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

Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

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

  • #16
    Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

    I don't care what Bird, Walsh or Carlisle said, I think there will be wholesale changes

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

      Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
      "Are there going to be wholesale changes? No."Larry Bird, May 10, 2006.
      Here's a random thought: Do you think you could dig up any quotes from Riley or the Suns' GM from last summer about their plans for their rosters? Could be interesting to compare them to what's being said here now.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

        Originally posted by J_2_Da_IzzO
        Hes just not brutal enought o make the changes needed. He has obviously seen Jacksons impact on this team and his negative attitude but seems like hes getting another chance. Tinsleys been given enough chances but hes just no gonna make it. I love him as a player when hes healthy, but he hardly ever is so I just gotta forget bout how good he is when hes healthy.
        Not sure if this is being fair. This offseason (which doesn't even start until after the Finals) is really the first good opportunity Bird is going to get to deal with this post-brawl team. Bird and Walsh rolled the dice on Artest and we all know how that worked out. Fault them for that if you want, but I (and I imagine many of you) was very excited about our chances at the beginning of the year.

        It's pretty evident now that Jax needs to go, and I think Larry knows this and has ever since Artest asked out of Indy and this season imploded. But right now is the first time he's actually really had to address the situation. The drawn-out timeframe of the Artest deal pretty much held the team hostage for months, and by the time of the trade deadline, there was really no reason to trade Jax, especially considering he was the only guy consistently not injured and because it's tough to get fair value midseason when you're "selling" rather than "buying." Better to wait until now when teams are trying to retool for next season instead of trying to just add assets for a Playoff push.

        Originally posted by J_2_Da_IzzO
        Jackson and Tinsley going and adding a starting PG like Andre Miller would be great. I like Freddy aswell but his inability to pass with his feet planted drives me mad so I wont be mad to see him leave. Add another shot blocker or someone that is a threat in that department like Nazr would be good.
        Easier said than done. Tinsley's value is at an all-time low. We're not gonna get much for this guy.

        And I'm pretty sure every other GM in this league saw Stephen Jackson throwing haymakers at the back of some guys head in the stands that night. I think we all over value both Jackson's talent and what we can get for him. He's really a poor man's Ricky Davis at this point, and his "character" issues are--to put it mildly--shady.
        Read my Pacers blog:
        8points9seconds.com

        Follow my twitter:

        @8pts9secs

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

          You make great points as always Scott.

          I do think, in spite of what they say in public, the Pacers will definitely move some of their problem children if they get a chance. They are playing a little bit of liar's poker I am sure, but I can't imagine they are fooling anybody. I actually think somebody might take a chance on Tinsley, because he is talented, and because the amount of point guards with his ability are few in the league.

          Jack on the other hand, I think we are stuck with, unless he is packaged with somebody else. Tinsley isn't enough sweet to dilute the bitter of Jack, so sending them together isn't a viable option. You would have to send him with O'neal or Granger, and we aren't going to do that.

          As much as I dislike Jack, I do think he could be valuable coming off of the bench. He is too inconsistent to start IMO. We just need a strong leader and coach to keep him in check. He doesn't seem to respect Carlisle or anybody else on the team, but management and the team should be able to deal with that. If that doesn't work, then you bit the bullet and trade him for whatever scraps you can get, but then you really just replace one problem with another one. If he behaves, then we can either keep him, or his stock value will increase.

          That being said, there are plenty of other guys we can/could move, and we should be able to make this team better. This team has just been tainted by bad attitudes and bad habits. It is possible that coaching, management, and time will take care of this, but I don't think it is likely. We don't need to clean the entire slate, but we do need to purge at least some of our bad apples. This team is diseased, and instead of anti-biotics, it needs some "anti-psychotics." I think it is too fargone to heal on its own.

