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

NBA Google Groups

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    NBA Google Groups

    NBA Google Groups

    A huge NBA message board that dates all the way back to 1981. It has a very nice search system, so you can go back and find some gems. Here are a few classics...

    Youch... (early 1985)

    Originally posted by William Baker
    The idea is that it would be stupid to draft a center when you have one
    of the best centers in the league. Look at Portland. They could
    have drafted Michael Jordan, but they took Bowie instead. Everyone
    said that they were making a mistake. No mistake. Portland needs
    another guard like it needs a hole in the head. Yes, Jordan has
    had a great rookie season, but Bowie has done well and the
    Trailblazers are looking strong for the playoffs.

    A true prophet....

    Originally posted by sosmondpt
    I recently watched three pistons games and I've decide one thing. The worst loser in the league is the Isiah Thomas. I'd noticed this before, but I didn't realise the little **** did it intentionally.
    The more things change.... (from Feb. 85)

    The real reason for the NBA's problem is a general decline in fundamentals. The
    players are better athletes, so they get minimal coaching at the high school
    and college levels. Those that make it to the top are the most gifted, and
    therefore, the least coached of the bunch. Even watching top teams play, I
    hardly ever see good defensive position, or a well executed boxout on a
    rebound. If you want a stat, note the general decline in foul shooting
    percentage. About 10 years ago, 80 percent was a bare minimum. Now it's
    considered excellent.

    Now the reason fundamentals have declined is part of a general trend in team
    sports away from the team and toward the individual. What we have is a cult of
    personality. People don't cheer the Bulls, they cheer Michael Jordan. Somebody
    noted a parallel development in the NFL. It's part of the same trend. Why does
    Brent Musberger talk of a matchup between Marcus Allen and Walter Payton?

    Some sociologist could give 100 reasons why this is. However, it does detract
    from the game in general. Basketball is never as good as when 5 individuals are
    cooperating in a balletic display of athletic skill. When 4 are watching a 5th
    solo, it's a lot less interesting.
    From Jan. 85.... (reminds me of the Bynum vs Oden debates, ie; media says Oden is better therefor Oden is better)

    Akeem is a very good athlete and will get better
    as he learns the game, but he's no Pat Ewing.

    Prior to the 1997 Draft....

    trust me stop saying we need tim Duncan!!!!
    WE DONT ----HE is a LoUSY center at best in the nba

    Trust me i goto univ of maryland and i watch acc games all the time he is
    nothing special---
    Back when we had joe smith (they were freshman the same year) joe ripped
    him up game after game--

    Joe should be a senior this year----MARYLAND would be #1 and wake would be
    nothing because they wouldnt even come out of the ACC.

    1996 Pre-Draft...

    I see
    Steve Nash as, at best, a superb third guard in a classic three guard
    rotation. He'll come off the bench and play either point or shooting
    guard, providing his team with instant firepower and passing. I think
    that trading Greg Anthony, a proven starter who looks like he wants to
    play in Vancouver, for Steve Nash would be utter folly. I pray that I'm
    proven wrong, that Nash will make me eat kibble and regret ever writing
    down these words. But somehow, I just don't think that'll happen.

    BREAKING NEWS: NBA Blockbuster About to Go Down?!....

    How's this for a good rumor?

    It makes no difference whether or not Houston wins the coin flip. They
    *will not* pick Akeem "The Dream" Olajuwan!

    Portland *will* pick Akeem. (Wait a minute, here's the good part).

    PORTLAND WILL TRADE AKEEM AND CLYDE "THE GLIDE" DREXLER TO HOUSTON FOR
    RALPH SAMPSON (which makes things *real* interesting if Portland fails

    Ironically enough, this was posted April 1st, 1996....

    Originally posted by Doug Stephens
    who the hell is this adam tolin kid?he thinks he knows something about basketball, doesn't he?kobe bryant is so overrated i believe he will not even MAKE the NBA, yet alone be a star. he has no hops, and can't dribble or pass.by the way, i heard from my father, who is the assistant athletic director at UNC, that Bryant is commiting to DUKE

    Those HUGE NBA contracts...

    Wayman Tisdale, however, has seen better days. He is a
    one diminsional power forward. He can score but I'd send
    him packing. He plays no D and the only thing larger
    than his contract (2 mill) is his waistline.

