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

Are we going to lose the Pacers?

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

  • #31
    Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

    Originally posted by Reckoner View Post
    How could anyone support a team that moves? They would be neither the old towns team or the new towns team.
    I can't recall all of them, but the list of teams that play today in a different city than where they started is very long.

    The Lakers started in Minnesota.
    The Jazz started in Kansas City.
    The Pistons started in Ft. Wayne.
    The Hornets started in Charlotte.
    The Kings started in Cincinnati.

    That's just a few from basketball. And as Kester points out, we're pretty content with our Colts.
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

      The Jazz were in Kansas City before New Orleans? I didn't know that.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

        Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
        Which is why it is justifiable to trade anybody on our roster right now, even Granger. Face it people, Granger is a glorified Dunleavy who at this point has some nice trade value because he is overrated among league executives but he's inconsistent on the offensive side and not a great defender, to me he's an average NBA starter on a bad-mediocre team and a 6th man on an elite team like the Mavs. And Granger will NOT be the future marketing tool of this franchise, he doesn't have the personality of a guy like Reggie to do so. He just hasn't put in the effort to make himself visible to the media off the court.

        Some with Diogu, while he's a level behind Granger he's still pretty overrated. We should package these guys with a player like Dunleavy or O'Neal as sweeteners to get something interesting going on with the Pacers. The team right now, as much as I support it, is bland and mediocre.
        The Simons could always sell the franchise....but I doubt it will happen for several reasons. First, they just made a huge investment in their HQ downtown. They appear to be here for the long haul....although they could always shed the Pacers. Another is that selling the franchise would definitely hurt commerce downtown including at the(ir) mall. Not sure what their financial stake is in the mall in terms of dollars, but it would be a drawback. Also, it would be very bad PR for them. In addition, they have to know things are likely to improve. The franchise has been dragged through the mud and might be seeing the bottom right now. In any event, if we get much worse, we will be drafting Eric Gordon and then they sell a whole lot more tickets.

        As for trading players, no one should be off limits. However, I doubt Granger will be traded because he is young, pretty good, and a good citizen. Basically, he represents an appreciating asset with very low risk....which is usually a very good investment you hang onto.

        The real trick will be what happens with JO during the next year or so. IMO, you can forget about him resigning with the Pacers because of his relationship with Bird, the mediocre status of the team and his own interest of competing for a championship. Fortunately, the team will be forced to make a move or lose Granger, Williams and/or Diogu in the next year or two. Know anyone with a big fat expiring and multiple first round picks?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

          Originally posted by Mal View Post
          The Jazz were in Kansas City before New Orleans? I didn't know that.
          I didn't know it either. Like a moron I typed without thinking.

          The Cincinnati Royals moved to Kansas City and became the Kings. (they actually started in Rochester, NY.) The Jazz started, as you say, in New Orleans.




          BlueNGold, good comments, there.
          Last edited by Putnam; 01-07-2008, 09:52 PM.
          And I won't be here to see the day
          It all dries up and blows away
          I'd hang around just to see
          But they never had much use for me
          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
            I can't recall all of them, but the list of teams that play today in a different city than where they started is very long.

            The Lakers started in Minnesota.
            The Jazz started in Kansas City.
            The Pistons started in Ft. Wayne.
            The Hornets started in Charlotte.
            The Kings started in Cincinnati.

            That's just a few from basketball. And as Kester points out, we're pretty content with our Colts.
            Started me wondering....If there are more relocated team then there are original teams.

            Relocated Franchises: 14
            Atlanta Hawks (Tri-Cities Blackhawks; Moline IL/Davenport IA)
            Warriors (Phila. Warriors)
            Kings (Rochester Royals)
            Lakers (Minneapolis Lakers)
            Clippers (Buffalo Braves)
            Rockets (San Diego Rockets)
            Grizzlies (Vancouver Grizzlies)
            Hornets (Charlotte Hornets)
            76ers (Syracuse Nationals)
            Spurs (Dallas Chapparrals)
            Jazz (New Orleans Jazz)
            Wizards (Chicago Packers)
            Pistons (Zollner Pistons; Fort Waynen IN)
            Nets (New York Nets, but started as the New Jersey Americans)

            Original Frachise: 16
            Boston Celtics
            Seattle Sonics
            Portland Trailblazers
            Phoenix Suns
            Charlotte Bobcats
            Chicago Bulls
            Cleveland Cavaliers
            Dallas Mavricks
            Denver Nuggets (Originally named: Denver Rockets, not to be confused with the Rocket franchise)
            Indiana Pacers
            Miami Heat
            Milwaukee Bucks
            Minnesota Timberwolves
            New York Knicks
            Orlando Magic
            Toronto Raptors

            Looks like there are nearly as many relocated franchises as there are original franchises. If you take away the recent expansions.... The NBA would nearly be all relocated teams. I was suprised to see how many teams that were relocated.
            Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 01-07-2008, 10:45 PM.
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

              Originally posted by Putnam View Post
              I can't recall all of them, but the list of teams that play today in a different city than where they started is very long.

              The Lakers started in Minnesota.
              The Jazz started in Kansas City.
              The Pistons started in Ft. Wayne.
              The Hornets started in Charlotte.
              The Kings started in Cincinnati.

              That's just a few from basketball. And as Kester points out, we're pretty content with our Colts.
              Yeah it seems very popular and accepted in the States. Didn't mean any offence (don't follow NFL so don't know anything the Colts at all - just that Bill Simmons is obsessed with Mannings face ), just giving my perspective.

              In major sporting leagues outside of the States it's very rare. Teams aren't considered franchises (ownership structures are generally different in most cases) and where they are located is nearly (actually probably is) their whole identity. A last gasp move to save from bankruptcy is about the only reason a team will move. Even then most fans would rather see them die. Otherwise it's just about civil war trying to make it happen.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                Started me wondering....If there are more relocated team then there are original teams.

