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

PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

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

  • #31
    Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

    Originally posted by Shade View Post
    Don't get me wrong, I'm very excited about seeing this new team (even moreso if we shore up our front court deficiencies). But I can't help but think about what might have been...
    Ya, I'm bummed about it too.. Especially if Jack is no good.. But it probably makes our chemistry and locker room much better, he seems like he talked about himself a little too much even though he does have room to talk.

    Im with you shade.. I'm excited about this next year.. But would have been much more excited having a potential superstar on our team.. Rush is good.. But I wish we would have asked for more.. Like Frye.. and a pick.. Instead of Jack.
    Last edited by Ownagedood; 06-29-2008, 10:29 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

      Shade, I get that Bayless was a great prospect, I kinda wanted to keep him too... but the way you talk about him it's like he's already Gilbert Arenas. I just don't understand that.
      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

        Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
        Shade, I get that Bayless was a great prospect, I kinda wanted to keep him too... but the way you talk about him it's like he's already Gilbert Arenas. I just don't understand that.
        All I can do is speculate based off of what I've seen. And I've seen enough of Bayless to know that I was bouncing off the walls for a reason when we drafted him.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

          I believe Bayless is slower than Gilbert or AI. Sure he has potential but why would so many people pass on him if he had NBA potential with NBA character.

          I am not a fan of the tweener pg/sg because they are so hard to build around and I don't trust Larry to know how to build around such guys.

          In any case we got high character guys with potential to becoming quality starters. All in all I am happy.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            Don't get me wrong, I'm very excited about seeing this new team (even moreso if we shore up our front court deficiencies). But I can't help but think about what might have been...
            I was really upset and am not the type to rationalize away the opportunity to get more talent here. If I had to make a bet, I would be comfortable saying that we traded away the best available talent....which supposedly you are supposed to pick.

            But the Pacers are in a different mode at the moment. The team needs to heal and does need to be careful about bringing in malcontents at this point. Whether Bayless is a great player or not, IDK. I think passing on him is just another piece of flesh we had to give up to get past the Artest/Jackson/Tinsley era. We just are in no position to take that risk. Let's look to take some risks next year or a couple years from now once the wounds are healed and the team is headed back uphill.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              Um...no. Hibbert is nothing like JO. Roy is much slower, a much weaker rebounder, and a much weaker scorer. He's not even as strong of a shot-blocker (yet), and that's Roy's main strength.

              Nester is essentially a taller Foster that can't rebound as well, but has a marginally better offensive game.

              A taller Foster with some offense sounds like an upgrade to me. Certainly an upgrade to Harrison or Diogu.

              You are also comparing Hibbert to the "old" JO. The JO from last year was gone half the season and played way below his old standards.

              Hibbert is a true center and a truely big defensive presence, and will probably give you offense on par with what we got from JO last year, except it will be way more efficient. I like 60% better than 43% from a bigman. He is also probably a better passer even.

              Even if he does not run the floor very well, he fits the role Obrien wanted JO to play last year better than JO. You don't generally run a 5 man fast break anyway.
              Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 06-29-2008, 10:59 PM.
              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

              - ilive4sports

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                I was really upset and am not the type to rationalize away the opportunity to get more talent here. If I had to make a bet, I would be comfortable saying that we traded away the best available talent....which supposedly you are supposed to pick.

                But the Pacers are in a different mode at the moment. The team needs to heal and does need to be careful about bringing in malcontents at this point. Whether Bayless is a great player or not, IDK. I think passing on him is just another piece of flesh we had to give up to get past the Artest/Jackson/Tinsley era. We just are in no position to take that risk. Let's look to take some risks next year or a couple years from now once the wounds are healed and the team is headed back uphill.
                In addition, our lack of talent last season was not just in our deficit of star power, but in our paucity of DEPTH as well. We've address the latter this summer.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                  Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
                  Ya, I'm bummed about it too.. Especially if Jack is no good..
                  Dude. Jack is good.

                  He's played a few years already and proved himself, unlike Bayless. Jack is a solid player and a known quantity. And he is a player we have desperately been needing for about two to five years, depending on your viewpoint.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    In addition, our lack of talent last season was not just in our deficit of star power, but in our paucity of DEPTH as well. We've address the latter this summer.
                    Paucity?

                    That's an "and 1" for you.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      But the Pacers are in a different mode at the moment. The team needs to heal and does need to be careful about bringing in malcontents at this point. Whether Bayless is a great player or not, IDK. I think passing on him is just another piece of flesh we had to give up to get past the Artest/Jackson/Tinsley era. We just are in no position to take that risk. Let's look to take some risks next year or a couple years from now once the wounds are healed and the team is headed back uphill.
                      agreed with this. sooner or later we'll have to take the risk to grab star talent, but it doesn't have to be this draft.

                      in truth, prospects like bayless come around every year. if you buy into the draft hype that is

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                        agreed with this. sooner or later we'll have to take the risk to grab star talent, but it doesn't have to be this draft.

                        in truth, prospects like bayless come around every year. if you buy into the draft hype that is
                        I'm really starting to wonder how many people around here have actually seen Bayless play...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                          Originally posted by Shade View Post
                          I'm really starting to wonder how many people around here have actually seen Bayless play...
                          Here's my feelings on the whole situation. Bear this in mind: I've seen very little of Bayless or Rush. I'm not a college basketball kind of guy, so my opinion may mean very little to you.

