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

Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

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

  • #16
    Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    I think it is fair to assume that he really won't be healthy again until the 2011 season starts in the fall of 2010

    I agree on your assumption.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      So is that saying this is more serious than an ACL tear or is it just 'different'?
      More serious, definitely.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        More serious, definitely.
        It's definitely a lot closer to something along the lines of Jermaine O'neal's chronic/ongoing knee problems than Al Jefferson's torn ACL.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

          Well, the obvious bright spot of this is that the starting 2 position is pretty much officially Rush's. If Dun were healthy this season and beyond, who knows when Rush would have gotten the start or even gotten consistent minutes.

          When Dun returns, there won't be much pressure on him, both mentally and physically, since he can start focusing on producing off the bench. He'll also be an attractive contract so we can look to move him if we can find something that helps us.

          The way I see it is this is a blessing in disguise, since we needed a lockdown perimeter defender to be paired with Granger in the starting unit, who doesn't require any offense but is capable when called upon. We're step-by-step moving forward, and once we plug in a few more holes, we'll be able to put together what we have into a competitive team. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not happy at all that Dunleavy's injured and I want him to get well asap, but this does expedite our future.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

            Personally, I expect Dun to miss at least 75% of next season, and not be the same player again when/if he returns.

            I'm bracing for the worst.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
              If it seems the case that we might need another swingman to backup Rush and Granger, I think we should make a move for Outlaw because the Blazers were willing to move him if they could get cap relief
              The Blazers wouldn't do a Salary-Dump for Outlaw as he's considered a fairly valuable asset. They may include him as sweetner to get some better player....but we have nothing ( short of Granger ) that they would consider trading for.


              Also...the Blazers don't really need much Cap relief....
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                Originally posted by TheDoddage View Post
                Well, the obvious bright spot of this is that the starting 2 position is pretty much officially Rush's. If Dun were healthy this season and beyond, who knows when Rush would have gotten the start or even gotten consistent minutes.

                When Dun returns, there won't be much pressure on him, both mentally and physically, since he can start focusing on producing off the bench. He'll also be an attractive contract so we can look to move him if we can find something that helps us.

                The way I see it is this is a blessing in disguise, since we needed a lockdown perimeter defender to be paired with Granger in the starting unit, who doesn't require any offense but is capable when called upon. We're step-by-step moving forward, and once we plug in a few more holes, we'll be able to put together what we have into a competitive team. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not happy at all that Dunleavy's injured and I want him to get well asap, but this does expedite our future.
                That's the way I see it.......BRush, by default....will either be the 1st Guard off the bench ( at least ensuring that he is a key rotational player ) if Jack is resigned and Starts....or may even get the Starting nod.

                Another benefit is that IF we draft a GF, just like what happened with BRush this season....JO'B will have little choice but to give him some consistent minutes.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                  We are not in a position to offer anyone cap relief.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    So is that saying this is more serious than an ACL tear or is it just 'different'?
                    It's a lot more of an unknown. ACL repairs are fairly common and the rehab schedule is known and somewhat predictable. Removing calcification from a patella tendon is something done fairly rarely, making the timetable for healing and rehab far less certain.
                    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


                    • #25
                      Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                      Hard to be competitive when you've got $18 mil in salary that's not producing for you (Tinsley/Dun). What are the rules surrounding someone who retires for medical reasons? I know we're a long way from that, but might as well start thinking about it.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                        Originally posted by Eindar View Post
                        Hard to be competitive when you've got $18 mil in salary that's not producing for you (Tinsley/Dun). What are the rules surrounding someone who retires for medical reasons? I know we're a long way from that, but might as well start thinking about it.
                        Two years from his last game, I think.

                        Count?
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                          Looks like we may need to attempt to draft a swingman as an insurance policy. I mean yeah, Jack can backup Rush, but that doesn't make sense if he is our starting PG.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                            Originally posted by Eindar View Post
                            Hard to be competitive when you've got $18 mil in salary that's not producing for you (Tinsley/Dun). What are the rules surrounding someone who retires for medical reasons? I know we're a long way from that, but might as well start thinking about it.
                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            Two years from his last game, I think.

                            Count?
                            per Larry Coon:

                            There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary. For example, in March 2003 the Knicks were allowed to remove Luc Longley's entire 2002-03 salary from their books (and since the luxury tax is based on the team salary as of the last day of the regular season, the Knicks avoided paying any tax on Longley's salary). This provision can also be used when a player dies while under contract.
                            So, as a practical example, had the surgery been unsuccessful, and Dunleavy forced to retire, the one-year waiting period would have started at his last game, or Feb 8, 2009. His salary would have come off of the cap next season. (We still would have had to pay it, though we'd likely get insurance reimbursement, but it would no longer count against our cap/tax number.)

                            The clock is actually ticking now, but if, as I suspect, he attempts a comeback sometime in the second half of next year, it will re-set to zero.

                            Worst case scenario: He sits out all of next season, targets the beginning of 2010-2011, plays a couple of games early that year, then calls it quits. While we may get some insurance reimbursement, we won't be able to claim any cap relief at all.

                            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                            Looks like we may need to attempt to draft a swingman as an insurance policy. I mean yeah, Jack can backup Rush, but that doesn't make sense if he is our starting PG.
                            Why are we drafting insurance policies for a 35-win team? Having the deepest, most awesome swingman roster does us no good if we're weak at all of the other positions.

                            We need to draft athletes. We are slow, and we can't defend. Now, I'm not looking for hyperathletic guys with no concept of basketball. I just think we need more guys like Brandon Rush and fewer guys like Troy and Roy. God love 'em, they play their asses off, but it's like trying to defend with the Maginot Line.

                            If the best combination of skill and athleticism is a swingman, fine. If not, we can probably pick up somebody to fill the 5-10 minutes not covered by Rush & Jack.

                            If we lose Jack, then that's another kettle of fish, but we won't know that until after the draft.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                              Originally posted by count55 View Post
                              We need to draft athletes. We are slow, and we can't defend. Now, I'm not looking for hyperathletic guys with no concept of basketball. I just think we need more guys like Brandon Rush and fewer guys like Troy and Roy. God love 'em, they play their asses off, but it's like trying to defend with the Maginot Line.

                              If the best combination of skill and athleticism is a swingman, fine. If not, we can probably pick up somebody to fill the 5-10 minutes not covered by Rush & Jack.

                              If we lose Jack, then that's another kettle of fish, but we won't know that until after the draft.
                              Yes, yes, and yes!!!!!!

                              Length, speed, strength, rebounding, defense, anyone?

                              Troy and Roy deserve loads of credit for what they've done this year and how they've gone about it. However, neither of those two can be fully effective or lead at team to playoff stability and/or title contention without being surrounded by some more powerful, athletic, enforcer-types on the front line.

                              EDIT: Not to mention the need for upgrading perimeter D whenver possible.
                              Last edited by D-BONE; 04-11-2009, 09:08 AM.
                              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                              -Emiliano Zapata

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Dunleavy Could Miss Half Of Next Season

                                Originally posted by count55 View Post

                                Why are we drafting insurance policies for a 35-win team? Having the deepest, most awesome swingman roster does us no good if we're weak at all of the other positions.
                                I'm sorry. I just feel if we lost Jack, we wouldn't be as deep in the guard position anymore.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X