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

Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
    Watched Davison vs WVU last night.
    Curry did not have a great shooting night but one of the color guys compared him to a smaller Reggie Miller with his quick release. Curry is a major player and I advise everybody on this board to go watch him play Purdue @ the Wooden Classic.
    WVU
    Devin E'banks (Yes, The Sampson Recruit) He is an aggressive rebounder, good athlete, & has a NBA body. He is a PROJECT but will probably be a one and done player and enter the draft.
    I went to High School with Stephen Curry for a year. He is a very high character guy who is all about the team. Would be a great pickup for anyone.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      i'm beginning to take the mindset that it's griffin, harden, derozan, patterson, or bust. this draft continues to look weaker and weaker.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
        i'm beginning to take the mindset that it's griffin, harden, derozan, patterson, or bust. this draft continues to look weaker and weaker.
        I disagree, I think its looking better and better. Monroe, Hill, Curry, and Lawson have all looked very good this year. I'm not sure that Monroe can play PF next to Hibbert though.

        This draft is going to have a lot of sleepers.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
          I disagree, I think its looking better and better. Monroe, Hill, Curry, and Lawson have all looked very good this year. I'm not sure that Monroe can play PF next to Hibbert though.

          This draft is going to have a lot of sleepers.
          monroe is decent, but he will be nothing special. lawson and curry might not even be picked top 20. this draft is indeed very weak comparative to last year's draft. there are only a few players in the upcoming draft who even have the potential to become all stars. if you're going into a draft where hasheem thabeet is being talked about as a top 5 pick, you know it's a weak draft.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            How is Lawson not a lock for the top-20? Please don't tell me because he's 5'11", 6'. Surely by now you realize that if a point guard is skilled enough, GMs wont hesitate to draft them in the lottery. D.J. Augustin, Chris Paul, T.J. Ford....

            Lawson is skilled enough.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by Quis View Post
              How is Lawson not a lock for the top-20? Please don't tell me because he's 5'11", 6'. Surely by now you realize that if a point guard is skilled enough, GMs wont hesitate to draft them in the lottery. D.J. Augustin, Chris Paul, T.J. Ford....

              Lawson is skilled enough.
              if you remember my posts from last year's recruiting center, i was one of the biggest lawson fans out there even stating my opinion that he's better than augustin. but there's a reason lawson came back to unc, because he wasn't a 1st round lock. this years draft is weaker which will improve his chances, but his game is essentially the same as it was last year therefore the only difference in his draft status would be the quality of players surrounding him. so no, i would not call lawson a top 20 lock even if he's a player i'd love to have on my team.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Monroe is going to climb up the mock draft boards but I believe the Pacers will be picking around 17 b/c we will make the playoffs. Do you see this Thabeet kid from UCONN dropping down to us? Curry from Davison? Do we go even younger and have a project pick? It is so hard to say. I really need to see the Cathalies kid from Florida play. If anybody is a fan of Florida basketball give me an update.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  if you remember my posts from last year's recruiting center, i was one of the biggest lawson fans out there even stating my opinion that he's better than augustin. but there's a reason lawson came back to unc, because he wasn't a 1st round lock. this years draft is weaker which will improve his chances, but his game is essentially the same as it was last year therefore the only difference in his draft status would be the quality of players surrounding him. so no, i would not call lawson a top 20 lock even if he's a player i'd love to have on my team.
                  Or maybe because he got a DUI right around the time he was thinking about declaring? That must not of had ANYTHING to do with it......

                  Or the fact that they didn't win a national championship, and every single player available came back? Nope, not a chance at being a factor.....

                  Here's part of an article from CarolinaInsider writer Greg Barnes:
                  When asked if the arrest affected his decision to remain in the draft or return to UNC, Lawson replied with the following: “Yeah, I think so, because Coach [Roy Williams] talked to Larry Bird and they were real high on me. I was either going to be the No. 1 or No. 2 pick [on their draft board]… They’ve had a lot of problems with things like that, like with Jamaal Tinsley and Jermaine O’Neal – there were a couple of people that he named – so he called and said that they just couldn’t take a chance.”

                  If Indiana had decided to take that chance, then Lawson said he would “probably” be in the NBA right now. Instead, he’s preparing to make another run at the national championship with a loaded Tar Heel roster.
                  http://www.wralsportsfan.com/rs/story/3409572/
                  Last edited by Since86; 12-30-2008, 11:01 AM.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    I don't think the Pacers will make the playoffs this year. I also think they'll be somewhere between 5-9 in the draft this year. The college season has a long way to go and you can expect the NBA draft (by the time June 2009 rolls around) will have a completely different shape. Since that is the case, I'm just going to list a few players that I would love to see wearing the blue and gold next year.

