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

It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

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

  • #16
    Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

    Originally posted by Cobol Sam View Post
    I agree with you. Danny Granger is just about the only thing left on the team that can be marketed to the casual customers of the Indiana Pacers.
    I agree, but the problem with both of your guys' reasoning is Williams has basically no value, whereas Granger could land us some guard help.

    Not saying it's a good idea to trade Granger for a guard, just putting that out there.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

      Originally posted by bnd45 View Post
      Graham needs to be in the rotation for the simple fact that Daniels has had maybe 1 good game in the last month. We need some energy and production from the bench.
      Totally agree, but JOB won't do it. Quis is among the veterans not to mention one of the higher price tag players on this team ($6.3M). No way will TPTB accept watching all that money collect dust parked on the bench even if it means the more talented rookie making only $770K is the better player.

      So much for "earning" playing time.
      Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-26-2008, 09:58 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        On top of that....I want to start building chemistry with the players...even if they are at the very end of the bench.

        Yes, to have role players w/o an inflated sense of entitlement, at the very least. This thread is something I completely agree with. The one player I'd most like to include to move a Tinsley is Marquis because of his injury hx, but sadly I think he has the least value for the same reasons. It's what we've all known they have 4 small forwards in Shawne, Granger, Dunleavy, and Graham. 1 cast off 2 guard and a pariah at the point, along with limited Deiner. You have to move pieces around and this is a way to kill two Birds with one stone. Problem is within the first 30 seconds of trade negotiations they'll want Granger. I don't want to trade the best of the bunch, potential, contract and arguable performance to bring in a another flawed Point Guard. would Andre Miller for Shawne and Tinsley be palatible to Phillie?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

          Yes Granger could get us a good PG, but Granger could be our "star player" in the next few years. He is an a goodd rebounder, shot blocker, a great shooter, and young, and you dont even consider trading that.
          The eyes of the Granger are upon you.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

            Originally posted by Cobol Sam View Post
            I agree with you. Danny Granger is just about the only thing left on the team that can be marketed to the casual customers of the Indiana Pacers.
            Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
            I agree, but the problem with both of your guys' reasoning is Williams has basically no value, whereas Granger could land us some guard help.

            Not saying it's a good idea to trade Granger for a guard, just putting that out there.

            I think its cutting of your nose to spite your face to move Granger. So I would be against it. I think it most likely sets you back further.

            Unless you think Dunleavy is your man, which you could make an arguement for except defensively at the 3.

            However, if you get back a Point Guard who could actually defend his position, then you could use Rush to guard some small forwards too. I'm really just sick of having to compensate defensively for someone who's supposed to be a legit NBA starter.

            I know they are running this match up strong side trap now, but I still think its okay to ask a player to be able to moderately guard his counterpart reasonably well. It's no knock on Dunleavy, he's just not going to be able to do it night in and night out, imho.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

              Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
              We could have traded JO a couple of years ago quite easily if we had any foresight. He was vastly overrated for awhile, if you look at some rumors and trade proposals on ESPN and other sites a few years ago you'd see him included in some deals that are now considered outlandish. We have to start looking a couple years into the future when making moves, but the hick from French Lick hasn't shown the ability to do that at this point.

              JO is virtually untradeable now, but it's still TPTB's fault because they should have seen the warning signs after his knee began to start flaring up consistently.


              The fact that there is any argument over who is making the decisions for this team just shows how ****ed up this franchise really is right now.

              I'll say it about a month too early, but I think they'll make the playoffs and I think it could be the best thing but will turn out to be the worst thing.

              I think they will back into the playoffs because a losing record and will get in. The schedule softens in the second half.

              I think it could be the best because of Austin Croshere, he had that Final against the Lakers and his stock was inflated way beyond his ability. This same thing could happen in a first round series, have Tinsley go off or Dunleavy and he becomes the flavor of the day.

              It would be the worst because TPTB would believe it too and think they have something and not trade them.

