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

Montieth just on 950...

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

  • #16
    Re: Montieth just on 950...

    Man if we get Al we will win at least 60 games next year

    Tins/Vicius/Chris Thomas??
    Jack/Freddie/Maurice Carter??
    Ron/Granger/JJ
    JO/Al/Bender/Cro
    Foster/Hulk/JO

    That rotation would be sick

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Montieth just on 950...

      Great. Al and JO could encourage each other to shoot lots of fadeways.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Montieth just on 950...

        I kinda like the starting center in New Orleans. How about a Pollard/AJ or Pollard/Fred trade
        "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
        Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Montieth just on 950...

          Originally posted by Pacerfan23
          Somehow I have a funny feeling we may pull a Mark Jackson and try to get AL back....lol.. He left on good terms he just wanted to be a starter but maybe know he just wants a ring...
          well that would do wonders for JOs mindset....

          and i believe al is an expiring contract as well, or am i dreaming?

          atlanta definitely needs a center....not sure pollard is that guy though, with his back problems....

          plus rumor has it al would be involved in a trade for eddie curry, if that goes down....now if the hawks signed curry outright, then the trade for pollard makes a bit of sense...

          and i cant help but think the hawks might be able to get more than pollard and aj for harrington....

          maybe fred and aj and pollard??? thats alot for al....

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Montieth just on 950...

            I still don't get the infatuation with bringing Al Harrington back. We saw what happened when he played behind O'Neal and Artest, with Bender and Croshere around. Now, it'd be the same, except for this guy named Danny Granger got drafted or, you know, something like that.

            It's not like he's changed or developed as a player over the last year ... and those who say a year in Atlanta may have humbled him or whatever are living on their own conjecture.

            And as some parrots say (not that they're completely wrong), we don't need another isolation player.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Montieth just on 950...

              nice picture with JO. He's always a stand out guy.
              As for the rumors....interesting to see who we get in return. I hope we don't trade jamaal
              "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Montieth just on 950...

                Originally posted by Kraft
                I still don't get the infatuation with bringing Al Harrington back. We saw what happened when he played behind O'Neal and Artest, with Bender and Croshere around. Now, it'd be the same, except for this guy named Danny Granger got drafted or, you know, something like that.

                It's not like he's changed or developed as a player over the last year ... and those who say a year in Atlanta may have humbled him or whatever are living on their own conjecture.

                And as some parrots say (not that they're completely wrong), we don't need another isolation player.

                theres probably only 2 reasons u even think of bringing al back here....

                and before i go into those, im not a real big fan of the idea....i dont believe al would be happy here, especially with what role he would have here, now....nevermind hes in the final year of his contract, and would like to make an impression, and he simply wouldnt get the playing time he wants....

                1) his relationship with jo and what he might be able to do from a team chemistry standpoint(avoiding the obvious-if hes unhappy with pt , etc)....hes jo's bud and seemed(some may correct me here) to get along with artest ok...his presence MIGHT make jo happier and might have a melding effect where jo and artest are concerned....either way, jo would love having him around...

                2) he would be a solid low post threat, something we probably could use....being jo's primary backup he could provide a threat down low, especially if harrisons development doesnt go as quickly as is hoped....and god forbid jo go down again, hes a helluva guy to have waiting in the wings...

                i still dont really like it....we already have a shortage of minutes amongst quality players....and despite him being an expiring contract he could just as easily be a disruption as an asset...that being said, he could be traded pretty easily at the trade deadline as well....probably would get us more than pollard would....so i can see an argument for both sides...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Montieth just on 950...

                  u think IF al did come back he could start at pf? a lineup of tins, sjax, ron, al, and jo wouldn't be too bad and for those pfs al couldn't match up w/, ron can switch over to pf. i do think al is best served being a 6th man for a team, but i think he could start for us vs smaller lineups.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Montieth just on 950...

                    Originally posted by Pacerfan23
                    For Some reason I believe Freddie is Gone, you all remember his name has been out there on a few trade one was for Kwame Brown. And these were confirmed rumors. So I think it will be Freddie and someone else.
                    The only reason why Freddie was included in those rumors is because the Wizards were looking for a SG.

                    I hope that you are wrong...cuz we are stacked at SF options ( Artest/SJax/Granger....even Bender if we have to )....but we only have 1 legit backup SG unless you play Artest at some SG minutes and keep AJ as a backup SG.

                    I really think that the Pacers can get a pretty decent "2 for 1" or "3 for 2" deal with AJ/JJ/Pollard involved. At least AJ and JJ are solid backup players for their respective positions.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Montieth just on 950...

                      Originally posted by CableKC
                      The only reason why Freddie was included in those rumors is because the Wizards were looking for a SG.

                      I hope that you are wrong...cuz we are stacked at SF options ( Artest/SJax/Granger....even Bender if we have to )....but we only have 1 legit backup SG unless you play Artest at some SG minutes and keep AJ as a backup SG.

