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

Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

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

  • Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

    And to a considerable extent. It's just difficult to read some of the recent threads.

    Firstly, discussions about Saras have themselves become very superficial. And the vocabulary has changed and become boring; while it was interesting to see all the "STFU", "lovers", "haters", "no defense", "clutch", "shaky passes", "backup", "third string" etc vocabulary in the beginning, the vocabulary now actually dominates the discussion. That's the worst thing that can happen to any discussion.

    Secondly, all the anger. I don't remember posters ****ing about other posters in this forum when I first came here. Now I often see rather insulting posts regarding Saras-haters or Saras-lovers, and rather often they are even out of context. In other words, posters started bashing each other just for the sake of bashing, not because of what someone says. Sometimes it reminds me of the many low-quality European basketball forums, dominated by teenagers.

    Thirdly, those problems have spread to other areas as well. For instance, lets take the recent thread I started - the one where I posted an article regarding Jewish extremists' reaction to Saras' wedding. The thread was actually closed in the end, which was probably the best solution as discussion was very dissapointing. Once again it was full of unsupported anger - smth I don't remember in this forum several mothes ago, when Saras-related discussions took off to new levels. In that particular thread, some of the posters were bashing one or another participant of the story - without clear arguments; some were bashing the discussion itself - quite justly, though again without arguments; and some were bashing me for starting the thread - with arguments so strange that they are hardly arguments (because I have conections with Switzerland, because the posted article is related to an extremist from Israel, because there are many Jews-haters in Lithuania, and because the Jewish extremist is of the right wing; well, considering that Switzerland has mostly been saving Jews during the 2nd WW, that Pacers Digest is hardly related to the number of Jews-haters in Lithuania, and that there are hardly any other extremists in Israel but right-wing extremists, I could hardly understand all that anger and willingness to "STFU", even though I have some Jewish among my relatives myself...). And that thread is just one example.

    All said, some measures must be taken. That's the point for this discussion. Maybe add a sticky thread for the Saras-related comments? Currently, for instance, while I like reading Peck's post-game comments, I'm starting to skip any discussion below them as I'm always 99% sure that it will be full of Saras-related or other angry clashes. I remember times when discussions initiated by Peck's recaps were as interesting as those recaps themselves...

  • #2
    Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board



    You all kill each other off, and I come out on top.....

    ....everything is going according to plan. I knew it was a good idea to send a Sarunas highlight film to Larry's office....

    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


    • #3
      Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

      Originally posted by SwissExpress
      And to a considerable extent. It's just difficult to read some of the recent threads.

      Firstly, discussions about Saras have themselves become very superficial. And the vocabulary has changed and become boring; while it was interesting to see all the "STFU", "lovers", "haters", "no defense", "clutch", "shaky passes", "backup", "third string" etc vocabulary in the beginning, the vocabulary now actually dominates the discussion. That's the worst thing that can happen to any discussion.

      Secondly, all the anger. I don't remember posters ****ing about other posters in this forum when I first came here. Now I often see rather insulting posts regarding Saras-haters or Saras-lovers, and rather often they are even out of context. In other words, posters started bashing each other just for the sake of bashing, not because of what someone says. Sometimes it reminds me of the many low-quality European basketball forums, dominated by teenagers.

      Thirdly, those problems have spread to other areas as well. For instance, lets take the recent thread I started - the one where I posted an article regarding Jewish extremists' reaction to Saras' wedding. The thread was actually closed in the end, which was probably the best solution as discussion was very dissapointing. Once again it was full of unsupported anger - smth I don't remember in this forum several mothes ago, when Saras-related discussions took off to new levels. In that particular thread, some of the posters were bashing one or another participant of the story - without clear arguments; some were bashing the discussion itself - quite justly, though again without arguments; and some were bashing me for starting the thread - with arguments so strange that they are hardly arguments (because I have conections with Switzerland, because the posted article is related to an extremist from Israel, because there are many Jews-haters in Lithuania, and because the Jewish extremist is of the right wing; well, considering that Switzerland has mostly been saving Jews during the 2nd WW, that Pacers Digest is hardly related to the number of Jews-haters in Lithuania, and that there are hardly any other extremists in Israel but right-wing extremists, I could hardly understand all that anger and willingness to "STFU", even though I have some Jewish among my relatives myself...). And that thread is just one example.

