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

Josh Smith Availability

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

  • Re: Josh Smith Availability

    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
    As for editorial comment deal, it's my opinion, so of course I'm going to think it's right. It's mine. Just as anyone else thinks their own is correct, and mine is wrong. If you'd rather not hear someone defend their own stance on something, you probably shouldn't be on the internet. Or talk to people. Or watch TV.

    I've seen you make a couple snide comments about me over the last year, and I've ignored them for the most part. Don't know what to tell you man, you seem to take me a bit too personal. Ignore function works well.
    Absolutely and you are the only one on this board that I ever put on ignore and now you're going back on. You can do the same.

    Comment


    • Re: Josh Smith Availability

      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
      Well if we're not standing pat, then we can trade the one's we don't plan on signing before that day comes, yes? Not seeing the problem....
      cdash must have been busy tonight, so I came in as a self-annointed middle-inning reliever.

      I'm glad our closer has arrived. And, may the force be with you. As for me, I'm going to bed.

      Comment


      • Re: Josh Smith Availability

        Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
        Absolutely and you are the only one on this board that I ever put on ignore and now you're going back on. You can do the same.
        .... but I don't need to do the same. I'm not the one that's cranky because the other person has an opinion. Hope it works out for you though, honestly.

        In fact, I'd say I dealt with your snide comments better than you deal with me having an opinion. I must have met you and did something to you personally, or said something that really hurt your soul. I don't get it. There's a few people I'd understand putting me on ignore, vnzla because we couldn't agree on the color of the sky, I swear, and Sookie at one point when I nitpicked multiple arguments with her over a 2 day span and 2 were a misunderstanding that was my fault completely. And maybe a couple of other people. You, you just seem to have a real personal issue with me like I met you and ruined your life or something. Get some thicker skin fella. It's the internet. You're not hurting my feelings that I'm your lone ignore victim. Save yourself the strain on your ticker and cool down. This isn't that deep.

        Last edited by xBulletproof; 04-03-2011, 12:24 AM.

        Comment


        • Re: Josh Smith Availability

          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
          cdash must have been busy tonight, so I came in as a self-annointed middle-inning reliever.

          I'm glad our closer has arrived. And, may the force be with you. As for me, I'm going to bed.
          A baseball, and Star Wars reference all the same post. That alone is deserving of a thanks.

          Comment


          • Re: Josh Smith Availability

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
            PF is not our best position, and Josh Smith is light years ahead of Tyler.

            Smith could be available because they have near 70 million dollars tied up in just 7 players. They still need 8 more signings and are looking at spending way, way too much money for a team that's as bad off as we are financially I'd guess. It's not because he sucks or for any other reason.

            Besides that you keep acting like this one thing is the only thing we'll ever do. We're far from being a contender and to get there it's going to take a series of moves. Nobody is going to just hand us Wade/Lebron/Kobe to help us out. Adding a guy who commands respect in the paint on defense, is an All NBA defender and can score, handle the ball and pass well is one hell of a step in that direction. No single move we make is going to make us contenders, I don't care what position it's at.
            How many All-Star games has Smith played in? He is not light years ahead of any starting PF in the league. He is a little above average. Not many teams will be in the hunt for an overpaid PF who has attitude problems.
            Again, concerning the finances, we have no idea what the CBA will be. We may be able to get 1-2 good pieces this summer. I hope we can, I just dont see it after we re-sign/sign bench players. WE already have 1 highly overpaid player in DG. Dont' want another.
            I would take Horford and Hinrich off their hands though!
            Last edited by troyc11a; 04-03-2011, 12:30 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Josh Smith Availability

              Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
              How many All-Star games has Smith played in? He is not light years ahead of any starting PF in the league. He is a little above average. Not many teams will be in the hint for an overpaid PF who has attitude problems.
              Based on this argument, you shouldn't want Andre Iguodala either. He hasn't played in an All Star game. In fact I'd say Smith and Iguodala are very comparable in skill sets except Smith is a much better shot blocker, and their standing relative to their positions is damn near equal. Both are above average on offense, but excel at defense. I'm not contradicting myself however, I've been very vocal of wanting Iguodala as well.

              In fact, now that I think about it I have no idea how you can support getting one, and not want the other.

              Comment


              • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                Based on this argument, you shouldn't want Andre Iguodala either. He hasn't played in an All Star game. In fact I'd say Smith and Iguodala are very comparable in skill sets except Smith is a much better shot blocker, and their standing relative to their positions is damn near equal. Both are above average on offense, but excel at defense. I'm not contradicting myself however, I've been very vocal of wanting Iguodala as well.

                In fact, now that I think about it I have no idea how you can support getting one, and not want the other.
                It is really easy to understand how Iggy would help our team more than Smith. WE get nothing out of the 2 spot - NOTHING at all. George is 2-3 years away.
                We have 2 realiable PF's who are getting better.
                So we really need Iggy. We could use Smith. Big difference.
                At least we can agree on Iggy. I say we need a pg worse than a PF too. They are just so darn hard to come by.

