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

Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

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

  • #31
    Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

    Any chance of seeing that video without the background? Maybe with a nice traditional gamelan orchestra instead?



    (And yes, it did occur to me to mute the video sound.)
    Last edited by Putnam; 09-03-2008, 01:52 PM.
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

      Please count more Putty.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        for all intensive purposes
        ITYM "for all intents and purposes"

        HTH

        HAND
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

          Originally posted by intridcold View Post
          Cause Artest, Stephen Jackson, JO,Rick Carlisle, Donnie Walsh, Al Harrington, and David Harrison are gone.

          dind,ding, ding. We post in a community of pessimists. If there is anything I have learned in my years on this board is that the fans love to hate (lay blame). I am not saying DG's the chosen scapgoat, but Tinsley is getting old and people need something to female dog about..

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

            Peck-

            That is what got me. It looked like he was enjoying himself. He was there in mind as well as in body. Not many NBA players would carry themselves that way in a similar scenario.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
              Sometimes I feel like Danny is a piece of plywood floating in a storm at sea, the way Pacer fans cling to him so desperately.

              He's a good player, but I will never understand how someone on a losing team can be untouchable.
              Well, it's simple.

              Despite your team's record, if the player is performing consistently well you keep him. Do you think the Bulls would have traded MJ before they won their first 3 championships? Remember, they were losing alot of games, too, before their first 3-peat but MJ was performing well (this before he became known as Air Jordon).

              Regardless, the "JO to Raptors" trade should be the format for doing trades: make the trade only if it improves your team, not just to be rid of a player (although that trade accomplished both. )

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                Well, it's simple.

                Despite your team's record, if the player is performing consistently well you keep him. Do you think the Bulls would have traded MJ before they won their first 3 championships? Remember, they were losing alot of games, too, before their first 3-peat but MJ was performing well (this before he became known as Air Jordon).

                Regardless, the "JO to Raptors" trade should be the format for doing trades: make the trade only if it improves your team, not just to be rid of a player (although that trade accomplished both. )
                Good illustration of a player on a losing team being "untouchable" or nearly so. Through Jordan's 1st three seasons, the Bulls were 108-138 (though Jordan only played 18 games during his second season, when they went 30-52.) Believe it or not, the Bulls made the playoffs at 30-52, then Jordan averaged almost 44 points a game against Boston in the first round.

                The key difference is that three years into his career, Jordan was clearly something special. Danny, though I'm a huge fan, still falls in the "very good pro" category. That's nothing to sneeze at, but it isn't enough to make him untouchable.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                  soon-to-be-former Pacer does something worthwhile; fans still blame O'Neal.

                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                    Carmelo, Lebron, Pierce, Artest, Iguodala, Luel Deng, Tayshaun Prince, Kirilenko, J-Rich, Odom, Shard, Hedo, Marion, Caron Butler.

                    14 guys on this list.

                    What do all of these guys have in common? They are all either better 3's than Granger, or close enough that we could have a fair argument about it. Granger is a top 15 player in his position. 15. He's a good pro, and nothing more. He's a good guy too, yes, but c'mon, we can't build our team around a top 15 player. Not if we ever want to be any good. Does that mean we have to trade him? No, not at all, but to say he's untouchable is silly. If we have a chance at a top 5 position player, particularly at a more important position than SF we'd be fools to not take it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                      It's interesting that now Danny has played for Indiana longer than he played for the University of New Mexico, yet most Indiana fans don't realize the kind of player and, most importantly, type of person Danny is. He was smiling because he was having fun. He does his camp in Albuquerque every year and he loves it. You can tell by watching. He is a rare individual and a very good basketball player. The Pacer don't exactly have a lot else going for them right now. You could do a lot worse than having Danny as the face of your team.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                        Jay, don't make me like you more than Redd. Without Rick to rip on you are a lot easier to deal with.



                        Not only was Reggie not what he became, he wasn't even close. He was 2nd fiddle to Chuck. That 5 game series was ALL about Chuck vs Bird, and it was Person that was known for hitting the big shots. Reggie was just another Allen Houston (before AH of course).

                        This is one reason why he had trouble getting to the AS game. And on top of that people have really, really forgotten that after Chuck you had Detlef as the team star. His last year as a Pacer he was the AS while Reggie sat home. He was the back to back 6th man winner. He was threatening trip-dubs on a nightly basis.

                        Reggie's big games in the mid-90's made history and secured his NEW image, but prior to that he definitely could have been traded, just like Chuck and Detlef were. Det even went to the AS game after being traded so it's not like they moved him right before he started to lose his game.