          I think TPTB know this, and I think they are concerned. I don't think they are concerned about making the changes to win a championship, but I think they are concerend about filling the seats. As is, I don't think this team will do that. They have lost/alienated alot of the fans, and most people aren't going to pay their hard earned money to watch a bunch of whiny underachievers.
          When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winners circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor.
          -Pat Riley

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

            Everyone seems to be deciding who the worst of the batch is and then thinking how we could replace that player (or couple of players). It's a 'bad apple' search and replace mission...

            BUT... was that what the other teams did when they went on a mission to 'fix' or 'upgrade' their team? Did they have a bad apple or two to cleanse from the apple barrel? Or were they just looking to make an already good team better? ...Or find a better compliment of players?

            Is just clearing out a bad apple or two really going to 'fix' anything? When you're rotten to the core perhaps the fix goes deeper than what many here are proposing.

            This whole thing is pretty depressing if you ask me.... and it's not something our normal management style will fix if historical patterns are followed. That's why it's so depressing. And now that we need to act quickly and decisively we instead have "GM by committee". A donkey is a horse designed by a committee. We need one voice and one vision.

            -Bball
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

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

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

              Originally posted by Bball
              Everyone seems to be deciding who the worst of the batch is and then thinking how we could replace that player (or couple of players). It's a 'bad apple' search and replace mission...

              BUT... was that what the other teams did when they went on a mission to 'fix' or 'upgrade' their team? Did they have a bad apple or two to cleanse from the apple barrel? Or were they just looking to make an already good team better? ...Or find a better compliment of players?

              Is just clearing out a bad apple or two really going to 'fix' anything? When you're rotten to the core perhaps the fix goes deeper than what many here are proposing.

              This whole thing is pretty depressing if you ask me.... and it's not something our normal management style will fix if historical patterns are followed. That's why it's so depressing. And now that we need to act quickly and decisively we instead have "GM by committee". A donkey is a horse designed by a committee. We need one voice and one vision.

              -Bball
              Yeah, but how many key guys did the Suns shuffle? I don't know anything about Leonardo, but I'm pretty sure that Nash, Marion, and Stoudamire are the core of the team. Sure, you could send out all of our B players and swap them for somebody elses, but I'm not sure it makes a big difference to our team. And since our team has been so injured, it is almost like we get a new player every night! And alas... one taken away.

              We are also talking about a team with Steve Nash at the point. That is another unique feature of the Suns. He is just one of those guys who is going to play a certain way and make other pieces easy to fit in. Nash is everything the Pacers aren't. He's healthy, a good basketball player with high IQ, unselfish, and he makes others around him better.

              I can't tell you what I want TBTB to do with this team b/c it depends on the day you ask me. Today I'm in a flush the toilet mood. I so crave to see something different that I'd almost not care who they brought in. Wait a minute... I just remembered Isiah Thomas. So, I do care, but some changes for change sake are okay with me. I mean, is this team's championship hopes riding on Jeff Foster or David Harrison? I'm more down on Foster than I've ever been and I'm not sure why. His offensive ineptness just really seems to have been on display this year.

              But, I really don't think we are going to see a JO trade. It will be deemed too risky this year. But if the train gets off track this year, anything could happen.
              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
              Reggie Miller

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                I don't know why the Suns are being used as the poster child for blowing up a team. They didn't get to the finals. They lost in the WCFs. Same place we were two years ago before Ron "blew this team up."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  Both teams kept the core, made a significant addition, and then re-tooled around what was left.

                  I'd LOVE to see us do that. But it won't happen.


                  Call me cynical, but I don't think that our "core" is as desirable to build around and re-tool around as a Nash/Marion core or a Shaq/Wade core.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                    As long as Jermaine and Danny stay, I'm fine with blowing this team up.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                      I don't think there is anything wrong with blowing it up. It needs to be blown up.
                      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                        Originally posted by Adam1987
                        Call me cynical, but I don't think that our "core" is as desirable to build around and re-tool around as a Nash/Marion core or a Shaq/Wade core.
                        Yeah, I'm with ya. I mean, what IS our core? Granger is a given. Jermaine, obviously. Throw in Peja, of signed. Is that it?

