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

2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

    Among the options being considered by the Toronto Raptors as they weigh the futures of team president Bryan Colangelo and coach Dwane Casey is making a run at Phil Jackson, according to sources with knowledge of Toronto's thinking.

    Now that heavyweight sports executive Tim Leiweke has been hired as the new president and CEO of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment -- the Canadian conglomerate that owns and operates the Raptors, NHL's Maple Leafs and Toronto FC in Major League Soccer -- Toronto's chances of successfully luring Jackson north of the border appear to be much more realistic.

    Sources told this week that the Raptors have interest in talking with Jackson about the Pat Riley-style role he craves in charge of a team's basketball operations. reported last week that Jackson, after nearly two seasons in retirement, is itching to return to the NBA next season, preferably in a role similar to Riley's in Miami that allows him to oversee both the basketball department and the coaching staff or perhaps as a high-level consultant such as Jerry West in Golden State.

    Leiweke is a major player in the sports industry and Jackson is very familiar with his work in Los Angeles, where Leiweke helped get the Staples Center built for the Los Angeles Lakers and Clippers as well as the NHL's Kings. Leiweke also has a longstanding working relationship with Lakers executive Jeanie Buss, Jackson's fiancee.

    Wherever Jackson ends up this summer, I think we're definitely losing B-Shaw to that team.


    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy


      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

        Lakers Star Steve Nash
        In Dogfight
        Over Child Support

        L.A. Lakers star Steve Nash thinks he has a good reason NOT to pay child support -- if he does, he thinks his ex-wife will spoil the kids with limos and other luxuries.

        Nash is locked in a legal war with Alejandra Nash over their 3 kids. She currently lives in Arizona, where a judge handled their divorce and ruled she was not entitled to child support. She's appealing the ruling and we now know what they're arguing over.

        Steve convinced the divorce judge -- Alejandra doesn't need child support because he made her a millionaire 5 times over in the divorce settlement. On top of that, she pulls in more than $30k a month.

        For her part, Alejandra says Steve makes a million bucks more than her every month, and it's unfair he's not forced to use some of it for the benefit of their kids.

        Steve is saying he's paying plenty -- 90% of medical, school and extracurricular activities, and 82% of the nanny's $2k a month salary. He says he's worried if he pays more, she's an excessive spender who will spoil and damage the kids with crazy luxuries.

        But there's more going on here. As we previously reported ... Alejandra wants to move to L.A. but Steve is objecting. It's really weird, because the b-baller has said he chose to go to the Lakers rather than the Knicks so he could be closer to his kids.

        There's one thing for sure ... if Alejandra moved to L.A., Steve would probably get socked with a big child support bill -- that's just the way it works in California.


        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

          I could not possibly care less about stuff like that. TMZ is the worst thing on the internet.


          • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

            Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
            What's he saying?


            • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

              Originally posted by Pingu View Post
              What's he saying?
              i don't know. i posted it mainly because Duncan's expression is hillarious. Reminds of this guy:


              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                Russell Westbrook underwent knee surgery today and will miss the rest of the playoffs, Thunder announce.

                Doctors repaired, as opposed to remove, Westbrook's meniscus, which requires a longer recovery time but also is a better long-term solution.


                • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                  the clippers/heat final is going to be epic.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004


                  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    the clippers/heat final is going to be epic.
                    If that is what it is, it won't be epic, it will be a mercy killing. Heat in 5 unless LeBron gets hit by a bus on the way to the arena.


                    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      the clippers/heat final is going to be epic.
                      Vinny The Black won't let Lob City get that far, don't you worry.


                      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                        Pacers Cares ‏@PacersCares 17m

                        It’s a new week for Call A Pacer presented by @StanleySecurity. Call 877-275-9007 to hear @Paul_George24 read Is Your Mama A Llama?


                        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                          Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                          I like that look on Duncan's face.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.


                          • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Vinny The Black won't let Lob City get that far, don't you worry.
                            They may not even get past the Grizzlies


                            • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                              Tom Ziller: The canon of David Kahn - A retrospective

                              Jonny Flynn. Wes Johnson. Tanguy Ngombo. Darko Milicic. David Kahn, this is your life.

                              David Kahn is reportedly done as the personnel boss for the Minnesota Timberwolves. This was supposed to be the season that the Wolves broke the league's longest active playoff drought; it did not happen for several reasons, the largest of which was a double-whammy of injuries to Kevin Love. Also, injuries to basically everyone else.

                              But that's all in the details. In the aggregate, Kahn built a team that should have been good enough to at least compete for the final playoff seed in the West and a team that also should have been way, way better than it was. And frankly, there's a lot of work to do for the next GM of the Wolves -- rumored to be Flip Saunders -- to reach the potential within the roster.

                              Kahn did some good things. He drafted Ricky Rubio despite the Spaniard's lack of comfort with Minneapolis, perilous buyout situation and total lack of jumper. It took a couple of years, but Ricky made it to the NBA, and he made it. He's quite exciting, and plenty of teams would like to have him. Kahn also signed a Kevin McHale draft pick -- Nikola Pekovic -- to a contract that really helped the Wolves not be the worst team in the league the last two seasons. Kahn's best move in the 2012 offseason was surely signing Andrei Kirilenko, who had been in Russia since the lockout, to a two-year, $20 million deal. Kirilenko could have been an All-Star if not for injury, and was the defender this team needed on the wing.

