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

AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

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

  • #16
    Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    How many caught the part where Bird said he doesn't like trading 1st picks but would this year?

    Bird's FA answer intrigued me about "couple of guys I've got my eye on who could help immensely, and we're going to go after them when the time comes."
    This is part of what made me think, he won't trade at the deadline.

    'when the time comes' = Free Agency

    I think.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

      Originally posted by DrFife View Post
      To me, the key statement was, "I would be looking around to maybe trade my first-round pick this year." This signals (again) an intention to try combine an expiring (and a young asset?) with a pick to acquire a player of significance who is on an "expensive" contract.
      That was the big one for me, as well as the "free agents that will help us immensely" comment. Also, didn't he say that he's "got his eyes" on a couple of free agents? Would that indicate that he's planning on staying with the Pacers? Just trying to read between the lines a little.

      But, like I said, his admitted willingness to trade the first round pick is intriguing. As DrFife says here, it tells me there's a good chance of packaging an expiring and the pick with maybe one of our young guys for a real stud.
      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        How many caught the part where Bird said he doesn't like trading 1st picks but would this year?

        Bird's FA answer intrigued me about "couple of guys I've got my eye on who could help immensely, and we're going to go after them when the time comes."
        IMO 2 guys available & fit a "need" & areyoung, big & athletic are:
        -J.Thompson/ Sac
        -A.Randolph/ NYK
        I bet we land 1 of these 2 & that is it (+ Lance).
        "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
        (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          It's guys like DC that I think might give him trouble most. The upside is he could reciprocate just like Stucky.

          I'm one of the few on here, I think, that want him to play Point Guard.
          I honestly have no idea where I want him to play. I liked his summer league at point, but it was just summer league. I watched a few Cincy games last year and he was a one man show that didn't even look to pass. He also was making shots that were pretty incredible. I'm more worried that he's going to be good on the court and a problem off the court. The better he is on the court the more news it will make when/if he gets in trouble.
          Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

            The last few days makes me wonder.

            If Lance has superstar upside, then why didn't Obie and now Vogel not played him yet. You play to win. If someone is that good, you play them.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

              Originally posted by BPump33 View Post
              I honestly have no idea where I want him to play. I liked his summer league at point, but it was just summer league. I watched a few Cincy games last year and he was a one man show that didn't even look to pass. He also was making shots that were pretty incredible. I'm more worried that he's going to be good on the court and a problem off the court. The better he is on the court the more news it will make when/if he gets in trouble.
              Ya i would have hated to play with him that year. He actually passed better in HS. He still makes incredible passes when he wants to. But he didnt seem to want 2 at cincy.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                Ya i would have hated to play with him that year. He actually passed better in HS. He still makes incredible passes when he wants to. But he didnt seem to want 2 at cincy.
                I know we had this conversation on the way up to Milwaukee, but I was pretty impressed with his pull up jumper. He has a pretty sweet stroke.
                Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                  I am high on Lance.

                  But his one lengthy appearance in preseason showed him to be almost completely clueless on defense and not that much better on offense.

                  I'm excited that Larry is excited. But I see at least five games of decent minutes before he even begins to be something other than a negative. And with the current playoff push, I can see Vogel being reluctant.

                  It may be that we see very little of Lance until the point that we clinch a playoff spot, and that, at the most, would be five or ten games before the season ends.

                  The time to introduce Lance to the NBA was earlier this year.
                  Last edited by McKeyFan; 02-17-2011, 12:23 PM.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    The last few days makes me wonder.

                    If Lance has superstar upside, then why didn't Obie and now Vogel not played him yet. You play to win. If someone is that good, you play them.

                    My feeling is, even though Bird and Vogel say he will play, that Stephenson was never going to play until AFTER his court hearing tomorrow.

                    I know there are those that feel that Stephenson will come out of this w/o any problem and that the Pacers know it. If true, why hasn't Stephenson been given PT? My guess is that the Pacers aren't certain how tomorrow will turnout, so they didn't want him playing only to have a PR problem. Better play it safe than be sorry laer if things turn sour in court.

                    If things are resolved in Stephenson's favor, I have no doubt those who about to wet their pants in anticipation of seeing Stephenson play will get their opportunity in the next game against the Wizards. You might even get to see him against Stuckey and Gordon the next night.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      It's guys like DC that I think might give him trouble most. The upside is he could reciprocate just like Stucky.

                      I'm one of the few on here, I think, that want him to play Point Guard.
                      If you mean like the way Dwayne Wade runs the point , I agree
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                        The funny thing will be if Lance gets playing time, and exceeds expectations

                        The hype will grow to epic proportions

                        After 1 good game it will be something like "Is Lance the new D Wade?"

                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          The funny thing will be if Lance gets playing time, and exceeds expectations

                          The hype will grow to epic proportions

                          After 1 good game it will be something like "Is Lance the new D Wade?"

                          Irony is that D-Wade is who Lance says he patterns his game after. So if we have Mini Wade and Mini T-Mac, minus the injuries of course, then we look to be in good shape going forward.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            The last few days makes me wonder.

                            If Lance has superstar upside, then why didn't Obie and now Vogel not played him yet. You play to win. If someone is that good, you play them.
                            Actually you have kind of answered your own question.

                            He has upside, supposedly at a star like potential upside, but he is all prospect and not ready to contribute. If your playing to win (ie O'Brien) you play the players who are ready to play now to help you win.

                            I'm not saying that this is the right way to go but it does make logical sense.


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

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Actually you have kind of answered your own question.

                              He has upside, supposedly at a star like potential upside, but he is all prospect and not ready to contribute. If your playing to win (ie O'Brien) you play the players who are ready to play now to help you win.

                              I'm not saying that this is the right way to go but it does make logical sense.
                              After hearing from Bird, Morway, and Vogel it sounds like they think he can contribute right now. After all, Bird and company have said repeatedly how much they want to make the playoffs this year, so if he couldn't contribute now, then I don't believe he would be activated

                              In summary it sounds like up until recently he wasn't ready, but now they believe he is.
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: AS Break Q&A with Bird (Big read)

                                We're definitely in the right track and have our best chance at making the playoffs for the first time in years.

                                I'm happy Bird has so much confidence in these young guys.

                                This is going to be a contending team in a few years.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X