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

Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

    Originally posted by dohman View Post
    Are you saying if a NBA player has thc in his body he cannot play basketball to his full potential? If that is the case then cigarettes and achohol also need to be put onto the list.

    I find that statement to be untrue. Even as a common person who smokes weed daily I know for a fact that I am in better physical condition than anyone I meet. If pot truly hindered your abilities I would not be able to bench 315 pounds, dunk two handed or be able to go out and run 8 miles at a time. I wasn't blessed with athletic abilities, just hard work daily and I can do every thing I did before I started using pot at the same level if not better. Also if a vaporizer is used then a lot of the harmful contaminates are not going into your lungs. Personally the reason why I started.

    As far as the gateway drug. I cannot comment on that. I have seen it goes both ways. I personally feel it has to do with your personality and having the ability to say no. I haven't tried another substance and probally never will, To this day I have never even smoked a cigarette and I don't drink. Easy decisions, but the. Again i have a very strong willed personality.




    I respect everyone for being civial in this discussion. It takes a lot to come out and talk about this knowing you will be judged.

    .
    I respect your right to your opinion.

    I don't do any drugs, alcohol, or tobacco products and never have due to seeing the physical and mental damage that those things have all caused in the lives of family and friends of mine. I just think that it is difficult to consume something that has, as a primary draw, a mind altering effect (that varies from person to person) without it damaging reflex responses and impairing judgement in a long term user. I definitely have seen that in my brother, and his decline as time has gone on has been frightening, which has impacted my view substantially, but he is not the only person I have had significant contact with whose health and mental function has been impaired through the long term use of pot and the drugs that its use has laid the foundation for.

    Do I think that smoking tobacco and alcohol should be tested for as well? Personally, every fiber of my being would love to see that happen, but I am in a distinct minority on those things, and probably would not have even 5% (one in twenty, not a typo) of the population in favor of that position. Those substances do not have the stigma attached to them that pot does, so they will not test for those things, despite the likelihood that there is at least some degradation of athletic performance associated with habitual use of those legal recreational substances which are, in fact, drugs. And, the league would not want to alienate a far larger segment of the population who use tobacco or alcohol by penalizing players who use those substances. That would cause financial damage to the league also, but maybe not quite as much as not testing for pot and other drugs, but I am not sure. Still, how would people feel who kick back in front of the tube with a six-pack of beer and a pack of tobacco cigarettes to watch a sport that they love, only to find out that a player they like had been suspended for doing something that they do every night? I doubt many would like it one bit, even if it were a league rule.

    Comment


    • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I think this is a very positive sign that Rush is coming along nicely. The coach has been pushing the 3 and Rush took that to heart so much he's applied it to everything in life.

      Why fail 2 drug tests when you can take a step back and fail 3 instead.


      Weed itself shouldn't be a dealbreaker IMO. Personally I think alcohol abuse is far more destructive, both socially and to your own body. Not being able to protect your lucrative career from in-season testing only is just lazy or dumb. Maybe he didn't smoke and his buddies did for all we know, but still....foolish and short-sighted.


      Having said all that, DO NOT PANIC PUNT ON RUSH LARRY!!!

      No more GSW trades, EVER! If a Pacer tries to murder me and burn my house down I still want you to slow play it and find a good trade. Don't double the misery by making a desperation move. Great GMs make lemonade from lemons. Handling TOUGH situations like this one with Rush is what separates the men from the boys.

      We just found out that you can't win fans back by removing the "bad guys", you must win games. Maybe the fans don't want to hear about the BS either - its obvious you can lose fans in more than one way. But you can only win them back one way and that's by adjusting the roster so that it wins games.
      Total nonsense!

      Comment


      • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

        Originally posted by Day-V View Post
        Yes, because Jerryd Bayless has lit the world on fire over in Portland. If anything, Rush has had the better career so far.
        ..... who didn't expect the first couple years for Rush to be better? That's not saying much, honestly. Anyone arguing that trade would have been arguing that down the road Bayless will clearly have more of an impact than Rush. Bayless is 3 years younger. Brandon was 23 years old in his FIRST NBA game. Today, Bayless is 22 years old, and on a better team, so minutes are harder to come by.

        To even compare their "careers" at this point, is still entirely too early. Not to mention completely geared to be in favor of Brandon.

        Comment


        • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

          Originally posted by dohman View Post
          Trust me I understand your feelings on the situation. I also fully agree with what you are saying. I just seen several posts throughout this topic that were ignorant. I just wanted to share a few thoughts and get some more discussion.

          Until the NBA takes it's off the list stand stops testing for it I still think athletes should not use it. Their employers control their lives and for the amount they are making they shouldn't cross the line at all.

          I understand the image of the NBA and if you seen me on the street you would never know I smoke. It does give you a bad image, I just personally feel the Image it gives you is not justified.

          I agree, and you only get the bad image when you get busted.

          Comment


          • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
            Negative. I took a drug test I had talked about in a different thread (I believe it wasn't this one, didn't look), and I was sitting in a car with the windows up with 3 friends getting high as hell, and this was the night before I took the drug test. Maybe 2 nights before. Either way, I passed.
            Being somewhat the subject expert on the matter (I work in a laboratory) the metabolites of THC are processed and eliminated relatively quickly in one's blood stream for "light" users. If you are not getting high on a regular basis, it is quite plausible that any THC that you may have absorbed would have been out of your system in 12 hrs... If you were to partake smoking a joint daily, you more than likely will have no detectable levels after 24-36 hrs...
            I see Brandon as either being a HEAVY user (mulitple joints daily), or he had smoked, or been exposed to the day prior to testing... Either way I see it as troubling that he put himself in this position for the 3rd time... If it is the contract (between the players and the association) then he should avoid pot entirely... Doing so to a point where he has failed 3 times is plain ignorant... Having said this, I think that it would be a mistake to make a knee jerk trade... I think that it is pausible that TPTB arrange some therapy for Rush, and conduct thier own random and frequent drug tests...
            Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

            Comment


            • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

              Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
              Being somewhat the subject expert on the matter (I work in a laboratory) the metabolites of THC are processed and eliminated relatively quickly in one's blood stream for "light" users. If you are not getting high on a regular basis, it is quite plausible that any THC that you may have absorbed would have been out of your system in 12 hrs... If you were to partake smoking a joint daily, you more than likely will have no detectable levels after 24-36 hrs...
              Time out. I believe that the information you have reported is for a saliva test, which detects only up to 12 hours for cannibis/mj and for a common urine test, which typically reveals drug use up to 36 hours depending on frequency of use.

