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

Kevin Durant to the Warriors

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

  • #76
    Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

    LeBron left and never had a talent like Westbrook next to him in Cleveland. He also helped a Heat team win a title who hadn't previously, while Durant is just going to a proven champion. To me, Durant's move is weak.

    Maybe he'll right a wrong like LeBron and eventually return to OKC however, as you never know.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
      LeBron left and never had a talent like Westbrook next to him in Cleveland. He also helped a Heat team win a title who hadn't previously, while Durant is just going to a proven champion. To me, Durant's move is weak.

      Maybe he'll right a wrong like LeBron and eventually return to OKC however, as you never know.

      The Heat unfortunately won a title in 2006 Wade was already a champion LeBron was not.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
        The Heat unfortunately won a title in 2006 Wade was already a champion LeBron was not.
        The Heat won with Shaq and an entirely different core except for Haslem. The Warriors are the exact same core.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
          The Heat won with Shaq and an entirely different core except for Haslem. The Warriors are the exact same core.
          But the Heat already won a title sure Wade/Haslem were the ones left from the 2006 team bu they had past championship experience.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
            But the Heat already won a title sure Wade/Haslem were the ones left from the 2006 team bu they had past championship experience.
            This is literally the same Warriors core of Curry, Thompson, Green, and Iguodala who won the title just a year ago. The Heat core just had Wade as the only star because LeBron came 4 years later. It was a totally different team, different head coach.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

              How Steve Nash convinced Durant to come to the Warriors

              http://www.si.com/nba/2016/07/08/kev...ncy-steve-kerr

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

                http://thebiglead.com/2016/07/11/las...-championship/

                Did a Las Vegas Gambler Use Inside Information to Make a $20,000 Bet on the Warriors Before Kevin Durant's Decision?
                Did a few connected gamblers know that Kevin Durant was picking the Warriors, or did they get lucky making educated guesses that he was leaving the Thunder?

                It’s a legitimate question to ask when you read this story about how some guy plunked down $20k on the Warriors to win the 2017 NBA Championship on July 3, the day before Kevin Durant shocked the basketball world and left the Thunder.

                The important nugget to pull: After the wager was placed at 3:2 odds, the Westgate SuperBook “treated the bet as an ‘educated guess wager’ and adjusted Golden State’s odds accordingly.”

                OAKLAND, CA - MAY 30: Stephen Curry #30 of the Golden State Warriors speaks with Kevin Durant #35 of the Oklahoma City Thunder after their 96-88 win in Game Seven of the Western Conference Finals during the 2016 NBA Playoffs at ORACLE Arena on May 30, 2016 in Oakland, California. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Ezra Shaw/Getty Images)

                Many directions to take this:

                1) It’s an obvious bet. The Warriors won the title in 2015, then won 73 games in 2016 and had a 3-1 lead in the Finals. They were going to be the favorites going into next season no matter what.

                RELATED:

                Kevin Durant's Friendship With Draymond Green Bothered Thunder Teammates
                2) This gambler had some people on the inside of some of those meetings in the Hamptons.

                3) Come on, of course they’d adjust the odds to protect liability. But if the bet was made by some rich guy from Minnesota, does the SuperBook adjust the odds? Because the SuperBook did adjust the odds after the bet was placed. The story doesn’t say what the odds were adjusted to, but a week later they’re at 2:3.

                RELATED:

                Kevin Durant to the Warriors Comp: Moses Malone Joining the 76ers
                The MGM took a “half dozen four figure” bets on the Warriors to win it all before Durant’s decision, according to ESPN. Again – educated guesses, or inside info?

                A week after Durant’s decision, the Warriors remain overwhelmingly the favorites to win the title at 2:3. The Cavs are at 5:2, followed by the Spurs at 8:1. The Thunder, who may not have Russell Westbrook on the roster by opening night, are 30:1 at the SuperBook and 20:1 at MGM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

                  This means Golden State isn't going to win it next year. Take Cleveland

                  Sent from my Nexus 5X

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

                    Originally posted by BornIndy07 View Post
                    This means Golden State isn't going to win it next year. Take Cleveland

                    Sent from my Nexus 5X
                    How about neither?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors


                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

                        http://nba.nbcsports.com/2016/07/23/...ning-warriors/

                        Kevin Durant: Nobody has said something negative to my face about joining Warriors


                        When Kevin Durant chose the Warriors, he received criticism from all angles.

                        Fans burned his jersey. Charles Barkley decried the decision. Markieff Morris said, “That ain’t right.” Durant’s former Thunder teammates leaked their displeasure with the process.

                        Durant was so reluctant to face the backlash, he stayed in his bed luxurious rental house for two days.

                        It, uh, worked.

                        Michael Lee of Yahoo Sports:

                        Though he has heard some criticism from Barkley and fellow Hall of Famer Reggie Miller, various talking heads and people in social media who believe he has cheated the system and cut corners to a ring, Durant said the reaction to his choice hasn’t been too bad: “All that stuff happens on the Internet. I haven’t had one person come to me and say anything negative. … It’s easy for the critics on the outside to tell you what to do, to tell you how to play. I’m the one that’s going through it, so I can’t really worry about the outside noise. The work don’t stop. Everything stays the same.”

                        This is a good reminder how insulated NBA players, especially stars, can be.

                        And it adds to why Durant signing with Golden State makes sense. While we’re debating his legacy and discussing the backlash (and the backlash to the backlash and the backlash to the backlash to the backlash and the…), he’ll be playing high-level basketball with his friends in a desirable city for a max salary.

                        Sure, it’s not all rosy. Durant altered his relationship with his friend Russell Westbrook, and Durant will have to return to Oklahoma City for a game. There, he’ll face plenty of booing fans.

                        But, all in all, Durant should have little trouble tuning out the critics.

                        They’re too far away for him to hear them much.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Kevin Durant to the Warriors

                          http://nba.nbcsports.com/2017/02/11/...-just-in-case/

                          Kevin Durant returns to Oklahoma City, and hires extra security just in case


                          It’s the game everybody is going to be watching Saturday night: Kevin Durant makes his first return to Oklahoma City in a Golden State uniform. It’s going to be emotional — for the fans in OKC, and for Durant.

                          It’s not just going to rain down boos on KD, it’s going to be a thunderstorm of boos. A tropical storm hitting a Carribean island of boos.

                          Durant has hired a little extra security for his return, just to make sure it’s only boos that hit him, reports Chris Haynes of ESPN.

                          A heightened armed security team has been procured, tripling the normal amount of security personnel the Warriors typically travel with, league sources told ESPN….

                          The Warriors will not have a shootaround, being that it’s the second game of a back-to-back. However, Durant “won’t be locked in his hotel room,” a source said. He plans to venture out into the city to a certain extent, though how much is unknown.

                          This is a smart precaution by Durant. That vast majority of Thunder fans may be mad at Durant for leaving and feel that booing him — and a Thunder win — would be cathartic, but there might be a handful willing to go further.

                          How Durant handles the heightened emotions, the insults, the experience will go a long way to how the Warriors do in the game. You know Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green will want to have KD’s back, but the Warriors are on the second night of a back-to-back and the third game in four nights. Oklahoma City has a real chance in this game, but Russell Westbrook can’t just put up another triple-double, he needs to be efficient doing it. And he needs to get some help.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X