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

POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

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

  • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
    Summary...throw wet noodles at the wall until something sticks to Paul George's liking. I'm sorry. I don't believe in that concept. Either he's part of solution, or he's not. If he's not, then don't complain when the FO make moves that they believe will make the team better.

    As a former manager myself, don't come into my office with demands in one hand and nothing in the other. If you're going to make demands of me, you better have some feedback and proposals to give as well. Otherwise, shut up and let me do my job according to the vision. If anything, I hate a complainer. In my world, I might start evaluating your performance to see if I can possibly do addition by subtraction.
    The NBA is nothing like your job.

    PG can make demands, because he is 1 of the top 15 guys at his job in the world. The FO job is to meet those demands, and not just because PG made them. They had the tools to be a contender, they failed.

    I keep asking, wtf was PG suppose to do? The Pacers set up no meetings where PG was needed to meet with stars.

    Comment


    • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      If the Pacers FO put together a team that challenged Lebron in the ECF or even semis, then the onus wouldn't be on them.

      But when you have Monta and Al on the team, players that are laughed at by pretty much every analyst, and you can't manage better than 7th seed 1st round and out in the East with the 2nd best player in the conference, then the moves were bad.
      If, if, if, if, if, if. So....what moves SHOULD they have made then? We can say "They should have built a contender" all we want, but I'm waiting for someone to provide a link to superstar trade or signing that Indiana whiffed on.


      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


      • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        The NBA is nothing like your job.

        PG can make demands, because he is 1 of the top 15 guys at his job in the world. The FO job is to meet those demands, and not just because PG made them. They had the tools to be a contender, they failed.

        I keep asking, wtf was PG suppose to do? The Pacers set up no meetings where PG was needed to meet with stars.
        No...PG can't make demands if he's not going to be part of the solution. PG need to shut up and play basketball, but it's too late now. He pretty much sabotaged any chances Indiana might had to get one more crack at building a contender.


        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


        • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
          Summary...throw wet noodles at the wall until something sticks to Paul George's liking. I'm sorry. I don't believe in that concept. Either he's part of solution, or he's not. If he's not, then don't complain when the FO make moves that they believe will make the team better.

          As a former manager myself, don't come into my office with demands in one hand and nothing in the other. If you're going to make demands of me, you better have some feedback and proposals to give as well. Otherwise, shut up and let me do my job according to the vision. If anything, I hate a complainer. In my world, I might start evaluating your performance to see if I can possibly do addition by subtraction.
          The FO actively froze Paul out of basketball discussions that centered on what position Paul would play and it's Paul's fault he's not part of the FO process?

          Okay.......

          In an ideal situation both would work towards the same goal. But when you're told to shut up and do what you're told, don't expect the one you told to shut up to do your work.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
            No...PG can't make demands if he's not going to be part of the solution. PG need to shut up and play basketball, but it's too late now. He pretty much sabotaged any chances Indiana might had to get one more crack at building a contender.
            This doesn't make any sense, how did PG sabotage anything? His contract being up does the sabotaging.

            Durant just shutup and played basketball, so clearly thats not the answer either.

            Comment


            • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
              If, if, if, if, if, if. So....what moves SHOULD they have made then? We can say "They should have built a contender" all we want, but I'm waiting for someone to provide a link to superstar trade or signing that Indiana whiffed on.
              It didn't take a superstar!

              You literally just had to NOT make ONE of the mistakes of signing Stuckey, Al, and Monta.

              How nice would it have been to be able to absorb Nerlens Noel instead? Or even taking on NBDL players throughout the season. Al Jefferson was just a fat waste, pun intended. Christmas was better for us. An out of shape slow big at 10 mill killed us and simply not signing him would have been better. No need to even name a replacement.

              Comment


              • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                The FO actively froze Paul out of basketball discussions that centered on what position Paul would play and it's Paul's fault he's not part of the FO process?

                Okay.......

                In an ideal situation both would work towards the same goal. But when you're told to shut up and do what you're told, don't expect the one you told to shut up to do your work.
                This is probably why I don't think the FO was "terrible", because I was mostly in agreement with their direction and moves.

                The NBA was changing, and Bird was trying to change with it. Paul George playing PF was not a horrible idea giving his skills and height. When the less talented CJ Miles played the PF, you could see it had potential. However, this very forum acted like it was dumbest idea ever as if Paul George was going to bang against Dale Davis or Karl Malone type player night in and night out. Also, Indiana had other players who could rotate in place of PG if there was a matchup problem.

                But Paul George whined about it to the media and forced Vogel's hand. Like Bird, I thought PG would rise to and embrace the challenge. Clearly that didn't happen on top of he didn't even give it a fair chance to possibly succeed or fail. He got roasted one game, and he wanted to call it quits.


                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


                • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  This doesn't make any sense, how did PG sabotage anything? His contract being up does the sabotaging.

                  Durant just shutup and played basketball, so clearly thats not the answer either.
                  Aargh. That is true. Okay...it comes down to this IMHO. If he wants to be on a better team, then I think he should be involved. For all FO knows, there could be a player he might like to play with, but who is dirt cheap.