              Most companies immediately confront the employee and take actions specified by their random drug testing policies. For example, if you are dealing with an employee that regularly performs work using potentially dangerous machinery, the employee might be suspended with mandatory counseling or even fired for their first offense.

              Smart companies even offer re-testing based on hair samples, if for no other reason than to just protect themselves. It is explained to the employee that this test likely will not reveal use during the previous 72 hours, but will very reliably reveal any history of drug use (including cannibis/mj) in the individual up to 90 days of use. The assumption is that the employee is not a first time user, but that the initial test simply caught the employee for the first time.

              Folks are just misinformed about being able to fool a drug test. Hair sampling is more expensive, but is exceptional for revealing historical drug use up to 90 days. Despite a lot of claims to the contrary, you cannot hide use with herbs or magic potions. ISO-qualified labs split their samples and mask for common methods for attempting to hide use. In other words, if you've used, you are screwed.

              The bottom line is that the simplest way to beat a random drug test is to honor the agreement that you made when you signed your contract to work with your employer. Same thing Rush should have done. Don't use and you have nothing to worry about. Use, and its not usually a question of if, it is usually a matter of when, your use will be discovered.

              Rush should consider being fined and suspended for 5 games as a gift. I do not know of a single employer in manufacturing, the trades or in the business world that would not dismiss an employee after the 3rd positive result.

              What the league can do better in its next CBA is to include a provision for notifiying the team whenever a positive result for testing is encountered. Don't wait for the third failure, inform the teams right away after the first failure so it can also be addressed by the team.

              Comment


              • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                Originally posted by bballpacen View Post

                that TPTB arrange some therapy for Rush, and conduct thier own random and frequent drug tests...

                I doubt that the CBA allows for this. Even if there is nothing in the CBA directly relating to it, I don't see the Players Union going along and abiding with it.

                Comment


                • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                  Maybe, a lot of Rush's problems weren't caused by Jim O'Brien

                  Comment


                  • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                    We don't know that he failed for pot. He could be using banned strength substances or it could be cocaine. Unless he comes out and talks about it, we'll never know for sure.

                    Really it doesn't matter what his drug of choice was. The fact that this is the 3rd failed test is what's matters the most.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Maybe, a lot of Rush's problems weren't caused by Jim O'Brien
                      Maybe, Rush turned to drugs as a coping mechanism that enabled him to just chill instead of staying all worked up about O'Brien all the time.

                      You are likely right, though, and it is a real shame.

                      I would much rather it have been an issue with coaching.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

                        Maybe, a lot of Rush's problems weren't caused by Jim O'Brien

                        Are you saying Jimmy hasn't contributed to any of Rush's problems?

                        Personally, I've never laid the blame squarely on Jimmy for Rush's problems. I have never been sold on Rush or Bird trading for him. Rush just doesn't have the make up to be the player so many feel he can be. At best, he will always be an underachiever like another former Pacer player who had a ton of ability, but wouldn't use it to be the player he could have been. I wanted Bird to draft Courtney Lee, and I still feel Lee will be the better player than Rush when all is said and done.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                          We don't know that he failed for pot. He could be using banned strength substances or it could be cocaine. Unless he comes out and talks about it, we'll never know for sure.

                          Really it doesn't matter what his drug of choice was. The fact that this is the 3rd failed test is what's matters the most.
                          It was confirmed it was pot. Wells said it, but also it's the only 5 game suspension tied to a 3 time offense, according to the league's drug policy.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            It was confirmed it was pot. Wells said it, but also it's the only 5 game suspension tied to a 3 time offense, according to the league's drug policy.
                            Thanks for the clarification. Rush is really dumb.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                              Originally posted by dohman View Post
                              I can personally say that I do smoke marijuana. I am 26 years old and never touched the stuff because of fear until last year.

                              I smoke daily later in the evening and can say it's one of the better decisions I have made. It's relaxing, helps me sleep and makes my dinner way more enjoyable. It cuts down on my stress level and actually helps with my joint pain.

                              Before anyone just labels me a pot head I'm 210 pounds at 6 percent body fat. I play competitive basketball 4 times a week and have a very good reputation in my industry which I work. I work with millionaires and billionaires on a daily basis and in no way does it hinder my ability to strive to be the best at what I do.
                              Putting this in its most simple form:
                              How can inhaling smoke be good for you? or how can it not be bad for you.

                              We could argue for days on end about how bad it is, but it cannot be good to inhale smoke
                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-30-2010, 10:27 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Woj - Rush suspended five games without pay for violating NBA's drug policy.

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                Putting this in its most simple form:
                                How can inhaling smoke be good for you? or how can it not be bad for you.

                                We could argue for days on end about how bad it is, but it cannot be good to inhale smoke
                                Can't say that I don't agree with this, Buck.

                                I just find anyone who says smoking weed (or anything of that matter) is good for you just ignorant.

                                From someone that has a hard time breathing to begin with it just baffles me to no end on why anyone would do that to themselves.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X