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

    I really struggle to understand the people who would rather be 41-41 and swept in the first round over in the lottery.

    There are no moral victories in the NBA. 8th seed and swept is the 100% absolute worst finish to a season you can have. You're ****ed this season AND ****ed for the future...and not any sort of pleasant oh that felt good kind of ****ed, either.

    Comment


    • Re: Bird resigns

      This is a complete non-surprise to me, to be honest.

      Last year, I had people at PS&E signaling pretty clearly to me that his time might not be long, that he's getting tired.

      If you look at my post history, I suggested that he'd be gone this offseason. When they brought in Lance, I began to wonder... but I suspect he'll stay on with the franchise in support of player development and drafting.

      So although all of this chatter around Paul George as the reason for the retirement might be true, the signs were coming forth last offseason.

      It seemed very clear to me that bringing in a person like Pritchard not all that long ago was no different than when Donnie Walsh brought Bird in. Pritchard was clearly, clearly the planned heir apparent.

      Comment


      • Re: Bird resigns

        The Pacers aren't moving to another city. Indy's entire identity is built around sports. There is no way they would let the team leave.

        Then you have the fact that the Simons have spent millions recently updating and renovating the Fieldhouse along with building a state of the art training/practice facility. A team on the way out doesn't do that.

        Comment


        • Re: Bird resigns

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          I don't know but when PG broke his leg the Pacers were still able to win some games with a bunch of scrubs making **** happen, I don't see us losing PG and going to ****, how many more games Pacers won with PG? 5?


          Re-sign Teague, get a pick and players maybe get Gallo and others, fire Nate and find a new Coach and we are good.
          Fixed.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Bird resigns

            Originally posted by cdash View Post
            You really want a star player calling the shots for the team and holding their feet over the fire? No, PG is a star, but he isn't LeBron.
            Some people are fine with allowing the inmates to run the asylum. That never ends well.

            Comment


            • Re: Bird resigns

              Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
              5th wheel?? Not even close. George Hill was the whipping boy that year. He was definitely 2nd. Roy and DWest weren't having their best years. If you are talking about the previous season then yes I agree he was the 5th wheel.
              Lance put up stats because everyone else was focused on PG and David West. Look we aren't arguing Lance is a bad player, we are arguing, he wasn't the cog that kept the Pacers moving. Those teams defensively were powered by PG, Hibbert, and Hill, and offensively powered by PG and West. Replace Lance with, Bradley Beal, JJ Reddick, Kyle Krover, we would have still been good.

              Comment


              • Re: Bird resigns

                Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
                Soooo...really seems as though you didn't watch the games at the end of the year if you can say with a straight face still "Lance wasn't a difference maker". You also never answered my question. None of our key pieces are even within 4 years of Lebrons age. Who else in the East can we absolutely not beat in the coming 3 years if we added a piece or two to this current roster.
                No, I watched the end of the season. Same old Lance. The nunbers back that up as well.

                I commented at the end of the Toronto game where Paul George went nuts and scored 35 that it was great Lance Stephenson finally had some help. It seems some people were actually thinking that. He was getting bigger ovations than the guy carrying the team on his back. Mind blowing.

                BTW, by your narrow definition of "contending," there are 8-9 "contenders" in the east, since not a ton separates everyone aside from Cleveland. If there's even one team in your conference you know you can't beat under any circumstances, you're not a contender. It just feels better to say you are.

                FWIW, I wouldn't take Indiana over Boston, Washington, Toronto or Atlanta in a playoff series. It'd be competitive but I'd give them an edge.
                Last edited by Kstat; 04-28-2017, 02:35 PM.

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment


                • Re: Bird resigns

                  Originally posted by Ryan View Post
                  Theyll do whatever it takes. Magic wants a superstar
                  Then he needs to pursue someone other than Paul.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bird resigns

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    Not sure Bird understood how important chemistry can be. Or maybe he did but he didn't seem to care about it
                    I thought in some mid-season interview......he said something along the lines of Team Chemistry NOT being important. I don't recall the exact wording....but it was more of the "Old School" approach where he didn't think it was something that the FO or Coaching Staff needed to really worry about and that it was up to the Players to figure it out on their own. He was surprised that things haven't worked out on its own at that point. If anything....that explains the Lance signing.....it was more of his attempt to get Lance ( a good team mate ) to coalesce.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bird resigns

                      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                      He's nice in his role, but could be exposed as being the second or even third guy on a truly good team.
                      He would never be exposed in such a situation... If Lance is your 2nd/3rd guy, you truly don't have a good team.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bird resigns

                        Originally posted by immortality View Post
                        Lance put up stats because everyone else was focused on PG and David West. Look we aren't arguing Lance is a bad player, we are arguing, he wasn't the cog that kept the Pacers moving. Those teams defensively were powered by PG, Hibbert, and Hill, and offensively powered by PG and West. Replace Lance with, Bradley Beal, JJ Reddick, Kyle Krover, we would have still been good.
                        He was maybe third behind DWest, but it was close. He was our second leading scorer with nearly 50% from the field that year. He was bringing his A game in the playoffs while Hibbert was having garbage 0 pts 0 rbs games. He also led the team in rebounding. His defense was decent. How quickly people forget that everyone hated george hill that year. But of course george hill is the golden child now .
                        Lifelong pacers fan

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bird resigns

                          I like Lance, I think he's fun, but he doesn't belong spoken in the same sentence as Bradley Beal. Or JJ Redick...or Kyle Korver.

                          He's a fun player to bring off the bench, but he isn't that good really. If he's starting, your team is bound to be Gon' Fishin' real soon.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bird resigns

                            This could end up not being a good thing for Paul too. The Grass isn't always greener. If he stayed here- he would be the best Pacer ever and would have his jersey retired etc.

                            He could go home to LA and turn into Melo.
                            "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bird resigns

                              I hope the Lakers realize that with PG, they will basically be a new version of the Clippers in terms of ceiling and will need at least 2 more All Stars to be a title contender.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bird resigns

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                No, I watched the end of the season. Same old Lance. The nunbers back that up as well.

                                I commented at the end of the Toronto game where Paul George went nuts and scored 35 that is was great Lance Stephenson finally had some help. It seems some people were actually thinking that. He was getting bigger ovations than the guy carrying the team on his back. Mind blowing.

                                BTW, by your narrow definition of "contending," there are 8-9 "contenders" in the east, since not a ton separates everyone aside from Cleveland.

                                FWIW, I wouldn't take Indiana over Boston, Washington, Toronto or Atlanta in a playoff series. It's be competitive but I'd give them an edge.
                                I'm not one of those guys who thinks Lance is anywhere near Paul in contributions (hence why I want to pay Paul 30% of our salary). But I am one who thinks he is right there with Teague as our 2nd-3rd best player to end the year (without knowing anyone but Paul when he joined). Pacers were +9 in point differential vs the Cavs when Lance played. Stats don't back you up my friend.

                                I think your answers are fair- but I take the post-Lance Pacers over anyone but the Cavs in a series because we finally had enough role guys around Paul to beat anyone except CLE. I don't think people realize in the regular season the differences between teams isn't very big. Lance could have added quite a few wins for us.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X