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

LeBron Feuding with Barkley

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

  • #16
    Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

    Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
    You think Chicago fans would've been quiet if Jordan would've flirted with leaving after 7 years?

    I think not.

    Any fan base would react this way.
    Cleveland is not Chicago.

    Small-market fans need to understand the financial realities of the league. It's not fair that the best NBA players want to play in New York, but is it any less fair than all the best computer people want to move to California? Certain places offer more for certain professionals.

    I understand that it's upsetting to a city that their superstar might leave but calling him a traitor and giving him more reason to leave is not the best thing to do. If by some stroke of God the Pacers had drafted LeBron and we were in this situation I would be enjoying the hell out of these last two years, not complaining about every perceived slight.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Flirting with leaving is one thing if it's the year of his FA, but doing it 2 years prior gives fans a right to be disturbed....Reggie all but said he was going to be a Knick during his flirtation with FA back in the 90's.
      All LeBron said was that the free agency period in the summer of 2010 will be crazy, since many teams are already jockeying for position to sign any of several free agents.

      He named no teams by name, no players by name, and just stated an obvious fact. By his play on the court he is obviously 100% committed to the Cavs for the duration of his current contract. If people want his opinion and he wants to give an honest opinion of such a general nature, Barkley and everyone else should just keep quiet.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

        Sorta like telling your first wife 5 years into your marriage that you might be looking for a
        new wife in 2 years. You are not sure but you tell her that it is a possibility. Honey this other
        gal has better potential than you.....
        Sure Lebron can say what he wants but he will also reap the results of a big mouth.
        If Lebron had kept quiet Charles and everyone else would have had no reason to
        open their mouths either. Bad move on Lebron's part.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

          Maybe he is trying to light a fire under Cavs management to try and get a team around him.

          "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

            James said that he felt really comfortable with Mike Dantoni when with the USA team. He liked the freedom. This is more than just flirting. This is talking at length about the possibility. Where is Stern in all of this? If this was anyone but Lebron and te NYK there would be fines. Kobe talking about going overseas is an issue as well. There needs to be less talking about these issues and more talking about the season.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

              I think we can all agree that LeBron has the right to do whatever he wants in this situation, but I think the right thing to do is to be sensitive to his current fanbase in Ohio. Just because it's the way the world works (professionals ditching their flyover state homes to head to either coast), doesn't make it any easier for the rest of us to swallow.

              For my money, as much of an opportunity as it would be for LeBron to play in New York, I think he'd be remembered in history in a unique way is he made it work in Cleveland for his career. The MJ of this generation, but in a small market. That'd be a truly rare kind of special.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                I agree with the... uh... Round Mound of Rebound (sorry, couldn't resist). Bron is being rather unprofessional in commenting on his free agency that is still two years away. Commenting on moving teams when there has seemed to be nothing wrong is very disrespectful from a fans standpoint. LeBron does need to shut up, play his game, get his numbers, keep making his team better, then in two years if greener grass is found, move.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  For my money, as much of an opportunity as it would be for LeBron to play in New York, I think he'd be remembered in history in a unique way is he made it work in Cleveland for his career.
                  Remembered in a basketball context absolutely, but his ambitions seem to be global and multifaceted. It's almost impossible for him to accomplish all he wants to do in the Cleveland market.

                  My sincerest hope is that he spends the rest of his career in Cleveland. The odds of that happening appear to dwindle with each week.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                    Originally posted by grace View Post
                    I totally agree. What makes it worse is that LeBron is from Ohio. People around here would be pretty honked off if Reggie had behaved like this while he was a Pacer.

                    Before someone jumps my case, LeBron has every right to want to play in New York (if he's really that stupid). All I'm saying is I think he should be playing a little kiss a$$ with the Cavs fans. Would it really be that difficult to say "I'm a Cav. I'll be a Cav until I'm not. As long as I'm here I'll do everything I can to get our fans a title."
                    I agree with Grace, also!
                    ...Still "flying casual"
                    @roaminggnome74

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                      As a Pacer fan, the more publicity this situation raises, the better off we are. I want to see fierce competition for James services because I think we can agree that Indy is the last place you will find him when everything is settled.

                      But what we may be able to do is to trade expiring contract(s) to a team that is willing to part with a better player in order to free up cap space in an attempt to sign James.

                      So, even though we won't get James, there is a chance that we could could greatly benefit from his eventual signing.

                      So, as unprofessional as it is at this point in time, as far as I'm concerned he can shoot off his mouth anytime he wants, as long as the end result is that it creates more competion among teams to obtain his services.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                        I think Lebron is fine on this. He's signalling to the Cav's that they need to continue to build a team around, because he can be gone when he wants to be. It's his way of getting some control of the situation. And bottom line is, the Cavs and the fans are going to have to deal with it.

                        I do not believe it's unprofessional, as he is not saying anything bad about his current team, or fans, but is merely pointing out (albeit obvious) that he is going to get his--which means he probably want's a winner to go along with a pay day.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                          Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                          Remembered in a basketball context absolutely, but his ambitions seem to be global and multifaceted. It's almost impossible for him to accomplish all he wants to do in the Cleveland market.

                          My sincerest hope is that he spends the rest of his career in Cleveland. The odds of that happening appear to dwindle with each week.
                          I don't want to take this too far off topic, but I have serious questions about how small market vs large market even applies today?

                          20 years ago, I could see where a serious distinction could be made. A large market could allow you to be exposed to more people. Presently, however, pretty much every home in America has access to cable television. I can watch LeBron play no matter if he is in Cleveland, New York, or Fountain City.

                          It seems to me we have moved away from a local market, and moved on to a global market. Is there anyone that knows what shape a basketball is that doesen't know who Lebron is? Is moving to New York really going to expose him to new people?

                          Look at Peyton Manning. Has playing in small market Indianapolis hurt his appeal? If he played in Chicago would he be in every single commercial that ever aired?

                          This is an honest question, as I really am not sure what the small market vs large market argument means anymore.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                            The only instance in which markets apply, that I can think of, would be NBA standards.

                            Teams can't promote their franchises outside of a certain distance, which is why the Pacers can't advertise in Gary.

                            Companies that have enough money to sign LeBron to endorse their product are going to be global companies to begin with. Local companies aren't going to be able to afford him. He's still accessible to the same amount of potential consumers if he lived in Russia, than if he would live in NY. Those who want him to be their spokesperson are going to fly to where ever he is, or fly him in, to broker a deal. He already is a global icon, playing for the Knicks will raise the Knick franchise stock, and give him a bigger stage to play on, but won't give him any more money in his pocket.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                              When I used to work for someone I would tell my boss all the time and my clients that I was starting my own business and I couldnt wait to do it.

                              I offered exceptional customer service and my customers would all say I am very glad you are moving on to do something you want to do and my bosses would say the same thing.

                              Lebron is a human being and has hopes and dreams, one of them is to play in New York. How can myself or anyone in the world tell him to SHUT for expressing those dreams? He is the best player in the NBA playing his heart out for the cavs and he continues to do that. As long as he does that he has the FREEDOM to do what he wants off the court and express his opinions freely.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: LeBron Feuding with Barkley

                                You also weren't a celebrity with thousands of fans who idolized you (more or less), either.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X