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

Bird resigns

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

  • Re: Bird resigns

    Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
    what did Pritchard and Walsh do without Bird? Just curious (not trying to act smart)
    Seriously??

    Check out the 90's Pacers, and the Blazers from about 2004-2009

    Comment


    • Re: Bird resigns

      I Have a feeling Bird would have gotten more out of Magic and the Lakers than anybody, so this hurts our chances to get more out of them. We are in a lose-lose situation imo.

      Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • Re: Bird resigns

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Well, there is one huge difference[ATTACH=CONFIG]1078[/ATTACH]
        Peck, Peck, Peck in vnzla's universe Vogel is only the reason the Pacers didn't win 60 games that season...
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • Re: Bird resigns

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          Well, there is one huge difference[ATTACH=CONFIG]1078[/ATTACH]
          He really worked wonders with the Magic, coach of the year right there.

          Comment


          • Re: Bird resigns

            Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
            He really worked wonders with the Magic, coach of the year right there.
            Lol....but in fairness to Vogel, their roster is a mess. Then they trade Dipo and others for Ibaka who was then traded for Ross. Horrible
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment


            • Re: Bird resigns

              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
              Simon might sell the team, but it's highly unlikely that the team moves. Honestly, I'm not even sure where this thought is coming from.
              Because a person looking to buy a team for their city might be more inclined to work harder to make the money work. And a city without a team with an investor wanting to bring a team to their city will likely find a city bending over backwards to give them the corporate welfare they need to make it happen.
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • Re: Bird resigns

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                I told a friend last week that 2 things needed to happen if the Pacers were ever to win a Championship:

                1) Bird needed to leave... one down

                2) Pacers need new ownership that is willing to spend money and not refuse to stay under the Luxury Tax as Simon does.

                I also said PG won't re-sign with the Pacers, and they need to trade him in order to rebuild. I am a PG fan from the beginning as I was one of the biggest advocates for the Pacers to draft him, but you can't let him leave w/o getting something for him.

                Bird wasted the 24 mil in salaries he got when Hibbert and DWest left on Monta 11 mil, and Stuckey at 7 mil. It did absolutely nothing to help build a team around PG. SMH Good luck in KP being able to find both new homes.
                I'm not sure Bird needed to step down, but the Pacers need ownership that puts a championship as the #1 goal. Whether that means Herb needs to re-evaluate his own position or whether that means new ownership is a different question.
                Having players and management operate under any other goal means you'll get any other results.
                So we'll never know what Bird would've or could've done if the goal was "Championship".
                Maybe he thought he could work within the current ownership's constraints and make a championship the goal but it's pretty clear now that what's woven into the Pacers' DNA is not "Championship", it's "playoffs".
                Which still doesn't answer the question of whether Bird is/was up to the challenge. But truthfully, nobody is until ownership sends the signal down that it's about rings, not just chasing the playoffs.
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • Re: Bird resigns

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  But truthfully, nobody is until ownership sends the signal down that it's about rings, not just chasing the playoffs.
                  When I hear this it always translates to "until ownership goes about building a championship team the way I would" and usually means "any time you aren't guaranteed a ring dump your decent players, lose games, and go for the lottery again."

                  You can't win the first round unless you get to the playoffs. You can't win the second round if you don't get to the playoffs. You can't win the conference without getting to the playoffs. And so forth.

                  The idea seems to be that the Golden Path to Championships is an ownership dedicated to an LT tax payroll in front of empty houses while stockpiling #1 picks for a decade. Seriously, how is that working for any team that hasn't managed to score a once-in-a-lifetime talent? How many championships did Cleveland win before Lebron went off to Miami? How many championships does OKC have? Philadelphia or Chicago in the 21st century?

                  "Our goal is to make the playoffs" almost never means "and go no further". There really is a legitimate point of view that you put together a team that can play consistently into the playoffs and then build from there rather than starting from scratch every single year and hoping to get the Next Generational Player. Especially since very few fan bases can put up with a decade of playing like absolute crap for a minute chance of coming out on top at the end.

