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

What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

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

  • #16
    Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

    Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
    Trade AJ to Cleveland for Luke Jackson

    Trade Stephen Jackson to Milwaukee for Dan Gadzuric

    Move Tinsley for a draft pick, any draft pick

    Sign & Trade Fred Jones to Portland for Steve Blake

    Sign Eddie House

    Thanks Peck
    I like it, I like.

    We could probably get more from Cleveland, however. At least a draft pick. And I don't think Steve Blake's the answer, if we get rid of AJ and Tins and hand the keys to Saras we need a veteran point who can play some D.

    But on the whole, it's addition by subtraction from here on out, and hopefully we can get value for either AJ or Saras.

    edit: I also don't like the idea of giving Cleveland another solid role player. But Luke Jackson is in the mold of guys I'd like to see us add.
    2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

      There's still no starter...unless it's 'Quis
      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

        Originally posted by Pointz
        With the recent news of the acqusition of Baby Al, What is left for us to do this offseason? What is the boards opinion on what else we should change?
        Well for starters the "One Goal" video, most of the signage and banners and about half the product stocked in the HC Gift Shop.

        My team calender from last season is already outdated and I've got a few months left to do on it. Left to go is Harrison, Jones, AJ, and Granger. Can the calender make it without actually being incorrect on the current month (meaning a Pacer photo shown for a month in which he's actually not with the team). DH and Danny are safe, but Fred isn't signed yet and AJ has been in tons of rumors.

        Seriously, can a person get a scorecard around here for all the "minor" changes the team is making.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

          Travis Best, no not someone to dribble and dribble and, well, dribble. Someone who can stay in front of a quick point guard, Tyrone Lue, Delonte West, Marcus Banks, Derrick Fisher types as an example, someone to take the pressure off our team D. Dribble penetration has killed the Pacers for years.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

            Originally posted by Speed
            Travis Best, no not someone to dribble and dribble and, well, dribble. Someone who can stay in front of a quick point guard, Tyrone Lue, Delonte West, Marcus Banks, Derrick Fisher types as an example, someone to take the pressure off our team D. Dribble penetration has killed the Pacers for years.
            That's why they drafted White and traded for Daniels.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

              What we need:

              A solid starter at PG. Some one who is capable of being a floor general, and can hit a shot. NOT A SHOOT-FIRST POINT GUARD, BUT A POINT GUARD THAT CAN SHOOT!!

              A SG that can consistantly hit the 3pt shot. I like 'Quis, but the dude can't shoot from outside. SJax should be moved for anything we can move him for, and Freddie is not a starting SG in the NBA (though a very good backup).

              We need, I mean it's imperative, to get rid of Tinsley and Jackson. I actually really like the rest of this team. Tins and SJax need to be gone and I'd be 100% happy with this offseason, even if we got jack-crap back for them.
              It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                Originally posted by Pointz
                With the recent news of the acqusition of Baby Al, What is left for us to do this offseason? What is the boards opinion on what else we should change?
                Sign Pollard.

                If we can, try to keep Jeff and AJ, but minimalize their roles. Make Jeff the 10-15 minute rebounding and intensity injection that he should be, and try to keep AJ as back-up PG. With so many young'ins, we need to try to keep him and his experience. Besides, it doesn't get a whole lot better than him at back-up PG.

                Make 'Quis the starting SG.

                Which gives us

                O'Neal/Harrison/Pollard
                Harrington/Foster
                Granger/Williams
                Daniels/White
                ?/AJ

                And leaves us Tinsley, Jackson, and Saras to trade with. I kind of think that Fred probably won't be back, which I kinda hate.

                Anyway try to acquire another starting guard with Jax Tins and Saras. Include Jeff and/or AJ if needed, although try to hold on to them if possible.

                Ideally we don't lose AJ or Jeff and get to plug a new PG into the lineup I had above, and then sign a veteran SG/SF to help out the rooks in case they can't cut it.
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                  As for changes, I think the Pacers have a couple of ways they can go.

                  They definitely need one more player in the frontcourt. If they start JO at center, then I think we should acquire a backup PF.

                  If we can get our hands on Magloire, then I think we would then start JO at PF, with Al at SF and possibly Danny at SG. But that move would definitely require a significant upgrade over AJ at PG because it would require a better distributor, since the SG (Danny) wouldn't be much help in that regard.