      All said, some measures must be taken. That's the point for this discussion. Maybe add a sticky thread for the Saras-related comments? Currently, for instance, while I like reading Peck's post-game comments, I'm starting to skip any discussion below them as I'm always 99% sure that it will be full of Saras-related or other angry clashes. I remember times when discussions initiated by Peck's recaps were as interesting as those recaps themselves...
      I agree on all points. I don't read as much as I used to here because it seems to be a bunch of nitpicking and complaining about the players, other posters, whatever. I also don't post and respond to posts as often at all because it seems that there are a bunch of people who are just waiting to "attack" someone's point of view instead of discussing the other view and making a point.

      Also I have noticed that there are a lot of posters who don't say a lot in their posts but write a bunch of negative stuff just to be negative or confrontational. To put it simply, it's just not as fun here anymore. And maybe it also is because the team isn't the team I had envisioned it as being-and somewhat tough to get a feel for?
      Two=the number 2
      Too=means "also"
      To=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (two, too) do not apply.

      Their=shows ownership-'it is their house'
      They're=they are
      There=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (their, they're) do not apply

      Sorry but it bugs me when these are used incorrectly when I read posts on PacersDigest.com.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

        Originally posted by SwissExpress
        And to a considerable extent. It's just difficult to read some of the recent threads.

        Firstly, discussions about Saras have themselves become very superficial. And the vocabulary has changed and become boring; while it was interesting to see all the "STFU", "lovers", "haters", "no defense", "clutch", "shaky passes", "backup", "third string" etc vocabulary in the beginning, the vocabulary now actually dominates the discussion. That's the worst thing that can happen to any discussion.

        Secondly, all the anger. I don't remember posters ****ing about other posters in this forum when I first came here. Now I often see rather insulting posts regarding Saras-haters or Saras-lovers, and rather often they are even out of context. In other words, posters started bashing each other just for the sake of bashing, not because of what someone says. Sometimes it reminds me of the many low-quality European basketball forums, dominated by teenagers.

        Thirdly, those problems have spread to other areas as well. For instance, lets take the recent thread I started - the one where I posted an article regarding Jewish extremists' reaction to Saras' wedding. The thread was actually closed in the end, which was probably the best solution as discussion was very dissapointing. Once again it was full of unsupported anger - smth I don't remember in this forum several mothes ago, when Saras-related discussions took off to new levels. In that particular thread, some of the posters were bashing one or another participant of the story - without clear arguments; some were bashing the discussion itself - quite justly, though again without arguments; and some were bashing me for starting the thread - with arguments so strange that they are hardly arguments (because I have conections with Switzerland, because the posted article is related to an extremist from Israel, because there are many Jews-haters in Lithuania, and because the Jewish extremist is of the right wing; well, considering that Switzerland has mostly been saving Jews during the 2nd WW, that Pacers Digest is hardly related to the number of Jews-haters in Lithuania, and that there are hardly any other extremists in Israel but right-wing extremists, I could hardly understand all that anger and willingness to "STFU", even though I have some Jewish among my relatives myself...). And that thread is just one example.

        All said, some measures must be taken. That's the point for this discussion. Maybe add a sticky thread for the Saras-related comments? Currently, for instance, while I like reading Peck's post-game comments, I'm starting to skip any discussion below them as I'm always 99% sure that it will be full of Saras-related or other angry clashes. I remember times when discussions initiated by Peck's recaps were as interesting as those recaps themselves...
        I think part of the problem is that we have attracted a certain fan element that really wants to see Saras succeed over here, and at the same time is reduced to box scores when it comes to hard information.