                  Around here, the "this team is no fun to watch so I am giving up my fandom" is prevalent - yet those fans would somehow show up for bad basketball because someone next year might be drafted who has potential. Or, perhaps, the idea is that a team owner should be willing to have empty seats year after year after year so that the two or three dozen fans of the team remaining can have a championship celebration some years later. Either one denies the reality that comes from there being only once championship a year and that there is a path to that goal, not a guaranteed leap from suck to ring.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bird resigns

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    stuff
                    The building way you are imagining still involves being a team with multiple players with upside to grow together. That isn't the strategy we've seen. We've seen repeated dumping of upside for instant gratification. I can get behind making the playoffs if you have 2-3-4-5 players who are on the upswing. Sure. That makes sense, get them playoff experience as they continue to grow together.

                    What makes no sense and is absolutely garbage is pushing for the playoffs by trading away your youth for mediocre players, or by letting your youth walk away. In the past several years let's look at the Pacers youth movement:

                    First round draft pick Solo Hill doesn't have his option picked up. Young potential walks away with no compensation.
                    First round draft pick traded away for Thad Young. That is a career loser who is 28, no potential to improve.
                    Second round draft pick who became a quality contributor on a decently successful team Lance Stephenson isn't re-signed, young potential walks away with no compensation.
                    First round draft pick Psycho-T, an old 4 year senior who anyone and everyone could see was a pick with little to no potential
                    First round draft pick Kawhi Leonard, traded away for a veteran player. Whether you thought Kawhi would be a monster or not, you knew who George Hill was before he put the jersey on, a solid player with no potential to be more than that.

                    Ok, so if you win 41 games and have all these young players with potential, you can feel good about next season. But if you win 41 games and you have 1 player with any potential at all because you let all your young potential leave without getting anything back, or you played it safe traded away potential for mediocre players or drafting old guys with low ceilings...well...that's not a title strategy.

                    It's just disingenuous to suggest the Pacers have this slow growth to a title strategy. They have a OMG DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS EVEN IF IT ****S US INTO SUCKING NEXT SEASON strategy.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bird resigns

                      Even beyond the draft stuff I mentioned, look at the signings...

                      Al Jef - old and done
                      Monta Ellis - old and done
                      Aaron Brooks - old and done

                      Other teams are bringing guys in from the d-league, playing their second rounders, signing guys off their first contract who didn't work out where they were drafted, BUT who still could be someone in a different setting. The Pacers bring in guys who are on their last leg. I'd rather cycle through 10 D-league big men trying to find someone who has that motor to be someone than ever give Al Jef a contract. A dozen hungry guards fighting to be in the NBA than a single minute of Monta or Brooks.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bird resigns

                        Originally posted by Dece View Post
                        They have a OMG DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS EVEN IF IT ****S US INTO SUCKING NEXT SEASON strategy.
                        I would say it's more of a "We cannot afford to suck next year even if it's for the best long term possibilities and potential. We MUST be in contention for playoffs to sell to the fanbase first and foremost, and then we actually need to make the playoffs to use to sell tickets next season"
                        Last edited by Bball; 04-30-2017, 05:27 PM.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bird resigns

                          I think they think in Indiana with the former popularity of the HS basketball tournament, and the popularity of the NCAA college tourney, they feel they can 'sell' fans on the idea that making the playoffs actually means you have a legitimate shot at a championship. And then when they aren't the better team and inevitably fall to the better team, they can use that to sell the idea they are taking steps towards a championship.

                          Maybe to some degree that thinking for marketing is true. But it's also can be a recipe for continued mediocritiy.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bird resigns

                            Some people act like winning 28 games can move the team to another country but winning 38 is good enough to keep them in town, crazy thinking if you ask me.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bird resigns

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              I think they think in Indiana with the former popularity of the HS basketball tournament, and the popularity of the NCAA college tourney, they feel they can 'sell' fans on the idea that making the playoffs actually means you have a legitimate shot at a championship. And then when they aren't the better team and inevitably fall to the better team, they can use that to sell the idea they are taking steps towards a championship.

                              Maybe to some degree that thinking for marketing is true. But it's also can be a recipe for continued mediocritiy.

                              Except people aren't dumb enough to buy that when you have LeBron going to the Finals every year and everyone else settles for second place.

                              Same with Jordan a decade before. Unless you have a superstar that matters you mean very little in the NBA that's why most basketball fans around here care a bit more about college and HS basketball in comparison.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bird resigns

                                Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                                what did Pritchard and Walsh do without Bird? Just curious (not trying to act smart)
                                They resigned George hill and added gerald green, mahinmi and Augustin to fix the bench. Green and Augustin were busts on the pacers but were solid after they left. Like was said earlier they didn't want to make drastic moves to Larry's team.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X