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

Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

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

  • #31
    Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

    I might change my username to Nurphy.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

      Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
      I see Jay want to rid us of Williams, Marshal AND Granger but wants to keep Harrison and Tinsley.

      Sorry Jay, I can't help but point that out.
      I am utterly unimpressed with Marshall.

      Granger is going to be the piece we have to give up to get a new backcourt. I don't want to lose him but with Dunleavy here (and Dunleavy doesn't have much trade value but is a legit starting NBA SF), he's the guy with trade value at the position where we have too much depth.

      I still think Williams is a couple years away and likely won't be with the Pacers when he breaks through, so I don't have any hopes invested in him.

      I'd still like to see Tinsley with a different coach and I'd like to see Harrison put some weight back on and have a legit big-man coach to mentor him. Of couse I've been saying that for how many months now?
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

        Regarding Harrison -

        I think you've been saying that for years. At least I have.

        But, I also believe that it is primarily the player's responsibility for improving. Harrison has done nothing the last few off-seasons to bring his game to an NBA level, he has done nothing to improve his temper and he has done nothing to stabilize his body or his health.

        I'm done with him.

        Not in a million years do I think moving Granger is necessary to improve the backcourt. That view is a bit ... narrow? closed? unimaginative? I'm trying to get a word that doesn't sound insulting, because I really don't mean any disrespect. I think you're throwing all of our young swingmen away because you don't want to consider other possibilities.
        “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

        “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
          Regarding Harrison -

          I think you've been saying that for years. At least I have.

          But, I also believe that it is primarily the player's responsibility for improving. Harrison has done nothing the last few off-seasons to bring his game to an NBA level, he has done nothing to improve his temper and he has done nothing to stabilize his body or his health.

          I'm done with him.
          Have you not seen him this season, Mr. Greenfeld? To say he's done nothing to improve himself after dropping so much weight doesn't seem fair.

          I wouldn't give up on such an athletic young big man this soon.

          If only we could somehow attach Ike's arms to his body.....
          PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

            Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
            I see Jay want to rid us of Williams, Marshal AND Granger but wants to keep Harrison and Tinsley.

            Sorry Jay, I can't help but point that out.
            Ike, Granger, Williams the three names that will probably keep a number of fans (right or wrong) from turning in their season tix.

            Why Not Us ?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

              Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
              Have you not seen him this season, Mr. Greenfield? To say he's done nothing to improve himself after dropping so much weight doesn't seem fair.

              I wouldn't give up on such an athletic young big man this soon.

              If only we could somehow attach Ike's arms to his body.....
              It's very hard to see a player who doesn't play on TV. I have heard that he's lost weight, And I did see his first appearance in months in person against the Clippers.

              I don't care how heavy he is, in fact I like weight on his frame. It's what he does with his hands, his feet and his attitude that are the big concerns for me, and where I note very little improvement over 3 seasons.

              EDIT: please note that I did NOT vote to ditch DH.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                We presumably need two starters in the backcourt, and we have to attach Tinsley to the deal somehow.

                To get value you have to give value.

                Whom else do we have with trade value?

                Lastly, I don't consider Granger, Dunleavy, or Williams to be swingmen. They are all natural Fs, and none of them are particuarly good at playing SG. That's a logjam.

                If we don't have to throw in Williams to the trade to sweeten the pot, that's fine. I don't really care either way.

                I can't see Marshall being invited to training camp next year, IMO he's not much more than roster filler.

                I'm okay with the team taking a risk on trading Granger in order to fix the backcourt. Sure, I think Danny is going to grow into being a player I love for years, but we're seeing right now that our current backcourt is a long way from being respectable, especially defensively.

                If I thought trading Dunleavy could get us a new starting backcourt, I'd be okay with that, too.

                The team may need to make other trades, but it can't keep Granger/Dunleavy/Williams and no legit SG.

                (Even if Marquis Daniels is the starting SG of the future, we still need a capable backup.)
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                  What a difference five hours makes.
                  “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                  “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                    OK - I don't want to rub it in.

                    Out of the 40 some-odd people who answered this poll in a selective manner (sorry btown, but voting for everyone may be funny, but doesn't count in the least) I "called out" Jay. In a poll like this, with so many variables, it is kind of unfair to pick on you, Jay. I'm sorry for that.

                    Our opponent is still trying to claw out of expansion team hell, so again we don't have the most fair barometer to judge things by.

                    But I'll say this - If you trade a guy who can score 32 points on a rookie contract, you either have one hell of an offer or a serious need for psychiatric care.

                    These guys are all "according to Hoyle" swingmen: they play the perimeter with rare-to-occasional post play but NEVER assume the roll of point.

                    Granger is more valuable to the future of this franchise than Tinsley. He is also be more valuable in trade, which I think is what Jay is ultimately getting at. There's a cliche that comes to mind: "don't throw the baby out with the bath water".
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                      We're overstocked at one postion, so we need to trade from a position of strength.

                      Dunleavy can play ball but has a horrible contract that makes it impossible to use him as the "showcase" player in a trade.

