The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

Rule #1

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

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

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

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

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

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #2

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

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

The right places to do so are:

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

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

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

Rule #3

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #4

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

Rule #5

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

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

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

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

Rule #7

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

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

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

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

Rule #8

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

Rule #9

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

Rule #10

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

Rule #11

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

Don't blame Danny...

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Don't blame Danny...

    for being the best player on this team, but not being one of the best players in the NBA.

    It is not his fault that there is not a player on the roster who's better than him. It's not even Bird's fault. When have we had the opportunity to acquire a better player than Granger?

    While we're at it, let's stop talking about his $60 million contract like it means he should be Kobe. Danny gets paid like a 2nd banana does on a really good team. How many 2nd bananas are consistently asked to win games for their team? He makes less than Rashard Lewis, Pau Gasol, Vince Carter, Jason Richardson, and Andrew Bynum to name a few. None of those guys are expected to carry their teams anywhere.

    Also, let's throw out the concept of a "franchise" player. It's useless especially if you somehow create it with the ability to get your own shot during crunch time. I guess Jameer Nelson is Orlando's franchise player. If that's your criterion, I guess TJ Ford is ours. It's not like there's a guy on the roster who does a better job of getting their own shot against tough defense.

    I'll say it again, don't blame Granger. I've never been a huge fan of his, but I like him as player. I like what I've seen this season more than I've ever liked what I've seen in the past. Over the past 3 games he's pretty much locked down 3 20+ ppg scorers: Joe Johnson, Eric Gordon, and Vince Carter. He's showing a commitment on the defensive end. He's not breaking the offense and looking for his own shot, and he's passing more effectively than at any other point in his career.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  • #2
    Re: Don't blame Danny...

    I love Granger, love what he brings to the table

    His only weakness in my opinion, is his inability to break people down off the dribble. Granger can sometimes get his own shot off, but when we are down by a point with the clock down to 5 seconds, we have really no one who can take his man off the dribble , strong to the hole. Danny will usually get that last shot opportunity, but its a jab step followed by a long jumper
    Sittin on top of the world!


    • #3
      Re: Don't blame Danny...

      Let's also not act like Granger's contract is some sweetheart deal for the Pacers.

      It's probably fair compensation, but it isn't like he did us any huge favors by signing that contract.


      • #4
        Re: Don't blame Danny...

        Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
        Let's also not act like Granger's contract is some sweetheart deal for the Pacers.

        It's probably fair compensation, but it isn't like he did us any huge favors by signing that contract.
        I disagree

        I think he could have definitley gotten a max contract from a few different teams, very simmlar to the JO situation
        Sittin on top of the world!


        • #5
          Re: Don't blame Danny...

          Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
          Let's also not act like Granger's contract is some sweetheart deal for the Pacers.

          It's probably fair compensation, but it isn't like he did us any huge favors by signing that contract.
          ITs a lot harder to get fair compensation in the NBA with your star player. Just ask the Hornets with Peja or the Hawks with Joe Johnson or Baron Davis with the Clippers or the Pistons with Ben Gordon or Jamison when he was with the Wizards, etc etc....

          Edit: I bet I could point out more teams that over paid for a star player than you could come up those teams that didn't.
          Last edited by Gamble1; 11-22-2010, 02:19 PM.


          • #6
            Re: Don't blame Danny...

            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
            I disagree

            I think he could have definitley gotten a max contract from a few different teams, very simmlar to the JO situation
            I really, really don't think so.


            • #7
              Re: Don't blame Danny...

              I don't know about max, but it was smart for us to give that extension before he became a restricted FA. We did it based on his play till 2008. If he became a FA after 2009 season when he was playing like an All Star... I think it's fair to assume there would have been quite a few buyers.

              Who were top free agents during summer 2009 anyway? Shawn Marion, Hedo Turkoglu, Ron Artest, Allen Iverson... who else? Kobe, Nash resigned with their own teams, Boozer took his option, so there was quite a few mediocre players getting overpayed. Danny would have been the top of the FA class.

              Max or not max, we would have payed much more to match his contract.


              • #8
                Re: Don't blame Danny...

                It's all relative. Granger could go out and drop 30+ on Lebron tonight (as he has in the past) and people would give him some credit, but then get right back on him after the next loss. It comes with the territory Danny is in and will probably keep coming at him until the Pacers are consistent winners.


                • #9
                  Re: Don't blame Danny...

                  idk...based on value to this team, i'd argue hibbert is far more valuable right now. but does hibbert's value make him a better player than danny? or is hibbert's value more of a product of the pacers lacking a solid back-up post presence?


                  • #10
                    Re: Don't blame Danny...

                    There isn't a team in the NBA who'd sign Granger to the max.


                    • #11
                      Re: Don't blame Danny...

                      Joe Johnson got the max (highest payed player in the league IIRC, as did rudy gay (who has looked great this year, but was coming off a year where he certainly didn't earn it.)

                      Granger could very well get the max depending on the situation.
                      Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".


                      • #12
                        Re: Don't blame Danny...

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        I really, really don't think so.
                        After the Joe Johnson max I think its really plausible that Danny could have gotten a max with another team. I know they are different players but just looking at their stats in 08-09 Danny had more points and a better 3pnt percentage. In his career he is as good as Joe Johnson when it comes to shooting. I am not saying they deserve a max but that other teams are stupid enough to offer it.


                        • #13
                          Re: Don't blame Danny...

                          I agree totally mellifluous.

                          It's still a very strange phenomenon to me how people's opinions seem to change from game to game. I don't know if it's just this forum or if it's the same from other team's fans as well, but when we win we're world-beaters and when we lose we need to take apart the whole team.

                          I think Danny's really stepped-up his game this year. He's still scoring the ball (and at a better percentage than last year mind you), but his defense is also much improved.

                          Look, I certainly don't want to make this into a fire-the-coach thread. For me though, much of the problem lies with Obie. It's not ALL him, but I think most of the players would look better in a more traditional offense. I think Collison would certainly be better with someone else coaching. When he's able to play his game, it really opens up the offense for everyone else.

                          I'm personally quite happy with how Danny's performed this year. I think we just need a different playing-style/system and another guy to help out Danny. Hibbert's coming along nicely, we just need one other consistent scorer.

                          Free agency next year, or trade deadline this year...


                          • #14
                            Re: Don't blame Danny...

                            Originally posted by Dece View Post
                            There isn't a team in the NBA who'd sign Granger to the max.
                            I am sorry but I dont know how on God's green earth you can make that assessment
                            Sittin on top of the world!


                            • #15
                              Re: Don't blame Danny...

                              Yeah with organizations like the Clippers and T Wolves you can't say nobody would sign him to the max, you can say that a winning organization would not sign Danny to the max...because he is not a max player.
                              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.