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

Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

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

  • Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

    It can be your favorites or who you want to see get more playing time or who is playing the best. IT DOESN'T MATTER Just Rank'em: I'll go first

    A.J.
    Hansbrough
    Solomon Jones
    Granger
    Hibbert
    Rush
    McRoberts
    Dahntay
    Foster
    Luther
    Diener
    Watson
    Dunleavy
    Ford
    Murphy

  • #2
    Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

    Dunleavy
    Hans-Bro
    Foster
    D. Jones
    Granger
    Hibbert
    Head
    Watson
    Diener
    McRoberts
    Price
    Solo
    Rush
    Ford
    Murphy
    Last edited by jhondog28; 12-10-2009, 07:50 PM. Reason: forgot 2
    JOB is a silly man

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

      So, you're talking this current roster? Not all time?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

        Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
        So, you're talking this current roster? Not all time?
        What gave you that idea?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

          Price
          Hans
          Dunleavy
          Dahntay
          Danny
          Roy
          Foster
          Rush
          Watson
          Solo
          Luther
          McRoberts
          Diener
          Ford
          Murphy

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

            I am gonna rank my favorite current Pacers players ,as far as who I enjoy watching the most ,whom I am endeared to the most, whom I get pumped up for the most seeing them do good on the court when they are getting minutes..

            I also kinda put them in order of who I'd LEAST like to see leave the Pacers.
            So it's all the above rolled into 1 .. lol


            Hibbert
            Granger
            Dunleavy
            HansBrough
            Diener
            Rush
            McRoberts
            D. Jones
            Foster
            Watson
            Price
            Solo
            Murphy
            Head
            Ford


            The reason I have Price so low, is because I haven't seen him play to really get on the aj price bandwagon yet , but I definitely see promise.

            And Solo , I DO like Solo, but I am not really endeared to him enough yet to have him any higher on the list.. Same with Watson..
            I have McBob high on the list, well cause frankly I really like the kid , and wanna see him stick around and develop into his potential.

            Diener... well I have liked the kid since his days at Marquette , and I ride the Dienremobile loud and proud.. LOLZ I think he could run our offense better and more efficient than anyone we have at pg position. That's not taking anything away from Price , cause he could be our future, but we probably will never find out untill JOB's tenure is done in Indiana... same goes with McBob on the last part...

            .
            .

            Don't get me wrong I LIKE Murphy when he is playing very well and playing hard like he was last year.. but he really needs does NOT need to be a starter , especially with his current play this season.. It's like he totally became useless AND worthless in a short span of time..
            .
            I hope he either proves us wrong, or get's traded to a team who could use him , so our youth can take his minutes..

            As far as Head .. I like what I've seen so far, but since his minutes are so limited, he seems to chuck alot more than if he had more rounded minutes in a rotation.. I am still undecided on him, but willing to give him the benifit of the doubt and a chance..
            .
            Last edited by Kemo; 12-10-2009, 08:15 PM.
            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

              Originally posted by WetBob View Post
              What gave you that idea?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                1) D. Jones
                2) Hibbert
                3) Foster
                4) Granger
                5) Hansbrough
                6) Dunleavy
                7) Diener
                8) Head
                9) McRoberts
                10) Price
                11) Rush
                12) Watson
                13) Ford
                14) S. Jones
                15) Murphy
                I like players that work hard, hustle, and show enthusiasm. I hate mediocre veterans with high salaries who make the team worse and have never won anything to back it up.

                I want Murphy and Ford taken down to third string. Diener should see a lot more time...he's good and has a great attitude. Rush has potential to move up my list. I like the guy, but am frustrated with him now.
                Last edited by pacers_heath; 12-11-2009, 01:14 AM.
                Lifelong pacers fan

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                  I'll bite.

                  Granger
                  Hibbert
                  Hansbrough
                  Rush
                  Dahntay
                  A.J.
                  Foster
                  Dunleavy
                  Watson
                  Luther
                  McRoberts
                  Solomon Jones
                  Diener
                  Ford
                  the towel guy
                  the water guy
                  the trainers
                  Dick Harter
                  Murphy

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                    I'll bite.

                    Granger
                    Hibbert
                    Hansbrough
                    Rush
                    Dahntay
                    A.J.
                    Foster
                    Dunleavy
                    Watson
                    Luther
                    McRoberts
                    Solomon Jones
                    Diener
                    Ford
                    the towel guy
                    the water guy
                    the trainers
                    Dick Harter
                    Murphy
                    Now that's funny right there.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                      Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                      I'll bite.

                      Granger
                      Hibbert
                      Hansbrough
                      Rush
                      Dahntay
                      A.J.
                      Foster
                      Dunleavy
                      Watson
                      Luther
                      McRoberts
                      Solomon Jones
                      Diener
                      Ford
                      the towel guy
                      the water guy
                      the trainers
                      Dick Harter
                      Murphy
                      So you are ranking your based on productiveness.
                      JOB is a silly man

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                        D. Jones (easily my favorite pacer to root for besides reggie miller, all time)
                        Dunleavy (His Bball IQ is a thing of beauty)
                        Hansbrough
                        Hibbert
                        Granger
                        Foster
                        Price
                        WAtson
                        Head
                        Solomon Jones
                        Brandon Rush


                        Anyone not on this list is not relevant in my world.
                        *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                          Why not?

                          Granger
                          Hibbert
                          Diener
                          Dunleavy
                          Foster
                          Rush
                          Dahntay
                          McRoberts
                          Hansbrough
                          Murphy
                          Price
                          Watson
                          Ford
                          Head
                          Solomon Jones (I just don't know anything about him and haven't seen him play enough)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                            Foster
                            Hibbert
                            Hansbrough
                            Granger
                            Rush
                            McRoberts
                            Diener
                            Dunleavy
                            Murphy
                            S.Jones
                            D.Jones
                            Ford
                            Watson
                            Head

                            Those are the guys I want to see...based on who I like most!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Rank your Pacers, no explanations needed

                              So pretty much the majority of us want to see Diener play a more prominent role at pg when he comes back...

                              I can only hope and pray ..

                              I think his playmaking, ballhandling, passing and overall BB IQ could REALLY REALLY help this team with the likes of Granger, Dunleavy , D.Jones and Hibbert on the floor at the same time..
                              "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X