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:
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

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 saying (and teasing)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ESPN saying (and teasing)

    *** PREFACE -- This is neither good news nor bad news. Don't want to get people's hopes up. ***

    ... that Austin Croshere is an unrestricted free agent because of an early termination option.

    ETO = Early Termination Option

    Indiana Pacers
    Restricted: John Edwards, James Jones
    Unrestricted: Austin Croshere (ETO), Dale Davis

    Of course, the Pacers' Web site doesn't call him a free agent or anything, but I thought I'd bring this to attention. I'm having no delusions of grandeur ...

    From Larry Coon ...

    48. What are option clauses? What kind of option clauses are there?
    An option clause allows a contract to be extended for one additional season after the date it is scheduled to end. For example, a six-year contract with an option for the seventh year means that if the option is exercised, the contract extends through the seventh season, but if the option is not exercised, the contract ends after the sixth season and the player becomes a free agent. Options must be exercised by the July 1 that precedes the option year. Once exercised, an option cannot be revoked (for example, a player cannot invoke an option on June 20th and change his mind on June 25th).

    There are various types of options:

    Team Options give the team the right to invoke the option year. There can be only one option year, and the option year can't be for a lower salary than the previous season.

    Player Options give the player the right to invoke the option year. There can be only one option year, and the option year can't be for a lower salary than the previous season.

    Player Early Termination Options (ETO's) give the player the right to terminate the contract early. An ETO can't occur prior to the end of the fifth season of the contract (so the contract must be for six or seven seasons), and may be made contingent on player or team performance benchmarks.
    Player options were previously used as a way to give the player more money. A long-term deal was agreed upon with a player option after the player obtained Larry Bird rights. The player invoked the option, became a free agent, and then the team & player signed a new contract for more money using the Bird exception. However, since the current CBA prevents ETO's before the end of the fifth year or more than one option year, the usefulness of this tool is now very limited.
    Rookie "scale" contracts for first round draft picks contain a team option for the fourth season.

    Here's a summary of the differences between an option and an ETO:

    Options can occur only when one season remains on the contract, while ETO's can occur when two seasons remain if the contract is for seven seasons.

    Options can be included in any multiyear contract, but ETO's are allowed only with six or seven year contracts.

    ETO's can be based on performance benchmarks, but options can't.

    Only a player can be given an ETO, but an option can be given to the player or to the team.

    Option years may not have a lower salary than the previous season. ETO's have no such restriction.
    Another note, this is incredibly misleading, since this has about 312 players as unrestricted free agents who won't be.

  • #2
    Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

    They have the Hawks Tony Delk listed the same, however with the Hawks and Delk nothing has changed. They have the same results they would have had under the old contract. Waiving Delk doesn't save them anything.


    • #3
      Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

      This is quite simple, Cro holds the option, only he can exercise it.

      InN other words, HE can "opt out" of the contract if he thinks he can get more moneyh elsewhere or feels that he has been paid to much and should get less.

      Neither is likely.
      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


      • #4
        Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

        maybe somebody should convince austin to opt out so he can possibly sign with someone for their MLE where he could play alot more....hes gonna get zero playing time over the next two years, so hes gonna have very little marketable value then...only vet minimum....maybe right now he could sucker some team into their chance of the two years from now....if he signed for an MLE for like 4 or 5 years starting at 5 million that would be worth a total of 23 million for 4 years...versus him getting 18 for the next two and then about the vet min for the following 2 years....if he really wants to play he might consider it, though im not sure how likely it would be for someone to give him the MLE....but when u look at some of the players that get it...he might be able to....

        or maybe austin looks at this as his retirement is starting now....

        or could he possibly opt out and sign a restructured long term deal with the pacers thats a little more cap that i think about it...that wouldnt work...because he would be a free agent and we would have to use our MLE on him then...that wont work....

        oh trying to think of matter howfutile it might be....

        who are we kidding , hes gonna take the money and run...


