PD archives... ), but his examples were weak.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  You really must have a short memory about Cabbages. He couldn't get the ball up court
                  That wasn't REALLY the problem with Sarunas. AJ couldn't beat the trap either... he worked on it and got better.

                  The problem with Runi is that he assumed he was a finished product, ready to win NBA ballgames. His problems were never HIS problems, they were the team or the coach or the system or the American style of play.

                  Sarunas never improved. That's not gonna get you wins (or even PT) in the NBA.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                    Yes but that is what you get with a project player at the bottom of the first round. Talented guy who isn't the full package, if he was the full package we would have been drafted earlier.
                    That may be true. There are exceptions, but true enough. However, in this case the "isn't the full package" applies to the player's mental make up. The emotional instabilities that we all saw, and the off-court bad decisions.

                    I DO THINK, however, that TPTB saw Harrison as the best center prospect available to them, and decided it was (at that position in the draft) not a huge loss if it did not pan out.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                      You can't give a guy of Diener's talent level a player option. You just can't.

                      He was a nobody coming from doing nothing and there were no other major bidders. You offer him two years. If you really like him and need to sweeten the long-term thing then you offer a team option third year as a motivational incentive for him to play well during his first 164 games.

                      If he asks for a player option you laugh and hang up. You can't give a fringe D-League guy influence over your cap number 24 months after the day you make the decision to take a flier on him in the first place.

                      We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant, but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.
                      Fair point. They have shown some signs of "Buck Fever," with this signing and, arguably, with Dahntay's.

                      Something to watch once they have real $$$'s. Not the most encouraging sign.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                        Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                        We're talking about a low, low salary, so it's not franchise-altering or even all that cap-significant,
                        Which is the primary point.

                        but it does represent a terrible negotiation and shows a lack of fiscal discipline and laissez-faire approach your team's future cap number — which is almost as bad a quality for a GM these days as not being able to recognize talent.
                        When it's small fry like this, throwing in something like a player option to ensure you got what you wanted is insignificant. I don't think terrible is a word I would ever use in this situation.

                        If they throw a bunch of money at a guy I'm not sure we'll want around for a long time, and they give that guy a player option, I'll feel differently.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          That wasn't REALLY the problem with Sarunas. AJ couldn't beat the trap either... he worked on it and got better.

                          The problem with Runi is that he assumed he was a finished product, ready to win NBA ballgames. His problems were never HIS problems, they were the team or the coach or the system or the American style of play.

                          Sarunas never improved. That's not gonna get you wins (or even PT) in the NBA.


                          But if you can't get the ball the up the court and over the line in Jimmy's system in the time frame he wants, what worth does Cabbages have playing PG for JO'B?? My post was in answering why Cabbages wouldn't fit in Jimmy's system.

                          Yes, Cabbage's attitude was a major problem with him, BUT as a PG if he couldn't get the ball up the court when pressured it makes him pretty worthless in Jimmy's system. Oh, he could fit in with Jimmy if you judged him only on being able to shoot the 3 and not play "D".

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                            Originally posted by count55 View Post
                            Fair point. They have shown some signs of "Buck Fever," with this signing and, arguably, with Dahntay's.

                            Something to watch once they have real $$$'s. Not the most encouraging sign.
                            this is the reason why I want them to make some trades with the expiring contracts, instead of waiting until they get all that cap space and then see them over paying for players just like Detroit did this year.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                              There's that old proverb or parabel that you must earn trust with the little things before you can be trusted with the big things.

                              Its not that Deiner's and Dahntay's contracts are going to break the team, its that Bird & Company hasn't shown the ability to take care of details on the small contracts, so why should we believe they can handle the details on the big contracts?
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers need Bird to take bold action Bob Kravitz

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                It's just a temporary thing. He will put Murphy back into big minutes just as soon as he can... and he will run home to his uptempo offense and defensive lip service at the same time. Unless Bird forces him to go this direction, we've already been down this road before. We know how the story ends.
                                I'm with you.....when it comes to JO'B....when given little to no choice ( like right now due to injuries to 3 of our key Players ) he will be forced to do things that he's not comfortable doing ( like playing the young, athletic and/or energetic Players ). But IF AND WHEN everyone returns and he is given more options to play Players, I think that he will always default to doing what he is most comfortable with. Unfortunately; this would mean that we'll see Murphy, Dunleavy, Granger and Foster finish games or something that makes little sense to us.

                                However, to JO'Bs credit....the only move that I have seen him make that doesn't seem like a "comfort" move is the decision to bench Ford in favor of Price. With the revelation that the FO has been trying to move Ford for the last year or so, you'd have to wonder whether Ford getting all the minutes at the start of the season ( despite his dreaded +/- ) was something that was decided upon by Bird/JO'B to try to "showcase" Ford at the obvious expense of Price.

                                As you said.....unless Bird forces him to continue this trend....like everything else JO'B does and says......when I see him do something that he says he would do, I will believe it...until then, I'm not going to hold my breath.

                                On a related note....I think that Wells speculates that Murphy will likely return in the next 2 games against the TWolves or the Thunder on the Road. I wouldn't be surprised if Murphy returns to playing a good # of minutes in the Frontcourt....the only real question is whether McRoberts/Solo are going to return to street clothing at the end of the bench or not. My hope is that Bird recognizes over the last couple of games that our offense/defense functions better with more athleticsm and that McRoberts/Solo ( along with Players like Head and AJ ) have earned a minimal # of minutes per game.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X