                Relocated Franchises: 14
                Atlanta Hawks (Tri-Cities Blackhawks; Moline IL/Davenport IA)
                Warriors (Phila. Warriors)
                Kings (Rochester Royals)
                Lakers (Minneapolis Lakers)
                Clippers (Buffalo Braves)
                Rockets (San Diego Rockets)
                Grizzlies (Vancouver Grizzlies)
                Hornets (Charlotte Hornets)
                76ers (Syracuse Nationals)
                Spurs (Dallas Chapparrals)
                Jazz (New Orleans Jazz)
                Wizards (Chicago Packers)
                Pistons (Zollner Pistons; Fort Waynen IN)
                Nets (New York Nets, but started as the New Jersey Americans)
                Some great names there.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                  Originally posted by Alabama-Redneck View Post
                  I think it is a great idea. The city would get rid of all those "thugs" and I'm sure the crime rate would drop 40-50%.

                  The city could downsize their police force and the newspapers could cut their sportswriters by 2/3's. Looks like a win-win sitution to me.

                  The city could hold high school and college games in Conceso and sell the place out everytime.

                  And yet sarcasm aside there are those that think your last line is true. I would love for them to be foolish enough to try and pack Conseco for college/HS games just to make my ongoing point/rant about "Hoosiers".

                  Obviously the problem goes a lot further than the Pacers. I mean it's not that bad a drive up to W. Laf, but the people skipping Pacers games aren't going up there instead. And despite what they say I'm pretty sure none of them without kids in HS are swinging by the local HS gym just to get their basketball fix.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    And yet sarcasm aside there are those that think your last line is true. I would love for them to be foolish enough to try and pack Conseco for college/HS games just to make my ongoing point/rant about "Hoosiers".

                    Obviously the problem goes a lot further than the Pacers. I mean it's not that bad a drive up to W. Laf, but the people skipping Pacers games aren't going up there instead. And despite what they say I'm pretty sure none of them without kids in HS are swinging by the local HS gym just to get their basketball fix.
                    With class basketball, I don't think anyone has to worry about HS games outdrawing the Pacers.

                    -Bball
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                      Not only did some of those teams move, but they did it more than once. The Clippers went from Buffalo to San Diego and then LA for example.


                      And while I do agree with the idea that the name and colors maybe should stay at the original city if possible, I'm pretty sure we are more than comfortable with the Dodgers and the Giants being in LA/SF. I mean the volume of history those two teams have in their new cities matches what they had back in NY, and that's saying something.

                      I do wish the Colts had left "Colts" back in Baltimore. But once they kept it and we learned to love it there is no way we are giving it up now.

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      With class basketball, I don't think anyone has to worry about HS games outdrawing the Pacers.

                      -Bball
                      Without a doubt.

                      But people watch that film and act like it's still true, at least some people do. Texas might still be living Friday Night Lights, but we aren't living Hoosiers one bit. I'm no die-hard myself, but I'll make that W. Laf drive a couple of times and did so even when they stunk in recent years.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-08-2008, 04:56 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                        Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                        Some great names there.
                        Here's some even cooler names from the ABA, most of which I saw as a young-un;
                        Pittsburgh Pipers and Condors
                        Oakland Oaks
                        New Orleans Buccaneers
                        Minnesota Muskies
                        Carolina Cougars
                        Virginia Squires
                        San Diego Conquistadors
                        Memphis Pros, Tams (get it, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi), and Sounds
                        Spirits of St. Louis (the bad-*** team of all time featuring Marvin "Bad News" Barnes, Maurice Lucas, Gus Gerard, Fly Williams, and M.L. Carr).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                          Originally posted by Alabama-Redneck View Post
                          I think it is a great idea. The city would get rid of all those "thugs" and I'm sure the crime rate would drop 40-50%.

                          The city could downsize their police force and the newspapers could cut their sportswriters by 2/3's. Looks like a win-win sitution to me.

                          The city could hold high school and college games in Conceso and sell the place out everytime.

                          LOL

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                            Originally posted by RomanGabriel View Post
                            Here's some even cooler names from the ABA, most of which I saw as a young-un;
                            Pittsburgh Pipers and Condors
                            Oakland Oaks
                            New Orleans Buccaneers
                            Minnesota Muskies
                            Carolina Cougars
                            Virginia Squires
                            San Diego Conquistadors
                            Memphis Pros, Tams (get it, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi), and Sounds
                            Spirits of St. Louis (the bad-*** team of all time featuring Marvin "Bad News" Barnes, Maurice Lucas, Gus Gerard, Fly Williams, and M.L. Carr).
                            Those are damn good ones, don't get me wrong, but something about New Jersey Americans just hits the right chord. In a related thought, I think our national team should from now on be named, in honor of Miss South Carolina, the US Americans.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              And yet sarcasm aside there are those that think your last line is true. I would love for them to be foolish enough to try and pack Conseco for college/HS games just to make my ongoing point/rant about "Hoosiers".

                              Obviously the problem goes a lot further than the Pacers. I mean it's not that bad a drive up to W. Laf, but the people skipping Pacers games aren't going up there instead. And despite what they say I'm pretty sure none of them without kids in HS are swinging by the local HS gym just to get their basketball fix.
                              Before class basketball they could have filled Conseco with some games. Class basketball
                              killed HS basketball in Indiana and the following it had. That was part of what Indiana was.
                              Yep, pretty much drove a stake right through the heart.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Are we going to lose the Pacers?

                                Well, after this season's 'performance', I'd think the Pacers would be more worried about losing us than vice versa. I mean, the few of us who still care, though are really trying hard not to.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X