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

Pacers rotation should be - will be

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

  • Pacers rotation should be - will be

    If you are like me you are sick of discussing White being cut.

    So I thought I'd start a thread about player rotations. This usually get a lot of response.

    I'd like to discuss what you think it will be and then also tell us what you would like it to be - but please be reasonable. Make it something that has a possiblity of happening.

    1) What I think it will be at least the first week or so of the season.

    Starters:
    JO
    Al
    Granger
    Jax
    Tinsley

    First players off the bench

    Marquis Daniels
    Foster
    Saras
    Harrison


    Here is what I'd like it to be.

    JO
    Al
    Granger
    Marquis
    Tinsley

    First players off the bench

    Foster
    Jax
    Greene
    Armstrong
    Harrison or Powell depending on size of opposing center


    I know that doesn't really make a lot of sense, but my mind is not very clear with all the White discussion. I'd like harrison to be a spot player splitting those 10-15 minutes per game with Powell

  • #2
    Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

    Will be:

    Tinsley/SJax/Granger/Harrington/JO

    with Saras, Marquis and Foster playing most of the bench minutes.

    Should be:

    Tinsley/Daniels/Granger/JO/Harrison

    with Armstrong, Harrington, and Powell playing most of the bench minutes.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

      They won't start Marquis cuz TPTB doesn't have the balls. They fear a whiny Jackson. ("Well, Okay then!")

      I like Sarunas off the bench until he proves he is not worthy. If so, I do like Greene.

      I would like to see some solid minutes early on for Powell. Will his outside shot open things up for JO?
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

        Starters:
        - O'Neal
        - Harrington
        - Granger
        - Daniels
        - Tinsley
        6th Man: Jackson
        - Foster
        - Saras
        - Powell, David, or Baston. Whoever is better.

        I'd love to see Marshall play but I don't see much room for him at the moment unless a trade, or injury occurs to one of the other swingmen.

        I'll let Saras begin the season as the backup with Greene still injured I believe but i'd make it well known to Saras that he is auditioning for the job because IMO to this point OG is the better player.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

          If and when we see a lineup of:

          Armstrong
          Greene
          Marquis
          Granger
          Harrington or JO

          I might get so excited I might pee my pants. No not a starting lineup, but that lineup with those three perimeter players will be fun to watch, the defense would be outstanding and any of the three can start the fastbreak.

          I hope we see that lineup quite a bit. Maybe replace JO or Al with Jeff even for a free wheeling halfcourt offense.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

            The expected stating line-up of:

            Tinsley
            Jackson
            Granger
            Harrington
            O'Neal

            Probably won't last through November. Then it will be a clutter of different starting line-ups, including as many players playing out of their natural positions as possible.


            What I'd like to see is this...


            Front line:

            O'Neal, Harrington and Granger each starting and playing 35 minutes
            Foster, Powell and Baston getting most of the remaining 39 minutes
            Harrison and Williams not in the rotation

            Guard positions:

            Jackson and Daniels sharing 48 minutes at the shooting guard, but more minutes will go to the guy who performs better and isn't in jail.


            Point guard:

            Tinsley starts and plays 25-30 minutes.
            Armstrong and Greene get the remaining 18-23 minutes.
            Sarunas plays himself back into the rotation when Tinsley needs a break.
            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


            • #7
              Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

              My projected lineup

              Tinsley
              Jackson
              Harrington
              O'Neal
              Foster

              with Granger, Daniels, Saras, and Harrison getting most bench minutes.


              I'm not sure what lineup I would prefer, but I'd say

              Tinsley
              Jackson
              Granger
              Harrington
              O'Neal

              with Daniels, Saras, Harrison, and Powell off the bench.


              I'd like to also experiment with

              Tinsley
              Jackson
              Harrington
              Powell
              O'Neal

              with Granger, Daniels, SarJas, and Harrison getting bench minutes.


