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

Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

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

  • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    I'm not trying to hate on Monta, but of those three dudes, only one of their previous teams wanted them back...and that was David West. Cuban is a smart dude. Judging by the coaching vote we all revere Carlisle around here. Yet they didn't want Monta back. That kind of bother anyone else?
    Monta didn't want to go back to Dallas. Not the other way around. Dallas was Monta's team, and then Cuban traded for Rajon Rondo, basically stabbing Monta in the back
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
      Monta didn't want to go back to Dallas. Not the other way around. Dallas was Monta's team, and then Cuban traded for Rajon Rondo, basically stabbing Monta in the back
      That'd be like signing Andrew Bynum when you already have a capable starter and backup at C.

      Comment


      • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

        Originally posted by LG33 View Post
        That'd be like signing Andrew Bynum when you already have a capable starter and backup at C.
        Bynum was a position of need. Hibbert had already started sucking, and Bird took a gamble on a potential upgrade at that position.
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

          Pacers signed Bynum on Feb 3rd. Roy was chosen to the All Star game later that month

          Comment


          • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

            Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
            Bynum was a position of need. Hibbert had already started sucking, and Bird took a gamble on a potential upgrade at that position.
            Anyone who has convinced themselves that Bynum was brought in here to do anything more than play a backup role is straight up delusional. Yeah, we were definitely banking on the guy with the worst knees in the NBA outside of Greg Oden to take a starting role on a championship contending team

            I have to admit that some of the crap people make up to diminish anything Hibbert did or contributed is pretty entertaining, though.

            Comment


            • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

              Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
              Anyone who has convinced themselves that Bynum was brought in here to do anything more than play a backup role is straight up delusional. Yeah, we were definitely banking on the guy with the worst knees in the NBA outside of Greg Oden to take a starting role on a championship contending team

              I have to admit that some of the crap people make up to diminish anything Hibbert did or contributed is pretty entertaining, though.
              It's called insurance. Hibbert already started sucking before he was named to the all-star team. Bird recognized this, and wanted an insurance policy in case Hibbert continued playing poorly. Larry was not going to bet on Hibbert getting better, and took a gamble on Bynum, which did not pan out. Bird was correct in attempting to get an insurance policy on Hibbert. Bynum would have helped out immensely in the Atlanta series, where our all-star player was completely ineffective. Scoring 0 points and grabbing 0 rebounds, not once but twice. This is fact, not delusion
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                Signing Bynum was not related to Hibbert's performance. The Bynum signing was a low risk, high reward move. If he stays healthy, he's a monster and we could arguably be hanging a banner right now. He threw up 12 and 10 in 18mpg. Larry just entered the Home Run Derby and swung as hard as he could to be aggressive enough to shut PD up. But he should've known they would still be bashing Hibbert even after he leaves town.

                If you have Hakeem in his prime, but also have a chance to bring in an injured mid-20's Patrick Ewing on a 1 year deal.. You do it. It's not a knock on Hakeem, it's bringing in talent to put a banner up

                Comment


                • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                  Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                  It's called insurance. Hibbert already started sucking before he was named to the all-star team. Bird recognized this, and wanted an insurance policy in case Hibbert continued playing poorly. Larry was not going to bet on Hibbert getting better, and took a gamble on Bynum, which did not pan out. Bird was correct in attempting to get an insurance policy on Hibbert. Bynum would have helped out immensely in the Atlanta series, where our all-star player was completely ineffective. Scoring 0 points and grabbing 0 rebounds, not once but twice. This is fact, not delusion
                  Nothing of that nature was ever stated. Every single report stated that Bynum was brought in as a potential (that being a key word) replacement over Mahinmi because of what he could offer on the offensive side of the ball. The second unit had issues scoring all season long and that was the reason he was brought in. We also tried addressing that issue by trading for Evan Turner. The reality is that the Pacers were hoping Bynum could give us 15 minutes or so off the bench and provide scoring for the second unit. The Bynum signing had to do with our poor second unit offensively and had nothing to do with Hibbert, no matter how much fabrication and fantasies people want to create.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                    I was looking back over the stats of that season. IMO, the Hibbert decline started in the December 16th game against Detroit where he got totally manhandled on the glass. It was our first loss at home that season, and it was mainly due to being completely out physicalled.

