Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

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

  • Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba,176171


    They're not rebuilding, I don't think, but shouldn't they be rebuilding? When you haven't made the playoffs in what has been the weaker of the two conferences since 2006, and you barely made it that year and the year previous, shouldn't you have a rebuilding plan in place that goes beyond "sign Al Harrington(notes)?"
    The latest move has been the push to pay Dahntay Jones(notes) through his prime kicking and pushing years. It's an awful contract, even at the cheap price of four years and $11 million, because what Jones does is so utterly replaceable.
    It doesn't mean all of Pacer jefe Larry Bird's moves have been bad moves, they've just been dull moves. Moves meant to pull 45 wins if everything goes right. And nothing has gone right.

    Kind of harsh but goes to say if we are rebuilding or retooling , not sure
    Last edited by PugdOut; 07-13-2009, 01:12 PM. Reason: grammer
    Because the streets is a short stop
    Either youre slingin crack rock or you got a wicked jumpshot

    Notorious BIG - Brooklyn's Finest A.K.A. G.O.A.T.

  • #2
    Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

    Bird isnt holding off rebuilding at all. We're taking small steps to make sure that we dont make any mistakes. I like what Bird has done thus far.

    Bird has a three year plan. At the end of the 3 year plan, Ford, Foster, Tinsley, Dunleavy and Murphy's contract will all expire. Once those big contract are off our books, Bird can hit the FA market with more aggression.

    Theres no way Bird has put rebuilding off. Theres 2 more years left in his 3 year plan and we all have to be patient and see what he does. Walsh left this team in a financial disaster and its Bird and Morway's job to pick up the dirt that Walsh left behind and get this team back into playoff contention. It'll take time nevertheless, but it'll happen, just have faith. We have no tradeable assets that we are willing to part with and we have no money!
    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

      We are rebuilding in the hopes that we can make a return to the Playoffs over the next 2 years with MurphLeavy/Foster/Ford on-board....then make some real moves before the 2010-2011 Trade Deadline and during the 2011-2012 Offeason to solidify our primary core of players for the future.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

        4 years 11 Million is an awful contract for D Jones. I disagree the Pacers have upgraded their defense with this signing. They are addressing a team need. DEFENSE.

        Tyler Hansbrough if we wanted to rebuild we would have not taken him either. The Pacers want to make the playoffs this year and have a legit shot with their moves. The summer is not even over yet.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

          Again, some senseless idiot simply saying that the moves the Pacers have made aren't the right ones and yet, he gives no ideas that he thinks are the 'right' ones.

          Just a guy that had a deadline and had to come up with something.

          I'm all for criticism of the team, management, whatever. But - if the only thing you're doing is poo-poo-ing the moves that have been made without being creative/intelligent enough to come up with a few counterpoints - I have no use for it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

            Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
            Bird isnt holding off rebuilding at all. We're taking small steps to make sure that we dont make any mistakes. I like what Bird has done thus far.

            Bird has a three year plan. At the end of the 3 year plan, Ford, Foster, Tinsley, Dunleavy and Murphy's contract will all expire. Once those big contract are off our books, Bird can hit the FA market with more aggression.

            Theres no way Bird has put rebuilding off. Theres 2 more years left in his 3 year plan and we all have to be patient and see what he does. Walsh left this team in a financial disaster and its Bird and Morway's job to pick up the dirt that Walsh left behind and get this team back into playoff contention. It'll take time nevertheless, but it'll happen, just have faith. We have no tradeable assets that we are willing to part with and we have no money!
            Yes, there's a three-year plan until salary relief begins, but Bird is building the nucleus of success. Anybody that actually expects much on-court over the next two seasons is way ahead of themselves, but the team is worth watching/ supporting again because they are laying the foundation for eventual success.

            Be careful with the three-year analagy. We won't suddenly become a contender just because in two more seasons we finally get a relief from some bad contracts. With that flexibility, we could either add the missing pieces or mess it all up. Just like adding Pooh Richardson and Sam Mitchell didn't help any...
            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
            And life itself, rushing over me
            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

              I'm not entirely sure what else could have been done over the last two years. It didn't help that the declining BRI cost them about $5mm worth of cap/tax space...and maybe as much as $16mm next year.

              They have untradeable assets: Dunleavy, Murphy, Tinsley.

              I'm sure Seth will wander in at some point and remind us that his is where the GS trade left us, but my comment to Mr. Dwyer is, "What's your plan?"

              This smacks of the typical "I don't know what I'd do, but it would be something else" type of stuff.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                4 years/ 11 million IS an awful contract for Jones, but he's a decent chip for the Pacers to build with. Both sides of this argument have something to point to.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                  I agree with the sentiments of the previous posters. We -are- rebuilding. We are just doing it in an effective way that doesn't require us to undergo TERRIBLE (20 win) seasons before being really good again; instead, it looks like our down years will be 37 win teams that are contending for the playoffs.

                  Honestly, if these guys looked at the salary situation, it would become apparent that we do not have a whole lot of options. Most of our good veteran players have monster contracts that no one wants to pick up for any reason whatsoever

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                    Yeah, thats great and all, but where do we find the second player to go with Granger if we don't get higher draft picks? At this rate we'd have to resort again to a Rashard Lewis type contract and we don't have a Howard to back that up, especially when we seem to be a borderline playoff team assuming full health.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      Yes, there's a three-year plan until salary relief begins
                      I'm convinced it's actually a 2-year plan. The Pacers will use those contracts to do some wheeling and dealing next summer, rather than wait for them all to expire.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        I'm convinced it's actually a 2-year plan. The Pacers will use those contracts to do some wheeling and dealing next summer, rather than wait for them all to expire.
                        I could see that happening also, but I dont see anyone taking Tinsley until the trade deadline
                        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                          Originally posted by PugdOut View Post
                          http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba,176171

                          Kind of harsh but goes to say if we are rebuilding or retooling , not sure
                          Its an article by Kelly Dwyer of Yahoo, for cryin out loud. For all those who don't like Kravitz, Dwyer is living (?) proof that things could be worse.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            I'm convinced it's actually a 2-year plan. The Pacers will use those contracts to do some wheeling and dealing next summer, rather than wait for them all to expire.
                            You could very well be right- I've always maintained that it is more likely we will obtain more talent for this team through trading expiring contracts rather than signing someone outright. Unfortunately in our market it seems as if we have to "draft" players to come here, even though they usually seem to like Indy once they actually show up.

                            I mean I guess it is possible that we sign an FA outright, even though it has never happened before we are under new management- but even though Bird is "rebuilding" and may be willing to take an extra year himself I'm sure the Simons are pressuring him to get backsides back in the seats ASAP- it is easy for us to talk about a process that would take another year than possibly necessary on this board, because it isn't our money.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers hold off rebuilding another year?

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              I'm convinced it's actually a 2-year plan. The Pacers will use those contracts to do some wheeling and dealing next summer, rather than wait for them all to expire.
                              I actually agree with this, but that's also why I think the tax is unavoidable next year. I think the expiring contracts are their best chance at bringing in talent, so they can't use them just to get out from under the tax.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X