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

NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

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

  • NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

    from NBADraft.net:
    http://www.nbadraft.net/draftbuzz044.asp

    Stock Watch - Moving Up

    Francisco Garcia -- If the Pacers hold onto their pick at 17, there's a very good chance they will take Garcia. With Reggie Miller having retired, they see Garcia as a very similar type of player who can grow into the role of clutch shooter offering offensive firepower.

    and here's their latest mock:

    http://www.nbadraft.net/index.asp
    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

  • #2
    Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

    Hell, I wouldn't mind getting Turiaf in the second round. He almost reminds me of a younger DD...Not much offensive power, but the guy is a monster on the boards, a great shot blocker and a pretty good one on one defender.

    I didn't pay much attention to Garcia.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

      Garcia is good player, infact, he's one of my favorite college player. He's going to be a good fit for the Pacers, he's kind of like a Reggie Miller, good shooter, underrated defender, and will hit clutch shots. He got long arms, might not be the best athelet, but the guy have heart. Pacers have a history of drafting established college players, so Garcia would make sense, but I still think 17 is little too high for Garcia.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

        Originally posted by wooolus
        Garcia is good player, infact, he's one of my favorite college player. He's going to be a good fit for the Pacers, he's kind of like a Reggie Miller, good shooter, underrated defender, and will hit clutch shots. He got long arms, might not be the best athelet, but the guy have heart. Pacers have a history of drafting established college players, so Garcia would make sense, but I still think 17 is little too high for Garcia.
        That is what we said about freddy

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

          http://www.nbadraft.net/profiles/franciscogarcia.asp

          I'm starting to really like this guy, I did see a few games. He could really excel in the Pro game. Only 9 days left to find out

          #32
          Francisco Garcia
          Birthdate: 12/31/81
          NBA Position: Shooting Guard
          College: Louisville
          Class: Junior
          Ht: 6-7
          Wt:
          190
          Hometown: Dominican Republic
          High School:
          Winchendon School
          Team Site Profile

          NBA comparison: Reggie Miller

          Strengths: The Latin Assassin can fill it up. Garcia has range on his 3 and gets it off quickly and often. Going into Louisville he had a reputation as a shooter but has added a number of dimensions to his game. He has excellent court vision. His work ethic and passion for the game brings an added edge to a team that won 18 games in a row. His heart is as big as they come as he proved with his back to back 24 point games in wins over Seton Hall and #1 Florida in the wake of his brother's passing. Garcia's defense has dramatically improved sincehe played prep school at Winchendon, as he led his team in blocked shots as a 2 guard last season.

          Weaknesses: The knock on Garcia is that he is too skinny and weak. Rumor around NYC has people talking that Garcia has added 15 lbs of muscle since the season ended. Athletically Garcia isn't going to fly in and dunk you anyone but with his long body he can cover more ground than you would think. His on ball defense needs to improve to become a great defender at the next level. His in between game from 10-15 feet needs to get better because teams will take away his 3 in the NBA and he isn't able to get all the way to the hole to finish.

          Notes: He holds Louisville University records in single game assists with 15 and single game 3 pointers made with 8.



          This space for rent

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

            I've thought Garcia's been underrated - and his workouts haven't been that great. But I don't care - it's what you do in games that matters and Garcia's a player.

            Turiaf would be ideal for you - a big, strong post player who excels on defense and doesn't mind knocking folks around. Actually, I wouldn't mind us taking him at 30 even though we've got PF's out the whazzoo.
            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

              I really want Turiaf. Garcia would be nice.
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                I really want Turiaf. Garcia would be nice.
                I'm not familar with Turiaf's game, who could you compare it to?

                This space for rent

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                  garcia at the 37 pick, if the pacers do indeed make the trade with the lakers, probably makes a lot more sense....17 seems to high to take him....then the question becomes if he will fall that low....some have him going at the end of the first round and others have him going in the second round....so who knows...

                  his stock does seem to be dropping, which if ur trying to get him at 37, isnt a bad thing...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                    Originally posted by fooddaman
                    I'm not familar with Turiaf's game, who could you compare it to?

                    Brian Grant. He wont be as good as Grant was in his prime but their skill sets are comparable. Turiaf is also a great person off the court like Grant. He'll work his butt off and give a lot back to the community.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                      Originally posted by LuckyMcPhearson
                      Brian Grant. He wont be as good as Grant was in his prime but their skill sets are comparable. Turiaf is also a great person off the court like Grant. He'll work his butt off and give a lot back to the community.
                      Then at that pick, sounds like a good pickup.

                      This space for rent

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                        I'd have no qualms taking Garcia at 17, even if it is a minor reach according to so-and-so draft site. I'd say he has more upside than a Sean May. He's got less bust potential than a Hakim Warrick.

                        I mean, if it's a player you want, you know will fit, you know can be productive ... why gamble? Especially in the middle of the first round. This isn't the NFL, where trading down is like trading baseball cards as 9-years-old.

                        If the Pacers are to keep the pick, I say they have to take a college player that's done things in college that a) aren't just athletic mismatches (Warrick) b) have experience in truly leading a team and c) have shown poise, experience and heart.

                        That's why I like a Julius Hodge, a Francisco Garcia and a Jarrett Jack. They're not just athletic mismatches, through and through. They're players who've shown some savvy, some want-to, some know-how.

                        Or just draft a European and leave him over there. Whatever.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                          Also, you take Garcia, you don't need to re-sign James Jones. I like JJ, but it just wouldn't be necessary in my book ... at least not if you have to guarantee more money than you'd want to.

                          I'm of the club that says you can never have too many shooters. But you can have too many contracts. And Garcia's would be cheaper, by a bit.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                            Forget pick 17 the Pacers will not have it , the Bender trade will take care of that.

                            Personally I would not mind a player like Ryan Gomes at pick 37 , a 4 year starter at Providenxe he avg 18 ppg and 9 rpg over a 4 yr career.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: NBADraft.net: Garcia and Turiaf for Pacers

                              Originally posted by fooddaman
                              Then at that pick, sounds like a good pickup.

                              At 46 I dont think you could ask for much more.

                              Originally posted by diamonddave00
                              Personally I would not mind a player like Ryan Gomes at pick 37 , a 4 year starter at Providenxe he avg 18 ppg and 9 rpg over a 4 yr career.
                              I agree man. Ryan Gomes is being overlooked for some reason. I can't believe he isnt considered a first round talent by a lot of mock drafts. Must be because he's a senior and doesnt have as much "upside".

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X