        I can relate, as I spent about 12 months in Taiwan during the 90s, so keeping up with anything was limited to delayed internet updates (which back then were even harder to come by).

        It's a very desperate situation, as there is this team (or in this case, person) that you are a big fan of, and you are information starved. Then, maddingly enough, this person's stats are widely erratic. He posts great games some nights, very poor games other nights. It makes you that much more defensive, because in the end, you are a TRUE FAN if you are going to this much effort to follow something.

        For Saras fans, I think they need to understand that Saras needs more experience in the NBA game before he gets better minutes and starts producing more regular numbers. He is a good player and he has passion for the game, I can't see why he won't succeed. But for the love of God, stop doggedly defending him at the end of every game if he has a poor one, and stop saying he should be the starter after a good one.

        For Pacers fans, just learn to deal with it.


        "Like [Jonathan Bender], AMC's Pacer was supposed to be fitted with a rotary engine--but both rotaries had technical problems late in their development (read: after incurring heavy research costs) that prevented them from seeing the light of day. Of course, both vehicles had plenty of problems that did reach production. The Pacer was a dud in terms of quality, execution and particularly styling. Make your own assessment about its bizarre proportions, but don't miss the one door that's bigger than the other."

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

          Originally posted by BigMac
          I agree on all points. I don't read as much as I used to here because it seems to be a bunch of nitpicking and complaining about the players, other posters, whatever. I also don't post and respond to posts as often at all because it seems that there are a bunch of people who are just waiting to "attack" someone's point of view instead of discussing the other view and making a point.

          Also I have noticed that there are a lot of posters who don't say a lot in their posts but write a bunch of negative stuff just to be negative or confrontational. To put it simply, it's just not as fun here anymore. And maybe it also is because the team isn't the team I had envisioned it as being-and somewhat tough to get a feel for?

          I think there is a lot more to that than what people realize.

          I was speaking to Roaming Gnome & Hicks after the last home game & we talked about how the board has seemed more confrontational.

          I surmised that the problem really was that this team is in flux & therefor we have a group of people who have no idea of how this team will be or where it will go.

          Let's take Uncle Buck for example, I can pick on him because he knows I respect him, but do you really think this is the team or the style of play that he had envisioned when the season began? I would guess no.

          Take any fan of our team that is 19 years old or younger. They would have been 13 years or younger when our team was at a real championship level & many of them have only become familiar with the team or aware of the team over the past 4 years or so.

          So to them Jermaine O'Neal, Ron Artest & Jamaal Tinsley are the Pacers.

          Not a one of them are on the floor for our team right now.

          Many of them have held onto Jon Bender (rightfully or wrongly we will not debate that here) & the promise of his potential & now that is not going to be realized.

          I think there are a lot of people who don't really know this team right now & don't even have a clue as to what this team will be.

          Even those of us that like the new team have to admit we have no idea how the new team will be once J.O. & Jamaal return. Will we be the same team we are now with a more active J.O. or will we revert to a half court team who sloggs it out. Nobody knows for sure.

          What the hell does any of this have to do with Saras? Nothing, I just thought I would put this observation here.

          As to the Saras thing it boils down to one thing & one thing only generally.

          You either think Saras is a superstar who is being held down by the man or you think he is a good player who has issues.

          Notice I don't think anybody hates the guy, I think he adds things when he is on the floor.

          I don't blame our Euro friends for being confused & I don't even blame Saras for being confused.


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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

            I don't really disagree with anything you said, Peck, but in my (confused) mind, at any rate, this is a pretty big issue:
            Originally posted by Ralph Snart
            I think part of the problem is that we have attracted a certain fan element that really wants to see Saras succeed over here, and at the same time is reduced to box scores when it comes to hard information.
            Look, I don't mind getting people on the boards that are fans of indiv. players rather than the Pacers. LoboRick comes around every once and a while solely because of Granger. In the early days, we picked up a couple of Tinsley's college fans. That's totally cool.

