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

Bird press conference

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

  • #76
    Re: Bird press conference

    If the plan is really no major moves and to just count on big improvements from the guys we've got now, this team will never contend.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Bird press conference

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      I'll pick on vnzla here because it's easy and terribly entertaining...

      The bolded. How can you possibly have any idea how big of an impact Foster was as a mentor? That is just a horse **** comment you threw in there in an ill-fated attempt to strengthen your position.

      I don't get why we spend so much time on this board discussing Foster. Of course the front office knew he had back trouble--he's had back trouble for the past half decade. It's nothing new. My guess is they resigned him in the hopes that he could be available for the playoffs. Anything he could give us in the regular season was icing on the cake. We had the cap space, there weren't a ton of other options on the market at the time, and the man has engrained himself in the organization over the course of his career. I'm sure if the front office were faced with this situation again (without the benefit of hindsight), they would play it the exact same way.
      Well that's my point making the argument that he was some kind of mentor is also BS, how do you guys know that? paying him 3mil was a huge mistake not matter how you guys look at it.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Bird press conference

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        You cannot be serious. The starters were more of the problem than the bench, because the starters didn't outscore the heat by enough to overcome the fact that the bench was outscored.

        Are you a politician with that type of spin?
        The starters were the biggest problem because they were not good enough to beat Miami yes, I don't care what your stats say I got to watch the games and some of our starters didn't play to their potential and some were just not good enough.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Bird press conference

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Well that's my point making the argument that he was some kind of mentor is also BS, how do you guys know that? paying him 3mil was a huge mistake not matter how you guys look at it.
          All the second hand reports from people close to the team is how we know he is a good locker room presence. Hell, I think our front office has said as much in the past.

          Paying him 3mil was a huge mistake in your opinion. That is an opinion. It is not a fact. For it to be a "huge mistake" there must have been another far superior option out there for our $3 million investment in Foster. I am more than happy to hear how you, the maestro of fawning over anyone and everyone who has ever even been rumored to be available, would have better spent that money.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Bird press conference

            The starters were good enough to beat Miami, which is why they outscored them. Do we need to talk about how a team wins a basketball game? I mean, I thought that outscoring your opponent was the whole idea of basketball, but I guess not. News to me.

            Starters outscore Miami = they're at fault for losing
            Bench gets outscored by Miami = starters are at fault for losing

            too good.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Bird press conference

              Originally posted by cdash View Post
              All the second hand reports from people close to the team is how we know he is a good locker room presence. Hell, I think our front office has said as much in the past.

              Paying him 3mil was a huge mistake in your opinion. That is an opinion. It is not a fact. For it to be a "huge mistake" there must have been another far superior option out there for our $3 million investment in Foster. I am more than happy to hear how you, the maestro of fawning over anyone and everyone who has ever even been rumored to be available, would have better spent that money.
              Yes he was a good locker room precense when he was in the locker room.....

              And thanks god your are not our GM or you would expend crazy money on "mentors"...
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Bird press conference

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Well that's my point making the argument that he was some kind of mentor is also BS, how do you guys know that?

                Originally posted by Larry Bird
                "He was somebody that came in here every day and worked hard, did the things he was supposed to do, he was a mentor to a lot of young players that came through our organization,"
                http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/caugh...r-ready-future

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Bird press conference

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Well that's my point making the argument that he was some kind of mentor is also BS, how do you guys know that? paying him 3mil was a huge mistake not matter how you guys look at it.
                  As I understand it, even WITH Foster we were under the minimum salary since we didn't sign anyone else. If not, we were right at the minimum salary because we still got to count the amount amnestied with Posey.

                  Either way, without Foster's salary we'd have been under the minimum. Under the minimum means we PAY OUT THE SAME AMOUNT IN SALARY SPLIT BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE TEAM.

                  So, Foster's roster space didn't prevent the acquisition of another player (still roster space and plenty of salary cap space).
                  Foster was traveling with the team until just before he announced his retirement on March 21 (3 months into a 4 month season), so he was around to make an impact.
                  Foster's salary WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE PAID ANYWAY.