                          I was ecstatic to see Bayless fall to us, and was heartbroken to hear we'd traded him. I'd seen him going very high in mock drafts and thought, "We lucked out to have a top 5 talent fall into our laps!" But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that there had to be a reason he fell to us, especially when other teams needed a PG so badly. The Knicks, for one. I'm sure an organization like the Knicks, and Donnie Walsh would have loved to steal that one, but they passed on him. There must be a reason so many other teams did too.

                          We picked up a guy in Rush who fits into his role on the team, can shoot the lights out, plays very good perimeter defense (which is something I saw several people on this board bemoaning), and will fit well into our style. We've got a true SG, one like we haven't seen since Reggie retired. Plus we got rid of an injury plagued Diogu.

                          Overall, I think we made a lot of strides in the right direction. If we suck this year, we'll be able to pick up a star PG next year in the draft. From everything I've heard about Bayless, he was an exceptional athlete, but not a true 1. I have faith in the organization to find the best player for our needs at PG, and I don't think Bayless was it. We need proven guys one our team, and we need character. Rush fits both of those, as well as TJ Ford.

                          This isn't our last draft, nor is it our last chance to pick up talent. Another Bayless will come along, he isn't Michael Jordan. He's not a once in a lifetime talent. This all, of course, is IMHO.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            I'm really starting to wonder how many people around here have actually seen Bayless play...
                            Not many, apparently.

                            I'm completely blown away by the rationalization on him "not being ready" and is an "unknown" because he hasn't played an NBA game, as if that's different from Brandon Rush, or LeBron James for that matter. Or the rationalization on why he fell in the draft as a legit reason as to why there's something wrong with him. Has anyone bothered to look at any past draft board? There are huge mistakes made by experienced GMs every year....lots of them.

                            How anyone could not see where Bayless is headed is beyond me. He's 19 and he's already NBA ready. He has the will and drive to be great. And I would take on an attitude; every team has room for one. Spurs had Jackson and Horry. Lakers had Kobe. Pistons had Rasheed. Heat had Walker. etc. etc. etc. And you could have Bayless at a discounted rookie contract (#11 price tag as opposed to #2, where he was projected as late as draft night).


                            I LOVE Brandon Rush, and I even think he'll be better than anyone is expecting him to be, BUT he's not Bayless. Bayless won't fail based on pride and work ethic alone.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                              Not many, apparently.

                              I'm completely blown away by the rationalization on him "not being ready" and is an "unknown" because he hasn't played an NBA game, as if that's different from Brandon Rush, or LeBron James for that matter. Or the rationalization on why he fell in the draft as a legit reason as to why there's something wrong with him. Has anyone bothered to look at any past draft board? There are huge mistakes made by experienced GMs every year....lots of them.

                              How anyone could not see where Bayless is headed is beyond me. He's 19 and he's already NBA ready. He has the will and drive to be great. And I would take on an attitude; every team has room for one. Spurs had Jackson and Horry. Lakers had Kobe. Pistons had Rasheed. Heat had Walker. etc. etc. etc. And you could have Bayless at a discounted rookie contract (#11 price tag as opposed to #2, where he was projected as late as draft night).


                              I LOVE Brandon Rush, and I even think he'll be better than anyone is expecting him to be, BUT he's not Bayless. Bayless won't fail based on pride and work ethic alone.
                              Beyond Arrogance, what makes your opinion any more credible than anyone else's on this board. Its an obvious reach to pretend like Bayless was projected #2 talent. Furthermore Adam Morrison was once a projected number one pick. To sum it up I just want to know how one justifys a rant like this with such a lack credible information.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: PROMISING DRAFT NIGHT More to come in July

                                Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                                Beyond Arrogance, what makes your opinion any more credible than anyone else's on this board. Its an obvious reach to pretend like Bayless was projected #2 talent. Furthermore Adam Morrison was once a projected number one pick. To sum it up I just want to know how one justifys a rant like this with such a lack credible information.
                                Not trying to be arrogant. I see little reason, other than never seeing him play, as to why anyone wouldn't want a player of his caliber. Some players' talent levels are obvious at an early age. Carmelo Anthony, Lebron James, Chris Paul, etc. I'm not saying Bayless is on that level, because he's not. But he's not too many steps down. And I think his talent level is pretty obvious for anyone that saw him play at Arizona.

                                For what it's worth, Miami had both Bayless and OJ Mayo in for "secret" workouts just prior to the draft. Beasley wasn't sure he was getting drafted by Miami, which was indicated by his post-draft reaction. So yeah, Miami was considering taking Bayless ahead of everyone in the draft not named Derrick Rose, yet nobody is wondering what Miami saw in him. Instead, it's "obviously there must have been something wrong because he slipped to #11".


                                BTW, it wouldn't surprise me if Morrison was considered a #1 pick. Scouts get it wrong ALL the time, even when it's clear that certain players aren't as good as valued (Morrison)
                                Last edited by imawhat; 06-30-2008, 03:32 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X