                              Kahn also somehow was possibly involved in bringing Rick Adelman aboard. Whether Kahn had anything to do with it or not, let's just say that it was the best coaching decision of Kahn's tenure.

                              But the list of things Kahn did wrong is significantly longer. The draft was not kind to Kahn. One pick after Rubio, the Wolves took Jonny Flynn. Who is already out of the NBA. In that draft, Stephen Curry went one pick later, Brandon Jennings went four picks later and Jrue Holiday, Ty Lawson and Jeff Teague went more than a dozen picks later. Kahn actually picked Lawson on behalf of the Nuggets; in return, the Wolves -- now set at PG with Rubio and Flynn -- received the pick that became Luke Babbitt, who was traded for a Martell Webster rental. Webster was waived by Kahn after two poor seasons.

                              The 2010 draft was no kinder to Kahn. He took Wesley Johnson at No. 4, in front of DeMarcus Cousins, Greg Monroe, Gordon Hayward, Paul George, Larry Sanders, Eric Bledsoe and Avery Bradley. How did Wes do in Minnesota? After two awful seasons, Kahn had to package him with a first-round pick to ship him out; Minnesota got a trio of future second-round picks in the deal. Well done!

                              The jury is still out on 2011 and beyond. Kahn took Derrick Williams, a near consensus No. 2 pick, at No. 2 in 2011 and didn't have his 2012 pick on account of an old McHale trade that's been looming for nearly a decade. (Seriously, the pick that became Austin Rivers for the Hornets last June was traded by McHale in 2005. Marko Jaric!) There was lots of other weird stuff in 2011: Kahn traded down about 2,000 times, somehow relinquishing the best international prospect available (Nikola Mirotic) in the process, and then used a late second on a 26-year-old Qatari ineligible for the draft DUE TO BEING 26 YEARS OLD.

                              The draft was but one of Kahn's problem, if you can believe it. He is responsible for Kurt Rambis' two-year reign of horror. The best part is how that whole experience ended: in the slowest, most public battle of wills ever. It seemed clear that Rambis would be fired after Sam Vincenting two seasons. But Kahn didn't do the job quickly to help everyone forget he paid Rambis gobs of money. He gave Rambis a take-home test with apparent essay questions about the future of the team. He let Rambis' fate hang in the balance all the way through draft prep season ... which allowed things like "Rambis and Kahn standing 10 feet apart, not speaking or acknowledging each other in front of 50 NBA scouts and GMs at a group workout" to happen. In the end, the Wolves canned Rambis, but had to sell draft picks to pay his buyout. Awesome!

                              The Kevin Love disaster is the single Kahntastrophe that could still screw Wolves fans into the future. In some way, Kahn lowballed Love in 2011, the offseason he was eligible for an early extension. It remains disputed exactly what happened, but essentially while Love was eligible for a five-year extension that would have kept the All-Star forward under contract through 2017, Kahn didn't offer it. Kahn wanted to maintain flexibility. Under the new collective bargaining agreement that went into effect in the 2011 offseason, teams had to choose which young rookie scale star would receive a five-year early extension, because you could only have one such contract on the books at any time. Kahn apparently wanted to save this for Rubio or maybe Wesley Johnson. (Who knows?! This is Kahn.) So he didn't offer it to Love, who was a top-10 player in the NBA. The entire NBA.

                              Understandably, Love was miffed. He eventually agreed to a four-year early extension ... but only if Kahn included an early termination option after three years. So instead of being locked up through 2017, Love can now opt out in 2015. How's that for flexibility? Love spent the following year being quoted as frustrated with Kahn, the bad job Kahn was doing and the lack of progress the team had made since he'd been drafted by McHale in 2008. No one knows if canning Kahn will brighten Love's spirits; the damage between the power forward and the franchise may have already been done. Certainly, nerves will be racked if Minnesota has another rough season, and we may start hearing about trades by the deadline (even though Love is under contract for 2014-15 as well).

                              That's all bad enough, right? We're not done...CONTINUE READING ON SBNATION.
                              This is the darkest timeline.


                              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy


                                Kobe’s mom ready to auction off his high school memorabilia

                                Would you like some Kobe Bryant Lower Merion High School memorabilia? Like an actual game-worn jersey (which if you actually try to wear you’re a fool… and probably really skinny, who can fit into their high school clothes?).

                                Kobe’s mom is about to auction things off through Golden Auctions reports Tom Hofarth at the Los Angeles Daily News.

                                The main draw will be a maroon uniform — jersey and shorts — from his freshman year when he wore No. 24. It is believed to be the only authentic game worn #24 Kobe Bryant LMHS jersey in existence. He switched to No. 33 for the rest of his high school days before going to the NBA.

                                There’s more: practice jerseys from high school, the version of his 2000 NBA championship ring he paid the Lakers to have make for his mom, his 1998 and 2000 NBA All-Star Game rings, 1996 high school state championship ring, his 1996 High School McDonald’s All American ring and even his he surfboard-shaped “Teen’s Choice” Award from Nickelodeon.

                                I know, I can’t believe he’d want to give up the Nikolodian award either.

                                My mom tried to sell off the stuff from my room after I left. I think she make $1.73.