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

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

    >>Who says ďblowing a team upĒ doesnít work?

    Iím pretty much now convinced there isnít a damn problem with ďblowing a team up.Ē Not in todayís league.

    Look at the final four teams this year and what do you see?

    Suns this year-

    Shawn Marion
    Steve Nash
    Kurt Thomas
    Raja Bell
    Amare Stoudemire
    James Jones
    Brian Grant
    Boris Diaw
    Leandro Barbosa
    Eddie House
    Pat Burke
    Dijon Thompson
    Jared Reiner
    Sharrod Ford
    Josh Davis
    Tim Thomas

    Last year-

    Shawn Marion
    Steve Nash
    Quentin Richardson
    Joe Johnson
    Amare Stoudemire
    Jake Voskuhl
    Zarko Cabarkapa
    Bo Outlaw
    Casey Jacobsen
    Maciej Lampe
    Leandro Barbosa
    Steven Hunter
    Jackson Vroman
    Yuta Tabuse

    The highlighted players are the only holdovers. Four guys. Four guys?!! Suns were in the WCF two years in a row.

    The Heat? This year-

    Shaquille O'Neal
    Jason Williams
    Antoine Walker
    James Posey
    Udonis Haslem
    Dwyane Wade
    Michael Doleac
    Dorell Wright
    Alonzo Mourning
    Gary Payton
    Shandon Anderson
    Jason Kapono
    Wayne Simien
    Andre Emmett
    Earl Barron
    Gerald Fitch

    Last year?

    Shaquille O'Neal
    Eddie Jones
    Dwyane Wade
    Damon Jones
    Michael Doleac
    Malik Allen
    Wesley Person
    Rasual Butler
    Dorrell Wright
    Christian Laettner
    Shandon Anderson
    Keyon Dooling
    Wang Zhizhi
    Jerome Beasley
    Udonis Haslem

    Heat were in the conference finals two years running and are now going for the title.

    Dallas has essentially stayed the same the past two years (although look the their roster three years ago) and the same could be said about Detroit. (Once again, look at three years ago.)

    I guess what Iím trying to say is that thereís a new model for winning a title these days, in my book. Make radical rosters changes, give it a couple of years, if it doesnít work, try again.

    Slow and steady doesnít get it anymore. Adding a piece here and there and pulling a wait and see will get you a wait and watch on the couch in your living room.

    The reason I bring this up is the radical change of opinion in this forum. I did a little checking, and in a forum poll at the begining of the season, something like %30 of us felt that the Pacers would be playing for the title and another big chunk felt weíd either get to the second round or be in the ECF. The midset was Ďkeep these guys together. Now? Well, you know.

    Iím more convinced now than ever, that we should not fear a ďblowing upĒ of the team. (Not that it will happen. Just 3 weeks ago, Bird flat out said he doesnít plan on any major changes, just shipping out those who are lazy, selfish or have bad attitudes if they don't shape up. )

    Who cares if we make a trade for Garnett (All you JO for Garnett naysayers) and give ourselves a 2-3 year window? Or you Stephen Jackson lovers, so what if he gets dealt. Maybe heís a one hit wonder and simply had a stern Popovich and the wonder that is Duncan to make him better.

    I guess Iím just venting my possible future aggravation. No matter what noise I hear from the front office or media, I just KNOW we arenít going to make any changes of note. I see one trade, thatís it. Other than that, I suspect itíll be business as usual.

    And that scares me.

    I feel maintaining your roster gives you no more leg up on the competition that it does keeping one key player (Nash, Shaq, Dirk, Ben Wallace), throwing caution to the wind and reshuffling the deck every three years or so.

    Which of course leads back into the previous thread about whether or not JO is a franchise guy who you build a team around. Is he? Check out otherís answers in rexromís thread.

    Man, I hope we majorly re-tool this roster. But this is the great Midwest, heartland of conservatism and we have a team run by pretty conservative guys. Iím not seeing it.

    Someone convince me my anticipatory frustration is unfounded. Is there any way you REALLY see us making some big trades? How many of you think "blowing up a team" (not just this team. Any team.) is a bad thing?


    >>
    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?

  • #2
    Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

    I wouldn't say that blowing this team up is a bad thing by any means. I just don't expect to because that isn't how Bird and Donnie work.

    You defiantly can blow a team up and do great. The thing that you have to have though is the right coach. Is Rick the right coach? Maybe so, I don't really know for sure.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

      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.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

        The equivalent would be keeping 3 top guys, like JO, Danny, and Peja and moving everyone else.

