Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

Rule #1

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

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

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

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

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

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #2

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

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

The right places to do so are:

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

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

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

Rule #3

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #4

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

Rule #5

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

An example:

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

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

Rule #6

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

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

Rule #7

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

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

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

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

Rule #8

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

Rule #9

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

Rule #10

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

Rule #11

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

The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

    I started this in a Walsh thread based on "DW won't spend" and then tadscout's reply (which I agree with). But since it annoys me every 2-3 weeks in some thread I figured I'd just go ahead and make it it's own discussion point.
    Originally posted by tadscout View Post
    How often did we have cap room?

    Also, wasn't that the role he did with the Knicks?
    The Pacers NEVER EVER EVER had serious cap room until this last summer.

    Considering the team ALWAYS lived over the cap and often near the tax limit, I'd say Donnie/Herb have a history of OVERspending, not being cheap. It's so much BS, I just don't get how people are Pacers fans and say any of the following:

    LIE 1) Team/owner/Walsh won't spend or make deals....except to spend on Reggie, Dale, Rik, Tony, Jax, B Scott, Perkins...or to deal Tony for a #5 HS prospect, All-Star Detlef for McKey, Herb for Detlef, fan fav Jax for Rose, Pierce/etc for Jax that very same season, fan fave Dale for a young, unproven JO, Rose/Best for Artest/Brad Miller, Dampier for Mullin

    I mean other than those FEW things, when have they ever spent or made deals on Donnie's watch? Other than 5 ECFs in 7 years when were they ever competitive (no NBA team had as many CFs during that span).

    You build a good team and just maintain it, you don't need to panic and chase insta-fixes that end up destroying your team instead. If anything the GSW deal was the biggest insta-fix meant to fix the team's off-court rep, and all it did was make the fanbase tune out totally when they struggled with salary/lack of talent.


    LIE 2) Free Agents won't come to Indy: the team has NEVER had the chance to spend on players or make a competitive offer. NO PLAYER HAS EVER SAID NO to a competitive offer because it meant coming to Indy.

    Guys like Scott, Perkins and even Saras did choose Indy money over similar teams, and West chose Indy over very competitive Boston despite similar money (extra year in Boston, a bit more per year in Indy).

    Indy never signed Jordan because NO ONE DID (except WSH when they shouldn't have). Indy never signed Shaq because they didn't have a spare $20m on the cap.

    The Bulls whiffed on both Hill and Duncan, and the Magic only got Hill. Ironic because Orlando was the team Shaq left to go to a "good" market, and yet with enough money Orlando was magically a "good" enough market for Hill. And turned out to be good enough for Lewis a decade later (thanks to overpaying) when he left higher profile Seattle for Orlando.

    Duncan could have gone to Chicago but stayed in San Antonio. And more recently Durant basically said that he wanted to build a team in OKC rather than leaping to another market or trying to "buy" a title.

    People forget every FA that doesn't go to LA, NY, CHI, MIA, DAL, BOS (which by the way is a pretty healthy chunk of the NBA teams already, meaning they are bound to get some of the FAs). When Rubio agrees to join Minny you don't hear a single "I guess I'm an idiot" from anyone that said he'd never agree to play in that small town market. They just go back to waiting for the next proof of their 100% correct theory.


    LIE 3) You can't get good (sometimes swapped for "title competitive") without tanking - Pacers sat at .500 for years, including the Bob Hill years, drafting mid-first round guys like Dale...or Haskins even, and yet went to 2 ECF straight. Then after a 1st round loss and then no playoffs, they changed coaches again and went right back to 3 straight ECFs, ie they didn't use a magic draft pick from 97 to create the 1998 team.

    And then they lost Jax, Rik and traded Dale for JO as part of 3 years of more .500 ball, only to instantly go to the ECF by swapping Isiah for Rick. They had the #1 record in the NBA and were it not for the BS deal that gave Detroit Rasheed for "free" the Pacers likely would have won the title that year...without tanking to get a top pick or even drafting particularly well.

    The Pacers picks that led to the ECF runs, the picks that helped Reggie/Rik get over the hump:
    McCloud (7) - meh, had nothing to do with the +14 wins the next year

    Antonio Davis (45)
    Kenny Williams (46) - the Pacers tanked into no first round pick and clearly you can only get an AS PF in the top 5... or at pick 45

    Dale Davis (13) - not a top 10, not from tanking, and a major factor in the ECF teams

    Malik Sealy (14) - nice kid, minimal impact on ECF runs

    Haskin (14) - injury, non factor

    Piatowski (15) - traded, non factor

    Best (23) - add to Dale and Tony as another ECF factor that didn't require tanking

    Dampier (10) - not from tanking but from the Jax for Rose deal, ie we RENTED Jax for Rose and Mullin on the 2nd run of ECF teams.

