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 if we shopped JO...

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

  • #46
    Re: So if we shopped JO...

    bball: I have to agree with you on this subject. I never have considered JO to be the leader of this team. I think he is a great player and would be a super second wheel on a championship team. Leaders lead. They don't have to be annointed or appointed. When Bird had to call JO out last year about being a leader and taking control of this team it was all over for JO in that role. It was too late for him.

    Ron was more of a leader than JO but his personality, self made reputation and manner was not acceptable to his team mates. To be a leader people have to want to follow you. They didn't want to follow Ron after all the episodes and immature behavior he exibited. On the floor Ron lead by example. Hard play and effort all the time. Off the floor he couldn't relate well.

    Saras was brought in to lead. I think he is a natural born leader who is being alienated by Carlisle for some reason. If getting rid of JO would clear up the pecking order on this team I'm all for it. If getting rid of Carlisle now would help I would be for that.

    Until these issues are settled this team is going nowhere.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: So if we shopped JO...

      Originally posted by Fool
      Starts with a "D", ends in an "O" the middle built by Noah himself. Trade J.O. for the next J.O.....
      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: So if we shopped JO...

        Originally posted by heywoode
        You just topped your own nomination.



        Surely you can come up with something more to add to the discussion than that.
        Naw, that's how I feel about that moron on this team. Sorry if I offended anyone with the molester analogy.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: So if we shopped JO...

          Soup, maybe they should just find a new team to watch ... seems that's what they wanna do anyway ...

          Fair Weather Fans

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: So if we shopped JO...

            Originally posted by Pacesetter
            Soup, maybe they should just find a new team to watch ... seems that's what they wanna do anyway ...

            Fair Weather Fans


            Here, I'll quote myself since you must've missed it, considering this post....


            Originally posted by heywoode
            Fine. Let's keep everybody we have, sign them all to whatever they want, and just talk about whether we won or lost. Let's not expound at all on anything a little (or a lot) off the wall, just for discussion's sake.

            Heck, what we've been doing has been working so well, why even THINK of changing anything??



            RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: So if we shopped JO...

              Originally posted by vapacersfanâ„¢
              Dont waste your time, Heywoode.

              He wont respond to logical comments, he just likes to bash those of us that dont support every thing the Pacers do 110%.

              God forbid people have opinions, and even discuss those opinions.....................
              Yep.



              RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: So if we shopped JO...

                Originally posted by heywoode
                Yep.
                I'm sorry if I seem to be bashing you Heywoode. That's not my intentions, and I am certainly not meaning any disrespect on a personal level. What bothers me is the talk of trade when someone doesn't perform like superman every game out. #7 has a sprained ankle. He is hurt. It confuses the hell out of me when people talk of trading someone when they're down, or have a bad game.

                vapacersfan, I am not bashing anyone in particular. Losses are never any fun for fans, but making hasty remarks about players from one game to the next is being selfish and fair weather, imo. I will voice concern over something if it is a serious concern. I will and always do, but I've learned to ease back a little bit and look at the bigger picture so I don't jump to conclusions hastily. I'm not good enough to suggest sweeping changes after one game or even 40 games. However, if it's in my face obvious, then I can generally call it out without being rash or insincere. There's nothing at all wrong with taking the time to think about the effects what I say has on the folks who hear them or read them. It's important enough to me to invest that sort of time into expressing myself. Hopefully I make myself clear. FWIW.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: So if we shopped JO...

                  Well, I think things can be discussed, one way or the other, without it being taken that anyone is necessarily advocating what is being discussed. When there are obvious problems, it pays to take a step back and look at things from different perspectives other than who should play more minutes, who should start, who should play out of position, etc...

                  Looking at things from a business perspective and looking at far more than what it will take to start winning games right now is a very interesting and stimulating conversation for some of us. We are not fair weather fans. We are not suggesting that since JO is hurt, or he hasn't been totally dominating lately that we should make a knee-jerk reaction and trade the guy. Not at all.

                  We are trying to look at the franchise's situation from a general manager-type standpoint, where even though you may like a player a lot, it could make more sense and be better for your franchise to move on. If things like that are never thought about, or personnel issues are looked at with rose-colored glasses or blinders on because our players are nice, good guys, a franchise can put itself in a long term bind for having been so short-sighted.

                  Questioning everything is always healthy for any situation, and it keeps everyone feeling like both the short and long term success of the franchise is being given the kind of scrutiny and respect it deserves.

                  Thanks for your more indepth explanation of your thoughts, and I hope what I have said will help some understand the context under which we are discussing personnel issues.



                  RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: So if we shopped JO...

                    Originally posted by Pacesetter
                    I will voice concern over something if it is a serious concern. I will and always do, but I've learned to ease back a little bit and look at the bigger picture so I don't jump to conclusions hastily. I'm not good enough to suggest sweeping changes after one game or even 40 games. However, if it's in my face obvious, then I can generally call it out without being rash or insincere. There's nothing at all wrong with taking the time to think about the effects what I say has on the folks who hear them or read them. It's important enough to me to invest that sort of time into expressing myself. Hopefully I make myself clear. FWIW.
                    Well, if you paid attention to what I was writing you would've noticed I talked about JO's progress since the signing of his contract (that's taking a long range look at things) and pondered whether his game had peaked or was still expanding. If you think he's improved leaps and bounds since then, then tell us about. Tell me why I am not giving him enough credit. Tell me why you think he's growing into (or beyond) his contract rather than the other way around.

                    I talked about the future in wondering whether JO was a help or hindrance in ever getting past Detroit. I wasn't asking about the Pacers vs Detroit game in Feb, I'm talking about future playoff runs.

