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

Just how big of a move was signing David West?

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

  • #46
    Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

    Who cares if you were for him or not. There is plenty of room on the bandwagon. As far as Nene, I liked him too. If we had him instead of West there would be a lot of people on that bandwagon to.

    So let's move on and just cheer for the players we have. And by the way I'm not holding it against all the Bird haters out there for the last few years. Just happy he got us where we are now. Room on the Bird bandwagon to.
    Good is the enemy of Great


    We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
    -- Frank Vogel.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

      To be fair, I'm not sure what's worse...the people that have hypocritically flip-flopped or the people that feel compelled to say, "I told you so!" and stick their fingers in others' faces.

      Earlier this offseason, I would've been comfortable with West from purely a basketball standpoint, but I was weary of giving of what I thought would be a four-year deal to a 31 year-old coming off major knee surgery. I think most people were and still remain shocked that the Pacers were able to get him on a two-year deal. That, in my opinion, changed everything.

      I do agree though that West's leadership may have been the one thing overlooked throughout this process. Whereas, Nene was highly touted for his versatility to play power forward and center, many fans remain unaware of the type of veteran leadership that West can provide having been a captain on a playoff battle-tested Hornets' team for so long. Being from a foreign background and never a captain, I'm not sure Nene would've brought that same type of communication (facing a language barrier) and leadership ability to our team.
      Last edited by PR07; 12-27-2011, 05:36 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

        What changed it for me is that David West is showing very little rust from his surgery, and he seems to be in great shape. In fact, he seems to be in better shape than a majority of the players on the team. He's come back strong, and full of energy, with physicality... That doesn't always come back after ACL surgery.

        The contract and loyalty helps, too.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

          West was my first choice but I wouldn't of gave him 4 years. Which is what I thought it would take to acquire him. Which is why I wasn't a huge fan when the media speculated we were after him. But after I heard he only had a 3yr 27m dollar offer from Boston I was really hopeful we could get him for the amount I wanted him for and we got him even cheaper.

          I just wasn't a fan of giving Nene max money sorry he isn't near that good. I still think West is a better player and if we got Nene and not West I would of said that. Nene was more coveted because he can play 2 positions and one of those positions C is really hard to find.
          Last edited by pacer4ever; 12-27-2011, 05:41 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

            WEST. the all-star PF, wanted to be a PACER, everyone else didn't. Enough for me.
            Last edited by Pacemaker; 12-27-2011, 06:00 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              There are few posters that never showed in what side they were and now they are trying to lecture people in how good of a fit West is and pretty much tellings us that they were right and how hard they were pushing for West and how much they loved him, the thing is that they were never there when Gamble1 and beast were the only guys fighting the Dwest cause.
              Vnzla, I believe IMF deserves credit as well. I favored Nene for the same reason you voiced: because I thought he was best qualified to start at 4 and back up Hibby at 5. That said, I've long respected West for his game and his intelligence (through his comments), and 2 years at $10M per is great for us. The only drawback, IMO, is that to reach contender status, we'll need to add another quality backup 5 (as well as a closer, or even an upgrade at starting guard). Like you (again), I was disappointed that we didn't reach out to Dalembert for a 1-yr contract. Trading for Kaman or Varejao this season will be costly. As much as I wish we'd do something like that, I prefer moves that add to our core. I think we may wait until the draft to address that need.


              "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

              - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                [QUOTE=vnzla81;1329576]

                I was getting ready to comment on this in another thread, it seems to me like we are getting a lot of bandwagon jumpers here telling us things like "he is the guy I always wanted" or "I knew he was going to be that good" where were this people when you and maybe one more person were having all this arguments about West with me and other guys?

                edit: I don't think is fair to never stick your head out of the window and all of the sudden "yeah he is the guy I wanted all along" I call BS on that one. Gamble1 was man enough to support the guy since the beggining unlike some people here.
                The moderators should place a gold star on the avatars of those who first posted that the Pacers should sign David West.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                  Originally posted by Freddie fan View Post
                  The moderators should place a gold star on the avatars of those who first posted that the Pacers should sign David West.
                  Its not who thought it was a good idea first its all the flack a person takes when they put their neck out there. Atleast thats my point in bringing it up and Peck had to shut down threads because they were getting out of hand with stupid theories on whether he could come back from the injury.

