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

The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

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

  • #16
    Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    The article goes against the popular opinion on here that Pritch hit a home run on this trade under the circumstances which I don't agree with.
    I don't think that people are saying we hit a home run on the trade. When you're forced to trade a player as good as Paul George then you have to forget about home runs. Heck, you have to forget about winning the trade entirely. You can never win a trade when you trade away a player of PG's caliber. That's why we cannot really judge the trade like we would judge a trade we made willingly. What I've heard most people on here say about the trade was that the return was at least good and not a poo-poo platter like Lakers package.

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    I do agree with the article that the PG situation was handled wrong but to do that justice the writer should have went into how Larry handled Paul during the retooling process. If you plan to build around a player today IMO you have to include that franchise player in the process of building the team much more than Larry did. The attitude that "he don't make decisions around here" is simply a my way or the highway type of thinking and it doesn't work.
    Absolutely. Bird is 100% to blame for PG's decision to move on. He is the one that failed to build a team around him after he broke his leg and he is the one who alienated him in the first place with his moronic comments (and the way he treated the members of our ECF runs, both players and coaches).

    Thankfully, Bird no longer makes any decisions around here. Bird did a lot of damage to the franchise in his last few years so let's hope that Pritch can fix them.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

      I agree that the offers we're talking about weren't much better but considering what we received I'd much rather have waited to see if we could have convinced Boston to give up next year's Nets pick or Cleveland to come up with a better offer. I know we didn't want to lose out on Collison but he might have still been there a few weeks later.
      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        I agree that the offers we're talking about weren't much better but considering what we received I'd much rather have waited to see if we could have convinced Boston to give up next year's Nets pick or Cleveland to come up with a better offer.
        Do we have any guarantee that Boston would have coughed up those picks? No, we don't. Personally, I'll never believe that those picks were on the table unless Boston actually deals them this off-season for someone like Kyrie. If they decide to hold on to them (which they will, I'm almost sure of it) then that's all the proof we need that they'd never give us those picks.

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        I know we didn't want to lose out on Collison but he might have still been there a few weeks later.
        Come on, mate. You're too smart to believe that this was why we didn't wait on the Celtics. We didn't wait on them because we were afraid that OKC would take their offer off the table if we told them to wait.

        Here's how it would go down if we had waited for the Celtics, in my opinion:

        1) We tell OKC to wait. OKC gives us a short deadline, we cannot meet it because the Celtics haven't signed Gordon Hayward yet and OKC pulls their offer.

        2) Kyrie asks to get traded and the Denver deal is off the table.

        3) The Celtics offer us Jae Crowder, the Clippers pick and the Memphis pick.

        4) No other team fields any offers because they don't want to risk PG being a rental so we're forced to take the Celtics offer.

        Obviously, the above is just a hypothetical. But I really don't believe that waiting would have helped us here. I believe that waiting would have only made our situation worse.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

          Come on, mate. You're too smart to believe that this was why we didn't wait on the Celtics. We didn't wait on them because we were afraid that OKC would take their offer off the table if we told them to wait.

          Here's how it would go down if we had waited for the Celtics, in my opinion:

          1) We tell OKC to wait. OKC gives us a short deadline, we cannot meet it because the Celtics haven't signed Gordon Hayward yet and OKC pulls their offer.

          2) Kyrie asks to get traded and the Denver deal is off the table.

          3) The Celtics offer us Jae Crowder, the Clippers pick and the Memphis pick.

          4) No other team fields any offers because they don't want to risk PG being a rental so we're forced to take the Celtics offer.

          Obviously, the above is just a hypothetical. But I really don't believe that waiting would have helped us here. I believe that waiting would have only made our situation worse.
          Sorry, I guess I could have made that part green.
          I personally would have rather waited until at least the day Hayward was signed.
          No one knew that Kyrie was going to ask for a trade but having the Cavs deal fall through because of that could have been a good thing.
          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

            Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
            Sorry, I guess I could have made that part green.
            I personally would have rather waited until at least the day Hayward was signed.
            No one knew that Kyrie was going to ask for a trade but having the Cavs deal fall through because of that could have been a good thing.
            Gordon Hayward signed on the 14th. We traded PG on the 6th. There's no way that OKC would keep their offer on the table for that long. They would have taken it off the table and we would have been forced to accept a much worse offer.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Gordon Hayward signed on the 14th. We traded PG on the 6th. There's no way that OKC would keep their offer on the table for that long. They would have taken it off the table and we would have been forced to accept a much worse offer.
              I'm not so sure the OKC deal would not have been there a week later you can't know that and no one knows if Boston might have offered more once they signed Hayward or not. I think at worst we'd still have had the Cleveland/Denver deal on the table. I do not think we needed to hurry and trade Paul at the very start of free agency considering that we had no major free agent signing.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                I'm not so sure the OKC deal would not have been there a week later you can't know that and no one knows if Boston might have offered more once they signed Hayward or not. I think at worst we'd still have had the Cleveland/Denver deal on the table. I do not think we needed to hurry and trade Paul at the very start of free agency considering that we had no major free agent signing.
                We didn't have major free agent signings but OKC did. Remember, they're trying to do everything they can to keep Westbrook to avoid the exact same situation we had with PG. Had we not taken the trade when we did they would have went after an FA and if they landed him then the deal would probably be off.