              I guess what I'm saying is I don' think Bird would be smart enough to capitalize on the moment, instead he'd stand pat thinking he finally had an answer. Sad.

              Side note: The very best thing that would save the franchise would be to miss the playoffs and hit the lottery, but that goes without saying.
              Last edited by Speed; 01-26-2008, 10:36 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                I'll preface this by saying that I don't think Granger will ever be a star in that I don't ever seeing him being a LeBron James equivalent player, or even a Michael Redd. Numbers wise (but not attitude wise) I see him having a career similar to that of Steve Francis, he'll peak at having a couple of seasons above 20 ppg, but it will ultimately boil down to him, on a good team, being a legit second option rather than a first option. He would only be the first option on an incredibly flawed team.

                When you look at our talent level overall, we're obviously way too good at the SF position. Dunleavy is not a true 2-guard, never was, he is only in the lineup that way because he is better at adjusting to the position than Granger. Dunleavy and Granger basically give you the same thing offensively night in and night out, yet Granger is a better defender. The one thing we do have covered on this team is the "productive wing" role which is filled by Dunleavy/Granger. The problem is we don't have anything else covered, so we're better off moving one of those wings and fulfilling our most gaping hole, which is at PG. Test the waters and see what you can get.

                And move Stephen Graham into the rotation.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                  What do you think we could get for Marquis?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                    Let's also remember that when Bird said he wanted RICK of all people to coach a running, athletic type of team fans said "finally" and "can Rick do it". Then when Rick was dumped for JOB it became just "finally".

                    There was a ton of fan campaigning for this direction for the team. My defense of Rick was that he was coaching to the roster, not forcing the issue. I stand by that still. They don't have the guys to do what they are trying to do, and frankly at this point they might not have the guys to win with any style consistently.


                    As for Graham playing, I am confused by his return to the bench so quickly. He's not an ace, but even Rick would have given him 3-4 games to play his way back out.

                    And I guess Rick and Nellie aren't the only two coaches unimpressed with Ike now. My only issue there is from a WTF do you have to lose standpoint.


                    Granger is not a star, but I still say he's headed to be a Pippen. He definitely could use one star with him to lean on. You don't build around him, but you don't toss him aside either. Think of how dreadful Marion and Amare were before Nash got there (and Ivaroni too for those with short memories). They added Nash, the ace star to take charge and suddenly everyone got great. Now imagine if they'd punted on Marion and/or Amare and/or Ivaroni before Nash got there.

                    The problem is JO. Not JO per se, but that JO is the mega-star by salary. It doesn't help that the borderline All-Star is Murphy by salary. Imagine if you were getting something close to those salaries in on-court production. Danny would be just fine then, as would JOB (and Rick previously).

                    I still like JO as a Pacer and there isn't much of anything you can do with his contract to instantly get a true mega-star in his place, but that doesn't mean it doesn't suck just because I'm riding it out as a fan.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                      The schedule softens in the second half.
                      Softer than Miami, Millwaukee, Chicago, Seattle, etc? This team hasn't exactly proven it can whip up on weak teams. They've got some big wins, but they've got even more bad losses.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Didn't you hear? Playing time is earned and not just given to those who normally get it anyways.

                        In the next issue we'll read how JO isn't well enough to practice yet but he'll be in the starting lineup next game!

                        In the mean time we get to read stories about how Tinsley got in a disagreement with the coach, then suddenly became injured and will miss the next 2 games because of chronic thigh pain and a severe case of "sinuspoutis."


                        Hooray for a new coach that changed the whole policy on how to run a team!! I love the way the new Pacers are ran.

                        That is completely and uttering unfair. Jim did sit Jamaal for a game, he has disciplined JT besides that - how do we - why else would Jmaaal throw and fit, and stop taking shots, and stop playing like he was in December

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                          We need to put in Jamison Brewer. He is going to be big if he gets some minutes.
                          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

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

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: It needs to be a priority for the next couple of weeks...

                            Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                            We need to put in Jamison Brewer. He is going to be big if he gets some minutes.
                            Sir, he had to go.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X