                  How is this somehow the bungle you make it out to be? It may not have been a big win but it was certainly a no-lose proposition.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Bird press conference

                    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                    If the plan is really no major moves and to just count on big improvements from the guys we've got now, this team will never contend.
                    As good as Bird has been as our GM, I've always found his loyalty to "his guys" has always been a bit of a detriment. He STILL seems to think that Lance is going to be our superstar player someday. Obviously Lance has talent, but if he was that "type" of talent, we would have at least seen some resemblance of this by now.

                    Whether he wants to admit it or not, we need more TALENT. It doesn't matter if its another starter, another 6th man, we just need more talent in general. Everyone seems to be able to identify what our true needs are (upgrade at PG, an athletic backup big man, and another slashing/scoring type of wing) so I wonder whether or not Bird sees the same things that we see.

                    Bottom line: Yes Growth from within is important, but an upgrade in talent is just as important if not more so.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Bird press conference

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Or that Miami was playing Lebron and Dwade full time, please tell me what bench is going to have a net positive against those two guys? I'll be here waiting for the answer............
                      On a related note.........I am guessing that LeWade playing the vast majority of the minutes at the SG/SF spots for the entire series is something that will work against non-elite Teams.....but once they start playing the Elite Teams or Teams that are built better than the Pacers.....this strategy won't work.

                      Playing 2 Elite Level Players "full Time" is going to be the exception for any Team and not the norm for the entire Playoffs. Sure, it worked against us...cuz we simply weren't as good as we thought we were.....but good luck using this strategy against a Team that was actually deep and could continually go against you for 48 minutes a game for an entire Playoffs.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 05-30-2012, 04:55 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Bird press conference

                        I think it should be considered what the effects of the new CBA will be on the NBA. It has been well documented that just about every year the team who has won the title has had a star. Those teams have been for the most part also been in the luxury tax. They've tended to have stars and depth.

                        Now, the new CBA seems to be scaring teams. The reports out of Chicago have them wanting to cut significant parts of their depth in order to avoid the tax. Cuban has been quoted that going into the luxury tax will be a much harder decision than before. Reports from Miami have them as out of money to make any moves. And it will get even worse when the harshest penalties for going into the luxury tax kick in.

                        So the team who wins the title will probably not have the same level of talent as teams in the past. The Pacers are in a similar boat. They could improve the roster by quite a bit immediately, but it would likely push them into the luxury tax soon enough. But if they keep the core while continuing to search for undervalued players, they could improve while these other teams are being forced to cut players from their rosters to avoid the tax.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Bird press conference

                          This off-season could really do in Miami. If they make it through a long Finals appearance, there is USA Basketball as well. The short season that will end late, and goes right into Olympics and then starts on time next year will really impact their health IMO. They could be looking at either having multiple nagging injuries to their superstars or come out of the gates really slow and have to work harder to get through the playoffs next year.
                          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Bird press conference

                            Looks to be pretty clear Bird has no intentions of signing Deron. That's extremely depressing. It's a huge mistake as well. You can't be loyal to your guys if they aren't talented enough to win.

                            By the way, it also shows in some retrospects, the David West signing was a mistake. Because Bird obviously sees West as part of the Pacers long term plans, his contract would be a direct reason as why Bird feels we can't spend any money on more talent. Trust me folks, if West is that third all-star level guy we're going to have on this team that helps this contend, he's not worth it. Because he's not that good. Not good enough to really beat down opponents.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Bird press conference

                              The sad part, is over the next 6/7 years, I almost guarantee you Hill/DC/Barbosa will take up the necessary contract space for Deron Williams. The thing is, they aren't good enough to get that money, so honestly 1 or all of them are going to be overpaid. /killme

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Bird press conference

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                As I understand it, even WITH Foster we were under the minimum salary since we didn't sign anyone else. If not, we were right at the minimum salary because we still got to count the amount amnestied with Posey.

                                Either way, without Foster's salary we'd have been under the minimum. Under the minimum means we PAY OUT THE SAME AMOUNT IN SALARY SPLIT BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE TEAM.

                                So, Foster's roster space didn't prevent the acquisition of another player (still roster space and plenty of salary cap space).
                                Foster was traveling with the team until just before he announced his retirement on March 21 (3 months into a 4 month season), so he was around to make an impact.
                                Foster's salary WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE PAID ANYWAY.

                                How is this somehow the bungle you make it out to be? It may not have been a big win but it was certainly a no-lose proposition.
                                What was the date when we needed to meet the minimum requirements?
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X