                    Oh edit: The above was just my curiousity. I also don't think Bynum was brought in to Indy to ever be anything more than a 10-15 minute per game backup guy who could feast on other teams 2nd and 3rd bigs.
                    Danger Zone

                    Comment


                    • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                      Monta didn't want to go back to Dallas. Not the other way around. Dallas was Monta's team, and then Cuban traded for Rajon Rondo, basically stabbing Monta in the back
                      1) Dallas was never Monta's team. I don't care if Dirk is not the Dirk of old: That is, and has been, his team.
                      2) Dallas had no interest in re-signing Monta. Maybe it was mutual, but Dallas certainly did not want him back.
                      3) In no way was trading for Rondo stabbing Monta in the back. That's silly talk.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        1) Dallas was never Monta's team. I don't care if Dirk is not the Dirk of old: That is, and has been, his team.
                        2) Dallas had no interest in re-signing Monta. Maybe it was mutual, but Dallas certainly did not want him back.
                        3) In no way was trading for Rondo stabbing Monta in the back. That's silly talk.
                        Offensively, I would definitely say it was Monta's team.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          1) Dallas was never Monta's team. I don't care if Dirk is not the Dirk of old: That is, and has been, his team.
                          2) Dallas had no interest in re-signing Monta. Maybe it was mutual, but Dallas certainly did not want him back.
                          3) In no way was trading for Rondo stabbing Monta in the back. That's silly talk.
                          1. This was Monta's team because he ran the offense
                          2. Dallas did not want him back because they already knew that bridge was burned
                          3. The Rondo trade was back stabbing because it meant that Dallas was taking the ball out of Monta's hands, and into Rajon Rondo's hands. Dallas was fine before the trade, and they nearly took out SA the previous year when Monta was running the show. After the disastrous Rondo trade, Dallas completely fell apart
                          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                          Comment


                          • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                            As ecstatic as I would be to get an all star performance out of Monta, a rookie of the year performance out of Turner, an uber aggressive GHill, a sixth man of the year type season out of Stuck, evidence that JHill is aware that defense is required, and have PG step in like he never missed a beat....there's no way all of those things happen this season.

                            Some are definitely more likely than others, but honestly I think the ones that are most likely to happen are actually being talked about the least here.
                            Time for a new sig.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                              As ecstatic as I would be to get an all star performance out of Monta, a rookie of the year performance out of Turner, an uber aggressive GHill, a sixth man of the year type season out of Stuck, evidence that JHill is aware that defense is required, and have PG step in like he never missed a beat....there's no way all of those things happen this season.

                              Some are definitely more likely than others, but honestly I think the ones that are most likely to happen are actually being talked about the least here.
                              All those things could happen though. I really don't think that any of those scenarios are that much of a stretch, which is why I'm optimistic about this season.
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                              Comment


                              • Re: Espn East forecast Pacers at #9

                                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                                As ecstatic as I would be to get an all star performance out of Monta, a rookie of the year performance out of Turner, an uber aggressive GHill, a sixth man of the year type season out of Stuck, evidence that JHill is aware that defense is required, and have PG step in like he never missed a beat....there's no way all of those things happen this season.

                                Some are definitely more likely than others, but honestly I think the ones that are most likely to happen are actually being talked about the least here.
                                ...and what would that be?

                                Turner will get his opportunity and has a fairly decent shot.

                                I expect Paul to come back strong, but I think his injury will have long term implications such that he's never going to reach his potential (i.e. top 3 player in the league). Still, I expect franchise level talent.

                                Stuckey is a good one-on-one player and useful scorer off the bench but will never be a great 6th man. It's just not his game.

                                Monta should have a good year. ASG is possible in the East so he could get some love. I would give him a 50% chance.

                                There is virtually no way Hill is going to be uber aggressive with the ball in Monta Ellis' hands...or in Paul's. Hill will be needed for perimeter shooting and that means he will be somewhat passive as he will be asked to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. It is highly unlikely the Pacers are going to have Monta, Paul or Hill sit in favor of CJ Miles...or to have CJ launching shot after shot with Hill, Monta and Paul watching. Just not happening.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X