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

Dynasty?

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

  • #31
    Re: Dynasty?

    There's no Dynasty without Heather Locklear....



    -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


    • #32
      Re: Dynasty?

      Originally posted by foretaz
      as i mentioned, we seem to have differing values on what a title means....

      and as i stated earlier, bragging rights have zero value in my eyes...let me see if i can explain....

      no, it was about just how sweet it felt to experience ur beloved team achieving the ultimate goal....and sharing the experience and excitement with other pacers fans-not belittling other teams fans or talking trash....
      ....
      ....

      as much as i hate the pistons, im not gonna feel compelled to brag about how great we are when we win the title...to their fans or anyone elses....winning to me, whether its a game or a title, is not about the entitlement of being able to say i told u so and belittle others....its about a feeling of satisfaction and excitement that can only be measured against the pit in ur stomach when u lose....and that sick feeling u get in ur stomach has nothing to do with bragging rights....my hate for the pistons has everything to do with nov. 19 and 20 and nothing to do with losing to them in the playoffs the last two years....and those losses in the playoffs hurt because of the sinking feeling of no hope to win a title-and nothing to do about what some moron piston fans might say...
      I kind of agree with this line of thinking. And while I don't brag about winning a championship, because, as Foretaz says, I didn't do anything to win it, I do take satisfaction in the misery of the fans of the team the Piston's beat. You read enough people talking about your team being lucky, overrated, Detroit is Iraq, Detroit fans are white trash, etc. it makes those victories so so sweet when I see the devastation in those opposing fans who insult my team, our fans, and our city.

      Does that make me a bad person?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Dynasty?

        Originally posted by Pistoner
        I kind of agree with this line of thinking. And while I don't brag about winning a championship, because, as Foretaz says, I didn't do anything to win it, I do take satisfaction in the misery of the fans of the team the Piston's beat. You read enough people talking about your team being lucky, overrated, Detroit is Iraq, Detroit fans are white trash, etc. it makes those victories so so sweet when I see the devastation in those opposing fans who insult my team, our fans, and our city.

        Does that make me a bad person?

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Dynasty?

          Is Taz a shrink? He suggests that we do soul searching a lot, I was wondering if this was a professional opinon, or the whim of an amateur.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Dynasty?

            Originally posted by Pistoner
            I kind of agree with this line of thinking. And while I don't brag about winning a championship, because, as Foretaz says, I didn't do anything to win it, I do take satisfaction in the misery of the fans of the team the Piston's beat. You read enough people talking about your team being lucky, overrated, Detroit is Iraq, Detroit fans are white trash, etc. it makes those victories so so sweet when I see the devastation in those opposing fans who insult my team, our fans, and our city.

            Does that make me a bad person?

            i personally think thats fine...and doesnt make u a bad person....as long as its limited to those people that u mention have insulted ur team, fans and city.....now, if u then use that as material to berate and belittle them, then in my book ur no different than them....but as long as u dont do that ur a classy winner......feeling that satisfaction is a very special feeling.....talking trash about it totally detracts from it in my eyes...

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Dynasty?

              Anyways, back to the thread...

              We do have a possible dynasty in the making. Nothing has been done yet to give us bragging rights, but, who said we're bragging? Jonathon Bender embodies this team, it's all about potential people!

              The players we have now are good enough when they work together to win 60 games, and have success in the playoffs. We all know that. We hope that they win the title, and then the next one, and the next, and every other one after that. I can't help but agree with the original post in that we have the potential to do these great things.

              Have we? No. Will we? That's why we're fans.
              It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Dynasty?

                Originally posted by pizza guy
                Anyways, back to the thread...

                We do have a possible dynasty in the making. Nothing has been done yet to give us bragging rights, but, who said we're bragging? Jonathon Bender embodies this team, it's all about potential people!
                Its very much like "horseness" in platonic ideals. In the offseason, we can achieve perfect "horseness" in our potential to be great, whereas in the real world the "horse"(our team performing in reality) won't possible achieve that ideal. That's why I prefer the offseason.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Dynasty?

                  Sorry if my initial post seemed very "fan boyish."

