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

Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

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

  • #76
    Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    I agree, but the FO clearly pissed David off to the point where he's shut them completely out of his circle. Very unprofessional, and I can't see him doing it just to do it.
    You are assuming too much. For all we know the reports are all false. Maybe West didn't want it to get out and just hasn't been able to contact the team (the draft is one of the busiest day of the year for teams). Maybe he is still deciding but is leaning towards opting out, then someone jumped the gun leaking he is opting out. We don't know what is going on behind closed doors. We only know someone (we have no idea who) told Candace he isn't coming back, then a bunch of other news people took that and ran with it. As far as New York goes, it is New York I never take any rumors about New York seriously.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

      Like I've said many times before, Pacers need to hire me as gm. I know how to build a championship team

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

        Past year all I hear from a lot of the board is "We're not young enough!" "We need potential!" We go out and draft a 19 year old who is still growing into his body, has a bit of a face up game, is already a very good shot blocker and one of the best per minute rebounders and now it is a lot of gnashing of teeth.

        Let's look at the other three guys people wanted us to consider there Payne, Booker, and Lyles.

        1.) Payne: Not a whole lot of potential here past being a good scoring point guard in the PnR. Solid granted, but I think you can find guys like this around the league. I like Payne, but I'm not crying about missing on him.

        2.) Lyles: Young, but his game seems to scream that he will always bee good at most things, but a master of nothing.

        3.) Booker: Obviously he became the PD darling leading up to the draft even though most of you probably didn't know who he was before TBird did his write up. I liked him a lot with UK, but really for one reason, he was the only UK guard who managed to be EFFICIENT in that system. He's young too and has some potential, but IMHO, not as much as Myles. Booker's floor is much higher than Myles though.


        So there are the 3 other options. Larry went with the guy that IMO you would have to say, regardless of how you feel about the rest of his game, has the highest upside. The last time Larry made that sort of decision it worked out pretty well for us.

        When WCS went off the board at 6, it started to become pretty clear that the top 10 was going to go "chalk" so to speak. We weren't going to have someone from that top 10 drop to us. So Larry went for the guy with the most potential to eventually break deep into that group. I don't know that Turner will do it, but I see the logic behind the pick.

        I'm happy with what Bird has done. back to back ECF's and I think we would have been in a 3rd this year if not for Paul's horrific injury. Yes, the team is going through some changes right now, but I think Larry has earned the right to helm those changes. There are still 4 months left in this offseason. The Pacers have cap room, and until we know differently are still anchored by Paul George, George Hill and Roy Hibbert and IMO that's a top 4 team in the East even if we did nothing else the rest of this offseason other than re-sign Stuckey and Scola, but something tells me Larry has something more than that up his sleeve.


        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

          Most upside = has the most he needs to improve upon.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            Honestly, I'm on the fence right now.

            I wanna hear what happened between Larry and David for David to completely shut out the Pacers about this offseason. That seems like the opposite type of thing David would do, so it makes me think he's pissed off about something. Going from the Pacers to the Knicks, for less money, and complete silence towards the Pacers about this decision? Something went down privately.
            Dave's his own dude. If he chooses to go to the Knicks, then that fact is just reinforced.


            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
              Most upside = has the most he needs to improve upon.
              No, it means he has the highest ceiling.

              Booker has the most NBA ready skill of that group, his shooting, but even he has a laundry list of things to get better at, like any teenager that is coming into the NBA.
              Last edited by Trader Joe; 06-26-2015, 10:39 AM.


              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                Something a lot of people aren't talking about BTW, is that Joseph Young was a really savvy second round pick. Some people thought he would go late first round. The guy is going to stick with us.


                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                  [QUOTE=Really?;2012144][QUOTE=Justin Tyme;2012127]

                  What is an exciting pick for you? /QUOTE]


                  DANNY GRANGER, PAUL GEORGE, KAWHI LEONARD, and could have been about Payne or Booker.

                  I don't want to hear the company line about Turner was the player the Pacers wanted all along tripe. I gather he is a player Bird liked, but keep the sales job. Just how many years Mr. Bird b4 Turner starts earning his salary... 3, 4, 5?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                    Tell me what his ceiling is and what he'll be able to do to reach that ceiling, since you're so convinced of it.

                    Stand behind the pick, instead of ad hominem justification of it.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                      You know who had the highest ceiling? Gerald Green, if he'd just learned how to play.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                        Has there been a pick by Bird that was mostly panned by the fanbase that turned out well? I know most of us were happy with the Granger and PG picks, but it feels like when Bird's pick was at odds with most of the fanbase, the fans were right far more often than not.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          I've watched tape on the guy. A lot more since we drafted him just so I could know what I'm talking about. The stats simply justify the things that I see. I disagree about his shooting touch, he's got a good stroke. It's no coincidence that he's a good FT shooter as well. Is he Steph Curry? No, but he doesn't need to be. A 19 year old who can already consistently hit open mid range jumpers is someone who can develop.

                          I also disagree about his rebounding. He's got over a 9 inch standing reach and utilizes it when rebounding. That length is still pretty darn good in the NBA. Yes he does need to work on boxing out, but I think that has more to do with strength than it does anything else. This is why he's not a good offensive rebounder.

                          You choose to see a 19 year old that was inconsistent last year, and think that he won't be any good. I choose to see a 19 year old that was inconsistent, but has two or three skills (shooting, defensive rebounding and shot blocking) that I believe will transfer well with experience and added strength.



                          Barnes had him camp out on the perimeter as a quasi stretch-4 quite a bit.
                          Simply for me, there is potential there but I don't think he will reach it, lateral quickness won't improve enough, he not only doesn't box out well, but he gets bad positioning on offensive and defensive rebounds, he does not play aggressive as a big. He does have god form shooting form, and hopefully he can improve his hip situation with the prescribed exercises he is supposed to do every day.

                          I wish the best for the kid, but I really don't see him turning into more than just a back up center who can block shots occasionally.
                          Why so SERIOUS

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                            [QUOTE=Justin Tyme;2012176][QUOTE=Really?;2012144]
                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post

                            What is an exciting pick for you? /QUOTE]


                            DANNY GRANGER, PAUL GEORGE, KAWHI LEONARD, and could have been about Payne or Booker.

                            I don't want to hear the company line about Turner was the player the Pacers wanted all along tripe. I gather he is a player Bird liked, but keep the sales job. Just how many years Mr. Bird b4 Turner starts earning his salary... 3, 4, 5?
                            I am not a Turner fan, as you can tell by my many post, I just meant what makes a pick exciting for you, sorry I did not phrase that correctly.
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                              Originally posted by Shade View Post
                              Has there been a pick by Bird that was mostly panned by the fanbase that turned out well? I know most of us were happy with the Granger and PG picks, but it feels like when Bird's pick was at odds with most of the fanbase, the fans were right far more often than not.
                              Plumblee maybe, he ended up bing solid for where he was drafted, although we traded him away...
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Do you still have faith in Larry Bird to run this franchise?

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                Something a lot of people aren't talking about BTW, is that Joseph Young was a really savvy second round pick. Some people thought he would go late first round. The guy is going to stick with us.
                                They are in the Joseph Young thread, think the bigger issues is hitting the high picks, rather than getting good role players in the 2nd round.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X