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

So let's talk about the roster...

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

  • #16
    Re: So let's talk about the roster...

    I see JJ as our backup sg this year. Everyone keeps putting him in at the 3 but he can play the 2 just fine. And since AJ IS NOT A POINT GUARD! I dont think he will complain too much about being moved to his natural position of SG.

    Tins/Saras
    Jack/JJ/AJ
    Artest/Granger
    J.O./Dale
    Jeff/Pollard/Harrison

    I think Cro and Bender are on the way out. There is just no where to play them.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: So let's talk about the roster...

      Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
      I look for Gill to be released unless there is a trade involving Johnson.

      I think the Pacers would bring back James Jones but why would Jones want to return & play behind Artest & Granger?

      Thier focus should be getting Dale Davis signed next, as long as he will accept whatever money we have available.

      Most assume that Croshere will be waived but I'm thinking it's Bender. Bird seems more impressed with Croshere's work ethic & ability to play thru pain.

      We do need to upgrade our backup 4 spot & we have lots of options to get that done. But if thats our only worry going into the season then I'm not gonna loose any sleep over it.
      OK this is really the last tiem but I am willing to do it one more time Jose, just for you and bball.......

      Cro will be waived (if anyone) under the amnesty rule and not JB.
      Reasons:

      More savings.
      Contract to big for whatever he brings, no matter how much he is a warrior.

      JB CAN already be waived under the "permanently injured rule" as of July 1.
      That would give the Pacers an excemption of an equal amount to his salary to sign a new player, whereas releases under the amnesty rule are just a dump under the luxury tax; no more.

      So with JB they can ride several horses: He gets fit and assumes the backup PF role (yeah pffffftttt)
      He does not get fit (enough) and is waived under the above (he only played 7 games last season which is the exact max he is allowed to play to fall under the permanently injured rule)
      In both cases they get "something" besides "LT relief" which in both cases is more valuable then that.

      They have an awful amount of money invested in JB, but I have a harsh feeling that if certain players become available under the amnesty rule JB will be labelled "permanently injured" before the season starts.
      The "unless" is that he shows that he is healthy upfront and works his *** off, unlike pullintg what he did in the summer league, which in my opinion is exactly what LB was referring to at the end of the season, though some of you think that referred to JO (pfffft)

      So waiving JB for LT purposes only is "not a good idea"(tm)
      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: So let's talk about the roster...

        I thought the originally injury had to have been sustained over two years before being waived. Now there are plenty of things you could point to that were at least two years ago but I thought he played too many games the year before last.

        I could be wrong but I remember them worrying about Hill playing too many games because they were thinking of waiving him.

        Hey if we can dump Bender under the injury rule I am all for it.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: So let's talk about the roster...

          I really don't think we will see any trades since we are now in a really strong position. The only person I see adding (besides maybe DD and JJ....if the price is right = Gill being cut) is Brian Grant once the LA Laters waive him. He will fill the spot left by Croshere when he is waived here. (hey, maybe the Lakies can pick him up to replace Grant...*Laughing*).

          Outsider

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: So let's talk about the roster...

            "small" line-up

            5 - JO
            4 - Ron
            3 - Jax
            2 - Saras
            1 - Tins

            Looks pretty good to me.
            You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
            All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

            - Jimmy Buffett

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: So let's talk about the roster...

              Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
              I just don't see how we can possibly go into this season with AJ, one of the best backup point guards in the NBA, as a third string player.

              If I were AJ, and were the third string point guard, I'd be insulted. AJ responded to the call to run the point last year for half the season, and did a damn good job of it.
              AJ imho is not one of the best back ups PGs... He plays a better SG than a PG. Every time he brings the ball up the floor, I cringe waiting for a turnover, he fights against the 8sec count every time, and the clock is always down to 10-14 secs before he even looks for the predictable set up pass to initiate the offense.
              That being said I like him as 3rd string PG or SG, maybe even stick him in front of Fred. He can still get 15 mpg or so, and I'd like to see him stay.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                Originally posted by Ragnar
                I see JJ as our backup sg this year. Everyone keeps putting him in at the 3 but he can play the 2 just fine. And since AJ IS NOT A POINT GUARD! I dont think he will complain too much about being moved to his natural position of SG.