                  The main idea I was trying to convey was that our big 4 (Jo, Ron, Jack, Tins) could lift this team to Dynasty status. They all seem to want a championship and they all seem to hate losing. Those are great qualities.

                  What they have lacked in seasons past have been simple, maturity. I think the Ron getting suspended thing was a God send. I could be wrong, but I think Ron will be the least of our worries this year. I think JO will be our biggest concern.

                  There is no doubt to me Ron will be ON FIRE this season. He has his head on straight, is in great shape, and has a lot of motivation to do great things. Ron Artest is our best player, but JO is the face of the franchise.

                  If JO can grow up and learn to work WITH Ron, Jack and Tins and everyone else. Then no one can stop us.

                  But if he continues to demand the ball in the post and shoot fadeaways, then we will be what we always are. A paper champion. We will win a lot of games, let a lot of games we should of won slip away. Then choke in the playoffs.

                  Basically, my thread should of been titled. JO: The Difference Maker.

                  On paper our team is as good as any of the Dynasty teams back in the day. Sure we don't have a FLASHY superstar. But that doesn't matter. We've got possibly one of the best defenders to play the game, two amazing point guards, championship experience (sjack.)

                  And of course....Jermaine.

                  Basically, someone needs to let Jermaine realize. Him being the "leader" of this team. Doesn't mean he has to score the most points or all that Jazz. With our offensive lineup, JO should just catch his breath on offense and focus more on D.

                  I think Sarunas style of play is going to completely change the way this team plays basketball and probably rub off on Tinsley a little bit. Tinsley has the same skills as Sarunas, might be a little better.

                  Anyways, I don't go to bed at night thinking this team will be a franchise. I just KNOW the pieces fit....it's just a matter of them working as a cohesive unit with....ONE GOAL.
                  *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Dynasty?

                    A few things I think really stick in my mind as very large factors in our taking a championship. First, getting in the mindset of building momentum towards the end of the season. That includes very much an element of team chemistry, but also as important the physical conditioning to be at our best in May and June. Secondly, really getting guys to trust each other in pressure situations and have clutch performers who want the ball and can keep their heads in those situations. In this regard, Ron has a lot to prove to everyone.
                    SJax has been in a championship situation, but no one else has. Physical talent and depth will take us a long way, but mentally we have a lot of growth potential. (that word again)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Dynasty?

                      I don't know what some of you are smoking but this team is not going to be a dynasty. Do you honsestly see us winning it all 2 years in a row? If you do I want some of that weed.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Dynasty?

                        Hell, I'll be happy with the first Pacers' NBA championship, whenever that occurs.

                        Let's not get the cart in front of the horse, here.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: Dynasty?

                          Pacer Fan in '06 and '07.. Why not us... Why not now???




                          ______________________________


                          Piston Fans in 06 and 07





                          Why Not Us ?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Dynasty?

                            Originally posted by Roaming Gnome
                            Mac, can I renew your Sunshine Brigade membership card? First you have to pick up the Blue and Gold glasses and firmly believe that this year's Pacers will take the record from Houston for best opening season streak by going 16-0 to start the season. Then believe later in the season we win 36 games in a row for the longest winning streak in the history of the NBA. Ultumatly believe that we will have a better record then the 72-10 Chicago Bulls. Finally, top it off thinking that we will just win the title because the Western Conf. Opp. will just forfeit because of overall fear of embarrassment.

                            So, 73-9 in the regular season, and 16-0 in the playoffs?

                            Sounds doable.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Dynasty?

                              Here is an Ironic Twist If the Pacers were to win the Championship..(knock on wood).. Reggie is still under contract, Do think they would have a Ring made for him as a honorary member.. hmmm food for thought....

                              Why Not Us ?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Dynasty?

                                Originally posted by Pacerfan23
                                Here is an Ironic Twist If the Pacers were to win the Championship..(knock on wood).. Reggie is still under contract, Do think they would have a Ring made for him as a honorary member.. hmmm food for thought....
                                I don't think he really cares about the actual ring, its winning a championship that he wants.

                                Plus, Jax already said he was going to fed-ex his ring to reggie

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X