                It's true that this whole discussion is hypothetical. We have no way of knowing right now what each team would have done had things went down differently. All we can do as fans is simply to guess what's more likely. And in my opinion, the most likely outcome of us waiting would be to lose out on the OKC deal and get stuck with the much inferior Celtics deal I mentioned above.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                  Boston had to trade Bradley's 8.8 mil contract for Marcus Morris 5 mil deal just to sign Hayward. After July 1st PG's contract went up to 19.5 mil meaning the Pacers had to take 8-10 mil in contracts in addition to Bradley's expiring deal to complete a trade . That would mean Crowder, and Rozier in addition to Bradley , after Bradley walks following next season is Crowder and Rozier a better package that Oladipo and Sabonis? Boston was not going to give up the Lakers or Nets #1 pick for a risky 1 year rental of PG. Ainge is a hoarder and refused to offer those for a 2 year deal that Jimmy Butler had left.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                    Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                    Boston had to trade Bradley's 8.8 mil contract for Marcus Morris 5 mil deal just to sign Hayward. After July 1st PG's contract went up to 19.5 mil meaning the Pacers had to take 8-10 mil in contracts in addition to Bradley's expiring deal to complete a trade . That would mean Crowder, and Rozier in addition to Bradley , after Bradley walks following next season is Crowder and Rozier a better package that Oladipo and Sabonis? Boston was not going to give up the Lakers or Nets #1 pick for a risky 1 year rental of PG. Ainge is a hoarder and refused to offer those for a 2 year deal that Jimmy Butler had left.
                    If the package was Bradley+Crowder+lower 1st round pick and/or Rozier...I would have been fine with that over Olapdio+Sabonis. I assumed that we would have made a strong push to re-sign Bradley ( which I love as a Guard ).

                    But I understand why we went with the Dipo+Sabonis deal over what the Celtics could have offered. I think that the Dipo+Sabonis move gave the Pacers more stability for the long term with more upside.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      If the package was Bradley+Crowder+lower 1st round pick and/or Rozier...I would have been fine with that over Olapdio+Sabonis. I assumed that we would have made a strong push to re-sign Bradley ( which I love as a Guard ).

                      But I understand why we went with the Dipo+Sabonis deal over what the Celtics could have offered. I think that the Dipo+Sabonis move gave the Pacers more stability for the long term with more upside.
                      I think the value of knowing we've got a solid player in Oladipo for 4 years, plus a potentially solid player in Sabonis for maybe 7 years is really a big part of the deal. Trading one year of half-hearted play from a guy who may or may not be All-NBA for maybe 10 (combined) years or more from two solid starter/rotation guys while not taking back any real albatross contracts (Dipo might be expensive, but not too much above his actual value), that's a good return.
                      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                        I have been watching Dipos individual highlighted games last season

                        He can really play, and was aggressive, does remind me off a "poor man's Dwayne Wade"
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          Domantas Sabonis, who progressively became worse during the 2016-17 season.
                          What in the absolute f*** is that writer talking about? Oh, you mean the 20 year old rookie saw his production taper off over the long NBA season? SHOCKING!

                          I'm not even making excuses just to feel better about the deal; this is just a stupid point, period. Rookie wall is a term, it wasn't just invented by Trump the other day. People say it for good reason. Hell, he probably has a sophomore slump in him too. Then he should hit that year 3-5 ramp when a guy starts to get it and just keeps increasing to his final steady-state level. When Sabonis is 25-27 and gets worse year after year, then we can talk about a trajectory.

                          I just hate stupid logic so much. There's plenty of legit concerns and hopes to debate, why does someone have to bring in some rogue garbage into the mix.


                          Did you hear - Sabonis also was getting taller every day and then suddenly he just stopped. So I guess that also means he's a failure because I would never expect that to happen either.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                            Well shoot, I didn't get as far as the author details before going off.
                            It doesn't improve the quality of the work, but it does explain it. Aspiring journalist have to try, fail and learn, I get that.

                            Hopefully he got some feedback on the issues with his content, presented maybe a bit less harsh than I put it.


                            On the other hand "well, the world needs ditch diggers too" :-)
                            Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                            For a young man in only his second year of college, I thought he did a good job. I don't really agree with it and it is a pure opinion piece with no personal sources, but I've seen a lot worse written by experienced journalists.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              Absolutely. Bird is 100% to blame for PG's decision to move on. He is the one that failed to build a team around him after he broke his leg and he is the one who alienated him in the first place with his moronic comments (and the way he treated the members of our ECF runs, both players and coaches).

                              Thankfully, Bird no longer makes any decisions around here. Bird did a lot of damage to the franchise in his last few years so let's hope that Pritch can fix them.
                              This, so much.
                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: The Paul George and Indiana Pacers relationship, and what other teams can learn

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Well shoot, I didn't get as far as the author details before going off.
                                It doesn't improve the quality of the work, but it does explain it. Aspiring journalist have to try, fail and learn, I get that.

                                Hopefully he got some feedback on the issues with his content, presented maybe a bit less harsh than I put it.


                                On the other hand "well, the world needs ditch diggers too" :-)
                                Unlike, according to the author, aspiring NBA starters.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X