              I'm completely curious with the last lineup. I think it would make for a tough and fluid starting lineup with lots of power off the bench.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                Here are my expected starters

                Sarunas
                Quiz
                Danger
                Harrington
                Foster

                bench minutes to Baston, Armstrong, Marshall, Powell and Harrison

                on the inactive list I put Tinsley, Jackson and JO.
                Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  They won't start Marquis cuz TPTB doesn't have the balls. They fear a whiny Jackson. ("Well, Okay then!")

                  I like Sarunas off the bench until he proves he is not worthy. If so, I do like Greene.

                  I would like to see some solid minutes early on for Powell. Will his outside shot open things up for JO?
                  I know alot of people minds are clouded by jackson hate;however,How can you justify letting Daniels start when he has baely had any playing time to this point? I mean damn can't you even accept the idea of someone earning a starting spot. Your bais makex the legitamacy of your posts suffer

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                    I believe Carlisle will start

                    Foster
                    JO
                    Al
                    Jax
                    Tinsley

                    and off the bench you'll have Granger coming in for either JO or Al (whoever is in foul trouble first), and you'll see Marquis and Saras playing together quite a bit, since Marquis can help Saras get the ball up the floor when he's struggling against say, Lindsey Hunter or another defensive-minded backup PG. Granger also can assist with ball handling duties more than Al can. When Tinsley's in the game, you won't see many who give him trouble getting the ball up the floor.

                    I can say that I would like to see this as our starting lineup as well, because if Granger and Daniels are the first two off the bench, you know that your second unit is going to have some scoring punch. If Foster is the first man off the bench, that isn't so much the case.

                    I think at the end of the game, you're going to see a lineup of

                    JO
                    Al
                    Granger
                    Quis
                    Greene

                    quite a bit after Greene gets healthy...mainly because defensive pressure on the opponets PG is key at the end of games.
                    Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                      I expect this to be the opening lineup to start the season.

                      JO
                      Al
                      Granger
                      Jax
                      Tinsley

                      However I expect Jeff to replace Granger when we open big.

                      As for who I want to start, I don't care who starts, I care who finishes.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                        Will be:

                        Tinsley/SJax/Granger/Harrington/JO

                        with Saras, Marquis and Foster playing most of the bench minutes.

                        Should be:

                        Tinsley/Daniels/Granger/JO/Harrison

                        with Armstrong, Harrington, and Powell playing most of the bench minutes.
                        Why in the hell would we start David Harrison? What has he shown that he deserves to start? He was horrible during the pre season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                          Originally posted by Saruniac View Post
                          Here are my expected starters

                          Sarunas
                          Quiz
                          Danger
                          Harrington
                          Foster

                          bench minutes to Baston, Armstrong, Marshall, Powell and Harrison

                          on the inactive list I put Tinsley, Jackson and JO.
                          You're secretly an Oden fan, aren't you? Maybe your next alias should be Odenaniac.

                          However, your projected lineup would certainly be bad enough to get us a very high lottery pick, so if Oden is your objective, then Saras should start and Baston should be in the rotation.

                          I'm just curious how many posters here have put you on ignore yet? Its okay to be funny (or try to be). And its okay to have a favorite player. But do you really need to clutter up the board with clearly non-sensical replies like that one?

                          We get your "jab" at Jerm. Okay. As Earl would say, can we please move on now?
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                            Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                            Why in the hell would we start David Harrison? What has he shown that he deserves to start? He was horrible during the pre season.
                            I think that if Daniels moves into the starting lineup and if SJax goes to jail in either Michigan or Indiana, we're going to need more bench scoring and I'd prefer Al in that role.

                            And I still like the idea of a Danny -JO -David frontcourt.

                            Lastly, that's the best way to get Powell into the regular season rotation, IMO.

                            Clearly, all those points are debateable, but I want David on the court, and I want him on the court with JO.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers rotation should be - will be

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                              Its okay to have a favorite player. But do you really need to clutter up the board with clearly non-sensical replies like that one?
                              Wow, the last weeks this board got cluttered with all kinds of anti-Saras **** and now you tell me a Saras fan can't post an occasional positive remark about him?

                              Did you tell this also to Jermaniac who's adoration for JO is more dispicable than mine for Sarunas? Or what about the Jackson groupies?
                              Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X