                    This is certainly not something to discuss just because he's injured right now (unless someone wants to add the frequency of his injuries to the discussion). We could ask 'why' he seems to be injured so much... Coincidence? Playing out of position? Not built for a physical game?
                    I suppose the actual answer to that question could impact (hey Jay!) some of the other points in this discussion.

                    The biggest question is whether JO is worth his contract and whether his on court play and growth seems in line with his contract on thru the future and how they will affect the team's ability to field a contender

                    -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


                    • #55
                      Re: So if we shopped JO...

                      bball, I'm about to head out for the game, but when I come back either tonight or tomorrow I will try to put something together that spells out why JO is such an incredible Pacer to have on our team and exactly why I believe he's worth his contract and more.

                      gotta get.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: So if we shopped JO...

                        JO is a piece. 1 good piece.

                        To be a champion you need at least 3 pieces:

                        2005 Spurs: Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Bowen
                        (Pistons: Billups, Hamilton, B. Wallace, R. Wallace)

                        2004 Pistons: Billups, Hamilton, B.Wallace, R.Wallace
                        (Lakers: Shaq, Kobe, Malone)

                        2003 Spurs: Duncan, Robinson, Parker, Bowen
                        (NJ: Kidd, Jefferson, KMart)

                        2000-2002 Lakers: Shaq, Kobe - an exception!
                        (2002 NJ: Kidd, Jefferson, KMart)
                        (2001 Philly: AI, Mckie, Mutombo, Coleman)
                        (2000 Indy: Reggie, Smits, Mark Jackson, A.Davis, D.Davis)

                        1999 Spurs: Duncan, Robinson, AJ, Elliot
                        (Knicks: Houston, Sprewell, Camby, LJ)

                        1996-1998 Bulls: MJ, Pippen, Rodman
                        (1997-1998 Jazz: Stockton, Malone, Hornacek, Russel)

                        1994-1995 Rockets: Hakeem, Drexler, Kenny Smith, Cassell, Horry
                        (1995 Magic: Shaq, Penny, Dennis Scott, Nick Anderson)
                        (1994 Knicks: Ewing, Starks, Derrick Harper, Oakley)

                        Currently, apart from JO, who would be considered a championship piece?
                        Artest - a good piece, but irrelevant.
                        Jackson - has the potential to be, but is currently too inconsistent, and mentally weak.
                        Tinsley - has the potential to be, but is injury-prone, and mentally weak.
                        Granger - has the potential to be, but is still a rookie. Scoring is a big question.
                        Sarunas - has the potential to be, but is still a rookie.
                        Freddie - has the potential to be, but is still inconsistent with his shot.

                        Foster, Croshere, AJ, Harrison, Pollard - are all role players at best.

                        So we have JO + 5 potentials. That's not good enough. Remember - you need at least 3 (some would say that today you need at least 4).

                        Giving away the one you still have is silly. You should trade 2-3 of your potentials for another one (Artest+Tinsley+Jackson for Pierce), and hope one of your rookies develops into another one (Saras/Granger). If you have the money to get a big FA (Al Harrington) - you should.

                        I can easily see next season with the Pacers going with JO, Pierce, Al Harrington, Saras, Granger, Freddie, and 3-4 role players at PG,C, PF.
                        This is a 3-piece team (JO, PP, Al) with 2 hopefully upcoming pieces (Saras, Granger) and a great 6th man (Fred). Add the right role players (Foster, Cro, whatever) and you have a wonderful team.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: So if we shopped JO...

                          bball the situation with Ron has caused a lot of doubt for everyone associated with this Pacers team. I am not at all concerned about JO. He's a winner and he's proven that time and time again. There's alot of mental in this game, and it ought to be fairly obvious to anyone watching why some players including JO, aren't performing at their peak. JO is a smart player, and he is tougher than given credit for. He is still yet just 27 years old, and that's not very old. His salary as far as I'm concerned is earned. He has a great deal of love and loyalty to this organization. He is very vocal about his goals for this team, and I believe he is a player who can carry this team once we're running on all cylinders. If you look at straight numbers he's in the upper echelon of Pacer greats. No one I can think of in the past 25 years has been where JO sits at the moment. He also carries a great many Pacers records with 3 of the top 5 defensive rebounds for a season record, he decimated the block shots for a season with 228. He has a great personality, and you always hear about him doing nice things in the community. I've had friends meet him out and about and said he's golden. Obviously his off the court activities may not be of any significance to some, but I appreciate JO very much. He's like family to me because of the way he carries himself, and you can't puyt a price tag on that.

                          He's paid alot of money but I'm sure that carries more responsibilities than just showing up with a time card and punching out at the end of the shift. He's probably working a great deal of time with charities and locker room stuff. His overall numbers of 20.10 is pretty significant. He's had some injuries but that's just going to happen. I can't remember the number of times Rik Smits feet went south on him, but even at full throttle Rik can't do what JO can do. At the end of the day JO is carrying this team from the Reggie years to the new generation, and not too mention he's been with us 6 seasons now. JO has proven to me he still hsn't reached his peak, and if we can get the other positions settled down, and he can come in and work on his game without the other distractions, I believe you won't even be concerned with how much he makes. I personally don't believe the staggering amounts these guys are making, so I don't think anyone is worth what they're making except maybe Artest. Regardless though, JO commanded what he's making, and obviously there's alot of teams who would love to have him. We got him, and he's a superstar!

                          Has it really been that long since he was considered for the MVP? Geez time flies!

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X