                Comment


                • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                  Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
                  It is really easy to understand how Iggy would help our team more than Smith. WE get nothing out of the 2 spot - NOTHING at all. George is 2-3 years away.
                  We have 2 realiable PF's who are getting better.
                  So we really need Iggy. We could use Smith. Big difference.
                  At least we can agree on Iggy. I say we need a pg worse than a PF too. They are just so darn hard to come by.
                  We really need Iggy over anyone else? For what? We're not going to be a contender the next year or two regardless. Do we really need to fill a job we expect PG24 to fill by the time we will matter anyway? George could easily come in and average 13 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals and 1 block next year. That wouldn't even take groundbreaking improvement. Hell, he'd probably average 12 points per game now if he could catch and shoot. He hits his jumpers on the move, but catch and shoot I don't think he's ever had to do in his life. He's always been the guy with the ball in his hand. Once he figures out how to catch and shoot this offseason, and adds some strength he should be an average starting SG next year.

                  We'll have only 1 PF unless McRoberts decides to come back, since he is a free agent. Even if he does, I wouldn't argue with him getting the backup C minutes against most teams anyway.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                    We really need Iggy over anyone else? For what? We're not going to be a contender the next year or two regardless. Do we really need to fill a job we expect PG24 to fill by the time we will matter anyway? George could easily come in and average 13 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals and 1 block next year. That wouldn't even take groundbreaking improvement. Hell, he'd probably average 12 points per game now if he could catch and shoot. He hits his jumpers on the move, but catch and shoot I don't think he's ever had to do in his life. He's always been the guy with the ball in his hand. Once he figures out how to catch and shoot this offseason, and adds some strength he should be an average starting SG next year.

                    We'll have only 1 PF unless McRoberts decides to come back, since he is a free agent. Even if he does, I wouldn't argue with him getting the backup C minutes against most teams anyway.
                    Everyone in the NBA would score more if ther were better at the "Catch and shoot."
                    I dont see any fight in George. He looks like a guy who is happy to be paid and just plays. I know he is young. But I am not sure the "fight" is something that is worked into you. You either have it or you dont. Right now, not only does he not have it - He looks like he's never seen it.
                    Great talent that could just as easily be wasted as going for 13/5 next year.
                    So is there ANY position on this roster that you think needs improvement other than the 4? You seem to act like we have a group of hall of famers running around out there (lol)

                    Comment


                    • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                      Smith brings shotblocking, but his game IQ isn't great, and he doesn't like contact on the offensive end of the court, hence, he likes to stay on the outside and shoot the three, which he's not too good at. He seems aloof and has had previous attitude problems. He's a bit of a tweener of 3/4 and doesn't have the beef that I'd like to see paired with Roy.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                        Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                        Smith brings shotblocking, but his game IQ isn't great, and he doesn't like contact on the offensive end of the court, hence, he likes to stay on the outside and shoot the three, which he's not too good at. He seems aloof and has had previous attitude problems. He's a bit of a tweener of 3/4 and doesn't have the beef that I'd like to see paired with Roy.
                        He has greatly reduced his three point shooting the last two years compared to his overconfidence before then with his outside shooting. He's not a tweener at the 3/4. He's a 4 who can guard 3s, so he is just versatile. Roy doesn't necessarily need beef next to him. He needs a defensive minded PF next to him. Either that's a beefy Varejao-type or an athletic rim protecting shot blocker like Josh Smith. Josh Smith has a more advanced offensive game than Varejao and would benefit from Roy's passing ability for dunks and put backs.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                          Given the choice betweeen Smith and Nene, I'd take Nene or a player like him. I think we need a 4 who can move over to 5 over a 4 who can guard 3's. If we could get Smith for the right price I'd still say do it. I'm hoping the new cba puts us in a position to help a team out that has to shed salary to get to the new cap, so we can be nice enough to take a star player off their hands for a pick.
                          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                            Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
                            How many All-Star games has Smith played in? He is not light years ahead of any starting PF in the league. He is a little above average. Not many teams will be in the hunt for an overpaid PF who has attitude problems.
                            Again, concerning the finances, we have no idea what the CBA will be. We may be able to get 1-2 good pieces this summer. I hope we can, I just dont see it after we re-sign/sign bench players. WE already have 1 highly overpaid player in DG. Dont' want another.
                            I would take Horford and Hinrich off their hands though!
                            So first you claim PF is our best position... Now you say that Granger is Highly Overpaid?
                            Wow.
                            Originally posted by Piston Prince
                            Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                            "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                            Comment


                            • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                              Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                              So first you claim PF is our best position... Now you say that Granger is Highly Overpaid?
                              Wow.
                              Granger is paid like a "Batman" but plays like a "Robin." This has been suggested on this board by many. That is not a controversial statement at all. Granger is a good player being paid like a great one.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Josh Smith Availability

                                ..Except for the part where he isn't overpaid. "Batmen" get paid max contracts. Danny is not getting paid a max contract. He's a good player getting paid like a good player.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X