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

Second best Pacer Player ever ...

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

  • #46
    Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

    Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
    Rasho Nesterovic and John Edwards.
    My buddy plays and looks just like John Edwards. He hates it, but we still call him John Edwards during pick up games...

    In my time watching the Pacers I'd probably have to go with JO even though i started to hate his game towards the end of his time here. He was killing it for a few years though.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

      I totally agree with the geezer on all his posts in this thread.

      For the young people, there really is no way to explain George McGinnis compared to anyone else in the game at the time. He was the biggest, strongest, beast on the floor. His combination of power and quickness was completely unique back then.

      Meta was really spectacular for us before he went all tru-warrior on us.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

        As another old timer, I have to lend perspective on the ABA guys.

        How you answer the question depends on the criteria. If I wanted one guy to make one play, at the peak of his game, it would be Roger. If I wanted to rely on one player to carry a team on his back and have the opponent look flat-out helpless for an entire game, it would be Big Mac. If I needed someone to get the tough rebound, make the right defensive play, take it strong to the basket, and lead a team year after year after year, it would be Mel.

        Since this question IMO begs a big picture perspective, I would say that the answer is Mel Daniels since he meant the most to the franchise. His arrival made us contenders, gave us interior toughness, and kept admittedly more talented players like Artis Gilmore from dominating.

        On a skill level, at his peak, nobody topped George McGinnis. With a Karl Malone build but more mobility, he was unstoppable for years and shared an MVP with Julius Erving, 3 times an ABA all-star, 3 times an NBA all-star, playoff MVP. He had more ability but a somewhat short career I attribute to poor nutrition and I even recall him being a heavy smoker.

        I would put Roger Brown behind both just because he didn't come into the league until he was 25 and then his knee injuries, as I recall, took away his 1-on-1 moves toward the end and prevented a longer career and NBA excellence. Like I said though, he was the guy you wanted for the big shot.
        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

          It's a real shame the Pacers had such complete suck-azz ownership at the time or
          else Adrian Dantley might be a part of this conversation.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

            I already cast my vote for JO but I loved Clark Kellogg, Chuck Person, and Detlef Schrempf. The worst trade in Pacers history (at least since I began following them closely in 1986) was the Chuck Person and Michael Williams trade for Pooh Richardson and Sam Mitchell. I was equally upset with the Detlef trade for McKey but in retrospect that trade worked out okay. I probably would've selected George McGinnis if I had actually seen him play.

            Still, in my years of watching the Pacers, JO was phenomenal. He accomplished a lot in his 8 years with the Pacers. He played through injuries that probably ruined his career. I always appreciated what he was great at more than focusing on what he wasn't. He could score, defend, and rebound better than Smits and Dale Davis.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

              I think if Jermaine O'Neal can be considered as 2nd best ever for his 'best' years, which were cut short by injury, then Clark Kellogg needs to be in the same conversation. When healthy, I think he was one of the best overall players ever for the NBA version of the Pacers.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                How exactly are Mark Jackson and Danny Granger on this list?
                The list is whatever you want babe. Just threw some names out there.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                  Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                  Funny I always hear Roger Brown. Would you rank him right behind these two?
                  Saw Roger play many times. Look at his stats. For all the local love, he really had a short career where in he made much of a difference. Billy Knight actually outshone him if you look at career accomplishment.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                    I understand all the JO references...but man, if he would have played like a 7 footer instead of shooting fade away jumpers, he may have actually been an MVP. Too much whining to the officials and playing "small" for me. He definitely THOUGHT he was MVP, and not in a good way.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                      Rajah was great but just hasn't stuck with me like Mel, Big George, and Freddy Lewis. I'm not sure why.
                      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


                      • #56
                        Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                        Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                        Favorite Jones?

                        Fred, James, Dahntay or Wilbert?
                        Fred
                        "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                          2nd best player I would give it to JO. Lifetime achievement I would give it to Smits or Dale Davis. I can't speak for any of the ABA players.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                            So I got to meet Rik Smits today as he was on-campus for his daughter's registration day. I told him how I used to pretend to be him when my friends and I played as kids and got a picture. Then I went to grab lunch and he sat down beside me and I got to chat with his family. He certainly gets my vote as my 2nd favorite Pacers player ever. So cool.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                              mike dunleavy
                              troy murphy
                              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Second best Pacer Player ever ...

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	thumbnailCA32Q85X.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	5.8 KB
ID:	3241043

                                Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                                mike dunleavy
                                troy murphy
                                Bambam

                                Follow me on Twitter @http://twitter.com/brockhubble

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X