            But most of the Saras discussions have a different element... I don't want to name the elephant at this point, but there's no doubt that our European friends have changed the nature of the board a bit.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

              Originally posted by Kstat
              You all kill each other off, and I come out on top.....
              [ultimate showdown]

              Mister Rogers, is that you?

              [/ultimate showdown]
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                Originally posted by Peck
                I think there is a lot more to that than what people realize.

                I was speaking to Roaming Gnome & Hicks after the last home game & we talked about how the board has seemed more confrontational.

                I surmised that the problem really was that this team is in flux & therefor we have a group of people who have no idea of how this team will be or where it will go.

                Let's take Uncle Buck for example, I can pick on him because he knows I respect him, but do you really think this is the team or the style of play that he had envisioned when the season began? I would guess no.

                Take any fan of our team that is 19 years old or younger. They would have been 13 years or younger when our team was at a real championship level & many of them have only become familiar with the team or aware of the team over the past 4 years or so.

                So to them Jermaine O'Neal, Ron Artest & Jamaal Tinsley are the Pacers.

                Not a one of them are on the floor for our team right now.

                Many of them have held onto Jon Bender (rightfully or wrongly we will not debate that here) & the promise of his potential & now that is not going to be realized.

                I think there are a lot of people who don't really know this team right now & don't even have a clue as to what this team will be.

                Even those of us that like the new team have to admit we have no idea how the new team will be once J.O. & Jamaal return. Will we be the same team we are now with a more active J.O. or will we revert to a half court team who sloggs it out. Nobody knows for sure.

                What the hell does any of this have to do with Saras? Nothing, I just thought I would put this observation here.

                As to the Saras thing it boils down to one thing & one thing only generally.

                You either think Saras is a superstar who is being held down by the man or you think he is a good player who has issues.

                Notice I don't think anybody hates the guy, I think he adds things when he is on the floor.

                I don't blame our Euro friends for being confused & I don't even blame Saras for being confused.
                While I agree with all of it, and I like the eventual optimism is those words, I have to wonder if waiting (for the team to become a contender again and for Saras to get better, so that this board becomes less confrontational) is the only solution in this situation.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                  Folks,

                  I too am starting to commonly skip over most posts because they may as well be scripted as soon as Jasikevicius pops up in the discussion. The bickering has become meaningless, and worse it's damaging the community and the forum itself. The only people who can change it, are all of us, together. We make and we break this place by how we choose to carry ourselves, and things must improve or this place will become "just another forum". I don't want this place to ever become that, and if you care about PD, neither do you.

                  Folks, we've come to a crossroads with the latest issues around here. We can either choose to continue down a path of mediocrity, or worse, or we can choose to take a higher road, and get back to civil discussion that amounts to a lot more than taking rehearsed shots at one another. We need to make PD strong again. Right now, it's pretty damn average. We are way, way beyond caring about who started what, who spurred on who, or what someone said to make someone else mad and respond with more anger. It's time to grow up, and move on.

                  I consider the thread about the Jewish discussion an exception to this, but it needs to be addressed as well. If anyone REALLY feels the need to discuss it, the News & Politics board is where it should start. And if ANYONE feels the need to get personal with one another, it needs to start and end someplace else than Pacers Digest; ANY part of it. Here, the N&P board, anywhere. PD is not here for that, and it never will be.

                  While I'm here, I also want to ask that there be less swearing and overall harshness. I know that's subjective, but do we really need to constantly see "****" 's peppering posts? Do we need to see "So and so sucks!!" Aren't we better than that, as a community? I'd like to think so. And if the answer in any of your minds is "no", then think about how you can help change that. This place can be so much better, and it's very attainable.

                  I know that a lot of you don't really respect me as the leader of this place, but if you don't care about what I think, at least care about the people that make this place worth coming to (and that means you), and try to improve yourself and this board for the good of it and everyone that comes here. As the population and popularity of this forum grows, so must its standards. Only you, the posters, can make it happen. I'm just the guy behind the curtain.

