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

Off season Rumors and Speculation

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

  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

    I knew we had to keep Hibbert even if it meant paying him max money and while it was a little hard to swallow, the Blazers giving Batum 46.5mil for 4 years makes it so much easier to swallow and be happy with. I really want to laugh at them.

    Now that I say that, he'll probably have a break out year and score 17-19pts or Minnesota will be dumb enough to give them three 1st round picks.

    Timberwolves would be really dumb to trade them three 1st round picks imo. The contract seems bad enough within itself let alone giving up a bunch of 1st round picks.
    "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

    Comment


    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

      Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
      I don't like NY either, but fanbases are all alike, just the bigger cities have more people so they also have more knuckleheads and trolls. PD would have sounded just the same if Hibbert would have gone to Portland under the same circumstances.
      I was referring to some of the really "out of bounds" remarks that some of them made that were made by some of those knuckleheads. Even if Hibbert left Indy for Portland....I don't think that Indy fans would have made comments like some of the ones that were made on Lin's facebook page. I will give the Indy Fanbase the benefit of the doubt.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        I was referring to some of the really "out of bounds" remarks that some of them made that were made by some of those knuckleheads. Even if Hibbert left Indy for Portland....I don't think that Indy fans would have made comments like some of the ones that were made on Lin's facebook page. I will give the Indy Fanbase the benefit of the doubt.
        People on facebook pages are morons. The knicks have more people on their facebook page, so more morons.
        "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          I was referring to some of the really "out of bounds" remarks that some of them made that were made by some of those knuckleheads. Even if Hibbert left Indy for Portland....I don't think that Indy fans would have made comments like some of the ones that were made on Lin's facebook page. I will give the Indy Fanbase the benefit of the doubt.
          I really don't think any fan base is any better then any other, and I think it's do to the Internet. People say what ever they feel like saying, because it's not face to face.

          Plus it seems to be getting worse. People are saying how great PD is, but it was better several years ago because there wasn't so much negativity and strife. I actually found it stressful until I started putting people on ignore. I still get bent out of shape by some peoples #%&^% comments, and make scathing replys, but you don't get to read those because I wind up deleting them.


          I think this place got stressful for Hicks too, but being a mod he couldn't put people on ignore and had to deal with it.

          Comment


          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

            Originally posted by TOP View Post
            I knew we had to keep Hibbert even if it meant paying him max money and while it was a little hard to swallow, the Blazers giving Batum 46.5mil for 4 years makes it so much easier to swallow and be happy with. I really want to laugh at them.

            Now that I say that, he'll probably have a break out year and score 17-19pts or Minnesota will be dumb enough to give them three 1st round picks.

            Timberwolves would be really dumb to trade them three 1st round picks imo. The contract seems bad enough within itself let alone giving up a bunch of 1st round picks.
            How do you not take Derrick Williams and picks. I'd have done that in a heartbeat.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              I asked this question a few days ago and got no answer, so I'll ask it again.

              What is the Pacers salary with the roster as it is now? How close are they to the LT?
              Hibbert $13.7m
              Granger $13m
              West $10m
              Hill $8m* (I'm assuming Hill's contract is a flat $8m per year until otherwise informed)
              Mahinmi $4m
              Green $3.5m
              Augustin $3.5m
              Hansbrough $3m
              George $2.6m
              Pendergraph $1.5m
              Plumlee $1m
              Stephenson $0.9m
              Johnson $0.5m (until otherwise informed)

              Total $65.2m, luxury tax is at roughly $70m.

              Originally posted by ballism View Post
              roughly 65 mil. Still plenty of room to use "room" exception (2.5 mil) or add minimum salary players.
              Or I could have just quoted you

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                So if Barbosa is going to be player #14, and paid somewhere in the 1-2 million dollar range, the roster is full and we are 3-4 million below the luxury tax. We still have the option of carrying either 14 or 15 players, right?

                Someone could beat out Pendergraph in camp, I suppose.
                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


                • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                  Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                  Hibbert $13.7m
                  Granger $13m
                  West $10m
                  Hill $8m* (I'm assuming Hill's contract is a flat $8m per year until otherwise informed)
                  Mahinmi $4m
                  Green $3.5m
                  Augustin $3.5m
                  Hansbrough $3m
                  George $2.6m
                  Pendergraph $1.5m
                  Plumlee $1m
                  Stephenson $0.9m
                  Johnson $0.5m (until otherwise informed)

                  Total $65.2m, luxury tax is at roughly $70m.



