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

O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

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

  • #46
    Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

    Originally posted by peasouptexan7 View Post
    I gave O'Brien chance after chance to win me over, but as this season continued I had absolutely no hope that he was the right guy for the team. Yes there were injuries, but when the players tune you out, you obviously aren't the right guy anymore. Hearing some of the players' comments during the postgame (George and Hansbrough specifically) made me think they weren't too sad to see him go. He would not make good adjustments on the fly and took out players in the wrong situations. Yes, it's not all O'Brien's fault, but not having him here gives us a better chance to win than with him here. While I don't wish anyone to lose their job, he had to go. If you think he should've stayed, I'm sorry, but you don't know basketball.
    Agree 100%.....and, let's hope LB brings Lance Stephenson back to play a few minutes a game while Brandon Rush is out injured. I'd think he'd know the offensive and defensive schemes by now (unless the reason he's being kept out is due to his 'legal troubles' that are not yet fully resolved).
    Last edited by TooBigNdaPaint; 02-02-2011, 01:17 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

      I've said before, part of a coaches job is to be flexible. To understand when and when not to do things in relation to the game and players. To recognize what is and isn't working and adjust accordingly. If you are not flexible, either through stubbornness or lack of ability, you need two things. The first is good healthy players that run "your" system to perfection. Until this season JOB didn't have the healthy players. Not that it mattered because he already proved many time over his complete inability or unwillingness to adjust his ways to the reality of the players he had available. McKeyFan is correct. The second thing you need is enough past success to justify your inflexible nature. He did make the playoffs previously, but he didn't do anything that countless other coaches before him hadn't done. So, JOB was running "his" system even to his own detriment. That's one last poor decision among many, and ultimately it's the one that cost him his job.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

        Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
        That was to long for me. Who was the author?
        I thought that the author was either you or UB
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Kegboy, it gets even worse IMO because of this one..
          So this guy supported firing Rick because JO, Tins, Harrison, Harrington....and who else, quit on him. Talk about backing the wrong horse.

          No one thought Danny quit on him, Jackson loved the dude and that's been proven by examples many times over, and Dun/Troy just freaking got here.

          What players quit on Rick but were reached by JOB, were turned around by JOB. What players did JOB get to play that Rick couldn't reach? Again, Dun and Troy at mid-season can't quit on a coach they just met with almost no practices even.


          Anyone who says "I supported firing a guy who surprised the league TWICE by taking teams well beyond expectations and each to an ECF because Tinsley, JO, Harrington and Ron didn't love him" is a nitwit, there's just no two ways about that. Those dudes, right down the line, are coach killers. None have gone on to save the NBA world or prove much worth beyond a team role filler or empty stat loader (Al). Ron had to freaking salvage his horrible season with a couple of playoff miracles in order to regain some kind of respect as a player.


          I'd rather have the coach that took Ron to the all-star game and got him a DPOY award and took a disaster to round 2 and has Dirk ripping through one of his finest seasons along with a list of "didn't you used to be great" players.

          Sheesh. It would be different if Rick had been terrible before or was bombing in Dallas. Winning 50 games with 3 different teams in 10 years is how you go on to be Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Sloan, Jackson, etc.
          That was so good, I almost want to print it, slap it in a frame and put it on the wall.

          Well done, Seth!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

            I hear the Siberian Winter League has an opening for an assistant video editor.
            "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              First, conventional wisdom is conventional because it's usually correct. Popular sentiment is popular because it's usually correct.
              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              It's been studied Bill.
              http://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-Crowds-...6693195&sr=8-1

              Beyond that gambling is a great example of crowds having a true sense of things when you look at how evenly distributed the results against the spread are, or how close the payouts of paramutual betting are to the odds the crowd sets.


              And he said "USUALLY". Of course the groundbreakers that changed conventional thought are well known. That's because it's UNUSUAL.

              Not so well known, every freaking crackpot who went against conventional wisdom and was really, really wrong. You know, like any dude that thought he could fly by flapping his arms as he jumped off a building.

              PEER REVIEW is how science freaking functions for chrissake. This is why COLD FUSION was roundly debunked, and rightfully so. Good thinkers are OPEN to new ideas, but they also understand that established ideas that have been scrutinized time and again might just have some real merit. The book on JOB as a bad coach grew over more than 3 seasons, not to mention prior results and comments from his previous jobs.


              JOB wasn't slammed by 2 nuts. First off he actually had a bad W-L record which is the job. Second he actually was pretty awful at distributing playing time to players this team will be relying upon next season. Third HIS PEERS in recent seasons have joked about his coaching style, and this includes guys like Phil Jackson.

              When the crowd gets that big and the facts all line up behind it then it takes an epic, groundbreaking set of proof to overcome that, not just the "unconventional viewpoints" of 6 guys on the internet. This doesn't mean the crowd is always right, just usually. And when they aren't it takes A LOT of evidence to the contrary to enact a paradigm shift.


              Or in short, you can enjoy forcing crow down our throat the day JOB leads some team against the odds to great results. But until then the idea that JOB was doing a pretty good job is going to remain the unconventional and totally unproven thought.