    Croshere (12) - actually hurt more than helped thanks to salary, but did have big impact on 2000 Finals.


    Also note the only picks from non-playoff teams prior to the JOB years were McCloud and Croshere.


    And if 2.5 non-tank improvements weren't enough, now we have a team built around two #17 picks (Granger, Hibbert) with a variety of other not-top 5 guys in the mix as well. Tyler is a higher draft pick than Collison, Hill, Granger, Hibbert and West.

    Talent evaluation, smart drafting and really smart trades are what builds a winner. Not just getting horrible and praying for the right draft star. For every Duncan you have a Kwame, and often the team that benefits from the high pick ends up being a team that trades or FAs them later (see Paul, Lebron, Bosh, Kidd, Melo, etc), a team usually run by a guy with a good eye for talent/value.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

    Amen, brother, amen.


    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

      . NO PLAYER HAS EVER SAID NO
      Crawford and Nene last year?
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

        Crawford said no because we were telling him to wait on us finding out about Mayo.

        As far as Nene, we don't know exactly what happened there, but I think West was our number 1 front court target.


        Comment

        • #5
          Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Crawford and Nene last year?
          We had a smart limit so we wouldn't overpay. They both took more money elsewhere. Actually Crawford ended up taking about the same as we offered, but was offended we didn't offer more of our capsace to him - ie we had cap, and he wanted as much as he could get. - and really who could complain we didn't pay either more?

          Also what TJ said about Crawford got impatient and wouldn't even give us 24 hours.
          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            LIE 3) You can't get good (sometimes swapped for "title competitive") without tanking
            This is a bit of a straw-man argument. I can't recall anyone saying high-lottery picks (which is what you mean by tanking) is the only way to acquire a competitive talent level, only that it's typically the easiest way. Bird and company did a fantastic job putting together this team without bottoming-out, but I stand by that claim.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Crawford said no because we were telling him to wait on us finding out about Mayo.

              As far as Nene, we don't know exactly what happened there, but I think West was our number 1 front court target.
              Yep but they still gave the Pacers a big NO, or we forgot the reported reason why Morway was fired?
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                I think not everything is so black and white with both camps. Yes, some free agents would be willing to come to Indiana and good ones too, but would guys like Dwight Howard or Deron Williams? Probably not.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Yep but they still gave the Pacers a big NO, or we forgot the reported reason why Morway was fired?
                  Read what he said-
                  Free Agents won't come to Indy: the team has NEVER had the chance to spend on players or make a competitive offer. NO PLAYER HAS EVER SAID NO to a competitive offer because it meant coming to Indy.
                  If the most money is what meant most to those 2, then our offer wasn't competitive.

                  Why be upset because we didn't overpay to be competitive to get them.

                  I know you have a man-crush on Nene, still doesn't mean it would have been right to overpay him, and give him a 4 year deal with the injury past he has... and especially since we were able to get a great deal on West (big difference between 2 and 4 years).
                  "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Yep but they still gave the Pacers a big NO, or we forgot the reported reason why Morway was fired?
                    I thought the reported reason was the screw-up with the Mayo trade.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      This is one of the most informed, sensible posts I've read this week.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                        Those .500 teams were built by high draft picks! Smits was #2 Person was #4 Miller at 11 and Davis at 13 all loto picks that made up 3 of your 5 starters. Draft picks help and picking Smits at 2 really helped set the table for the Finals run. So lets not act like those teams were all mid round picks.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          I thought the reported reason was the screw-up with the Mayo trade.
                          ... Yep and after that they said NO THANKS to the Pacers.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                            I don't know. These are all very good points, however I still don't think they trump the idea that Eric Gordon will sell his testicles to join the Pacers and that the Hornets will either not match our offer or give us a discount because Eric Gordon is from Indiana.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: The 3 biggest Pacers fan fallacies (that I want to end ASAP)

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              ... Yep and after that they said NO THANKS to the Pacers.
                              Not how it went down. Crawford cut us out of his list of teams before the Mayo trade was screwed up. So he said no because we weren't all in on him, not because he didn't want to come here.

                              Either way, you're arguing a tiny unimportant detail. In the case of Crawford he went to Portland to go home. That's where he's from. Which is understandable, and has nothing to do with avoiding Indiana like it's a plague.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X