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

Wells Tweets

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

  • #61
    Re: Wells Tweets

    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
    Just for interesting conversation. Who do you want us to sign?
    This is such an open ended question. I don't know how to answer it, like I said for me it is all about what it would take to sign them.

    I don't have a problem with Nene, Gasol, David West, or Jamal Crawford at the right price, but probably at least 3 of those guys and maybe all 4 will end up getting contracts that would be too rich for my blood.


    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Wells Tweets

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      Your takeaway from Jamal is he can create shots just not hit them. I'm kinda floored. I'm not arguing he hits 50% of them, but damn it's clutch self-created jumpshots, I don't think hitting 40% of those is that ridiculous. Hell, look up Kobe's %'s sometime in that regard.
      LOL no doubt!

      How many shots did Crawford miss when he lit kobe and the LAkers arse up for 50 last season

      Jamal stays in great shape
      only 31, not 35
      PROVEN ability to go absolutely freakin nuts when he gets hot
      Seems highly intelligent and well grounded
      and oh, outside of Danny, and not even so much him, who can create off the dribble on this team?

      Pitch him 8M a year and the starting 2 on a very up and coming team with a rabid fan base and great state love of basketball
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Wells Tweets

        Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
        Um, excuse me, but I find problems with all of these.

        EJ gets hurt a lot!

        Howard? DWIGHT Howard? His teeth are too white and creep me out.

        CP3 just looks too wholesome. I'm expecting a Dexter-like history where he's a serial killer that only kills people that kill gators in Louisiana or something.

        DWill has a LOT of tattoos!
        good one
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Wells Tweets

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Is not exaggeration, there is a reason why Hicks sounds frustrated, because everybody here is expecting that every player we pick is perfect and has not flaws, for example somebody mentions Nene? and the answer is No, how about Crawford? meh......
          I don't understand what there is to be frustrated about. We aren't the ones running the team....


          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Wells Tweets

            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
            LOL no doubt!

            How many shots did Crawford miss when he lit kobe and the LAkers arse up for 50 last season

            Jamal stays in great shape
            only 31, not 35
            PROVEN ability to go absolutely freakin nuts when he gets hot
            Seems highly intelligent and well grounded
            and oh, outside of Danny, and not even so much him, who can create off the dribble on this team?

            Pitch him 8M a year and the starting 2 on a very up and coming team with a rabid fan base and great state love of basketball
            No you need to keep him on the bench IMO. That is his best role.


            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Wells Tweets

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Collectively, you guys are impossible. Every player has some fatal flaw that means we can't or shouldn't sign them or trade for them. Terrific.
              LOL

              "The Pacers had a chance to trade for Dwight Howard for just cap relief, however Bird was emphatic that "Superman has no place on this team with "Batman" already here

              Bird passed up the trade
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Wells Tweets

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                I don't think that's what most have been saying. Free agents, like all things, for most of us come down to price.

                Nene at 14 million? No thanks. Nene at 12 million? Ok, I can maybe buy it. Nene at 10 million? Fo sho.

                Same goes for Gasol for me basically, though I'm a little more inclined to over pay for him.

                Crawford at 10 million? No thanks. Crawford at 8 million? I'm in. Crawford at 6 million? Hooray.
                Trader Joe, did you really just say "fo sho"

                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Wells Tweets

                  ill pass on Crawford too. I bet he is going to cost to much and he takes a lot of bad shots.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Wells Tweets

                    The problem with this free agent class is that since these are the only players available and they are below average in quality (relative to other free agent classes), it's very likely that teams are going to overpay for most or all of the players that sign early.

                    Unfortunately Nene, West, Crawford, Chandler all fall into that category of players likely to sign early as they are the best players available. All of them will likely be overpaid.

                    I don't think there's a need for Crawford on this team, but he's perfect for a team that really struggles to score like Charlotte. Right now, we have enough SGs in a PG's body (Collison, Hill).

                    I think he's a more potent scorer than Collison and Hill, but he has a bad shot selection (that has improved from worst in the league to satisfactory) and I don't think he offers much that George Hill can't do. That's especially the case when you factor in the differences in cost between the two players.

                    Crawford had an amazing playoff run though. I had as much watching him against the Magic as I did any player against any team (up until the Finals).