        The trouble is, that core is not as good as that of the Suns and Heat, and the other players have less value than, say, a Joe Johnson.

        But in principle, the idea is a good one and opposes the Pistons model of lineup consistency.

        I want quick, smart players. We are near the league's bottom in both areas.
        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

          Do we really have a 'core' of players worth keeping and building around?

          After 'darkside' voting, I felt obligated to ask that question.

          -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, thatís teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

            I expect to see the Pacers make wholesale changes.

            The Mavs also changed almost their entre roster in two years.

            Why is everyone so quick to say "Pacers won't make any significant changes" Everyone is complaining riught now, why not wait until at least the free agent signing period.

            This is not directed at you SE

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              I expect to see the Pacers make wholesale changes.

              The Mavs also changed almost their entre roster in two years.

              Why is everyone so quick to say "Pacers won't make any significant changes" Everyone is complaining riught now, why not wait until at least the free agent signing period.

              This is not directed at you SE

              Most people are assuming the Pacers will follow their historical tendency to do very little in the off season when push comes to shove. Not re-signing Eddie Gill and/or Scott Pollard isn't going to count as a key moves in major change.

              -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, thatís teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                Originally posted by Bball
                Do we really have a 'core' of players worth keeping and building around?

                After 'darkside' voting, I felt obligated to ask that question.

                -Bball
                Well I missed darkside voting, but as of now I see us having a core of JO and Danny.

                So I think we may have to look at getting that "person" to build around via free agency or the draft (and I would have no problem with us trading Mel-Mel and/or Jackson for that right pick, although this years draft isnt going to have any players like that IMO)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                  Bball, the fact they it appears Rick is staying should be more evidence that major personnel changes are coming this summer

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                    I'm basing my assumptions on the fact that TPTB seem to be saying not to expect major changes.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                      Originally posted by Anthem
                      I'm basing my assumptions on the fact that TPTB seem to be saying not to expect major changes.
                      "Are there going to be wholesale changes? No."

                      Larry Bird, May 10, 2006.
                      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


                      • #12
                        Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                        I don't think that you can listen to a GM. Saying that we are going to get rid of players X, Y and Z does nothing to help the situation. This is a buisness where you should keep your cards close to your chest.

                        I hope and expect changes to be made.
                        "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                        "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck
                          Bball, the fact they it appears Rick is staying should be more evidence that major personnel changes are coming this summer

                          If I was to start a "My Fear Is:" thread, I'd have to say I fear that old habits die hard and when push comes to shove TPTB will not be able to pull the trigger. Whether it's trying to get too much for some players, holding off on a deal/deals until someone else scoops us, or simply deciding to roll the dice on "one more year".

                          Injuries = fall back excuse
                          Playoffs = Goal #1 met.

                          Mix everything together and I wouldn't be surprised to hear LOTS of rumors see lots of smoke... but in the end "Standing pat" (or darn near close to it) winning out.

                          Of course if I had any faith in our management system then I'd be agreeing with you because wholesale changes are what is needed both for the on the court product and for the re-energizing of the fanbase.

                          -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, thatís teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                            Well, Bob Hill came into Seattle and announced wholesale changes.

                            Pat Riley did the same thing.

                            Rick Patino threatened wholesale changes and did it.

                            Bird basically said, "I'm telling our guys for the last time, they'd better act better or we'll look a some trades." It seems he wants to gives them a short leash, then he keeps letting out the slack to give them more leeway.

                            I just get the feeling that announcing that you ARE going to make changes puts more fear into the knucklesheads than saying, yet again, "just one more mess up..."

                            I dunno. I was just reflecting on the season and what may come and I have this sinking feeling we aren't going to do much, other than a single trade.

                            I'm in line with Bball's thinking. Historically,we tend to have a wait and see attitude, even when the warning signs are all around us. We won't do jack.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Re: Who says "blowing a team up" is a bad thing?

                              IF we dont change this year and have another bad season then I could bet money that Bird will say the same and just give them another chance or few tweaks.

                              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.

                              I dont think MAJOR changes are needed. Just clever ones.

                              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.

                              Nazr/Harrison
                              JO/Cro
                              Peja/Danny
                              ??/AJ
                              A.Miller/Saras
                              My Dream Team

                              PG - A.Iverson
                              SG - K.Bryant
                              SF - R.Artest
                              PF - J.O'Neal
                              C - D.Howard

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X