                        Back to Danny. This is so freaking good for him. Not from the image aspect, though that doesn't hurt, but from the "learn to be an ambassador, a spokesman, the center of attention, etc.

                        This is Danny getting the star treatment in a way he doesn't get here. He's not able to share the stage with a bigger star like a Lebron to take the focus off him. He got the chance to be "Lebron" for a few days and learn a bit more about how to handle things when the entire focus is on you.

                        Sounds easy but it's not, just like giving a speech looks easier on the outside than when you are doing it. To me this is part of shaping Danny as a man and will pay off not just in short term new found fans around the world but in the long term with how DG deals with PR in the future.

                        Plus that kind of experience helps mature a person in general. It's good to see the world and deal with other cultures, and more so when it's not just a frivolous vacation where you can go at your own pace and pleasure.



                        As already said, Danny is worth more to the Pacers than he is to other teams. And DG has also yet to hit a plateau in his growth. Maybe you predict that for this season, but that's all it is so far, a guess. Statistically he's continued to improve and taken on more of the team's load each year.

                        As mentioned, Reggie was able to come in behind Person's wake to clear the way early on. Reggie wasn't "the man" even by year 3, he was just the shooter specialist.

                        Danny is already more diverse than that and is putting up a 3% that's moved into Reggie territory. And just when does anyone remember Reggie running the length of the court to block a layup...ever?

                        I would not trade Danny for Melo (issues), Artest (issues), AK47 (game has gotten spotty), J-Rich (streaky), Hedo (no defense), Deng (unproven), Shard (streaky) or Prince (no better than Danny, has much better teammates to work off of).

                        Odom has issues in the spotlight at times which is the question on DG right now, though I like Odom's handles.

                        So my list shortens to James, Pierce, Iggy, Marion and Butler. I can understand that teams wouldn't trade those other players for Danny either, but that doesn't mean it's an obvious trade going the other way.

                        No one the Pacers would take for Danny is going to be offered for Danny, and that makes him "untradeable".

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                          Almost at mid-season form there, Seth. I almost made it halfway through before snoozing.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                            Originally posted by loborick View Post
                            It's interesting that now Danny has played for Indiana longer than he played for the University of New Mexico, yet most Indiana fans don't realize the kind of player and, most importantly, type of person Danny is. He was smiling because he was having fun. He does his camp in Albuquerque every year and he loves it. You can tell by watching. He is a rare individual and a very good basketball player. The Pacer don't exactly have a lot else going for them right now. You could do a lot worse than having Danny as the face of your team.
                            I think most Indiana fans love Granger and even have a decent understanding of his character. Yes, we could do worse than Danny as the face of the franchise. However, Indiana fans have higher expectations than to have a below average franchise player. While Danny is loved in Indy, fans know he's only about #40 in the league in terms of overall talent. He's going to have to get better to fill the shoes, and that's not going to be easy. No, he's not going to be at the Lebron level...but he's probably better than an oft-injured overpaid overconfident PF though...so we should be more thankful...

                            BTW, the term "untradeable" seems like nonsense to me. Let's just say I would even trade Lebron and filler for any 3 of the following: DWade, Dwight Howard, Mello, CP3 and Amare.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                              Originally posted by Dece View Post
                              Carmelo, Lebron, Pierce, Artest, Iguodala, Luel Deng, Tayshaun Prince, Kirilenko, J-Rich, Odom, Shard, Hedo, Marion, Caron Butler.

                              14 guys on this list.

                              What do all of these guys have in common? They are all either better 3's than Granger, or close enough that we could have a fair argument about it. Granger is a top 15 player in his position. 15. He's a good pro, and nothing more. He's a good guy too, yes, but c'mon, we can't build our team around a top 15 player. Not if we ever want to be any good. Does that mean we have to trade him? No, not at all, but to say he's untouchable is silly. If we have a chance at a top 5 position player, particularly at a more important position than SF we'd be fools to not take it.
                              Melo, Lebron, Pierce, Marion, Butler i would rate as better than Granger at the moment.

                              Artest, Igoudala, Deng, Prince, Kirilenko, Richardson, Odom, Lewis, Turkoglu each have their own strengths and weaknesses and I would put Granger somewhere in this group between 6-15.

                              I know its only fantasy but Granger was a top 10 player in the yahoo fantasy ratings for a good portion of last season after the allstar break. Nobody is ever truly untouchable, but we aren't going to get a top 5 PG or C so I think the argument is moot.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Another Reason Why Danny is Untradeable

                                I must admit I'm a little confused by this thread. Danny's untouchable because he's popular in Indonesia? Really? That's how we're making our decisions?
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X