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

A queston....

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

  • A queston....

    Ok, I've been wondering this for some time now & I want to know everybodys thoughts on this.

    It's a simple question actually but I bet the answers very wildly.

    When did the foundation of this team begin to crumble?

    I'll throw out some ideas just to get you guys started but I know there will be many more ideas about this.

    BTW, I'm not talking about when did we start losing, that's kind of obvious. But when do you think that the cracks were created.

    Here are some topics for thought/discussion.

    1. Reggie Miller retires.

    2. Al Harrington for Stephen Jackson

    3. Brad Miller for Scot Pollard

    4. J.O. signs Max contract

    5. Donnie Walsh saw Marcus Camby in the 99 playoffs & became convinced that athleticism was more important than skill

    6. Isiah Thomas was hired

    7. Isiah Thomas was fired

    8. Larry Bird was brought in to allow Donnie to retire

    9. The brawl

    10. Jalen Rose, Travis Best & Norm Richardson for Brad Miller, Ron Artest, Ron Mercer & Kevin Ollie


    Oh there are more, but I want to know when you thought it was. BTW you can choose more than one but please tell us how the combination impacted (thanks Jay) the team.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: A queston....

    When Reggie retired.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A queston....

      I think it was the year when Mark Jackson left. Antonio Davis was traded and DD moved west. Rick Smits retired. All this stuff happened and then they hired Isiah Thomas. That was the beginning of this fiasco we have now.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A queston....

        I really don't know, but I'd have to say it was along the lines of the Brawl and Reggie retiring.
        Super Bowl XLI Champions
        2000 Eastern Conference Champions




        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A queston....

          11/19/04

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A queston....

            I don't this team ever had a solid foundation. The only time it looked to be cement drying was the end of the 2002 season. Then we got 2003, where the cracks started to really show. Then we got Rick, who in a way sealed the cracks as much as he could, but even then old problems resurfaced (mostly behind the scenes) to keep some cracks alive. Then we had the brawl, which created a pot-hole sized piece of damage. Now we have this season, which dropped a wrecking ball in the middle of the foundation, creating a crater.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A queston....

              The drafting of Tinsley and Isiah giving him the reins to the team.

              Tinsley is always injured, has a questionable attitude, and sometimes for no apparent reason has his own agenda. All of these from your starting point guard are bad for cohesiveness.

              During Tinsleys rookie season I remarked that when Reggie came off a screen Tinsley held the ball to long before passing it to him. Mark Jackson hit Reg with a pass as soon as he cleared. Since Tinsley is a very good passer I thought he was doing it on purpose, but no one even remarked on my post.

              I think Andre Miller, or someone comparable might be what this team needs.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A queston....

                I agree, this team was never really cohesive. Even the 61 win team did not have the togetherness that Detroit had.

                The problem with this team is that they have WAY too many role players. I mean, it's great we can win with people out. The problem is, we can't win with those people in. We are just a team with a bunch of slightly above average players, but no real star (other than Jermaine). Trade 3 or 4 for a star.
                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A queston....

                  I still puke when i think about the Brad Miller trade...

                  Brad Miller for Pollard?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A queston....

                    Losing Reggie and Mike Brown combined with the Ron Artest fiasco.

                    Losing Reggie and Mike Brown at the same time with such an immature team has had a huge impact. It is like Daddy has left the house and the kids have gone nuts. Reggie and Mike were the two "glue guys" between Rick and the players. I am afraid without that glue and with the trade talk, the players are not too excited about playing for Rick.

                    ...and of course Reggie is obviously an incredibly deadly 3pt shooter, so that has crushed the team as well.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A queston....

                      I actually have a different take on this.

                      I think we could have survived a lot of things if we hadn't ended up with the players being expected to carry the team spending so much time injured.

                      If Bender doesn't turn out to be so fragile, if JO hadn't burned out his body playing summers, if Tinsley and even Brad turn out not to be hurt in postseason, we might be in a completely different place right now.

                      I know that isn't something that can necessarily be blamed on anyone and in many ways was not preventable (JT in better shape his first season? JO taking care of himself?), but I think the foundation was built on players who often weren't physically able to carry it.

                      Where we are now, even with the whole Artest situation, is aggravated due to the injuries and uncertainty.
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A queston....

                        We were 7-2 and had a commanding lead with 40 some seconds to go in the 4th we had completely outplayed the defending champs and thennnnnnnn..... #9 on your list. Never in the history of pro-sports has one player done so much to destroy a franchise as Ron Artest. It has reached a point of complete frustration for me.
                        "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


                        • #13
                          Re: A queston....

                          I pretty much blame keeping Ron for our franchise's state. He should have been shipped out two summers ago.
                          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: A queston....

                            I think the biggest mistake was the one that set a cahin reaction into action;

                            Letting Brad go and keeping Ron (and I think Ron is a bigger talent, way bigger) was the initial spark that set it all in motion.

                            Because Ron was retained there was no longer room for Al, so after Brad (JO's pal) his best friend Al was also traded, in return we got Polly, a great charachter, but injured, and Jax, a great pal for Ron, next Ron got involved in the brawl, with a lot of help from Jax and JO got involved as well as AJ and mr Dustpan, heck even Big Boy the rook and for one reason or another I still have the feeling that JO is none to grateful to Jax for swinging his fist in the crowd.

                            This year was hard to start, no changes were made, but most likely anticipated (we are going to try to get under the cap) Saras was brought in, which would bring a form of unrest under the PG's on the team, Granger was our yearly lottery pick draft and the race started.
                            Saras decided that he was to be the leader of this team, which most likely did not go down to well with the rest of the team, so he saw few balls in the beginning, and at the near end of this charade Ron decided it was best if the team got rid of him, as they were talking about that already anyway.

                            Now, 5 weeks later, the unrest under the players enhanced by all the trade rumours and no end in sight, the team leader injured, the floor general injured (I remember how Tins pulled the team through those first games after the brawl, with Reggie still injured) and his backups failing the team is in shambles.
                            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: A queston....

                              When we lost to the Lakers in overtime in the 2000 finals with Shaq out.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X