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

The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

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

  • The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

    Since it's now September, I thought it would be a goodtime to get this rolling. I know the complexion of things may yet change with impending trades, preseason injuries, etc., but I'm going to go ahead and do a Top 10 as if the season were about to begin. As always, feel free to post your own rankings.

    1) - If not for the Lakers' last hurrah, the Wolves would likely have been in the Finals last year. With pretty much the entire cast returning this year, only the Spurs stand in the way of Minny taking the West.

    2) - If the Wolves fail to come out of the West, you can practically guarantee that San Antonio will be representing the conference for the third time in seven seasons. They, too, return a cast that was, also, stopped short by the now-disassembled Lakers.

    3) istons: - The reigning champions managed to reinstall the old cliche of "defense wins championships," and also did so without the benefit of a bona-fide superstar. However, the completely revamped bench, relying on young rookies and aging veterans, may not be enough to allow Detroit to repeat. Of course, they've already beaten the odds once.

    4) acers: - If Bender can step into Al Harrington's former role as sixth man, and Stephen Jackson turns out as good as advertised, it's very reasonable to expect the Pacers could finally get over the hump and send Reggie Miller into the sunset with a ring.

    5) - With a slimmer Shaq now in the East, coupled with rising star Dwayne Wade, the only thing stopping the Heat are a better supporting cast and bench. That could be rectified before the start of the season, which could propel the Heat to favorites in the suddenly-rejuvenated East.

    6) - After tallying a 50-win season and playoff appearance last year, there's no reason to believe that Hubie's bunch won't at least match that performance in what will likely be Brown's final season.

    7) - Although Shaq has been replaced by Vlade Divac and Payton was shipped out for Chucky Atkins, the one-two punch of Odom and Kobe should be enough to keep the Lakers in the playoff race, though likely not strong enough to overcome the Wolves or Spurs.

    8) - Like the Heat and Lakers, the Rockets have a powerful one-two punch in Yao and TMac, though this one is more unporven, with even less surrounding it. In time and with the right acquisitions, however, Houston could once again move to the forefront of championship contenders.

    9) - Carmelo didn't have the best Olympics, and his attiude definitely has fans in Denver worried about team chmistry going into the season. But if they can keep it together, the Nuggets should make a return appearance to the playoffs.

    10) - In just one season, Utah has gone from preseason last-place finishers to a solid playoff team. They added Okur and Boozer and lost...Ostertag. However, the big bucks spent on these unproven players could hamstring the Jazz for years to come when looking to build upon their foundation.

    WORST) - With the exception of Okafor, who's a rookie, you'd be hard-pressed to find a team with fewer players least likely to make another NBA team's roster.

  • #2
    Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

    1. Detroit - The first championship team to keep their starting five intact in several years. Plus they added McDyess and will have Rasheed for the whole year. The team to beat.

    2. San Antonio - The second best team last year in my book added Brent Barry, who will form a lethal backcourt with Parker and Ginobili. Their only weakness is at center.

    3. Indiana - Reggie Miller should come off the bench.

    4. Miami - Slimmed-down Shaq is scary.

    5. Minnesota - Health at point guard (of both Cassell and Hudson) is key.

    6. Utah - If Jerry Sloan could almost make the playoffs with the team he had last year, they should be great this year with the additions of Boozer and Okur. Okur will be overmatched defensively in the West, but he will excel on offense in the pick and pop. Harpring will also help a lot if he's healthy.

    7-13 are all Western Conference teams. If I had to guess an order I'd say Houston, Dallas, Sacramento, LA Lakers, Memphis, Phoenix, Denver.

    14. Cleveland - The fourth best team in the East (assuming Ford isn't healthy for Milwaukee). Snow will really help. The key will be Gooden.

    15. New Orleans

    16. Milwaukee

    The five Atlantic Division teams are all about equally mediocre. They'll all be bunched together, and if I had to guess an order I'd say NY, NJ, Philly, Boston, Toronto.

    The bottom of the barrel will be Orlando, Portland, Chicago, Washington, Golden State, LA Clippers, Seattle, Atlanta, and Charlotte.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

      I'm just going to skip this one, because any thread that begins with the reigning champs as #3 just smacks of

      Its still WAAAAY too early to do this.
      [edit=64=1094063980][/edit]

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

        Originally posted by Kstat
        I'm just going to skip this one, because any thread that begins with the reigning champs as #3 just smacks of

        Its still WAAAAY too early to do this.
        Yeah, 'cause you're not exactly biased or anything.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

          What would be the point of having a power ranking poll if you had to pick the defending champions as the number 1 team? It's not about who won last year, it's about who you think will be the best team THIS year. Shade thinks the Wolves and Spurs will be better teams this year, which is a valid prediction.