    Have to love tose post-draft grades (1998)

    Boston Celtics

    They took Paul Pierce, who will no doubt have a productive pro career. But
    they could have had Michael Doleac. Although Doleac does not have greatness
    in him, he is a solid, dependable center. The Celtics need one of those
    desperately. There are a lot of Paul Pierce's out there.
    Grade: C

    I did not make that last part up.... (1998)

    Originally posted by Tim Kanute
    Kobe Bryant is the most over-rated player since Danny Ferry. How could
    he ever start an all-star game. There are 20 guards in the West more
    deserving of that honour. It is pathetic that enough LA ballotbox
    Stuffing and 8 year olds with Kobe Bryant shoes can get a crappy player
    into an All-Star Game. Who's next........... Acie Earl. Damn.


    With Kobe throwing up 10 bricks every game like he did at all-star
    weekend. You guys won't even be able to get past the second
    round........... You have the 2nd best player in the NBA in Shaq yet
    even he can't lead the team to a ring with Kobe showboating around the
    court.



    HEY THE RAPTORS WILL BE ALRIGHT IN ABOUT 5 YEARS. BY THAT TIME JOHN WALLACE WILL
    BE TAKING OVER THE NBA AND KOBE BRYANT WILL BE GETTING ARRESTED FOR RAPE OR
    SOMETHING.....
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: NBA Google Groups

    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.s...8286dc5b40ba88

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: NBA Google Groups

      1996 draft a bust

      Originally posted by Todd Trubey
      I'm going to go out on a limb here. This year's draft is going to be a huge bust. Maybe not Hudson Hawk, maybe not Waterworld, but at least a Beverly Hills Cop III. This year marks the anniversary of the dreaded 1986 draft.

      For those of you who don't remember, that was the year that had Brad Daugherty going first, Len "Dead on Arrival" Bias second, and Chris "biggest flop of all time" Washburn going third. It also gave us Roy Tarpley and a bunch of other druggies. Possibly the biggest success high in the draft has been Chuck "Pop-Gun" Person; that should tell you a lot.

      I see three reasons for this year being a watershed year of disappointment.
      First, all the players coming out too early. What is it, 40something early
      entries, including 3 high school players? Please. They haven't developed the skills and maturity yet. Not everyone is a Penny or even a Kevin Garnett.

      Second, none of the high picks plays a position. Iverson and Stephon are not point guards. They are scorers who sometimes have to pass the ball. One'll probably turn into a Dee Brown, and another into a Nick Van Exel. Marcus Camby? Great kid. Not a center. Not a 3. And where's his "power?" He's not tough enough for the pro game. Ray Allen? Didn't he go to Connecticut? Enough said.

      Finally, the 3 year contract is going to have a bunch of these guys out quickly. They won't develop quickly enough, and no one West of Portugal will want to pay them to do so in their fourth year.

      Trube

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: NBA Google Groups

        What? The internet existed in 1981? I thought in 1981 the internet was just some communication between nerds in the same office building and nothing else.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: NBA Google Groups

          I believe it started with something called Usenet back in 1979.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: NBA Google Groups

            Nice finds. Thanks for posting.
            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

            - Salman Rushdie

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: NBA Google Groups

              And even in the 80's there were plenty of boards you could join and call into. Post thoughts, chat, play chess.

              Certainly it wasn't remotely like it is today overall, but for the kind of interaction we have on PD (sans pictures/graphics) it hasn't really changed so much.

              I had no idea that Google had anything that old still available. What does blow my mind is getting search hits for articles 10+ years old. Time to bust out the cane I guess.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: NBA Google Groups

                this just proves that there was already Smartass posters back then! hahaha

                sigpic

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: NBA Google Groups

                  You know I didn't even know things like this existed. Which is funny, because years from now I was hoping to browse Digest posts and laugh at people (maybe myself) who discounted the ability of the next Jordan or Kobe to even be a decent player in the league.

                  Awesome find Kofi. A lot of this stuff is just priceless.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: NBA Google Groups

                    Some of those are classics. Nice finds!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: NBA Google Groups

                      Here is a nice one from March 1, 1998:

                      Eliminating salary cap and other extraneous considerations, would you trade Ron
                      Mercer for Kobe Bryant?

                      There's no way in hell that I would. Personally, I think Kobe's overrated due
                      to the hype machine that is L.A. I also think that he gets alot of attention
                      because he came into the NBA out of high school. But if you look at his game,
                      it isn't all that special. So what if he can jump through the gym and produce
                      highlight film dunks? Have you seen Mr. Mercer the past few games? There's some
                      quality dunks if that's what you want.

                      Mercer has the better overall offensive game. He's much more of a pure shooter
                      than Kobe. Bryant's more of a chucker. I will give Kobe this - he does have
                      better range as a shooter. Mercer has yet to show (or even attempt to show) he
                      can shoot the three. Maybe this will come with time or maybe it's something
                      that isn't part of his game. Either way, I'd take Mercer over Kobe any day of
                      the week.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X