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

Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

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

  • #16
    Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    I was very happy when Larry returned but I gave up on him in the summer of 2015 with all the terrible moves he made so many terrible moves and started the dysfunctional small ball project. I'm starting to think there was a lot of luck involved in putting together our recent ECFs teams because he seems to have no idea how to add players that compliment each other now and seems to place no value on defense any longer.
    I'm only a little disappointed in the lack of progress at the trade deadline though. The best move that Larry could have made to keep Paul George however I think he could have improved considering some of the trades that went down and rumors of players being available.
    I've been ready for Larry to depart for 2 years but it has nothing to do with today.
    It's been a continuous slide down for me. Maybe for those same 2 years. Bird has proven he's not a good GM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Bird has taken this team from contender to a dumpster fire if PG walks. He's acquired CJ Miles and Rodney Stuckey and has a 3rd stringer as his SG. He traded away defense with George Hill and Ian Mahinmi when he should have known he needed that defense when he didn't have a shooter to go with Teague. He's really built one of the most poorly constructed Pacer teams I have seen.
      To be fair I am pretty certain that Stuckey & Miles came in the one season Bird was away and Walsh was running the show.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        To be fair I am pretty certain that Stuckey & Miles came in the one season Bird was away and Walsh was running the show.
        No, Stuckey signed in the summer of 2014. Bird returned in the summer of 2013. Bird's the word and it's a dirty word right now.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          I gave Bird a pass all year because I thought he made few decent moves (minus getting Nate) but it's obvious is not working and it won't work.

          Why not make some moves if the guy you are trying to keep pretty much told you he wants to "compete"?

          Is Larry so stubborn he doesn't even listen to his own star? think about it PG is now mad because they didn't communicate with him, this is Melo/Phill Jackson all over again and is not going to end up well either.
          PG Bird and Simon were "on the same page" yesterday or two days ago. Then after the deadline, our superstar whines about being "in the dark" during the deadline. Even though nothing actually happened during the deadline.

          The problem isn't Bird or Simon. It's the media and the fans who only read or hear what the media tells them. A whole bunch of people without Front Office jobs, who sit in front of a microphone or a television, is where the majority of fans get their information and opinions. It's sad really. Reminds me a little bit of the novel 1984.

          #fakenews

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            To be fair I am pretty certain that Stuckey & Miles came in the one season Bird was away and Walsh was running the show.
            His year away was the Ian and Gerald signings + the Solo draft

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

              It's worth the risk of PG walking because we won't be a contender with any trade anyways. If PG walks, fire Bird and hire Hinkie and Process it I guess.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                Wow I can't believe is so close I expect this to be a blow out
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                  Originally posted by dgranger17 View Post
                  His year away was the Ian and Gerald signings + the Solo draft
                  Ian for Collison was a great trade.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Wow I can't believe is so close I expect this to be a blow out
                    There must be a lot of ISU fans on the board right now. In no way has Bird done a good job managing this team with the exception of the draft. I would say wait until July to fire him.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                      Yes, but only if they are willing to bring in Grimp to take over basketball operations.

                      Otherwise no.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        A lot of us are afraid he will leave in free agency leaving us with nothing.
                        Personally, it was just the perfect opportunity to build a young team with top draft picks and solid players without tanking. I was looking towards the future when Lebron is no longer the best player in the NBA while playing on a loaded team.

                        My vote is yes. I would have been cool with not trading PG if he at least did SOMETHING reasonable for another player.
                        Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 02-23-2017, 10:04 PM.


                        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                          I voted no which really means, "Not yet." While I absolutely share others' extreme frustration that no moves were made, I'm pondering the possibility that details we may not know about dictated Larry's actions. For example, let's say that he either couldn't or didn't want to trade for younger players "of potential" such as Okafor or Noel. Then we shift our attention to "support" veterans and salaries become a significant part of the equation. Factor in Larry's belief (shared by at least some of us) that playoff experience is paramount to building a contender and then ponder the idea of signing one or even TWO veterans cheaply after a buyout. Terrence Jones and Aaron Afflalo, while not world beaters, would be nice, cheap additions by month's end, still in time for a playoff push.

                          We have to be strategic with our salary management. Signing Jones and/or Afflalo post-buyout would be savvy moves. Drafting someone this summer who can contribute a little next year and show developmental potential, being frugal with signing a couple veterans, and getting lucky by landing a star or perhaps a respected leader & former all-star (a la David West) will be critical to the team's success next year and beyond. If not, I actually believe Larry will show himself out.


                          "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                          - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                            They should've fired him in or before May 2015, maybe even June 2014. Aside from drafting Turner, every move since then has been bad, imo. You could make an argument about the Hill/Teague trade or maybe even the Jefferson signing, but that's it.

                            More importantly, he's done a **** ton of irreparable damage. I know people aren't hot on David West any more, but how many guys like West and Hill have completely soured on the Pacers, let alone our current star player?

                            Today didn't move the needle at all for me.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                              They should've fired him in or before May 2015, maybe even June 2014. Aside from drafting Turner, every move since then has been bad, imo. You could make an argument about the Hill/Teague trade or maybe even the Jefferson signing, but that's it.

                              More importantly, he's done a **** ton of irreparable damage. I know people aren't hot on David West any more, but how many guys like West and Hill have completely soured on the Pacers, let alone our current star player?

                              Today didn't move the needle at all for me.
                              You are more forgiving than me.

                              My needle moved to "Ask him for his entire Mock Draft List rankings, then politely agree that he should retire from the Pacers Organization so that we all can move on" the second the Trade Deadline passed and seeing that our Team didn't improve.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                                They should've fired him in or before May 2015, maybe even June 2014. Aside from drafting Turner, every move since then has been bad, imo. You could make an argument about the Hill/Teague trade or maybe even the Jefferson signing, but that's it.

                                More importantly, he's done a **** ton of irreparable damage. I know people aren't hot on David West any more, but how many guys like West and Hill have completely soured on the Pacers, let alone our current star player?

                                Today didn't move the needle at all for me.
                                Fired him in June 2014 right after the team made its second straight ECF's? Why in the world would they have done that?

                                I'm certainly ready for him to go at this point and see a different direction, but it doesn't matter. He will retire to Florida long before the Simons would ever consider canning him. His seat will never be hot.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X