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

Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

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

  • #16
    Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

    Originally posted by owl View Post
    We will be in lock out mode in 6 years. Count on it and without someway to lock up your superstar it will always be thus. The NFL has it right, mostly. Two franchise tags might do it. I am thinking that maybe the Simons are not willing to spend money at least that is the way it looks today. Nene really should have been given the max. Of course he still may have not come here. He is the one player that makes the Pacers much better.
    Excellent post Owl. The NBA has become a two tier league. While Dan Gilbert isn't popular, he is mostly right on the mark. 25 Washington Generals teams and 5 that might have a shot at the title. I follow this game only because I prefer basketball and these are the best players in the world...but my interest in the league is beginning to wane. Dwight and CP3 to LA and other big market teams raking in the free agents this round is chipping away...

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Excellent post Owl. The NBA has become a two tier league. While Dan Gilbert isn't popular, he is mostly right on the mark. 25 Washington Generals teams and 5 that might have a shot at the title. I follow this game only because I prefer basketball and these are the best players in the world...but my interest in the league is beginning to wane. Dwight and CP3 to LA and other big market teams raking in the free agents this round is chipping away...
      Ya honestly the last couple days as things progressed and it became obvious the power teams were only going to get stronger, the more i thought im gonna have to drop my interest in the NBA soon... Only reason i don't want to is i don't want to abondon my Pacers.. Also the talent level in the league is unmatched. But i much rather watch IU and other college basketball than this league that obviously just isn't built very well for teams to be even. Players should have next to 0 control when they are under contract. They signed with you, they play for you, unless you decide you don't want them. NFL, MLB is built MUCH better.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        How can you devise a system that keeps players from going where they want to go.
        I think removing the max on individual salaries, even in current system, would help. Guys wouldn't take less to play with their buddies if less was $15mm a year, not $2mm.

        The CP3 trade to the Lakers doesn't bother me as originally proposed. They gave up a lot of talent to get Paul. If they manage to turn Bynum into Howard, that's a different story.

        The DWest to the Celtics trade is sketchy. I don't understand how you can give up absolutely nothing and get a borderline all-star.

        The most offensive thing, however, is JO asking to be waived if he's traded to the Hornets so he can go sign with the Heat. Waived players still get their full salary. There's a lot of hypocrisy here. Guaranteed contracts are a blood issue for the players, so teams have to pay them whether or not the team is interested in having them around or not. However, as soon as a player gets on a team they don't want to play for, they expect to be released so they can go sign somewhere else while still getting paid for the contract they essentially refused to honor. If I'm Demps/Stern and I wind up with JO, I'd tell him to sit at home and get fined until he decided he wanted to honor the contract he signed.
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

          The most infuriating part of all of this is that the teams with lots of cap space are losing all the big-name FAs to teams that are already contenders and have no space to add them w/o lopsided trades. It's not a coincidence that those "big cap space" teams are all small markets.

          Sign-and-trades need to go. They cheat the spirit of the system.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

            That was the point that irks me too Shade. Teams wait abiding by the rules building cap space to get "name" free agents, then big market teams with no cap room are able to get around rules to magicly get them.

            Tyson Chandler (tho not a big fan of his) signs with Knicks but magically becomes a sign and trade for a scrub giving the Mavs an 8 mil trade exemption to acquire a 10 mil a year player in spite of being well over the cap.

            Boston gets David West the same way.

            Even the Hornets / Lakers/ Rockets deal would give the Lakers an 8 mil + trade exemption , enough to taKe Turkoglu with Howard for Bynum.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

              Well, even though I was a militant hardcap-er, the most important thing to come out of the new CBA is revenue sharing. Sounds like the Pacers will get an extra $10M a year thanks to it.

              Now, you may say big deal, that doesn't help us compete. But yeah, it does. We may not sign FA's, but Simon has shown he's willing to spend money when we can put a winning product on the floor. It'll help with trades and keeping our young core together.

              Also, it'll hopefully keep PS&E from gouging the city again.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                I like your ideas Geezer.