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Wells Tweets

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      This is such an open ended question. I don't know how to answer it, like I said for me it is all about what it would take to sign them.

                      I don't have a problem with Nene, Gasol, David West, or Jamal Crawford at the right price, but probably at least 3 of those guys and maybe all 4 will end up getting contracts that would be too rich for my blood.
                      Me too, I am more of a bargain shopper. I'd like to see us find someone younger than all these guys.. at least under 29 years old. A 4 year deal for these guys makes them senior citizens in NBA years while they are on contract. It just doesn't seem prudent to dish out a max contract to guys who are going to be winding down sooner than later.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Wells Tweets

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        No you need to keep him on the bench IMO. That is his best role.
                        Yeah I could see your reasoning there

                        maybe reassure him he will get at least 30 minutes a night and be on the floor at the end of the fourth quarter
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Wells Tweets

                          does anybody know if the Pacers have been mentioned in any CP3 or DHoward rumors? Cause i hear that they are trying to find a way to play together and we have the cap room to get them here. Someone media guy at least needs to get a story out there and Cp3 and Dwight could actually get it in their even if its a little

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Wells Tweets

                            Our team has weaknesses, but we were close to squeaking out a series win against one of the best teams in the East. We're already better than we were last season with the addition of Hill, and we have multiple players with a lot of room to grow.

                            If we're going to spend a lot, it better be for a markedly better player, not for someone who is likely to be surpassed by someone on our current roster at a much, much lower price.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Wells Tweets

                              For those that suggest that we should go after BOTH JCraw and Milsap....could you breakdown how the minutes will work out for the PG/SG/SF/PF rotation?

                              Although both are combo-players…..which gives us some flexibility.....my concern is that it would be very difficult to work out the # of minutes in the rotation unless we reduce at least one or two of the key rotational Players to playing 24 mpg.

                              For example, the below rotation would work IF JCraw was ONLY added to the rotation where the key Rotational Players would be playing at least 28 to 30 mpg:

                              PG
                              - DCollison ( 30 mpg )
                              - GHill ( 18 mpg as the backup PG )

                              SG
                              - JCraw ( 28 mpg )
                              - GHill ( 10 mpg as the backup SG )
                              - PGeorge ( 10 mpg as the backup SG )

                              SF
                              - Granger ( 30 mpg )
                              - PGeorge ( 18 mpg as the backup SF )


                              But if we were to go with Milsap ONLY to the rotation ( assuming that he plays a small # of minutes as a Backup SF ), we could have a rotation like this where the key rotational Players will be playing at least 30 mpg:

                              PG
                              - DCollison ( 30 mpg )
                              - GHill ( 18 mpg as the backup PG )

                              SG
                              - PGeorge ( 24 mpg as Starting SG )
                              - GHill ( 12 mpg as the backup SG )
                              - Some combination of Inferno/Lance/BRush ( sharing 12 mpg as a backup SG )

                              SF
                              - Granger ( 30 mpg )
                              - PGeorge ( 6 mpg as the backup SF )
                              - Milsap ( 12 mpg as the backup SF )

                              PF
                              - Milsap ( 18 mpg )
                              - Hansbrough ( 30 mpg as the backup PF )


                              The problem is that if we were to go with BOTH Milsap and JCraw….unless we cut someone down to 24 minutes and the rest of the key rotational Players to 26 to 28 mpg, then the minutes won't necessarily work out.

                              I know that I seem to be obsessed about minutes when it comes to Players and that this may seem very granular in detail when it comes to Players……but this part is important ( at least to me ) only because it makes little sense to add a Starting quality Wing Player or a PF/SF ( such as Milsap ) IF we don't have the minutes to justify bringing them in at a certain cost.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Wells Tweets

                                Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                                Um, excuse me, but I find problems with all of these.

                                EJ gets hurt a lot!

                                Howard? DWIGHT Howard? His teeth are too white and creep me out.

                                CP3 just looks too wholesome. I'm expecting a Dexter-like history where he's a serial killer that only kills people that kill gators in Louisiana or something.

                                DWill has a LOT of tattoos!
                                Hahahahahahahhahaha....got my laugh for the day.
                                Love the teeth part.
                                {o,o}
                                |)__)
                                -"-"-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X