                    ** Please note that some of these players might be 2nd rounders, or a trade-down in the draft type of acquisition.

                    1. Blake Griffin - A no-brainer. He also fills the Pacers biggest need: Power Forward. Although Troy Murphy has done admirable, I think it's safe to say that the biggest weakness or question-mark for the Pacers future is at the four.

                    2. Ty Lawson - Although he's projected to go somewhere in the middle to late first round, if the Pacers were to make a move to acquire an additional pick (like last year) or trade out of their lottery pick for two first-rounders somehow (Minnesota is slated to have four first-round choices in 2009, including their own, Miami, Boston and Utah), Ty Lawson could run the floor as a backup behind Ford. ** Lawson would not be worth reaching for in the draft, but again, if the players we want aren't available when we select, why not make a move and get (possibly two picks out of it).

                    3. Hasheem Thabeet - I love the idea of having Thabeet and Hibbert somehow. Not sure if it would work with our current system, but I imagine that Jim O'Brien is looking more and more to be our rebuilding coach. The good thing about having two young big men is that you have a better chance of seeing one of them succeed.

                    4. Jordan Hill - I like his position and stats. So far I feel like he's the most realistic player the Pacers have a shot at in the draft. Again, he's a PF so would fill a role.

                    ** That's it so far. If the Pacers end up in position of drafting someone besides these players, I hope it's based on best-available.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      I just checked out Patrick Patterson's stats and was impressed with his production. His rebounding is up a lot from last year and when I checked on it earlier. He's also shooting an absurd .722 from the field as well as being a near 80% free throw shooter. Over two blocks per game, 2.6 assists per game.

                      Really impressive all-around.
                      Last edited by Quis; 12-31-2008, 08:50 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        I agree with croz on the quality of this draft. But with that said I believe there could be a steal in the 7-12 range. A player who could become a great player. I say this because of counts awesome numbers. I believe percentages will equal out.

                        Last night Purdue was down 2 with 1.9 seconds left. The player went to the line shooting 7-8 FTs that game. He was 68% on the season. He hit the first FT. But I knew he would miss the second. Sooner or later the percentages catch up.

                        It seems that a great player should fall in coming season. Wishful thinking I know. But I believe this.

                        I think the later half of is equal to last years second round. The top 5 is like last years 6-10. But this years 6-12 is equal if not better than last years 6-12.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Saw Robert Vaden (UAB) play live last night @ Hinkle. He has a quick release on par with Stephen Curry. He did get frustrated during some series ie Pushed Down Howard and the proceeded to then tell Shelven Mack (Butler guard) to shut his face while he was sitting on the bench. Mack had just been benched after going on a scoring barrage. Mack stole the ball clean from him with ten second left clinching the game for Butler. I think Robert Vaden is at most a late first round pick. He has zero chance of being a Pacer unless we take him in the second round.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            The big wild card for me is Rubio if he comes out - really impressed during the Olympics but that's a bit of a different game and he's been hurt a lot. I'm hoping he waits a year - IMO he has pretty good bust potential and I could see him being someone D'Antoni lobbies DW to pick.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Or maybe because he got a DUI right around the time he was thinking about declaring? That must not of had ANYTHING to do with it......

                              Or the fact that they didn't win a national championship, and every single player available came back? Nope, not a chance at being a factor.....

                              Here's part of an article from CarolinaInsider writer Greg Barnes:

                              http://www.wralsportsfan.com/rs/story/3409572/
                              Why would you torture me like that? I would LOVE Lawson on this team. Its interesting to think how things would be different. Would we have taken Rush or Hibbert with the 11th pick? Something tells me Bird liked Hibbert more and knew we could get him later. That means no Jarrett Jack, McRoberts, or Rush. Man, it would be interesting.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                I agree with what most of you are saying...this draft kind of resembles the 06 draft in terms of it being so weak. Griffin is the obvious 1st pick, but after that its a crap shoot. I do however like Monroe, Hill, Thabeet, and someone who I think could be special is Earl Clark from Louisville. Hes a versatile forward who passes very well and is really strong for the sf/pf position. I never like the ideal of a combo player but he for some reason really strikes me as someone who translates well to the nba. His nbadraft.net comparision is to danny granger so you gotta like that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X