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

Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

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

  • Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

    It seems Brandon is one of the main subjects of trade talks right now, so I wanted to maybe talk about this up front and center.

    Let me start with this.

    If you are going to build a contender what types of players do you need. One of the types would be an athletic, defensive minded, perimeter defender who can knock down the 3. Spread the floor, but not need the ball to be effective. With the 13th pick maybe you want more than a role player, but if you look at it outside of original expectations, maybe Brandon is a perfect fit.

    I’d argue that he’s already proven he can be a very high level component on a championship team. He wasn’t the go to guy, he wasn’t a guy who would carry you offensively or as a vocal leader in the lockeroom at lace Kansas, but he was one of the main reasons they were so good.

    I wonder if we focus more on the things he can do vs. what he doesn’t do if he becomes more valuable.

    Two reasons I’d like to keep him. Troy Murphy and Roy Hibbert.

    lace Troy likely won’t be here. This changes the dynamics of the team in that you won’t have the best 3 pt shooting PF in the league. This means the ability to spread the floor becomes more valuable to this team. Another words, what Brandon does becomes much more important because it won’t be duplicated at another position.

    Roy Hibbert and the low post game. If you started with a blank slate and said you are going to have Roy as a legit low post/high post scoring Center with outstanding passing ability isn’t an athletic, 3pt shooting, defensively 2 guard something you’d want to put with him? I think as Roy gets better, Brandonlace becomes more valuable.

    Lastly, I’m not saying Brandon is untradeable, but if you trade him and get back other prospects to fill other positions. I just don’t want to be looking for a Brandon Rush type in a year from now.

    My point is I don’t want to part with Brush unless it’s really something that provides an answer for the team. Another words, I don’t want it to be a lateral move in the big pictures.

    I’ve made the argument that Brandon is pretty replaceable with the likes of Raual Butler type is that really true? Those guys aren’t a dime a dozen and you’d have to get one that is not just that type of player, but a very good version of that type of player.

    Look it’s more about expectations than about reality with lace Brandon, even though everyone around him sees what he could be, I don’t want it to be lost on what he is. A perfect complimentary player on a good team, potentially

    I’m interested to hear other opinions on this.
    Last edited by Speed; 06-14-2010, 09:45 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

    Can you clean up all of the 's, please ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

      Originally posted by count55 View Post
      Can you clean up all of the 's, please ?
      Done!

      Edit, wait do you still see the icons now?
      Last edited by Speed; 06-14-2010, 09:50 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

        Speed, the font is too small for me to read, yes I'm getting old. So for those of us now over 40, here is Speed's post in larger font. No jokes please


        It seems http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...st1:City w:st=Brandon is one of the main subjects of trade talks right now, so I wanted to maybe talk about this up front and center.

        Let me start with this.

        If you are going to build a contender what types of players do you need. One of the types would be an athletic, defensive minded, perimeter defender who can knock down the 3. Spread the floor, but not need the ball to be effective. With the 13th pick maybe you want more than a role player, but if you look at it outside of original expectations, maybe Brandon is a perfect fit.

        I’d argue that he’s already proven he can be a very high level component on a championship team. He wasn’t the go to guy, he wasn’t a guy who would carry you offensively or as a vocal leader in the lockeroom at lace Kansas, but he was one of the main reasons they were so good.

        I wonder if we focus more on the things he can do vs. what he doesn’t do if he becomes more valuable.

        Two reasons I’d like to keep him. Troy Murphy and Roy Hibbert.

        lace Troy likely won’t be here. This changes the dynamics of the team in that you won’t have the best 3 pt shooting PF in the league. This means the ability to spread the floor becomes more valuable to this team. Another words, what Brandon does becomes much more important because it won’t be duplicated at another position.

        Roy Hibbert and the low post game. If you started with a blank slate and said you are going to have Roy as a legit low post/high post scoring Center with outstanding passing ability isn’t an athletic, 3pt shooting, defensively 2 guard something you’d want to put with him? I think as Roy gets better, Brandonlace becomes more valuable.

        Lastly, I’m not saying Brandon is untradeable, but if you trade him and get back other prospects to fill other positions. I just don’t want to be looking for a Brandon Rush type in a year from now.

        My point is I don’t want to part with Brush unless it’s really something that provides an answer for the team. Another words, I don’t want it to be a lateral move in the big pictures.

        I’ve made the argument that Brandon is pretty replaceable with the likes of Raual Butler type is that really true? Those guys aren’t a dime a dozen and you’d have to get one that is not just that type of player, but a very good version of that type of player.