                  And, with the Magloire-JO-Al lineup, if we started Daniels at SG, then we could survive with AJ at PG.

                  Of course, all of the lineups above consider Jackson and Tinsley gone.

                  Beyond either a starting C or a backup PF, I believe we need an upgrade at PG and a perimeter shooter.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                    i say keep tinsley, saras, and greene as our PG rotation. i know a lot of ppl want tins moved, but i don't think we'll ever get anything of value for him. i also have a gut feeling that with all the critiscm he's taken this year, there is a good chance he'll come back strong next year. he makes the offense flow so much more efficiently that to me it's worth taking a chance on him. even if he flops again this year, quis is more than capable at taking some spot mins at point. i also think saras is up for a good year too.....in the past most euros stink it up there first year and then come back strong there after.

                    if we do get al, our final move should be for a guard who can shoot lights out and is capable of giving mins at both the 1 and 2. i know he's had a bad rep in the past, but i like jamal crawford quite a bit. seems like he turned over a new leaf under brown last year. from what i hear he's going to be the odd man out in NY behind francis, marbury, and robinson, so he could be available.

                    if we indeed are only moving cash, the T/E, and picks for harrington, i would welcome a deal where jax and AJ are out and crawford is in.

                    tins/saras/crawford
                    quis/crawford
                    granger/quis
                    harrington/foster
                    jo/harrison

                    that's a very solid and well balanced 9 man rotation. white, williams, greene, and pollard could get scrap time.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                      Jamaal Crawford is definitely someone to look at. he'd help with just about everything we need. Clutch, someone to help push the tempo, good outside shooter.

                      I'd love to have him. Andre Miller would be my number 1 choice, but I don't see that happening any time soon, so I'd look at Crawford, since he can probably be had at a pretty reasonable price.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                        Sign a back up big man ---- Antonio Davis
                        Sign a shooter ----- Kareem Rush
                        Trade Stephen or Fred plus picks to the Bucks for Magliore
                        I dont know where to put Foster and Saras

                        Tins/AJ
                        Quise/Rush/Flight
                        Al/Danny/Shawne
                        JO/Danny/Davis
                        Mags/Harrison/Davis

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                          Originally posted by McRoberts2Pacers
                          Why in the hell is Foster at the 4 and JO at the 5?????
                          my bad lol

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                            I think that we should keep future picks if the draft will be as good as some say instead of taking on Magloires contract
                            I also think LB wants Saras to be a big part of next year (he's pretty much the only one)
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                              Originally posted by bulldog
                              edit: I also don't like the idea of giving Cleveland another solid role player. But Luke Jackson is in the mold of guys I'd like to see us add.
                              Me, too. I think he's lost on the depth chart and due to his injury, but he still hasn't had a chance to show what he can do. I think he would fit here and will end up being a talented player. I think Jose and I had kinda discussed him in another thread.

                              Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
                              Trade Stephen Jackson to Milwaukee for Dan Gadzuric
                              That woud be a smart move in my book. Dan is a guy I think the casual fan doesn't know, but would be really nice on this team. Kinda perfect, actually. Most fans always throw out these high profile guys, but it's guys like Dan whom we need. (Magloire? phah!)

                              Love your Jackson trade and this one.

                              With the recent news of the acqusition of Baby Al, What is left for us to do this offseason? What is the boards opinion on what else we should change?
                              What's left? What's left??

                              A lot.

                              Right now this team is still built around Tinsley, Jackson and Jermaine. What's left is to trade Tinsley and Jackson, first and foremost. What's lieft is to pick up a dynamic starting PG. How about one more prescence in the post with some size?

                              I actually edited this post because I went on and on. As long as we have the same core and the same coach, then I see the need to make some REAL changes, not just bring back a fan fav to appease the angry masses.

                              We have a LOT of work to do.
                              Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: What changes are left to be made before 2006-2007 season?

                                Originally posted by Skaut_Ech


                                That woud be a smart move in my book. Dan is a guy I think the casual fan doesn't know, but would be really nice on this team. Kinda perfect, actually. Most fans always throw out these high profile guys, but it's guys like Dan whom we need. (Magloire? phah!)
                                .
                                I would think most Pacer fans would know Dan, he always eats us alive.
                                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X