                      Danny can play and has trade value in excess of his contract - we'd have to throw in salary filler (Tinsley, Foster, Harrison, Murphy, whatever) to match.

                      Williams has yet to prove he's going to be worth more or less than his rookie contract - not the type of player you can replace your starting backcourt with.

                      Marshall is veteran-minimum filler.

                      Daniels is a wild card, but post-trade, our success rate with and without him is quite compelling - he's an important part of this team's future.

                      I don't "want" to trade Danny. But I don't want to overrate him, and not trade him, if that's what it takes to fix the backcourt. Which continues to be a problem, especially since Dunleavy is way out of position at SG.

                      "Swingman" to me means that the player can switch ("swing") between G and F. Those guys can't, although we keep trying to convince ourselves that Dunleavy can. (Hint, he can't.) Granted, the term made a bit more sense when F's played on the baseline and G's played on the wing and it was meant to describe a player that could swing along the sideline to either position...

                      "Swingman" and "perimeter player" are not synonyms. These guys might be "perimeter players" but can't play guard. They can't defend guards consistently. They don't handle the ball *that* well (we call Dunn the SG because he is somewhat capable of handling the ball - I'd like to never see Granger get trapped in the backcourt ever again after tonight.) Etc.

                      PS - I don't care if you call me out. I know you know that. If I wanted eveyone to say "I agree" and not challenge me, I wouldn't take positions that are out on the edge like I do.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                        Jeff Foster, Marquis Daniels, Keith McLeod and Orien Green. I should have also included David Harrison but forgot to some how...anyway thats who i feel should be gone...maybe Tinsley too...cant believe i forgot him....yep thats who i pick. My picks were based mainly on injures.
                        If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                        [/center]
                        @thatguyjoe84

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                          Originally posted by Jay View Post
                          We're overstocked at one postion, so we need to trade from a position of strength.

                          Danny can play and has trade value in excess of his contract - we'd have to throw in salary filler (Tinsley, Foster, Harrison, Murphy, whatever) to match.

                          I don't "want" to trade Danny. But I don't want to overrate him, and not trade him, if that's what it takes to fix the backcourt. Which continues to be a problem, especially since Dunleavy is way out of position at SG.


                          PS - I don't care if you call me out. I know you know that. If I wanted eveyone to say "I agree" and not challenge me, I wouldn't take positions that are out on the edge like I do.
                          I don't know that you're really as far "out on the edge" as you imagine yourself to be.

                          I also don't know why you'd want to trade Danny, a productive player on a rookie contract and a fan favorite, as the remedy for our backcourt.

                          JO is our most overpaid player, and the player most likely to bring us back a difference-maker at SG or PG. Plus, we wouldn't be subjected to his "Well, I'm going to have to have a conference with Donnie and Larry at the end of the year to talk about whether this group gives me a chance to win a championship" nonsense anymore.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                            FYI, my vote wasn't meant to be funny. I really do want as much change as possible.
                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                              Donnie Walsh should go first

                              I think the reason Larry wants Donnie to stay is because of the "technical stuff" ( Salary cap.....etc)

                              I think David Morway can handle that.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Who should be gone by the start of the 07-08 season?

                                Originally posted by JB's Breakout Year View Post
                                I don't know that you're really as far "out on the edge" as you imagine yourself to be.
                                Maybe, maybe not. I probably agree with 80% of what I type on here. Sometimes, the contrarian in me just can't resist taking certain positions when the popular sentiment has moved too far in a particular direction.

                                I also don't know why you'd want to trade Danny, a productive player on a rookie contract and a fan favorite, as the remedy for our backcourt.
                                I don't "want" to trade Danny. I like Danny. I happen to think that's the best move, though.

                                JO is our most overpaid player, and the player most likely to bring us back a difference-maker at SG or PG. Plus, we wouldn't be subjected to his "Well, I'm going to have to have a conference with Donnie and Larry at the end of the year to talk about whether this group gives me a chance to win a championship" nonsense anymore.
                                If we trade JO for a "difference maker" in the backcourt, and have a big gap at PF, this is a 20-30 win team for a number of years unless Ike pans out to be a top-five PF. And I like Ike, but he's too small to reach top-five PF, IMO.

                                If we trade JO for backcourt help, we need to get a franchise player in return. I don't see that happening, unless you're going to say trading JO for Ray Allen puts us in a championship window over the next 1-2 seasons.

                                Does anybody believe that a JO for KG straight-up, or a JO for Gasol straight-up, or a JO for Dirk straight-up would make either team better or worse? Ignore injury concerns for just a minute - at a talent level, the difference among those four is not very wide.

                                The only scenario in which trading JO makes any sense to the Pacers is if JO requests one.

                                And to JO's credit - he's been here with some looney players, serious disruptions, etc. endured a variety of criticism for things out of his control, and yet he's maintained a very high level of professionalism, charitable involvement, etc.

                                The day JO leaves this franchise will be a very, very sad day in its history.

                                Having said that, if he makes another lazy cross-court pass out of a double team I may strangle him with my own bare hands. But that's not the point...
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X