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

CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

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

  • #16
    Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

    A few thoughts --
    1. All the trades made in the past couple of weeks by other teams are entertaining. Some will be successful like last summer's trade that made a contender out of Boston. Some will not work out. Only one team can come out of the West, so several teams there mortgaged their future for a cheap thrill in February.
    2. JO and JT are not part of the long-term solution for the Pacers. They aren't tradeable for other players. The lack of movement in the past few weeks despite front office effort is proof. The whole league knows these two are injury prone so we can't get equal value. Pacer management is stubborn on this point and they can't get past it. Their 'overpaid stars' can't play even 60 games/season.
    3. I'd like to see us take whatever it is we can get for these two has-beens in the form of draft choices, not players. The picks won't be high lottery pick draft choices but they could be first round. Then, we have to really do our homework so we make the best selections we can.
    Last edited by madison; 02-21-2008, 09:18 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

      Well Madison, as has been mentioned the trades of the summer are often forged at the previous deadline. Just because things weren't done now doesn't mean the price wasn't close. A healthy JO playing well in April bumps up his value and maybe makes something work. Or TPTB having time to stew on things might make them pull the trigger when they weren't willing to cave before.

      There are only 2 reasons to deal right now:

      1) You are making a serious playoff run (ie, not the Pacers)

      2) Because teams are desperate to get that last piece they are willing to overpay and you get higher value on some of your parts. It sounds like this wasn't the case for Indy either.

      So really if a deal can be done it would seem like summer is the place to do it. We'll see.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        These points need to be repeated ad nauseum to all "tankers" and "blow it up" types.


        And Indy has been there before too. We know how horrible it can be, at least if you are over 35 or so. 5 straight years of 21 wins? Can you imagine what Conseco would look like...that's if the team wasn't moved in that time?

        Curtains for the upper level and ends of the club level. Legends is closed down. In short a LOT worse than it is even this season. They haven't got that average down to 7-8K yet.
        You forgot one:

        "There comes a point where making the playoffs isn't received as well by the franchise or the fans," Walsh said. "Nobody's excited anymore that you make the playoffs because you always make the playoffs. It doesn't mean as much to you or your fan base."
        There's only one real difference between 5 seasons of 21 wins and 5 seasons of 31 wins -- a better draft position and higher chance at drafting a good player. Neither of those teams makes the postseason, and neither of those teams brings in fans.

        The only people going to games now are the diehards, and they're the same fans that will go to the games during a rebuilding phase.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          But I'm in the "they are already rebuilding" camp, so I don't agree.

          Here's my rough plan for the team considering the contracts they've worked into.

          You have DG and Shawne to develop. Okay, both need to cook about another 2 years. Danny is just starting to tip into team star (not all-star) status. Shawne is about 1.5 years behind him I think.

          In the meantime you've just got zero room to work, especially considering the resign cost on Granger.

          So instead of trying to fix everything now, you try to hover around and then make a sudden leap in about 3 years. In the meantime while you sit in this dead-end waiting room the East is poor enough that even as configured you can get into the playoffs.

          The team peeks into the playoffs once or twice which gives DG and Shawne that taste as more critical components in those situation. And at the same time something much more important is happening - JO, Tins, Dun and Troy all have their contracts getting better and better.

          So just as Danny and Shawne are ready to be THE guys and are needing some help to push past first round fodder status, off the books comes JO, and Tins/Dun/Troy suddenly have become killer trade bait instead of dead weight.

          Along the way you might have picked up another Foster or Woody or Tony type in the mid-first, a guy that isn't the star but helps round out the youth movement.


          In other words, pretend that JO/Tins/Dun/Troy aren't even a part of what you are becoming. Yes they are here, but in a rebuilding spirit where the target is to get good in 3-4 years they aren't because clearly they will be coming off the books or traded by then.

          If you buy into Danny, and why not, and perhaps Shawne too, then what the F is the hurry to fix anything? As if EJ gets drafted and JO is traded for Vince and suddenly the Pacers are champs. That wouldn't be the case. Even if they can get a Rose, EJ or Bayless, those guys are going to need a couple of years just like Danny did.