                  I really hate very general demands/threats with no hint of constructive feedback. I'm pretty sure FO wants a contending team too, so it's not like they don't have the same goal in mind.


                  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


                  • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                    I don't have sympathy for PG or for the Pacers FO. Larry failed to build a contender around PG for the second time around and his blue print for success is/was a failure. That being said he did not leave the franchise in terrible shape. Turner + Lance + and possibly Teague are a nice core so even if PG isn't coming back this isn't ground 0 and I still think there is a very real shot at keeping PG.

                    Bottom line I think PG will qualify for the supermax next year and this team takes a step in the right direction.

                    Comment


                    • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                      Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                      I really hate very general demands/threats with no hint of constructive feedback. I'm pretty sure FO wants a contending team too, so it's not like they don't have the same goal in mind.
                      And I hate the idea that just because the fans have heard nothing it means no one has been giving constructive feedback.

                      I am fully on board with the idea that under Bird there was no such thing as constructive feedback because I think Bird made it clear he didn't want to hear it. When a guy coming back from a potentially career-ending injury doesn't want to bang against guys bigger than he is and is pooh-poohed because Larry decided to do it in his old age, that tells me what direction the messages flowed (and it wasn't from the players).

                      I am hopeful something different is the case with KP and that he'll listen to what Paul has to say. Anyone with an expert in their employ who doesn't listen to that expert because it somehow gives the appearance of being told what to do by an underling is being foolish. It's one reason I think former stars make poor FO guys - they think they are the one in the room with the most knowledge of how the game is played even though it passed them by years ago.
                      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: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                        You're in agreement with the FO moves while at the same time complaining that PG, who was frozen out, wasn't apart of them.

                        If you agreed with the moves then obviously how the moves came about worked.....

                        And I love how you mock those who agreed with Paul while ignoring CJ's injuries from playing the 4. Which was a major reason why people didn't want to watch Paul take the added workload of defending 4s.

                        This is just a way to ***** about Paul.
                        Last edited by Since86; 05-23-2017, 12:18 PM.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                          The fact we (the public) know that he's only staying if we contend is a problem. The fact he retweeted that tweet about the Boston pick while we are trying to build around him, is a problem. There isn't anything more to say as there is no excuse for either of these things. In no way does making this stuff public help. He could motivate the Pacers just as much keeping all of this in internal negotiations, but he hasn't. That is a fact.

                          Comment


                          • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            The fact we (the public) know that he's only staying if we contend is a problem. The fact he retweeted that tweet about the Boston pick while we are trying to build around him, is a problem. There isn't anything more to say as there is no excuse for either of these things. In no way does making this stuff public help. He could motivate the Pacers just as much keeping all of this in internal negotiations, but he hasn't. That is a fact.
                            Or it could have the opposite affect and motivate the team as whole to work harder. I mean if you just look at the upcoming players going into the final year of there contract then you can easily see that guys like GR3, Thad, even Kevin Seraphin playing for there upcoming contract.

                            The only issue is whether or not FA's will want to sign here not knowing if PG will stay however really we are talking about one or two spots on the roster of true impact.

                            Comment


                            • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              And I hate the idea that just because the fans have heard nothing it means no one has been giving constructive feedback.

                              I am fully on board with the idea that under Bird there was no such thing as constructive feedback because I think Bird made it clear he didn't want to hear it. When a guy coming back from a potentially career-ending injury doesn't want to bang against guys bigger than he is and is pooh-poohed because Larry decided to do it in his old age, that tells me what direction the messages flowed (and it wasn't from the players).

                              I am hopeful something different is the case with KP and that he'll listen to what Paul has to say. Anyone with an expert in their employ who doesn't listen to that expert because it somehow gives the appearance of being told what to do by an underling is being foolish. It's one reason I think former stars make poor FO guys - they think they are the one in the room with the most knowledge of how the game is played even though it passed them by years ago.
                              Where there is smoke...Like I said before, you can choose to ignore what could be possibly red flags in Paul George's attitude, actions, and general comments. Even we choose to ignore the public speculations (Boston trade, Magic on TV, Sam Amic, etc), Paul George is still displaying common behaviors of employees (and I use this term very loosely) who are ready to quit their job. Paul George is not an expert...he's just a damn good employee in your store. he's expendable under the right conditions.


                              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


                              • Re: POLL - What do you want to do with PG13?

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Or it could have the opposite affect and motivate the team as whole to work harder. I mean if you just look at the upcoming players going into the final year of there contract then you can easily see that guys like GR3, Thad, even Kevin Seraphin playing for there upcoming contract.

                                The only issue is whether or not FA's will want to sign here not knowing if PG will stay however really we are talking about one or two spots on the roster of true impact.
                                Guys on contract years are naturally going to do everything they can to play well. Also, even if him possibly leaving motivates them in some way, he demotivated them by basically saying they are bad players because he has to carry the load...or that other players should not be getting the last shot. It might motivate some to want him to leave so they get his minutes but he will know that and want to leave that much more. Nothing good comes to the Pacers from him airing his dirty laundry.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X