                Another option is for the small market teams to not do any spending. That would devalue the league as a whole. Bring on guys like Jeff Pendergraph. Better yet, bring Britton Johnson back and make a mockery of the league. I'll go out there and play for the minimum. If they want the Washington Generals to compete against, let'em have it.

                I'd rather see that so I would just turn off the channel.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                  The more I think about it, the more I like not spending a penny more than required. Let the teams all stink except of course Chicago, Boston, LA and Miami. Revenue sharing is good. At least the owners make a marginal profit and the tax payer doesn't get the shaft.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                    Originally posted by Shade View Post
                    The most infuriating part of all of this is that the teams with lots of cap space are losing all the big-name FAs to teams that are already contenders and have no space to add them w/o lopsided trades. It's not a coincidence that those "big cap space" teams are all small markets.

                    Sign-and-trades need to go. They cheat the spirit of the system.
                    But all those small-market teams need to AGREE on those trades first.

                    Not giving in to demands is the first step to getting rid of them.

                    "lose them over nothing!!" perhaps, but feeling better and making your fans feel better as well as having capspace don't hurt that much.

                    On top of that, you are able to put a deal on the table for said player next year, that will put the decision in HIS court, not yours, to lose all that money.

                    The system is fine, it was fine, the owners got what they wanted; more money.
                    Forget revenue sharing, it will be at best 5%

                    As long as owner are fighting the battles in the FO's as they have done all their lives in business, ruthless, FO's will find ways of collecting toptalent in certain places.
                    You made a difference bigger in signing for your own team and signing with a new team and next you purposely help circumvent it, so the solution is to make it impossible??
                    BS, if i player wants to leave so bad he is willing to take the loss, he has the right, it is the owners dealing a year early that are screwing it up.

                    Of course there's also FO's like ours, but the owner handpicks those as well so he can sit on his own blisters there too.
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                      Pacers will get more like 15-20 millin in revenue sharing. And if u read what Cuban wrote yesterday, the new system I why they could nt re-sign Chandler

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                        A mini Occupy NBA huh? The owners "go on strike" by only paying the minimum and then getting the Luxury payout etc. Yep, teach the league a lesson. Years ago there was a NASCAR driver that drove only to finish the race and every year he ended up in the top tier of money winners.
                        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Pacers will get more like 15-20 millin in revenue sharing. And if u read what Cuban wrote yesterday, the new system I why they could nt re-sign Chandler
                          Please UB, what you base those calculations on ?
                          I have not seen the new revenue sharing in print anywhere and i KNOW the penalty pot is going to be LOTS smaller, so please tell ?
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                            No they couldn't re-sign Chandler but the sign and trade gives them a huge trade exemption to replace him . They can work a trade now to acquire a player plus use the exemption if needed to take a bad contract back in a seperate but in reality one big trade move.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                              Great thread! And shade is right on the money with this

                              Originally posted by Shade View Post
                              The most infuriating part of all of this is that the teams with lots of cap space are losing all the big-name FAs to teams that are already contenders and have no space to add them w/o lopsided trades. It's not a coincidence that those "big cap space" teams are all small markets.

                              Sign-and-trades need to go. They cheat the spirit of the system.
                              Restore the Passion - Restore the Pride

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Howard and Paul will end up Lakers- Nothing in NBA changes

                                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                                Well, even though I was a militant hardcap-er, the most important thing to come out of the new CBA is revenue sharing. Sounds like the Pacers will get an extra $10M a year thanks to it.

                                Now, you may say big deal, that doesn't help us compete. But yeah, it does. We may not sign FA's, but Simon has shown he's willing to spend money when we can put a winning product on the floor. It'll help with trades and keeping our young core together.

                                Also, it'll hopefully keep PS&E from gouging the city again.
                                Problem is, deals like the Lakers one that was nixed would have allowed the Lakers to acquire Paul while shedding a ton of salary, effectively making them better while putting them under the luxury tax threshold. That would have negated a TON of luxury tax revenue the Lakers would have had to share.

                                It's too easy to cheat the system with stuff like this.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X