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

ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

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

  • ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

    http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/7...on-brian-banks

    It's not every day that the Washington Redskins call up a man convicted of rape and ask him if he'd agree to a one-day workout, but it happened Tuesday.


    Oh, and the Kansas City Chiefs called Tuesday, too. And the Miami Dolphins. And they were three days behind the Seattle Seahawks, who will work him out on June 7.



    Why are all these NFL teams eager to check out a convicted sex offender, a man who served five years in prison and wore a GPS ankle bracelet for another five?



    Because Brian Banks didn't do it.



    A judge in Long Beach, Calif., threw out his kidnapping and rape conviction last week after looking at a videotape of his accuser admitting she lied. After 10 years, he was suddenly a free and innocent man.



    "My mouth hurts from smiling so much," Banks told me Tuesday night. "Unbelievable."



    Banks was 16 in 2002, the bluest of blue chips out of Long Beach Poly High School, an NFL feeder if there ever was one. He'd already been offered a full-ride scholarship at USC by then-coach Pete Carroll.


    But on a summer day that year, he and a girl named Wanetta Gibson decided to go make out in a stairwell at school. When they came out, she accused him of rape.



    No semen traces in the rape kit. No witnesses. And yet Banks' attorney insisted he cop a plea, saying his size, age and race would mean a sure conviction of 40-plus years. He said no, no, a hundred times no and finally, reluctantly, yes.



    Banks got six years. He served 62 months.



    When he got out, he had to wear a GPS ankle bracelet at all times. He had to register as a convicted sex felon. Couldn't go near schools, parks or zoos. Couldn't get a job. He was lucky to get a few hours a week unloading docks.



    What did Gibson get? A $750,000 settlement from the school.



    But then, last year, a chunk of luck fell from the stars. Out of the blue, Gibson, then 24, sent Banks a Facebook friend request.


    Banks slammed the laptop cover down and jumped out of his chair. Was somebody playing a joke on him?



    He looked again. Amazing. Gibson had typed, "Let's let bygones be bygones."



    Easy for her to say. She didn't watch 10 years of her life go by.



    "She was adamant about meeting me," Banks says. "I asked my brother (Freddy), 'What should I do?' He said, 'Whatever you do, make sure you play chess, not checkers.'"



    Banks' first move: To get everything she said on tape. He hired a private investigator and met Gibson in the man's office, where every conversation is secretly videotaped. The tape recorded Gibson saying, clearly, "No, he did not rape me."



    Was he nervous she wouldn't say it?



    "I didn't have to get her to say anything," Banks said. "She came into the room expressing herself. She even came back the next day. The investigator asked her again, point blank. 'Did Brian rape you?' 'No.' 'Did he kidnap you?' 'No.'"



    And why would Gibson meet with Banks in the first place? Was it a trap? Was it guilt? No. Banks thinks Gibson -- are you ready for this? -- was hoping to get back together.



    "You read the texts and that's the only conclusion you come to," says a source who worked on the case. "She seems absolutely clue-free about what she did to him."



    Getting evidence is one thing, getting your rape conviction flipped is another. Banks called the California Innocence Project in San Diego. They agreed to help. It was the first time they'd taken a case of a man already out of prison.

    "As soon as we met him, we had no doubt," says Justin Brooks, the lead attorney. "We could see this was a kid who had a big future ahead of him, one that had been lost."



    On Thursday, May 24, in a Long Beach courtroom, Banks got his future back.



    What's the first thing he did, besides cry at the courtroom table? Snipped off the stupid ankle bracelet, the scarlet letter of our age. "Oh, man, when that thing came off?" Banks says. "There are no words."



    Then he went with Brooks' wife and kids to a place he couldn't have gone the day before -- Sea World.



    "It's so crazy to go from being labeled a monster to seeing your phone light up with all this support and offers and love," he said. "It's, really, a little hard to get used to."




    And what does Banks want most now? Retribution? Revenge? Gibson's head on a serving platter? No. He's not even demanding Gibson give the money back. While he is suing the state for $100 for each day he was falsely imprisoned, what he wants back most is football.


    [+] EnlargeAP Photo/Nick UtBanks celebrates his exoneration and freedom with his mother, Leomia Myers.




