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 bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

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

  • #31
    Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

    JOB just doesn't think about the effect of what he has on other people (the players and the fans). He is definitely speaks what is on his mind at that exact moment. It is not good for anyone, but us. It gives us something to post about.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

      Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
      Darren Collison was on the Dakich show a couple of days ago. When asked what he'd done today he said, "We just watched a lot of film, get yelled at." Dakich says you were up 20 in the second half, what the hell? "There's never nothing we can do right around here, but it's good for us. It's good yelling."

      Sounds like he's letting them know face-to-face.....
      In that same interview Darren talked about how hard the practices are and how tired they are but that they just have to push through it. I know we've talked before about the hard practices JOB likes and whether or not they are too vigorous in terms of keeping the players relatively fresh for a game. So I thought it was interesting...
      "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

      "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

      "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

        I like that Darren calls it like he sees it.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

          I love what says to the media about his players. It's fine to me. No one needs to tell Price that he wasn't expected to be the long term solution, and isn't expected to be a long solution.

          He's just using the media to motivate his players or show them whats expected or not. I have no problem with it at all. I think more coaches should do this.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I am staying away from this thread for the most part, but did want to respond here. Jm might be a lot of things, but cowardly in this context is not one of them. He's very straightforward with the players
            You may be correct. I couldn't distinguish between cowardly and stupid. You can't expect players or anyone else to respond positively if you aren't at all concerned about their feelings. JOB doesn't get a pass if he is accurate but tactless.

            He doesn't own the team and his name isn't Steinbrenner.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

              Originally posted by flox View Post
              I love what says to the media about his players. It's fine to me. No one needs to tell Price that he wasn't expected to be the long term solution, and isn't expected to be a long solution.

              He's just using the media to motivate his players or show them whats expected or not. I have no problem with it at all. I think more coaches should do this.
              There are people here who despise almost everything JOB does, no matter what.

              You're like the opposite of that. He can do no harm. Everything he does is "how it should be".

              Come on. Let's just be fair. When one of your young players has played basically the best game in his career and got most of his things done outside of garbagetime, but the team lost the match, then you don't publicly tell that what he's done is irrelevant. Sure the team lost, but you are also dealing with a person who you want to positively motivate.

              The player did well, but the team lost. It happens, compliment the player and try to win the game by maybe using time-outs at different moments, use different lineups, etc, etc.
              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I think he does the exact opposite all the time - sometimes with poor results. He doesn't think about what people want to hear and that gets him into trouble
                If that's true, he has made some stunningly wrong judgments over the last couple years.

                Does anyone really believe that Stephen Graham could possibly be a better player than Brandon Rush? I looked for some quotes back when Rush was benched in favor of Graham, but I couldn't find any on the net. What I do know is that Graham is gone and no one in their right mind thought he was a good player.

                Also, the constant criticism of Josh McRoberts last year and the diss when he called Josh's performance irrelevant. You take that as an emotional reaction by JOb due to the loss. I think that's part of it. The other part of it was that he would have to deal with more people crying for McBob to get on the floor...when he knows he needs to play Murphy due to the huge contract and the fact the Pacers were shopping him.

                Basically, when he is forced to play Murphy due to the financial aspects of the business, he looks foolish not playing McBob. Things are more complicated than meet the eye and it's more than just a game. Everyone knew McBob was a good player, including JOb. He just couldn't play him last year.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  If that's true, he has made some stunningly wrong judgments over the last couple years.

                  Does anyone really believe that Stephen Graham could possibly be a better player than Brandon Rush? I looked for some quotes back when Rush was benched in favor of Graham, but I couldn't find any on the net. What I do know is that Graham is gone and no one in their right mind thought he was a good player.

                  Also, the constant criticism of Josh McRoberts last year and the diss when he called Josh's performance irrelevant. You take that as an emotional reaction by JOb due to the loss. I think that's part of it. The other part of it was that he would have to deal with more people crying for McBob to get on the floor...when he knows he needs to play Murphy due to the huge contract and the fact the Pacers were shopping him.

                  Basically, when he is forced to play Murphy due to the financial aspects of the business, he looks foolish not playing McBob. Things are more complicated than meet the eye and it's more than just a game. Everyone knew McBob was a good player, including JOb. He just couldn't play him last year.
                  Jim wasn't forced to play Murphy...Jim wanted nothing more than to play Murphy every damn minute of the game, damn the consequences. With your reasoning TJ Ford would have logged just as many minutes.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                    Jim wasn't forced to play Murphy...Jim wanted nothing more than to play Murphy every damn minute of the game, damn the consequences. With your reasoning TJ Ford would have logged just as many minutes.
                    TJ Ford's contract is not that big and he's had a history of being benched. Not so with Murphy. Also, experienced PG's tend to be more marketable...especially at the February deadline when teams may be desperate for a backup. In addition, Murphy's stats inflate his value and if he sits they drop like a rock. TJ's stats do not inflate his value.

                    Now, if you are saying that JOb truly believed Troy helped win games...well, I am trying to give JOb more credit. We all know by looking at the past W/L with and without Troy that it's clearly not true. This season will confirm it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                      I think Jim doesn't want his judgement questioned. He has his ideas and refuses to see otherwise.

                      I think Jim didn't think Josh was an NBA player. He showed that when he played Dahntay and Dun at the 4, when Josh was fine and healthy to play. Josh proved him wrong. He didn't want to deal with it. Now, he has no choice on who to start. It won't shock me if eventually Posey takes his place though.

