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

2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

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

  • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

    Originally posted by B00sh View Post
    David Aldrige on NBA TV didnt say a definite yes or no if we would match, he actually didnt understand why toronto signed him since they have two backup pg's...so we will see....
    It's cuz the Raptors need some depth at the SG spot. Jack would probably be used as their Starting SG or 1st Guard off the bench.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

      I'll go out on a limb and say that the Pacers will match JJ's offer and keep working to trade TJ, Diener, or Tinsley to get a little more breathing room below the LT threshold.

      This deal is about what I expected Jack to make and is much less than a lot of starting PGs around the league. Mo Williams, Beno Udrih, and Marko Jaric immediately come to mind. Jack is as good if not better than those guys.

      He's a good player and a good fit with the team and it's very possible that he has a breakout year, as many PGs do in their 3rd season. I'm all for matching the offer.

      Comment


      • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

        would it be possible to make some sort of sign and trade with the Raps to lessen the impact of jack going?
        Haggard's Blog: Can't Buy a Basket. Covering the highs and lows of the NBL

        Comment


        • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

          Originally posted by Haggard View Post
          would it be possible to make some sort of sign and trade with the Raps to lessen the impact of jack going?
          No, he's already signed the contract. That's the deal he will play under be it for us or the raptors.

          Comment


          • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

            Originally posted by PacerFreak31 View Post
            I agree but to me it seems a bit obsessive to try to find all of this out. I mean really why even try? I say this because none of us know for sure. We can guess but thats about it and in the end Bird will spend what he can to help the team. I mean does it matter to us how much we have to spend? Bird will make the correct decision with what money we do have left.
            Why even try? Different strokes for different folks.

            Yes we are guessing a lot of the time, but it's almost always an educated guess because some figures are almost always released. Just like Jacks offer for 4 years, and 20 million. As for rookie contracts they are known to the penny.

            Myself I like to know the contract figures so I can see what is and isn't possible.

            Why it's good to have such figures is we can put a stop to a lot of rumors that hit the net because we know immediately the trade is not possible. There's been basketball writers that have pretended they were in the know and published made up stuff. But they've made a mistake and been caught by number crunching fans.

            As for it being a bit obsessive, well most of us that frequent this site can be termed hard core fans and we like to talk about anything Pacer related.

            Comment


            • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

              I do not think the team should sign him. It is too big and too long of an investment right now. This team doesn't need a long term investment for more than 15 million unless if they are Granger-like. I'm looking forward to the 2010-11 season and signing Jack for a longterm deal can change what could go down that year.

              Comment


              • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                This is the part of the NBA that I absolutely hate. Nothing is worse, to me anyway, than everybody discussing the financial merits of a player and not actually talking about the players on court performance.

                (Note that is not happening in this discussion btw, it's just a general thing I pretty much hate)

                I hate the fact that because of the Simons financial situation that I even have to care about this. Walsh really left this team in a financial mess and then it was compounded with all of the issues and then multiplied again with the global economic crisis.

                It depresses me to the point of almost losing enjoyment knowing that for the next two years we are not going to be able to make any real significant changes to improve the roster. It really really really depresses me that there is a very good possibility that when the Pacers finally may be out of their financial woes that the entire league may be in a lockout.

                That is three years of our lives pretty much just spinning our wheels.

                Now if you really want something depressing to think about. When we are out of our economic woes there is no guarantee that we will improve. We will be able to use Murphy and Dunleavy as expiring contracts so maybe that will net us something, but no guarantees.

                Then on top of all of that let's for the sake of this thread say that there is a season lost to lock out. Do you realize that when we come back Danny Granger will be months away from 30. How many years beyond 30 do we expect him to have a high impact. Remember Reggie Miller is the anomoly, not the rule.

                I don't know why I have posted this really, I guess just reading through all of this made me want to jump off of a building so I needed to vent or be talked off of the ledge or something.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  This is the part of the NBA that I absolutely hate. Nothing is worse, to me anyway, than everybody discussing the financial merits of a player and not actually talking about the players on court performance.

                  (Note that is not happening in this discussion btw, it's just a general thing I pretty much hate)

                  I hate the fact that because of the Simons financial situation that I even have to care about this. Walsh really left this team in a financial mess and then it was compounded with all of the issues and then multiplied again with the global economic crisis.

                  It depresses me to the point of almost losing enjoyment knowing that for the next two years we are not going to be able to make any real significant changes to improve the roster. It really really really depresses me that there is a very good possibility that when the Pacers finally may be out of their financial woes that the entire league may be in a lockout.

                  That is three years of our lives pretty much just spinning our wheels.

                  Now if you really want something depressing to think about. When we are out of our economic woes there is no guarantee that we will improve. We will be able to use Murphy and Dunleavy as expiring contracts so maybe that will net us something, but no guarantees.