                  Personally I am just glad it worked out the way it did and hopefully he's back to his old self here in the next couple of weeks.
                  Last edited by Gamble1; 12-27-2011, 08:07 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    West was my first choice but I wouldn't of gave him 4 years. Which is what I thought it would take to acquire him. Which is why I wasn't a huge fan when the media speculated we were after him. But after I heard he only had a 3yr 27m dollar offer from Boston I was really hopeful we could get him for the amount I wanted him for and we got him even cheaper.

                    I just wasn't a fan of giving Nene max money sorry he isn't near that good. I still think West is a better player and if we got Nene and not West I would of said that. Nene was more coveted because he can play 2 positions and one of those positions C is really hard to find.
                    Nene isn't as good as West and never will be that good of a basketball player. I always knew that, but I wanted a guy to set next to either Hibbert or Hansbrough without missing a beat. I don't think we get that with David, but I'm not complaining. West is more physical than I had expected. He's thicker and a lot stronger. So, I'm glad we have David West. I just don't think, at the highest level, he can play the C position. Not only due to the knee, but even if he were 100% healthy. Still, the man is a very, very good basketball player and I would probably conclude he is the best player on our team now.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                      I think most people who were against West were against him for non-basketball reasons. Instead it was healthy, age, and money reasons. Very few players can easily come back from an ACL and even be close to their former self within the first season or two, let alone at any point in their career. Combine that with his age, there was a good reason to be skeptical of whether or not he would be able to come back and be worth his predicted salary.

                      I think this is where the people who never really took a side come in. They may have knew he was a good player and would fit, but were concerned about his injury, age, or salary. So they never really took a side.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I think the David West signing is a lot like the Byron Scott signing back in the day. He's not only a great addition on the court, but he's a respected veteran that is telling this team that they do have what it takes to be great! West and Hill really make a difference on a young team like the Pacers!


                        Rise up Pacer Nation!!!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                          I wanted West, but I didn't think there was any way he would come for less than 14 million per. I also didn't think it would be for 2 years, I was expecting 4. No way anyone would have told me that and I believed it. I would have said you were smoking something.

                          When I saw the price and years, I knew we got a steal. It's awesome. I hope West is just as happy as we are.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                            I may have been the biggest pessimist about West. I honestly didn't think he was this tough. I also didn't know he was such a great team player with a great understanding of the game.

                            I just figured since he came here no other team wanted him or could pay him enough. I wasn't sure which one was the truth. A big guy with his excellent numbers who is a two-time All Star coming to Indiana and only getting 10 million year by his own free will? I just didn't think it was possible. I ignored the recruitment the players did with West and only focused on Nene.

                            Looking back I was completely wrong and I'm glad to admit that. West was the best fit and I'm actually happier with him than Nene. I'm glad he can play center and is going to make us a lot better this year. I could easily see AT LEAST 40 wins. 40-26 I would be happy with. I could see us making it to the ECF if we don't face Chicago or Miami before then. Still if we face one of them I will believe we can beat them even if I have my heart ripped out. I never give up on the Pacers until we are eliminated from the playoffs.

                            How sweet would it be for David to be rewarded with a ring here in Indiana? It would definitely make us much more considerable for future guys who are looking to win. Plus like I've said before the low cost of living in Indianapolis makes a 10 million dollar contract in Indianapolis worth more than a 15 million dollar contract in NYC or Golden State. Indianapolis is probably the best affordable place to live in the Midwest. I'm surprised more guys haven't figured this out yet. GREAT place to live and play if you care more about your art than your pleasure.

                            He sold me after ONE GAME. That speaks VOLUMES I hope.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                              D West was the guy that I always wanted, he was always going to be more affordable than nene, and I believe he's the better player too.
                              Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Just how big of a move was signing David West?

                                David West is the veteran leader that this team has missed since Mark Jackson and Reggie Miller.

                                The type of vet who has earned respect, on the court and in the locker room. When he talks he knows what to say and can back it up.

                                I think having a leader like West will help set this team up to win for years. Just as long as one of the young talents on the team take notice on how he handles himself professionally as a player and a teammate.

                                Could end up being one of the Pacers' greatest free agent signings.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X