              N'menace - appreciate your appreciation...of course my opinions were formed by the crowd, by the interaction of thoughts and discussion, and I don't even mean that as a sarcastic extra dig for this thread. Just saying it's not surprising it doesn't resonate at least a little since similar stuff has been said by many of us.
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-02-2011, 07:46 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                The academics amuse me. Why they continue to attempt to prove that 1+1 = 3 is beyond me. I just know it's wrong by looking at it. In any event, Jim is that type based on his bio. His brother apparently could have warned us:

                His favorite courses at the Jesuit institution were philosophy and theology."As my brother Barry once told me, ‘Your problem is you think about eight shades too deeply,’ " O’Brien said after a recent training camp practice as he readied for his second year with the Pacers.“I like to think. What philosophy does is force you to think and give your viewpoints on any number of things in the world. With theology, the Jesuits . . . they force you to understand all religions. Whenever you’re thinking about theology, it can be a very challenging thought process.”

                http://www.indy.com/posts/another-side-of-jim-o-brien
                Source: Indy.com

                This explains a bit why certain people on this board think like Jim...while others do not.

                BTW, it's not like BnG is uneducated with 8.5 years of college...I just don't think success in the real world is a matter a PhD can necessarily figure out. In fact, I think they come in handicapped...and I have a lot of real world experience seeing that.

                Based on my 20+ years as a business owner and corporate employee, my conclusion is that many (not all) highly intelligent people do some of the dumbest things. Especially the engineers and computer scientists. For example, I know a Mensa who writes some of the worst software I've ever seen because he has zero...no make that negative common sense. The software is an amazing invention in some cases, but is often either entirely unnecessary or not wanted by the customer. This dude is paid 120/hr and counting his cut from his employees he probably pulls in 500K/yr. I suppose he's doing well...but his software and decision-making is still horrible. The Director in charge of the department always says "but he's a Mensa". The rest of us just shake our heads.

                Kind of reminds me of Jim O'Brien and all the stat-fan-boys. Really smart and really wrong.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                  BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?
                  You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                    Originally posted by RWB View Post
                    BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of sliding friction during that transitional phase during which the vector of their moment of inertia ceases to be parallel to the surface and instead becomes perpendicular to it while at the same time their physical bodies experience the exact opposite orientational relationship to the same surface?
                    Fixed?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      there is about 10. IMO Jim wasn't fired because he is a 'terible coach" but because his time with this group was time to end. Sort of similar to the reason why Larry brown only lasts so long
                      Who do you think those 10 (or even 5) are, just out of curiosity?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                        Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                        Who do you think those 10 (or even 5) are, just out of curiosity?
                        I did this right before the season started I think. broke the coaches into 4 categories. quickly and off the top of my head.

                        The elite:
                        Skiles
                        Phil Jackson
                        Larry brown
                        Popovich
                        Sloan

                        The next group of very good coaches.
                        Doc Rivers - although I think I would move him up to the elite.
                        Nate MacMilan
                        Scot Brooks
                        SVG
                        Spoelstra
                        Adelman



                        Then the average to slightly above average group which included Jim O'/Brien. I would not want to have any of these guys replace Jim.
                        Avery Johnson
                        Doug Collins
                        Mike D'Antoni
                        Gentry
                        Vinny Del Negro
                        Karl
                        Hollins


                        Then the worst of the current NBA coaches. I think I had 8 or so in here only 5 right now. .
                        Flip Saunders
                        Westphal
                        Rambis
                        Triano
                        Kuster

                        keep in mind several are first year coaches, so I did not know. Although I will say now that Monty Williams has done a great job, I would give him an A. Larry Drew has done a nice job give him a B. Tom Thibbodeau, i would give him an A+ would love to have him as our coach. Keith Smart is OK.

                        I would put Mike Brown in the very good category. Mike Woodson i would put him in the same category as O'brien
                        Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-03-2011, 04:17 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                          UB will you admit though that Obie was a really bad fit for our roster?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                            What about Rick?
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                              Originally posted by RWB View Post
                              BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?
                              That is the difference between being a theoretical engineer and a practical engineer
                              http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                              "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: O'Brien's most famous supporter comments on firing

                                Originally posted by RWB View Post
                                BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?
                                Two men had their cars parked under the Artsgarden yesterday morning. One was named Jim the other Frank.

                                At 9AM, Frank looked outside and saw chunks of ice melting on the windows and watched a few fall harmlessly on the street. By 9:15AM he had his car moved down the street to a place safe from the falling ice.

                                Earlier that morning at 8AM, Jim looked outside and saw chunks of ice melting on the windows and watched a few fall harmlessly on the street. Jim pondered this for awhile and logged into his premium account with weather.com. He checked his thermometer, barometer, hygrometer and anemometer. After 3 hours of collecting and analyzing the data with a few SAS macros, he decided it was time to move his car before a chunk of ice falls on it.

                                Of course, you know the rest of the story. Frank caught the game last night. In fact, he had a really good seat.

                                Jim, however, is now in intensive care at Methodist...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X