                  Then on top of all of that let's for the sake of this thread say that there is a season lost to lock out. Do you realize that when we come back Danny Granger will be months away from 30. How many years beyond 30 do we expect him to have a high impact. Remember Reggie Miller is the anomoly, not the rule.

                  I don't know why I have posted this really, I guess just reading through all of this made me want to jump off of a building so I needed to vent or be talked off of the ledge or something.
                  Take a deep breath. It'll be ok. You don't know that we won't improve. Sure, it's possible we may not make any trades that are significant, but we can still improve from within. Roy, Brandon, and Tyler will hopefully get better. There's enough possible improvement there that could make us a much better team.

                  And you never know, we may be able to trade and get rid of the bad contracts. Lets not worry about lockouts; they're too far away. Let Bird/Morway deal with that.

                  It will all work itself out. And if you're still depressed, go watch Hoosiers. It'll make you feel better.
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                    I don't think there will be a lockout - the overall impact that the prolonged negotiations brought about to the league as a whole in the 99/00 season should serve as a lesson to the owners and the players.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                      Sorry if this has been posted.

                      http://www.probasketballnews.com/story/?storyid=639

                      JACK OFFER UNLIKELY TO BE MATCHED

                      Indiana officials on Saturday night were waiting to formally get the offer sheet Pacers restricted free-agent guard Jarrett Jack signed with Toronto. But they were preparing for the likelihood of not matching an offer reportedly worth $20 million over four years.

                      "If it's more than $4 million (average per season), I would think we wouldn't match it," said a Pacers source who was speaking when the source knew the deal was for four years but didn't yet know the total amount.

                      CBSSports.com first reported Jack's offer sheet, but did not report how much it is worth. ESPN.com later reported it worth $20 million.

                      If the Pacers don't match during the allotted seven days, the Raptors likely would get a backup behind starting point guard Jose Calderon after Anthony Parker bolted to Cleveland as a free agent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                        I hope AJ Price can fill the void.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                          I think they are okay without Jack, here is why.

                          I think D Jones can guard some of bigger point guards that Jack used to have to guard. I think it's trouble some to think that you have two physically weak defensive point guards in Deiner and TJ, but I think it kinda depends on if AJ can get SOME minutes given match ups and hold his own.

                          Let's face it in Obies offense you really don't need a traditional point guard, at least in the half court, so I think TJ and Deiner excel at pushing the ball, maybe not finishing by dropping a nice pass, but at least they will press the matter with early offense.

                          Also I think BRush is ready to own the 2 guard spot so you won't need to have a Jack type playing there anyway.

                          I think if you look at TJ, his numbers were excellent last year. He's a guy that the other teams coach doesn't have an answer for sometimes, especially at the end of game. TJ just has to blend better, imo, and pick his spots. I don't think he's a natural leader like Jack, I think he's in more of the JO mold when it comes to that sadly.

                          I think you'll miss Jack in the lockeroom and enormously as a leader.

                          However, I think you may have some guys willing to step up in this. I actually think Roy can help here and Danny and Mike Dunleavy when he gets healthy.

                          I guess you'd love to get a Byron Scott or the like to fill that void as your 14 or 15th guys, but we'll see.

                          Otherwise, I think on the court you are okay to not match this contract.

                          Lastly, the only thing I'm not sure what the JJ/TJ fight was about, so I wonder if there is much more going on there that could affect this school of thought.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            This is the part of the NBA that I absolutely hate. Nothing is worse, to me anyway, than everybody discussing the financial merits of a player and not actually talking about the players on court performance.
                            I think of this stuff as the price we have to pay in order to allow a team like Indiana to be competitive. In a world with no salary cap, no luxury cap, no complicated and prohibitive rules, teams like the Indiana Pacers are second class citizens. We would basically be renting Granger until the Knicks put together a 9 year, $140 million contract.

                            Not to mention, I actually do find it interesting.
                            2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                              Originally posted by Speed View Post
                              I guess you'd love to get a Byron Scott or the like to fill that void as your 14 or 15th guys, but we'll see.
                              Agree with your post with this exception ........... Byron was far from the 14th or 15th guy on that team.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

                                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                                Agree with your post with this exception ........... Byron was far from the 14th or 15th guy on that team.

                                Good point, I don't necessarily mean 14 or 15th on the roster, I mean they have 13 guys they'll have under contract minus Jack, but counting Tinsley, so there are 2 spots left. I wish one could go to Robert Horry, not Robert, but you know what I mean.

                                I wonder if one of the last two will go to NBDLer Trey Johson or Jackson, I can't remember his name, from summer league. He played an inordinate amount of minutes in those 5 games compared to others, so I think they hope to get a really cheap wing player in him. Total speculation on my part, though. That would leave the one spot I'd love to get a vet at.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X