    Thanks to the best Tuesday of his life, he's now got a chance at it.

    None of the four teams are offering any guarantees for a spot in training camp, nor is Banks asking for any.


    "I'll make 'em happy," says Banks, who's been training non-stop since October. "After all I've been through these last 10 years, I can still do some things that will impress you."



    Like ... dead-lift 545 pounds, box jump 55 inches flat-footed, broad jump 10-plus feet and run a 4.6 40, all at 6-foot-2 and 245 pounds. NFL trainer Gavin Macmillan, who has volunteered to train Banks for free, says he has a shot. "You see him run and you can see why USC wanted him."



    And if the NFL doesn't pan out? Banks already has all kinds of job offers. One of them is to "work in the front office and explore other sports opportunities" for the Arizona Diamondbacks.



    "I about fell out of my seat when I read that one," Banks said.



    I don't know about you, but I can't remember another story that made me want to alternately punch something and hug something like this one. The way Banks has handled himself, without bitterness or bile, with grace and guts, makes you wish he were running the U.S. Senate.

    If it were me, I'd be stomping around, waving lawsuits and screaming, "I TOLD you I didn't do it!!!"



    "I know my story makes people angry at first," Banks says. "That's where I was, too, at first. But where would it have gotten me to stay mad for 10 years? It's like when you're a little kid and you cry about having to clean your room. You can cry and cry, but it doesn't get your room cleaned."



    Brian Banks' room is clean again. His heart is spotless. He's holding on to nothing but his dreams. He lost a full decade of his life and now all he wants in exchange is an NFL jersey.



    C'mon, Miami Dolphins. Who's had more "Hard Knocks" than Brian Banks?

  • #2
    Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

    These kind of stories make me sick to my stomach. That a woman just has to say the word 'rape' and the guy is automatically guilty. Just sad. Hope everything works out for the guy.

    From the article
    Banks got six years. He served 62 months.
    Could you stop making me do math. If you write 6 years, just tell me how long he served in years. You can't just say he wanted to walk 5 miles, but instead walked 14Kilimoters. Sheesh, it's about consistency people. Math is hard!
    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

      She is now saying he paid her 10K to lie

      Wow. Just wow.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GDRrcfd7Uk

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

        Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
        From the article Could you stop making me do math. If you write 6 years, just tell me how long he served in years. You can't just say he wanted to walk 5 miles, but instead walked 14Kilimoters. Sheesh, it's about consistency people. Math is hard!
        So you would prefer he wrote: "He got 6 years. He served 5.1666666666666666 years." That makes sense.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

          If you look at his emotions at 5:55-6:25 of that video, you cannot tell me that he is lying. If that's an act, he is the very best actor on this Earth. Robert DeNiro would take acting lessons from the guy. Meryl Streep would have him on speed dial.
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

            Maybe he paid her 10,000.00 to tell the truth?
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

              Maybe she's lying to keep from going to jail.
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

                This ***** makes it 10 times harder for real rape victims out there. A disgrace to my gender.

                Rape victims need to unite and beat the crap out of her.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

                  Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                  Maybe she's lying to keep from going to jail.
                  Maybe she'd have to give that settlement back but unfortunately the legal system doesn't seem to be very harsh on perjury and false accusations so I'm not sure how worried about that she should be. The system doesn't take that stuff as seriously as it should IMHO.
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

                    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                    This ***** makes it 10 times harder for real rape victims out there. A disgrace to my gender.

                    Rape victims need to unite and beat the crap out of her.
                    I don't get this line of reasoning. No one ever adds this kind of qualifier to other false charges of crimes (for example a person falsely accused of murder or a false charge of theft.)

                    I've even heard people say "the worst thing is this will make it harder." No, the worst thing is Mr. Banks had his life and dreams stolen away and our system made it easy for it to happen.

                    If a top prospect headed to USC or Michigan can have this happen when he didn't even have sex with the girl and the rape kit was negative..what do you think is happening all over this country with Joe Averages?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN: Rick Reilly: The Redemption of Brian Banks

                      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                      So you would prefer he wrote: "He got 6 years. He served 5.1666666666666666 years." That makes sense.
                      Or, you know, maybe just "5 years, 2 months"....

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X