                  Thanks for reading,

                  - Hicks

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                    Originally posted by Hicks
                    I know that a lot of you don't really respect me as the leader of this place, but if you don't care about what I think, at least care about the people that make this place worth coming to (and that means you), and try to improve yourself and this board for the good of it and everyone that comes here. As the population and popularity of this forum grows, so must its standards. Only you, the posters, can make it happen. I'm just the guy behind the curtain.
                    Funny, I almost swore in response to this. Guess I'm part of the problem, not part of the solution.

                    Anyway, Hicks, I just felt the need to quote my very favorite piece of scripture: 2 Samuel 12:7. "Thou art the man."
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                      "We need to make PD strong again. Right now, it's pretty damn average."

                      I think the board is probably average because the team is average. As we all care about the P's, its hard to see us suffering through the drought we have been going through. I try to stay positive in my posts and hope we all can keep it above the rim as has been suggested by others on the board.
                      "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                        And I want to quote "Bling Bling", Ali G: "Respek!".

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                          Hicks, I have only one thing to say to you:


                          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                            Originally posted by Hicks
                            Folks,

                            I too am starting to commonly skip over most posts because they may as well be scripted as soon as Jasikevicius pops up in the discussion. The bickering has become meaningless, and worse it's damaging the community and the forum itself. The only people who can change it, are all of us, together. We make and we break this place by how we choose to carry ourselves, and things must improve or this place will become "just another forum". I don't want this place to ever become that, and if you care about PD, neither do you.

                            Folks, we've come to a crossroads with the latest issues around here. We can either choose to continue down a path of mediocrity, or worse, or we can choose to take a higher road, and get back to civil discussion that amounts to a lot more than taking rehearsed shots at one another. We need to make PD strong again. Right now, it's pretty damn average. We are way, way beyond caring about who started what, who spurred on who, or what someone said to make someone else mad and respond with more anger. It's time to grow up, and move on.

                            I consider the thread about the Jewish discussion an exception to this, but it needs to be addressed as well. If anyone REALLY feels the need to discuss it, the News & Politics board is where it should start. And if ANYONE feels the need to get personal with one another, it needs to start and end someplace else than Pacers Digest; ANY part of it. Here, the N&P board, anywhere. PD is not here for that, and it never will be.

                            While I'm here, I also want to ask that there be less swearing and overall harshness. I know that's subjective, but do we really need to constantly see "****" 's peppering posts? Do we need to see "So and so sucks!!" Aren't we better than that, as a community? I'd like to think so. And if the answer in any of your minds is "no", then think about how you can help change that. This place can be so much better, and it's very attainable.

                            I know that a lot of you don't really respect me as the leader of this place, but if you don't care about what I think, at least care about the people that make this place worth coming to (and that means you), and try to improve yourself and this board for the good of it and everyone that comes here. As the population and popularity of this forum grows, so must its standards. Only you, the posters, can make it happen. I'm just the guy behind the curtain.

                            Thanks for reading,

                            - Hicks
                            It's not like there really are a lot of Runi haters. In the beginning perhaps, and I for one had to fend off a lot of them being the Runi fan that I am. It's more like there's so much die-hard Runi fans that have "godly" expectations that rival his actual accomplishments in Europe and post criticisms focused on the individual success of their hero as opposed to the overall betterment of the team. Maybe it would have been better if we just ignored posts like that after so much but hey, not everybody reads all the threads in this board. Discussions will be discussed over and over again by different people. Arguments, reargued. Banters, rebantered. (if there is such a word) The fact that posts on this board is at an all time high I think is a tribute to Hicks management and the overall success of PD. So with that said, I really can't say the quality of this board has decreased. There are days you just want to post stupid stuff and not be "smart" all the time anyway. Good job to all those responsible.
                            http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Saras-related clashes have decreased the quality of this board

                              I like Sarunas

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X