                      With AJ, it seems to be a bit more complicated. Because first it was:
                      "He's going to be a really good player, I'll have to find him minutes. He outplays the vets."
                      Then he sends Price back to the deep bench.
                      Then he said he was going to play AJ over TJ because AJ helps the team win more
                      Then he called AJ the steal of the draft, and said he could start right now for a .500 team (with potential to be a high calibeer PG)
                      Then he started him when Watson was at a funeral.
                      Then he benched him for no reason. (We liked what we saw so we benched him.)
                      Then came the draft position insults.
                      Then came the high compliments again (He's been the best player in preseason, I'll have to get him more minutes.)
                      Now it seems kind of obvious that the second TJ is healthy, TJ's getting the backup spot. He doesn't even like TJ, at least he liked Troy.

                      I mean sheesh..I don't even know what to think here. But regardless, you don't do the above to a young player. Particularly one that hasn't even given you a reason to jerk him around. (Like, as much as I like Rush, I can see why a coach might jerk him around a bit.) At least TJ's a vet, and probably just feels like "it's not me, it's coach."
                      Last edited by Sookie; 10-17-2010, 05:26 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                        Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                        There are people here who despise almost everything JOB does, no matter what.

                        You're like the opposite of that. He can do no harm. Everything he does is "how it should be".

                        Come on. Let's just be fair. When one of your young players has played basically the best game in his career and got most of his things done outside of garbagetime, but the team lost the match, then you don't publicly tell that what he's done is irrelevant. Sure the team lost, but you are also dealing with a person who you want to positively motivate.

                        The player did well, but the team lost. It happens, compliment the player and try to win the game by maybe using time-outs at different moments, use different lineups, etc, etc.
                        If we were a good team, what McRoberts would do would be irrelevant. It the long run of things, if a bench player has one good game, so what. It shouldn't mean anything- especially in a losing effort were we lost by 23.

                        And no, I think Jim has made a few mistakes. I'm pretty sure he messed up big time with TJ and needs to make his team have some better shot selection at times- I would love it if our team moved the ball more and did more reversals.

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                        Now, if you are saying that JOb truly believed Troy helped win games...well, I am trying to give JOb more credit. We all know by looking at the past W/L with and without Troy that it's clearly not true. This season will confirm it.
                        I can't for this season to start so for once and for all we can see if you are me are right about Murphy. Without Murphy last season we would have lost at least 4 more games.

                        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                        I mean sheesh..I don't even know what to think here. But regardless, you don't do the above to a young player. Particularly one that hasn't even given you a reason to jerk him around. (Like, as much as I like Rush, I can see why a coach might jerk him around a bit.) At least TJ's a vet, and probably just feels like "it's not me, it's coach."
                        I'm fine when you do to a young player. Some respond well to it (Parker), some don't (Kwame). Not everyone has to use positive motivation. Not everyone responds well or best to positive motivation.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                          Originally posted by flox View Post
                          I'm fine when you do to a young player. Some respond well to it (Parker), some don't (Kwame). Not everyone has to use positive motivation. Not everyone responds well or best to positive motivation.
                          It's not motivation. It's confusing and borderline nasty to a player.
                          "yea, you're outplaying the two guys ahead of you in the rotation...but I'm going to bench you"
                          Any player would be like "......"

                          And in Josh's case. That had to be defeating. He had the best game of his career against the best frontline in the NBA, after being benched in favor of two shooting guards..and coach thinks it's "irrelevant"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                            It wasn't a losing effort until Josh came out.

                            And almost every single thing Troy has ever done in the NBA has been a losing effort. Does that make all of his performances irrelevant.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              It's not motivation. It's confusing and borderline nasty to a player.
                              "yea, you're outplaying the two guys ahead of you in the rotation...but I'm going to bench you"
                              Any player would be like "......"

                              And in Josh's case. That had to be defeating. He had the best game of his career against the best frontline in the NBA, after being benched in favor of two shooting guards..and coach thinks it's "irrelevant"
                              How do you know this? Are we sure this defeated Josh? Did he sulk around the court? Did he say that it hurt him? Did he play poorly afterwards? Does he suck today? Did the comment affect him to the point where he can't play on the floor anymore? Does he look unhappy? Is he not playing well? Was he so upset with this comment that he didn't work on his game anymore, refused to play for the summer league, gained 20 pounds, and quit basketball?

                              I mean, none of that happened right? He's the starting four on a NBA team right now. What, if any damage did that comment do to Josh? Has his comments affected Price the player or Price on the court?

                              Does it matter if he's benched for two wings? How badly do you think Blair was upset that he didn't get to see the floor at times because Pop wanted to play small ball and have the corpse of Mike Finley play the four? A lot? A little?


                              Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                              And almost every single thing Troy has ever done in the NBA has been a losing effort. Does that make all of his performances irrelevant.
                              Who knows- maybe? Has anyone ever asked this question before? I'd like to see his answer.

                              Hey coach, I know we lost today, but how do you feel about Troy's 15/10 tonight?

                              Irrelevant might be a good word to describe it.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: The bluntness of Pacers coach Jim O'Brien

                                Originally posted by flox View Post
                                Hey coach, I know we lost today, but how do you feel about Troy's 15/10 tonight?

                                Irrelevant might be a good word to describe it.
                                Making that statement about a proven vet is an entirely different thing.

                                For a young player who had a great game, it is a poor way to motivate and help a player gain confidence. Seriously, that is the best way to put it. I just hope that is not standard operating practice for him, but I'm afraid it is.

                                BTW, this thread IS about Jim O'Brien...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X