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

Pacers Have High Hopes in East

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

    Originally posted by ejwallace View Post
    Wait a minute.....Where's Foster at??? Watching him play, I say he still has a good 2 to 3 years.....Then it's off to the front office for him.....
    I expect Jeff to retire at the end of this season to one of the biggest ovations in franchise history.
    You Got The Tony!!!!!!


    • #17
      Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      I think some of you need to embrace that Paul & Danny are a team and stop trying to push Danny out the door to elevate Paul George into Kevin Durrant.

      Why mess with what is working. Sounds to me like Danny is embracing his role on the team and enjoying the success of the club over the individual success he once had.

      I keep coming off as a Danny Granger fan boy, believe me there are things to criticize. But some of this over the top "we've gotta get rid of this guy" stuff is just to much.

      I swear the same people who bash Danny Granger are probably the first people to line up to praise Reggie Miller not realizing how similar the two are.

      I have seen every game Danny Granger has played in as a pro & I saw the vast majority of games Reggie Miller played in and I'm telling you at this point in their career's you guys would have been wanting to dump Miller as well. Every complaint you have about Danny you would have had about Reggie except one small thing. Danny actually can defend when he wants to, Reggie had to work just to be an average defender and that was only after years of not caring about it.
      And to further Peck's point, Reggie only had the excuse of briefly having to play for Irvine and Versace, while Danny had to toil under coach satan... his game is currently undergoing a basketball exorcism, so give the guy a brake (and your prayers!)
      "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

      Bob Netolicky


      • #18
        Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

        Originally posted by purdue101 View Post
        We have more than enough money to keep the core together (assuming we don't splurge in FA). Our cap next year is at $34M, but remember, we can go up to $70M (luxury tax) to keep our own players via bird rights. Worst case, Hibbert and Hill will get $18M/year max next year ($12M & $6M respectively). That puts us at $52M worst case scenario next year between our core players (Granger, West, Hibbert, Hill, Hans, Collison, & PG).

        When Hans and Collison are up the following summer, West & Dahntay are coming off the books at $13M in addition to the $5M from Hans and Collison. Assuming West is still productive, I view all 3 of those players as $6-7M/year players. So it's essentially a wash from where West, Hans, and Collison were at before, just reallocating the dollars, primarily the $10M West was getting

        PG is up the next year, however Danny's $14M comes off the books in addition to PG's $3M. No way Danny will sniff $14M/year. Maybe $9M/year max. Let's just assume PG is maxed at $15M/year.

        PG - $15M
        Hibbert - $12M
        Danny - $9M
        Hans -$7M
        West - $6M
        Collison - $6M
        Hill - $6M

        Total = $61M. We still have $9-10M under the LT to round out the roster with minimum salary players (7-8 players). Keep in mind, these are all very high end estimates for every player.

        Bird and Morway have done an excellent job staggering the expiration of our large contracts with extensions for the young guys, so we will never get pinched into the LT for a single season.
        I see Collison and Hill making more than $6mil a year, but thats me.


        • #19
          Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

          Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
          I expect Jeff to retire at the end of this season to one of the biggest ovations in franchise history.

          And I will do my best to not cry my eyes out like a little baby.


          • #20
            Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

            Hansbrough has generated zero assists while attacking the basket and the boards relentlessly.

            "The other nine guys on the court start to play harder as soon as he walks on the court,''
            There's Tyler's "assists" right there.


            • #21
              Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

              Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
              Keep shooting 30% from the field and it won't be to hard to take care of the future extensions after they trade your butt Danny Boy.
              haha was pretty funny when i read that.


              • #22
                Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

                Originally posted by pacers74 View Post
                I hope we can keep our core 8 players together for the next 4 years, but those numbers purdue101 put upper are pretty conservative. I see Collison getting at least 10mil per year, Hill closer to 9mil, and if we don't someone will pay 10mil for Tyler.
                If Tyler gets $10M per season than he will have to be tearing it up (I'm talking 18 & 7 minimum), in which case you give him the $10M per season, let West walk, and then sign a 10-15mpg backup for $3-4M. In that scenario, you're probably in better shape long term b/c you have a young guy putting up great numbers as opposed to splitting time/production with an older player.

                Collison & Hill will not sniff $9-10M per season unless they are vastly improved. I put them on par with Conley & Lowry when they received their extensions, which were 5-7M per year. Same with Jameer Nelson and Raymond Felton.

                I thought my projections were generous to the players, particularly PG getting $15M year, which is going to require him to be a franchise cornerstone.


                • #23
                  Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

                  Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                  Keep shooting 30% from the field and it won't be to hard to take care of the future extensions after they trade your butt Danny Boy.
                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Why would you trade Danny at his lowest? do you really think anybody is going to trade anything of value for him right now? I don't think so.
                  I was crackin a joke man, I'm sure Danny will find his stroke and he won't have to be nervous!
                  Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL


                  • #24
                    Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

                    I think if we make a deep playoff run this year and the next, with Collison proving to be a good floor general, he may get up to $7-8M per season even if his numbers don't vastly improve. Rondo started at $9M per year and he won a title and is much better than Collison.

                    Hill is somewhat cornered b/c his extension is this summer. He would have to suddently start averaging 15+ ppg to get more than $5-7M/year. Unless there is an injury, I don't see that happening. #1 bench guards that average 9-12ppg typically get $5-6M/year (Korver, Jared Dudley, Redick, Lou Williams, Jack, etc).


                    • #25
                      Re: Pacers Have High Hopes in East

                      very generous purdue, the idea Tyler would get 10 per would mean he grows to the quality of David West aka an All Star forward who play BOTH ENDS of the floor.

                      Tyler if he stays as he is, and there is little reason to assume he will make big leaps is 5 or 6 per tops.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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