                        Nash/Amare/Marion

                        vs

                        Peja/Jermaine/Granger?

                        And bulletproof, I'd still use them as a model seeing as how they did it this year minus Amare and Bell for a bit. Pretty impressive.

                        BTW, folks, I was kinda curious about our injury thing. You realize Jermaine has only played 95 games in the past 2 seasons?

                        By way of comparision, Tracy McGrady, a guy we tend to diss for being too injury prone, played 125 games past 2 seasons. Weird and scary, huh?

                        The Heat only kept two guys who mattered, Wade and Shaq, then pretty much scattered the rest of the roster and look where they are.

                        That's the gist of what made me start this thread. I don't see our "core" stacking up with the contenders. So we build on what ain't working? That's what I'm afriad management will do.
                        Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                          Blow it up, draft Oden! Hooha!
                          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                            Originally posted by Skaut_Ech

                            BTW, folks, I was kinda curious about our injury thing. You realize Jermaine has only played 95 games in the past 2 seasons?

                            By way of comparision, Tracy McGrady, a guy we tend to diss for being too injury prone, played 125 games past 2 seasons. Weird and scary, huh?
                            Somebody will point out that JO missed some games for some other reason... something about November 2004...

                            But wasn't that 15 games in the end? So that would mean JO should've played 120 games if the league would've let him. Hmmmm... that's still less than McGrady... And JO ended up injured even with a nice little league imposed vacation in the season.

                            The Heat only kept two guys who mattered, Wade and Shaq, then pretty much scattered the rest of the roster and look where they are.

                            That's the gist of what made me start this thread. I don't see our "core" stacking up with the contenders. So we build on what ain't working? That's what I'm afriad management will do.
                            Apparently, being patient isn't the only way to win a title. Has anyone ever won a title being patient?

                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

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

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                              Originally posted by Bball
                              Somebody will point out that JO missed some games for some other reason... something about November 1994...
                              1994? Was he suspended 15 days in High School?

                              Originally posted by Bball
                              But wasn't that 15 games in the end? So that would mean JO should've played 120 games if the league would've let him. Hmmmm... that's still less than McGrady... And JO ended up injured even with a nice little league imposed vacation in the season.
                              Actually 95 + 15 = 110, but your point stands.


                              Originally posted by Bball
                              Apparently, being patient isn't the only way to win a title. Has anyone ever won a title being patient?
                              I'm not enough of an NBA historian to tell you that one. I'd like to know. If we'd beaten in 2000 we'd have been at least 1 of course. Past that... I'm trying to think of a team that was together for years before winning a title. How long were the late 80's Pistons together before '89? What about the Bulls that won in '91?

                              If you want to be cute, you can recall that the Celtics were patient (ironically more than the Indiana Pacers) and drafted Larry Bird a year "in advance."

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                                I've been watching my team get blown up for the past two years. Webber - gone. Christie - gone. Peja - gone. Bobby Jackson - gone. Unfortunately, we still have a flock of albatross left over from some of those explosions.

                                I used to be one who thought you simply couldn't blow up a team. We didn't blow up in one big explosion. We've done it over time and I strongly suspect some MAJOR movement of players this off-season, too, as Petrie works with Muss to refine the team into something for the new Musselman era.

                                As far as your Pacers go, I suspect you may be seeing pretty significant changes. I think you should keep Granger if at all possible. I think O'Neal is the real deal, and just needs more support around him AND a better point guard.

                                I'm almost as interested in watching what happens with the Pacers as I am with the Kings. Could get very, very interesting.

                                Should be some pretty eye-opening trades coming down. The draft isn't that strong. There's not a LeBron James in there. Petrie has alluded to some European talent entering the mix, but I'm predicting the best moves this year will be made via the trades.

                                If you have to blow up a team, blow it up. Let the pieces fall where they may. But, much like making sourdough bread, just make sure you keep some "starter."

                                NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X