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

Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

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

  • #16
    Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

    The problem with the Mad Ants thing, which actually is something of an elegant solution, is that I don't think the Pacers can dictate what position Lance plays or minutes.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

      Originally posted by count55 View Post
      The problem with the Mad Ants thing, which actually is something of an elegant solution, is that I don't think the Pacers can dictate what position Lance plays or minutes.
      That's true. We're not like the Lakers, who own their own D-League team so they can make them run the triangle.

      I like both the European and Mad Ants solution. It's essentially a paid one-year suspension from the Indiana Pacers and the NBA. It gives the Pacers some time to let the situation resolve itself legally, serves as a (non)punishment for Stephenson, and forces him to not make anymore mistakes for a full year if he wants to resume his NBA career.
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

        Of these possible solutions, the only viable one, assuming he doesn't get the minimum prison sentence of SEVEN years for his charged offenses, is the European option.

        Even the NBADL would not want to associate with someone who has been all but convicted in the court of public opinion, even if his presence would elevate the level of play in any game he is involved in. The NBADL begins with NBA, which I would think, as a league, not want public perception of the league tarnished any more than it currently is being with the ongoing situation and its nationwide media coverage and consistent negativity regarding the permissive nature of the NBA, and sports in general, with respect to athletes who engage in immoral or unlawful activity in their personal lives while being paid millions of dollars and having few consequences compared to an average person.

        In today's economic reality, coupled with the climate of overall intolerance with respect to things considered outside of societal norms, I can't imagine a scenario outside of a complete and public recanting on the part of Lance's girlfriend of the entire story that fully exonerates him (and which fully explains away the injuries she sustained), where Lance is given an opportunity to play professional basketball in the United States for a long period of time whether it is fair to him personally or not.

        I really believe Europe is his only hope, and that is only if he is not convicted.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

          I let Clark Kellogg handle the situation and report back that's what we pay him for. He's not going to Europe, he's already under contract. We have to pay him first 2 years, unless he's guilty and can't compete then I could see his contract being voided or suspended with out pay. Then we would lose him.
          "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
          Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

            D league would be a great test to see if Lance is honest and humble about proceeding in his career. Honestly, historically he would react horribly to that type of situation, see it as a huge dis, I think. Some time in D league would be a really good way to see where his mind is, imo. Great suggestion, T Bird.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

              By putting Lance in the D League, would that open a roster spot until he is called up?
              You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                I like what TBird proposed, particularly using the Mad Ants as a place to stash him while this is all being sorted out. I think he'd get just as valuable an experience there as with the Pacers, because rookies just don't get that kind of playing time in the NBA, with more coaches other than :

                As to why you sign him after summer league, how many folks on here would have been screaming for TPTB's heads if there was no contract and no incident? If Lance had done really well in camp as well and suddenly we were talking about first round type money?
                BillS

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

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  I think the D league could be an excellent solution until his legal situation is concluded, which just might take an entire year.
                  No, domestic vilence cases are expidited.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                    IF he is convicted, he is gone.
                    Nothing else will suffice.
                    The years since the brawl has cost the P's many 10's of millions of dollars.
                    They aren't forgetting that.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                      Originally posted by RWB View Post
                      By putting Lance in the D League, would that open a roster spot until he is called up?

                      Nope, Lance would still be counted as one of 15 players on the Pacers.

                      He'd still be a Pacer.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                        Well done Tbird.

                        It is weird, the idea of trading Lance never crossed my mind until I read your article. I think that is probably the best idea I have heard yet. he has to have some value, teams saw him in Orlando and I have to believe teams are willing to take a chance on him. Of course his trade value is going to be low and 3 years from now it very well might be one of the worst trades the Pacers have ever made, but I think that is the best alternative

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Well done Tbird.

                          It is weird, the idea of trading Lance never crossed my mind until I read your article. I think that is probably the best idea I have heard yet. he has to have some value, teams saw him in Orlando and I have to believe teams are willing to take a chance on him. Of course his trade value is going to be low and 3 years from now it very well might be one of the worst trades the Pacers have ever made, but I think that is the best alternative
                          See, I thought that he would have zero to negative value with these circumstances. I thought you'd have to add sweetner to get someone to take him, thus making him untradeable.

                          I could be wrong and someone might be willing to gamble with such a low salary.

                          I was thinking wow he dropped to 40 in the draft because of the potential for these issues, now that there is a pending issue it makes him worth even less.

                          Again, I could be wrong, it only take one intrigued team.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                            Tbird,

                            Very eliquently put. My hat goes off to you, man. You hit the nail right on the head!

                            Frankly, unless Stephenson is convicted I'd send him to the Mad Ants anyway for the very reasons you've outlined. He cannot be allowed to become a distraction in the locker room, on the court or in the public eye. This team and the fanbase have been through enough negative drama with the last headcase we had. By all accounts the Pacers were just starting to get beyond that. I mean, they didn't have one off-court incident last year, not one! I can't tell you how good that felt to go a summer without hearing of any controversy from this team. In fact, I was rather upset that sports writers had the nerve to link Shawne Williams to the Pacers when he was a member of the Nets at the time of his last run-in w/the law. That really tic'd me off that they'd continue trying to run this team through the mud that way. But I digress...

                            I think yours is the best advice in this situation: If not found guilty, send him to the Mad Ants for the season or overseas but retain his rights and let him mature away from the spot lights.
                            Last edited by NuffSaid; 08-19-2010, 10:34 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                              It's hard to add anything to what T-bird has said. My thoughts exactly. You have said it much better than I could.

                              I like the idea of a trade most of all. Not a fire sale. We should not be desperate to make just any trade. Mr. Simon needs to be made whole in this case. Nothing should be said or done to further lower Lance's value in the mean time.

                              Let me add that Lance should have no contact with the team until this situation is resolved. This year could be a turning point and no player should be allowed to derail it in any way. Alot of good things are happening with the Pacers now. Let's move on.
                              Last edited by dlewyus; 08-19-2010, 10:57 AM.
                              “It is what we learn after we know it all that really counts” - John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Tbird Topic: My Muddled Thoughts on the Lance Stephenson Dilemma [The Front Page]

                                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                                D league would be a great test to see if Lance is honest and humble about proceeding in his career. Honestly, historically he would react horribly to that type of situation, see it as a huge dis, I think. Some time in D league would be a really good way to see where his mind is, imo. Great suggestion, T Bird.
                                IMO this is the best option.
                                I know everyone thinks/feels that the Pacers are "obligated" to cut ties w/ Lance over this, but I'm unconvinced. Yes, they need to be more careful then most, & must rule w/ a strong hand on behavior matters, but in the end thier jod is to win games. Lance needs time to mature, & we need time to elavuate & get better. D-League could do that IMO.
                                We all agree Lance is talented & young. IMO he is like a puppy. (I know this may seem odd, but work w/ me here...) One needs to invest time & effort into training & development before a determination can be made. You can research bloodlines & observe a litter all you want, but regardless of your dilligence you wont fully know what you are getting for a while. One nip on the hand, chewed shoe, or puddle on the floor is not worth a trip to the pound. Only after significant time & effort is invested, & behavior issues continue, then maybe it is, but not after 1 issue. Our problem is we have been bitten (hard) before, so we are more sensitive. Because we have been harmed in the past, what do we do? Do we keep playing the part of victum & removing us from any disorderly conduct forever, or do we move forward while acting causiously yet responsibly? Either way (Lance & a pup), you made the commitment, now you need to be responsible for putting it in the best situation to succeed. D-League could fit both our needs & in the end, we keep our pup, & our pup gets the support he needs to mature into something special.
                                "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                                (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X