          If you had picked the defending champs the past 2 years, you would have been wrong anyway as the Lakers won in 02 but lost in 03...and the Spurs won in 03 and lost in 04.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread



            istons:

            acers:









            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread



              acers:



              istons:












              [edit=536=1094069670][/edit]

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                Shoot, forgot about the Rockets. They could go almost anywhere in my top 8. Depends on how well a duo of Yao T-Mac works.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                  1. Pistons
                  2. Spurs
                  3. Pacers
                  4. Wolves
                  You could put these 4 in a hat and pick 'em. As always, if the defending champ is right in the mix, I put them number 1.
                  5. Sacto
                  6. Memphis
                  7. Dallas
                  8. Denver
                  9. Miami
                  10. Houston
                  11. Lakers
                  12. Knicks
                  13. Utah
                  14. New Orleans
                  15. Philly
                  16. Milwaukee
                  17. Phoenix
                  18. Cleveland
                  19. Portland
                  20. Seattle
                  21. New Jersey (They are gonna be SOOO weak without either Kidd or Martin to start the season)
                  22. Boston
                  23. Wizards
                  24. Golden State
                  25. Toronto
                  26. Clippers
                  27. Orlando
                  28. Bulls
                  29. Hawks
                  30. Bobcats

                  I'll come up with more thought and explanations when the season gets closer - may decide Toronto, Utah, etc., are a little better too - we'll see.
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                    Certain people really don't have the champs, with their core players and coach intact, at #1 to begin the season?


                    [edit=72=1094078387][/edit]
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section222
                      Certain people really don't have the champs, with their core players and coach intact, at #1 to begin the season?

                      Exactly. I chewed the same people out last year for not having the spurs #1. Its just stupid.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                        The spurs also didn't win last year, so maybe in hindsight it was you that was stupid.
                        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                          Opinions are never stupid, and that's a fact.

                          It's too early for me; last year I made my power rankings before Walker got traded from the Celtics...Although I don't share the possibly extremist view of Jay and Mr. Simpson, I am on their side, at least for now.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                            Originally posted by Shade
                            Since it's now September, I thought it would be a goodtime to get this rolling. I know the complexion of things may yet change with impending trades, preseason injuries, etc., but I'm going to go ahead and do a Top 10 as if the season were about to begin. As always, feel free to post your own rankings.

                            1) - If not for the Lakers' last hurrah, the Wolves would likely have been in the Finals last year. With pretty much the entire cast returning this year, only the Spurs stand in the way of Minny taking the West.

                            2) - If the Wolves fail to come out of the West, you can practically guarantee that San Antonio will be representing the conference for the third time in seven seasons. They, too, return a cast that was, also, stopped short by the now-disassembled Lakers.

                            3) istons: - The reigning champions managed to reinstall the old cliche of "defense wins championships," and also did so without the benefit of a bona-fide superstar. However, the completely revamped bench, relying on young rookies and aging veterans, may not be enough to allow Detroit to repeat. Of course, they've already beaten the odds once.

                            4) acers: - If Bender can step into Al Harrington's former role as sixth man, and Stephen Jackson turns out as good as advertised, it's very reasonable to expect the Pacers could finally get over the hump and send Reggie Miller into the sunset with a ring.

                            5) - With a slimmer Shaq now in the East, coupled with rising star Dwayne Wade, the only thing stopping the Heat are a better supporting cast and bench. That could be rectified before the start of the season, which could propel the Heat to favorites in the suddenly-rejuvenated East.

                            6) - After tallying a 50-win season and playoff appearance last year, there's no reason to believe that Hubie's bunch won't at least match that performance in what will likely be Brown's final season.

                            7) - Although Shaq has been replaced by Vlade Divac and Payton was shipped out for Chucky Atkins, the one-two punch of Odom and Kobe should be enough to keep the Lakers in the playoff race, though likely not strong enough to overcome the Wolves or Spurs.

                            8) - Like the Heat and Lakers, the Rockets have a powerful one-two punch in Yao and TMac, though this one is more unporven, with even less surrounding it. In time and with the right acquisitions, however, Houston could once again move to the forefront of championship contenders.

                            9) - Carmelo didn't have the best Olympics, and his attiude definitely has fans in Denver worried about team chmistry going into the season. But if they can keep it together, the Nuggets should make a return appearance to the playoffs.
                            nah...his attitude about the NUGGETS is great...his attitude in greece sucked.
                            Denver Nuggets Talk

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The Official PD Preseason Power Rankings Thread

                              Power rankings aren't about "predicting the next champ". Nobody here is a prophet, as far as I know. Had Kstat (Mr. Simpson? ) - at this time last summer - predicted the Pistons would trade a bag of chips for 'Sheed at the deadline and easily dismantle the Lakers in The Finals... well we all would have called him names. I guess we already call him names. Specifically, we would have called him "looney".

                              Power rankings are about ranking the teams, here and now.

                              Since the season ended, The Champs (title case) have either (a) not made any major changes, or (b) made minor changes that could make them even stronger next year. Other contenders, such as Minnesota, the Spurs and the Pacers have not done enough for most rational people to believe they've clearly surpassed The Champs. Thus, I'm dumbfounded that Shade, and others, ranked the Pistons errr The Champs lower than #1.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X