                      I really think that the Pacers can get a pretty decent "2 for 1" or "3 for 2" deal with AJ/JJ/Pollard involved. At least AJ and JJ are solid backup players for their respective positions.
                      the likelihood of jj being signed and then traded are very very slim...i also think u might be failing to look at the fact that jj often times filled the two guard role in the offense last year-meaning they ran him in the same type of plays that they did for reggie...

                      now all that being said...i dont think there are gonna be many 2 guard minutes to be had...ive touched on this before the signing of saras...

                      whatever backup 2 minutes they are, saras will most likely get...i have a feeling that jackson, tinsley, and saras will get all but maybe 10 minutes or so of the backcourt minutes...whether its jj, freddie, aj or someone else who gets those minutes, remains to be seen...and i like freddie for his defense and jj for his size and shooting...however it could end up being someone different than even these guys....

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Montieth just on 950...

                        Originally posted by Jermaniac
                        Gill + Pollard for Al
                        You can pray all night, guy. Won't do any good. Billy Knight is much more savy than that. If someone gets Al, they will have to give up a good player or a good pick probably.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Montieth just on 950...

                          Originally posted by foretaz

                          theres probably only 2 reasons u even think of bringing al back here....

                          and before i go into those, im not a real big fan of the idea....i dont believe al would be happy here, especially with what role he would have here, now....nevermind hes in the final year of his contract, and would like to make an impression, and he simply wouldnt get the playing time he wants....

                          1) his relationship with jo and what he might be able to do from a team chemistry standpoint(avoiding the obvious-if hes unhappy with pt , etc)....hes jo's bud and seemed(some may correct me here) to get along with artest ok...his presence MIGHT make jo happier and might have a melding effect where jo and artest are concerned....either way, jo would love having him around...

                          2) he would be a solid low post threat, something we probably could use....being jo's primary backup he could provide a threat down low, especially if harrisons development doesnt go as quickly as is hoped....and god forbid jo go down again, hes a helluva guy to have waiting in the wings...

                          i still dont really like it....we already have a shortage of minutes amongst quality players....and despite him being an expiring contract he could just as easily be a disruption as an asset...that being said, he could be traded pretty easily at the trade deadline as well....probably would get us more than pollard would....so i can see an argument for both sides...
                          Guessing on what Al would do with team chemistry is a two-sided coin. Would JO be happy he's back? From everything we've read, sure. But this team, the one we saw last year, has to build its own kind of chemistry. Brawl included.

                          Does Al fit that? Who knows? Pure guesswork.

                          On point two ... I hate the idea of Al Harrington as a primary backup to Jermaine O'Neal. It's either a) he's getting way too much pay for 12-18 minutes of play or b) JO and Al are maning the paint. B is a horribly scary thought, don't you think?

                          The Spurs brought Horry in, slid Duncan to the five, and went with it. Two problems. One, O'Neal is no Duncan (not that I have to say that). Two, both O'Neal and Harrington's greatest strength is a offensive post game. Neither are adept passers out of the post. That'd get ugly fast. Horry, on the other hand, would drop bombs but keep on forgetting that he's old and played crappy defense.

                          I realize you're not a fan of this idea, either, but I just wanted to continue my rant. The Al Harrington idea - which I've never even considered remotely possible or discussed - just makes me want to throw up all over Conseco Fieldhouse.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Montieth just on 950...

                            Originally posted by Kraft
                            I still don't get the infatuation with bringing Al Harrington back. We saw what happened when he played behind O'Neal and Artest,
                            You mean runner up 6th man of the year???????

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Montieth just on 950...

                              and as far as jo having a buddy on the team....i wouldnt mind if he talked to his buddy brian grant, and talked him into coming to pacer land...hes got bad knees like al, is buds with jo like al, would be loved by all his teammates like al, but wouldnt be worried about his next contract and his playing time like al

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Montieth just on 950...

                                Originally posted by Kraft
                                Guessing on what Al would do with team chemistry is a two-sided coin. Would JO be happy he's back? From everything we've read, sure. But this team, the one we saw last year, has to build its own kind of chemistry. Brawl included.

                                Does Al fit that? Who knows? Pure guesswork.

                                On point two ... I hate the idea of Al Harrington as a primary backup to Jermaine O'Neal. It's either a) he's getting way too much pay for 12-18 minutes of play or b) JO and Al are maning the paint. B is a horribly scary thought, don't you think?

                                The Spurs brought Horry in, slid Duncan to the five, and went with it. Two problems. One, O'Neal is no Duncan (not that I have to say that). Two, both O'Neal and Harrington's greatest strength is a offensive post game. Neither are adept passers out of the post. That'd get ugly fast. Horry, on the other hand, would drop bombs but keep on forgetting that he's old and played crappy defense.

                                I realize you're not a fan of this idea, either, but I just wanted to continue my rant. The Al Harrington idea - which I've never even considered remotely possible or discussed - just makes me want to throw up all over Conseco Fieldhouse.

                                You've a short memory. Two years ago when Reggie was out at the beginning of the season and we were finishing with Jermaine/Al and Ron at the 2 spot,we POSITIVELY DESTROYED teams. And the good teams too. Not just beat them. Beat the **** out of them. It was an awesome combination that teams couldn't match up with. I'd take it again in a minute.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X