        Look it’s more about expectations than about reality with lace Brandon, even though everyone around him sees what he could be, I don’t want it to be lost on what he is. A perfect complimentary player on a good team, potentially

        I’m interested to hear other opinions on this.
        Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-14-2010, 10:37 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Spped, the font is too small for me to read, yes I'm getting old. So for those of us now over 40, here is Speed's post in larger font. No jokes please
          Thanks, I type it in word first and haven't gotten the hang of translatting it, format wise.

          I just tried to make the font size bigger in advanced edit, does that help at all?
          Last edited by Speed; 06-14-2010, 09:46 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

            Speed,
            I think a lateral move is to trade him for multiple picks which i have never suggested. If he is involved in a trade deal it has to be for a guy like Collison (starting pg) or a good number 2 option ie Gordon.

            I think Rush is a victim of a team with very little trade assets. IMO he is gone.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Done!

              Edit, wait do you still see the icons now?
              yes, they're still there.

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Thanks, I type it in word first and haven't gotten the hang of translatting it, format wise.
              that's funny, i just tried doing that (copy from word to the textbox in the browser), but it just shows plain text without any funny formatting. is there something like a "paste as text" option when you're trying to put it into pd? that might remove the problem.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                I love Rush.

                If we're going to think of things in terms of being a contender, I'm fine with thinking of our roster like this (X's are players who aren't here yet):

                PG: X, Price
                SG: Rush, X, D. Jones
                SF: Granger, X, D. Jones
                PF: X, Hansbrough, McRoberts
                C: Hibbert, X, McRoberts

                If you get the right guys, the 5 X's could be filled by 3 players. The way we fill them, however, is crucial. If we're set with Rush at SG, then we need a 20 ppg scorer at either PG or PF. The other option is that Hibbert develops into a 20 ppg scorer, which is possible, but unlikely.
                "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                - Salman Rushdie

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                  as to the post, well i think it depends on how much better you think rush is going to be.

                  if he is what he is, i.e. a role player, albeit a very good one, then yes you'll have to think of swapping him if you can get a star player or multiple good role players in return. example: memphis trading battier to houston for rudy gay some years back, which ended up being a good trade for both teams. unfortunately we have more in common with that memphis team than with houston, so it makes sense that we'd be willing to trade rush.

                  the only reason for not trading him is if you think he won't become much better, either as a scorer or as a stopper. i'm guessing the pacers don't think he'll be much better.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                    You make some good points, but you seem to be satisfied with what Rush can only do. It's like you don't feel another SG can do more than Rush. Sure Rush can play "D", shoots 3's, and rebounds well for a SG; but why not want more than just that? Why not want a SG that is consistant, has a better mid-range game, that is agressive, goes to the hoop frequently, and is a better FT shooter? I'd rather have a SG that rebounds less and is agressive with going to the hole to score and shoot FT. A SG that isn't so much "one dimensional" in scoring as Rush mostly is. I don't feel Rush is the total answer to the Pacers SG position. Yes, Rush a nice complimentary player, but right now the Pacers need more than complimentary players to be successful. They need very good to NEAR Allstar talent to grow for the future. If the Pacers can use Rush to bring in a player of that caliber, I have no problem trading Rush. OTOH, I just don't want to give Rush away either to make a trade. IOW, Rush is tradeable, but it has to really bring something good back to fill a Pacers' need.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                      If Xavier's there at #10, do you take him and trade him or BRush to address the PG position?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post

                        i'm guessing the pacers don't think he'll be much better.

                        That's my guess as well. I just feel Bird doesn't think Rush will ever get consistant and raise his level of play.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                          I would like to avoid trading Brandon because he's still young and considered a future piece.

                          For now, we need to get a veteran like Michael Redd to take the starting SG role from him and allow him to backup. This will probably be better for Brandon. He'd make a great sixth man.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                            I'd love to keep Rush if at all possible...his defense is stellar and his offense WILL get to being consistent. Who knows if that will be this upcoming season or the season after this upcoming one--I don't know. His offense towards this end of this season (same as his rookie season) was amazing and showed that he is able of being a big-time contributor to our offense. But if we were to unload him, I'd HAVE to be wanting some type of amazing deal that I just couldn't turn down, like a starting-quality PG that we would be guaranteed to have for several years, along with a few nice players with potential, either in the form of future draft picks or current players (if I were the Pacers Front Office guys). For me, I'd have to get a nice deal in able to trade Brandon right now.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why dealing Brush might be a mistake?

                              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                              that's funny, i just tried doing that (copy from word to the textbox in the browser), but it just shows plain text without any funny formatting. is there something like a "paste as text" option when you're trying to put it into pd? that might remove the problem.
                              Nope, I'll just type it directly next time, sorry guys.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X