                Tins/Saras
                Jack/JJ/AJ
                Artest/Granger
                J.O./Dale
                Jeff/Pollard/Harrison

                I think Cro and Bender are on the way out. There is just no where to play them.
                No way can JJ guard 2 guards. just not quick enough. besides he rebounds and blocks shots very well for someone his size.
                He's a THREE.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                  Originally posted by able
                  Cro will be waived (if anyone) under the amnesty rule and not JB......

                  JB CAN already be waived under the "permanently injured rule" as of July 1.
                  That would give the Pacers an excemption of an equal amount to his salary to sign a new player, whereas releases under the amnesty rule are just a dump under the luxury tax; no more.

                  So waiving JB for LT purposes only is "not a good idea"(tm)
                  Agree totally.
                  --------------------

                  I do believe that JJ is capable of playing SG for short stretches. In fact, he was used in that capacity at times last season.

                  Also, I believe that Saras will also see time at SG. Actually, if he is as capable a shooter as we are lead to believe, I think he may get more minutes as the backup SG than any other bench player. And, if that is the case, then Freddie just became expendable.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                    I do expect the Pacers to sign DD, and man the center position with DD, Harrison and JO.

                    I think Foster will continue to get decent minutes as the backup PF.

                    So I see it as:

                    C - DD/ JO/ DH
                    PF - JO/ JF/ AC
                    SF - Knucklehead/ DG
                    SG - SJax/ Saras/ FJ
                    PG - Tinsley/ Saras/ AJ.

                    The best you can do is a eight man rotation of Tinsley, SJax, Knucklehead, JO, DD, Saras, Granger, and Foster. A regular season nine-man rotation would include Harrison, and if he progresses as expcted, then Harrison could be substituted for DD in the 8-man rotation as the season progresses.

                    I'd consider trading FJ and Foster for a backup PF that can play in the post. I guess D. Marshall is off the table. But somebody like that. Or what about FJ and Foster for Al?

                    BTW, Gill isn't being paid very much, he's a fine fourteenth-man candidate.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                      I didn't think Bender's situation fit the clause allowing him to be waived due to permanent injury. But if it does I know of no reason not to use it. However we get rid of that distraction and waste of roster space is fine by me.

                      -Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

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

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                        What some people call a problem at the backup power forward spot, I call a bigger problem at the starting center spot.

                        Jeff Foster as the backup big man is virtually ideal, considering the offensive punch that would inevitably be on the floor with him. Jeff Foster (or DD) as a starting center is far from ideal.

                        Moreover, I really don't understand how some of the same people who say there's a backup power forward problem also go on to say that Jermaine O'Neal needs too many touches. This is Jermaine O'Neal. He's going to play 36 minutes. What more offense do you want from the position?

                        You're only as good as your top seven will take you. We've got six, plus a rookie and some guys who, while solid, won't see the floor enough to matter (unless David Harrison learns to rebound and defend).

                        If I'm BirdWalsh, I'm not sitting on the couch smoking a cigar over a solid addition. I'm looking for the final piece.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                          I I'd consider trading FJ and Foster for a backup PF that can play in the post.
                          I'm laughing at myself because no way they do it but the first name that popped in my head was Nene. And Denver really needs outside shooting in case Lenard isn't 100%.
                          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                            No way we trade Foster for anyone. The man gets offense rebounds like an
                            animal even with a busted bag on his hip. One scoring post player at a time anything
                            else is my clogged toliet in the paint. And since i am here Tinsley is one of my
                            favorite pg and JO is one of my favorite pF good thing i am a Pacer fan but
                            Sars is about leadership and Larry had that in mine for a long time. JO is not a
                            leader and neither is Tinsley but Sars is. Watch him take the starting spot away
                            from Tinsley and make this team his. Hopefully a team with a ring with lots of
                            diamonds.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick
                              I'm laughing at myself because no way they do it but the first name that popped in my head was Nene. And Denver really needs outside shooting in case Lenard isn't 100%.
                              Don't feel bad I had one too.

                              Foster & Jones for Troy Murphy.

                              GS just drafted a PF & they are looking for somebody to bang inside.

                              Works on real gm anyway.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: So let's talk about the roster...

                                The guy I'm thinking of is PJ Brown. But I just don't know why New Orleans would want to trade him for one of our guys.

                                I mentioned in another thread that Freddie + Bender for PJ works...but no way would they do that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X