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

Our Core

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

  • Our Core

    To deviate from the repetitive "Jim sucks"threads I thought about who I think is our core players going forward.

    What I mean by core are those players who you think, (baring a very lopsided trade) should be the players to build around.


    Danny Granger- Still a very elite scorer, an unhappy one, but still very good
    Tyler Hansbrough- All the fight and attitude you could want in a PF
    Paul George- Mature beyond his years, athletic marvel, great potential
    Darren Collison- Making of an elite PG, just stuck in a system that doenst fit
    Roy Hibbert- cant teach height, and still has potential to be very solid

    I think these are the only players that I definitely want to see going forward.
    I honestly dont care what happens to any other players on the team

    JMHO
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Our Core

    Hard to see "90s" and "Core" in a thread an not think of the birth of PD. Good times

    I'd agree with you, that is the Core. I could easily see that change with the idea that you need to acquire a #1 for Danny to be the Robin for and Birds thoughts that you can't have mostly young guys.

    I like that group going forward, but I also can see trading some pieces to get proven better players.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Our Core

      yep, everything was golden in the 90's

      I go back and forth with whether to move Granger or not. Part of me wants to see the effects of another coach, the other says Granger is not enough and should be moved as part of a bigger package to get younger and more potential
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Our Core

        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
        To deviate from the repetitive "Jim sucks"threads I thought about who I think is our core players going forward.

        What I mean by core are those players who you think, (baring a very lopsided trade) should be the players to build around.


        Danny Granger- Still a very elite scorer, an unhappy one, but still very good
        Tyler Hansbrough- All the fight and attitude you could want in a PF
        Paul George- Mature beyond his years, athletic marvel, great potential
        Darren Collison- Making of an elite PG, just stuck in a system that doenst fit
        Roy Hibbert- cant teach height, and still has potential to be very solid

        I think these are the only players that I definitely want to see going forward.
        I honestly dont care what happens to any other players on the team

        JMHO
        pacers have been running the NO offense most of the time this trip west. collison is still sucking at it. blaming the system for his lack of production is erroneous. collison is an average PG. if he was really good, he could play no matter what the system. collison is better than watson, but trading him for someone else wouldn't cause any lost sleep.

        i would add AJ and brandon to the list. AJ is a much better PG that he looks. he just seems to be one of those guys whose numbers are better than you think watching the game. brandon is a defender/3point shooter. and makes the SG/SF rotation complete.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Our Core

          I would not say Granger is a very elite scorer anymore. He's a shell of the guy he was two years ago.


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Our Core

            I could tend to agree with that, although I HOPE he is just "O'Briened out"
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Our Core

              that's a pretty depressing "core" going forward. Not sure that there isn't a worse group in the NBA. Paul George is the only guy to get excited about.
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Our Core

                Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                that's a pretty depressing "core" going forward. Not sure that there isn't a worse group in the NBA. Paul George is the only guy to get excited about.
                Really?

                I admit its not exactly world beaters, but I wouldnt say anywhere near the bottom 5
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Our Core

                  Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                  Really?

                  I admit its not exactly world beaters, but I wouldnt say anywhere near the bottom 5
                  Well, as Pacer fans we are biased because we watch these guys play frequently. But if we were a fan of another team, we wouldn't really fear the Pacers as a team on the rise. Other bad teams I am sorry to say have us beat. The Warriors have a better core, and the Clippers do by far. The Kings probably do. We may have the T'Wolves beat, but that is all I can think of.
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Our Core

                    Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                    that's a pretty depressing "core" going forward. Not sure that there isn't a worse group in the NBA. Paul George is the only guy to get excited about.

                    Further proof that rebuilding without actually rebuilding in a small market is a failed strategy. Need a new direction in the front office.

                    I'd listen to offers on ANYONE currently on this roster. Starting price is Picks and younger assets.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Our Core

                      I d say Cleveland, Washington, New Jersey, Minnesota,Golden St, Detroit, Phoenix

                      are worse off than us
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Our Core

                        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                        I d say Cleveland, Washington, New Jersey, Minnesota,Golden St, Detroit, Phoenix

                        are worse off than us

                        Cleveland-Possibly but they haven't even had a lotto chance yet

                        Washington-Better off because John Wall is better than anyone we have, and they have Blatche, Nick Young and Rashad Lewis who are all starters on this Pacers club.

                        New Jersey- Lopez and Favors are both better building blocks than what we have right now

                        Minnesota- Love and Rubio have more trade value than anyone we have. Plus Wes Johnson and Mike Beasley. Lots of intriguing 25 and under assets there

                        Golden state- Has Ellis and Curry. David Lee absolutely a better team than us right now.

                        Detroit- We might be better off than them. I do really like Greg Monroe. Other players are ugh. Another team that shouldn't have cut corners on their rebuild. Though it looks like Dumars is FINALLY admitting his mistakes and going to bottom out and rebuild. Will our Front Office admit mistakes? They haven't yet?

                        Phoenix- They've been a perennial playoff team. Haven't really even had a chance to rebuild at this point. Their owner totally sucks and ruined their title hopes

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Our Core

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          I d say Cleveland, Washington, New Jersey, Minnesota,Golden St, Detroit, Phoenix

                          are worse off than us
                          Cleveland- yes, but that doesn't really count becaus that whole team was built around Lebron

                          Washington- No. John Wall and Nick Young are better than our prospects.

                          New Jersey- Maybe.

                          Minnesota- yes

                          Golden St- big no. Monta Ellis > Granger. Steph Curry, David Lee and Dorrell Wright are more formidable than our core.

                          Detroit- yes

                          Phoenix- maybe.
                          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Our Core

                            Here's the thing, when you have a group of guys

                            Collison, Price, Rush, George, Danny, Josh, Hans, and Hibbert

                            a good majority, are going to fall somewhere between good role player to good starter.

                            Danny Granger is a borderline All Star player, and Roy Hibbert...I thought was a borderline all star player (or will be)..and I haven't given up on him.

                            And then there's George. I think this core turns on how good George will be. George could be really special, but I think that won't be for a few years.

                            I've said before, I think we need another "borderline all star" type player, either at SG (Iggy)or PF, and if we get said player at SG, then we'll need an actual starter at PF. (I'd love it to be NeNe.

                            I'd like to see
                            Collison/Price
                            All Star SG/PG
                            Danny/PG
                            PF/Hans
                            Roy/Josh

                            next season

                            But regardless, I don't think our talent is bad. I think we have a lot of "good players" and no real star (yet, we'll see with George) so it doesn't look as good as it actually is.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Our Core

                              I'm not sure its fair to compare the current roster to teams like the Clippers who have already blown their FA money load. We'll know more about our "core" once we turn Dunleavy and the rest of the awful contracts into players.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X