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

Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

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

  • Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

    Jack is laying low. Understandable....
    Donnie and Larry are still not talking. Frustrating but, ok...
    The line right now is ' We are just happy Stephen is ok.' Shows support, love, understanding but, also...?
    Put 'em all together and it COULD be that a move is being constructed.

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

    Doubt it.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

      I doubt it, too. I've never believed that Jackson was untradable, and I believe the reason he wasn't traded during the summer was that Bird and Wlash didn't want to trade him.

      They won't trade him now. It's his world.
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

        There's no such thing as an untradable player. There is short-sighted management tho.

        -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


        • #5
          Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

          Since anything is possible, it could be the case, however, history tells
          us this will probably not be.

          I know the Jax haters out there would like that, and it would open up
          minutes for guys like White to get out there and develop.

          But it seems the TPTB, the players, and many fans are rallying around Jax.

          TPTB are keeping quiet as they usually do, so nothing different there.

          I know if I were Jax, I'd be laying low too, not because I was scared or
          about to be traded, but because I would still be sore as hell after getting
          rolled over the top of a car.

          You may be looking a little too closely into these "signs", but other than
          TPTD, who really knows?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

            No. I'm sure Jackson might be a little more scratched up than thought. There is no doubt it was a PR move as well.
            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

              Possible? Yes.

              Probable? No.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                Regardless of the fact that I began this thread, I would tend to agree that it's not true. There has indeed been a lot of support for Jack from all sorts of places. Over all, it seems that the TPTB want people to see this as an unfortunate situation that the Pacers were on the recieving end of.
                As they say, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
                But what about Larry bird? What about his stand against nonsense and bad judgements at last seasons end? After telling the fans that he was getting more involved in discipline and then giving Carlisle more power in disciplinary matters, how great is his need to NOT have egg on his face?

                Also, how much does this situation, to TPTB, smack of the second burn by RonRon?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                  Originally posted by Smooth_for_Pres. View Post
                  But what about Larry bird? What about his stand against nonsense and bad judgements at last seasons end? After telling the fans that he was getting more involved in discipline and then giving Carlisle more power in disciplinary matters, how great is his need to NOT have egg on his face?

                  Also, how much does this situation, to TPTB, smack of the second burn by RonRon?
                  There's a paradigm shift underway right now in Pacer Nation. The smartest thing TPTB can do is to stay quiet as long as they can, and then when they start talking again, to say, "....as I was saying," and try to make it sound as if they have been in control all along.
                  And I won't be here to see the day
                  It all dries up and blows away
                  I'd hang around just to see
                  But they never had much use for me
                  In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                    I think he's always been on the trading block, but no one is offering a trade that the Pacers think is worth it.

                    And for everyone who says the Pacers should just get rid of Jax and it doesn't matter if they get nothing in return aren't you the same people who complain that in essence the Pacers didn't get anything in return for Artest?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                      Originally posted by grace View Post
                      I think he's always been on the trading block, but no one is offering a trade that the Pacers think is worth it.

                      And for everyone who says the Pacers should just get rid of Jax and it doesn't matter if they get nothing in return aren't you the same people who complain that in essence the Pacers didn't get anything in return for Artest?
                      I dunno about that - I thought the Pacers would be better served for giving Artest away for a bag of chips and I think the same's probably true for Jackson.

                      Different reasons though - I thought Artest was tearing apart the team and was a ticking bomb that would go off again at some point - still do.

                      I don't see Jackson as the divisive element within the team that others do. In this case management has to do it for two reasons - first to retain any credibility that they mean what they've been saying all summer and second, to not lose a bunch of fans. Those two are related.

                      Personally, what I'd do if I was management is put some trade feelers out there but hang on for a bit unless a good offer comes along. In a couple of weeks, once this has died down, hire someone to do a survey of likely Pacer fans to try to find out what the impact of keeping vs trading Jackson may do to ticket sales. If they find little or no impact, keep him unless a good deal comes along. If they find that they'll take a big hit from the fan base (which I expect is what they'd find), ditch him, for scraps if need be.

                      Simple business decision on this one IMO.
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                        Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                        No. I'm sure Jackson might be a little more scratched up than thought. There is no doubt it was a PR move as well.
                        Only a PR move since he did work out and Edwards was at the Fan Jam doing nothing himself. If he was injured by a drunk driver as he walked home from church you would have seen him at FanJam (in his current condition I mean, not more injured).

                        But its a smart, understandable decision to at least hold him back from public reception for more than a few days after the incident. They probably want to get in at least one game in front of the home crowd before bringing him back. I would think that his first pre-season game would have to come on the road so fans can get the image of him on-court back in their heads. That should tone down some of the negative reception he gets in that first Conseco game.

                        And if he puts up some productive efforts you will see a lot of fans move past it.

                        do a survey of likely Pacer fans to try to find out what the impact of keeping vs trading Jackson may do to ticket sales.
                        Worthless numbers. A lot of people will SAY they will buy tickets if Jack was gone, but that doesn't put money in the bank after you trade him and they decide that the reason they haven't been going is that it's just too expensive. There is only one survey they need - actual sales. He'll be playing and they will see the ticket sales. If they go up, if they track along with the win total, then you don't have an issue.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          But its a smart, understandable decision to at least hold him back from public reception for more than a few days after the incident. They probably want to get in at least one game in front of the home crowd before bringing him back.

                          Good point...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Worthless numbers. A lot of people will SAY they will buy tickets if Jack was gone, but that doesn't put money in the bank after you trade him and they decide that the reason they haven't been going is that it's just too expensive. There is only one survey they need - actual sales. He'll be playing and they will see the ticket sales. If they go up, if they track along with the win total, then you don't have an issue.
                            Worthless comment.

                            Marketing surveys are conducted so extensively for one reason - they are an accurate predictor of consumer buying patterns. This one would be too if the Pacers hired a Marketing Research firm to conduct it.

                            Of course they may already have done that. The whole, "It's up to us" image-changing marketing campaign may be because some professionals already told them they need to change the team's image to retain fan support. If that's the case then Jackson may have already written his own ticket out of here.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Official Stephen Jackson Conspiracy Thread

                              The idea is plausible, but who's to say?

                              Bird and Walsh are feeling the heat on this, as they should. In the end though, these players got a wake up call, and it's highly unlikely they'll feel complacent enough to do something like this again.

                              Best thing imo, is for the franchise to count its losses, and move forward with Jackson. I'm pretty disgusted the whole thing happened because I like Jackson, but it happened, so there's no need for the TPTB to do anything rash just to move him along. They should just tell him that he's got one more chance, and if he blows it, they'll sideline him like they did with Artest until a trade is made.

                              I think this was the kick he needed (I hope)!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X