          In the meantime someone check the list of possible FAs the year that JO comes off the books. That's the real rebuild target date, not today at 3pm. That's how a team that is as stuck as any team in the NBA gets out of that spot. And along the way you get some minor playoff distraction instead of total crap.
          Let me get this straight.....are you saying that whatever we are doing now isn't a "true" rebuilding process ( where you acquire draft picks, try to clear salarycap space and develop the young players ) but some long drawn out pseudo-rebuilding process where we will likely continue to lose games ( like we would if we were rebuilding if we were the Sonics ) while we develop players like Granger, Shawne and whatever players we draft in the next 2 or 3 seasons?

          Essentially, we are doing the same thing in rebuilding minus the typical clearing of the bad contracts ( and subsequent benefits of salary cap flexibility ) and simply living with them?
          Last edited by CableKC; 02-22-2008, 12:14 AM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Let me get this straight.....are you saying that whatever we are doing now isn't a "true" rebuilding process ( where you acquire draft picks, try to clear salarycap space and develop the young players ) but some long drawn out pseudo-rebuilding process where we will likely continue to lose games ( like we would if we were rebuilding if we were the Sonics ) while we develop players like Granger, Shawne and whatever players we draft in the next 2 or 3 seasons?

            Essentially, we are doing the same thing in rebuilding minus the typical clearing of the bad contracts ( and subsequent benefits of salary cap flexibility ) and simply living with them?
            Obviously I'm not Seth, but I think that's what the team is doing. I think this is Plan B. Plan A is to trade those contracts for shorter ones or at least for players we don't mind keeping that long. But those trades aren't always going to be there and quite possibly were not right now. Better to wait then force Plan C: Trade because things are bad, even though we don't like the trade.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

              It wasn't as bad as I expected. I was ready to hear the city and state short-changed and an excuse of how limited the options were for the Pacers as compared to some other teams.

              I was ready to hear Walsh say how in X city you have more flexibility to retool and rebuild a roster but that it wouldn't work in Indiana.

              -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


              • #22
                Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

                Originally posted by madison View Post
                3. I'd like to see us take whatever it is we can get for these two has-beens in the form of draft choices, not players. The picks won't be high lottery pick draft choices but they could be first round. Then, we have to really do our homework so we make the best selections we can.

                JO has far more value as an expiring in 2 years than any draft pick they might get.
                At least I think so. Unless someone gives up a 1-5 pick you keep JO. I just don't think anyone is going to give up a pick that high. AD got the Pacers a 5 I believe. AD was healthy.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

                  This jumped out at me after reading all the "tank the season" stuff:

                  For every year that offers a LeBron or a Carmelo, however, there are far more that include players such as Adam Morrison and recently traded Shelden Williams among the top five. That reality may give a general manager pause before taking the sledgehammer to his team. And that's to say nothing of the team that swings for a lottery prize and misses.

                  "Teams have gotten really burned going for the worst record," Walsh said. "Instead of getting a Greg Oden, they pick 4 or 5 or 6, and that sets you back a long way. You'll get a normal, good player, but you've given up your whole team and you can't really replace it, so you've probably put yourself way behind."


                  It was interesting to see how Ferry pretty much admitted that teams do tank seasons to rebuild.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

                    I like this article. I can see the whole idea that if you tank and try to get a high draft pick, you really have to do it in the right year. You want to have it happen in the D Wade, Melo, Bosh, Lebron year, not the the Adam Morrison/Sheldon Williams year.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: CNNSI article: Path to success unclear for teams stuck in the middle (Walsh input)

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      I like this article. I can see the whole idea that if you tank and try to get a high draft pick, you really have to do it in the right year. You want to have it happen in the D Wade, Melo, Bosh, Lebron year, not the the Adam Morrison/Sheldon Williams year.
                      I think that a very good scouting staff that you can at least improve your chances of picking a future All-Star ( if not a very solid Starter ) in the draft.

                      I'm not saying that there is any guarantees that you can get a Franchise level player....but at least with a top 10 pick....if you do your scouting right you can get a future Starter for your team that can effectively contribute.

                      Although it's always nice to draft the next Michael Jordan in the draft......since most are few and far between......drafting the next Scottie Pippen would go a very long way to improving this team. It's been said many times before.....given the core of players that we have....we just need to draft the right type of talent that is NBA ready that can help us now.

                      I'm not hoping for the next Franchise player in the upcoming Draft....I know that we're not going to get a high enough draft pick to even get near Beasley. I'm just hoping that we draft someone that makes sense for us ( as in not drafting yet another SF that can shoot ) while filling a definite need for us ( as in drafting a solid Guard or a Big Man that can defend ).
                      Last edited by CableKC; 02-22-2008, 11:36 AM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X