        • #5
          Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

          Think about this...although it would never happen...but what if the Pacers tell Croshere that if he exercises the option that they will give him the full MLE for the remaning years of his current conttact.

          Still a good amount of money but also cuts some of the money as well, enough to sign DD back, JJ though would more than likely be gone.

          Sort of like you said Foretaz though the team concedes on JJ, and maybe by some luck DD signs for the 1.6 million exception.
          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

          ----------------- Reggie Miller


          • #6
            Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

            I've mentioned this before, but I'll tell it again so you'll better understand.
            Back in my days as a poster on the ESPN board I had a friend who delivered pizza for a living (Standup comedy doesn't pay squat). He said one of his regulars was AC...and AC always tipped in quarters. Called him one of the tightest SOB's he'd ever come across.

            Does that sound like someone who would willingly take a pay cut?
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.


            • #7
              Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

              Originally posted by indygeezer
              I've mentioned this before, but I'll tell it again so you'll better understand.
              Back in my days as a poster on the ESPN board I had a friend who delivered pizza for a living (Standup comedy doesn't pay squat). He said one of his regulars was AC...and AC always tipped in quarters. Called him one of the tightest SOB's he'd ever come across.

              Does that sound like someone who would willingly take a pay cut?
              But...I just read that Austin's a milk-drinker. How could he possibly do such a thing?
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!


              • #8
                Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                He didn't have to do anything with the ETO all he had to do was not opt out .... I think there will be some trades and the Pacers may do something and agree to pay part of his salary if he is sent elsewhere.
                "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                  Originally posted by indygeezer
                  I've mentioned this before, but I'll tell it again so you'll better understand.
                  Back in my days as a poster on the ESPN board I had a friend who delivered pizza for a living (Standup comedy doesn't pay squat). He said one of his regulars was AC...and AC always tipped in quarters. Called him one of the tightest SOB's he'd ever come across.

                  Does that sound like someone who would willingly take a pay cut?
                  Sounds like a man who has wisely saved his huge NBA contract. That way he won't have to worry if no one is willing to sign him after his contract ends here. He'll never work a day in his life again.
                  House Name: Pacers

                  House Sigil:

                  House Words: "We Kneel To No King"


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                    Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                    Sounds like a man who has wisely saved his huge NBA contract. That way he won't have to worry if no one is willing to sign him after his contract ends here. He'll never work a day in his life again.

                    Maybe he's just worrying about feeding his children.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                      What's wrong with paying in quarters? He should be happy he got a tip. Money is money, tell him to go cash those quarters for dollars then he will feel better.
                      Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!


                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                        Originally posted by TruWarier
                        What's wrong with paying in quarters? He should be happy he got a tip.
                        It depends on how MANY quarters.

                        If an NBA player tipped my one or two quarters, and he was a regular, I'd probably spit on his pizza next time, or garnish it with some buggars or rat turds.


                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                          Speaking as someone who works in a Pizza place, who cares how much tip the driver gets? I just spent hours last night doing nothing but washing a constant stream of dishes, lids, pans, and other crap. That's a lot more work than driving a car. I don't get tips. We both get paid the same salary. You figure it out.


                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                            Originally posted by Roy Munson
                            If an NBA player tipped my one or two quarters, and he was a regular, I'd probably spit on his pizza next time, or garnish it with some buggars or rat turds.


                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN saying (and teasing)

                              Originally posted by vapacersfan
                              I know now adays the driver (at least here in VA) has to drive his own car, so while I see your point, the driver has to deal with wear and tear, gas money, and if he gets any kind of tickets or anything he has to pay for that out of his pocket.

                              I really dont want to drag this topic OT any more then it is, Ive had some good debates with friends over tips, maybe another day and another thread Ill get into that here at PD
                              As he should. If he gets a ticket that's his fault.

                              Gas money is a good counter-arguement, but then when I think about it, considering how little work there is compared to being in-house I think it balances out.