                  Or I could have just quoted you

                  My personal opinion is that the Pacers will not add another player unless it's thru a trade. For some reason ,I have a feeling ownership put a 65 Mil limit on the FO spending. Ownership was true to their word that they were willing to spend money, and they have but with a limit on spending. Again, I'll be surprised if any more players are added unless it's thru a trade. JMOAA

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    Hibbert $13.7m
                    Granger $13m
                    West $10m
                    Hill $8m* (I'm assuming Hill's contract is a flat $8m per year until otherwise informed)
                    Mahinmi $4m
                    Green $3.5m
                    Augustin $3.5m
                    Hansbrough $3m
                    George $2.6m
                    Pendergraph $1.5m
                    Plumlee $1m
                    Stephenson $0.9m
                    Johnson $0.5m (until otherwise informed)

                    Total $65.2m, luxury tax is at roughly $70m.



                    Or I could have just quoted you
                    Since we are over the Salary Cap but under the Luxury Tax......how do we sign Barbosa?

                    I am not sure how this works....are we able to use either of the Smaller or bigger MLE to sign Players EVEN if we are over the SalaryCap?

                    If we are able to sign some Players...how much can we spend?

                    Is there a maximum ( like the Veteran Minimum ) that Teams can spend regardless of how much they are over the Salary Cap or Luxury Tax?
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                      So if Barbosa is going to be player #14, and paid somewhere in the 1-2 million dollar range, the roster is full and we are 3-4 million below the luxury tax. We still have the option of carrying either 14 or 15 players, right?
                      In another thread Vnzla quoted Wells as saying Barbosa has "officially" been replaced by Green and will not be re-signed. The guy I'm most interested in seeing us sign is Mickael Pietrus, who I'd like to see at backup SF, and Green playing mostly backup SG. (I see Lance as 11th or 12th man on this team.)

                      "In addition to their pursuit of Carlos Delfino, the Celtics remain very much in the picture for Mickael Pietrus.

                      "His agent, Bill McCandless, has told CSNNE.com that his client has had a number of teams express interest, but the connection Pietrus made with Celtics players and their fans is very strong."


                      http://www.csnne.com/basketball-bost...blockID=742757


                      "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


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        Since we are over the Salary Cap but under the Luxury Tax......how do we sign Barbosa?
                        Bird rights I'm guessing.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          Hibbert $13.7m
                          Granger $13m
                          West $10m
                          Hill $8m* (I'm assuming Hill's contract is a flat $8m per year until otherwise informed)
                          Mahinmi $4m
                          Green $3.5m
                          Augustin $3.5m
                          Hansbrough $3m
                          George $2.6m
                          Pendergraph $1.5m
                          Plumlee $1m
                          Stephenson $0.9m
                          Johnson $0.5m (until otherwise informed)

                          Total $65.2m, luxury tax is at roughly $70m.
                          Boy, it just doesn't seem like we added $32+M worth of salary this offseason.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                            In another thread Vnzla quoted Wells as saying Barbosa has "officially" been replaced by Green and will not be re-signed. The guy I'm most interested in seeing us sign is Mickael Pietrus, who I'd like to see at backup SF, and Green playing mostly backup SG. (I see Lance as 11th or 12th man on this team.)

                            "In addition to their pursuit of Carlos Delfino, the Celtics remain very much in the picture for Mickael Pietrus.

                            "His agent, Bill McCandless, has told CSNNE.com that his client has had a number of teams express interest, but the connection Pietrus made with Celtics players and their fans is very strong."


                            http://www.csnne.com/basketball-bost...blockID=742757
                            I think Lance will be the backup sg and will see regular minutes. Why else would we keep him around if we weren't going to play him this season
                            Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              Since we are over the Salary Cap but under the Luxury Tax......how do we sign Barbosa?

                              I am not sure how this works....are we able to use either of the Smaller or bigger MLE to sign Players EVEN if we are over the SalaryCap?

                              If we are able to sign some Players...how much can we spend?

                              Is there a maximum ( like the Veteran Minimum ) that Teams can spend regardless of how much they are over the Salary Cap or Luxury Tax?
                              The new CBA created a "Room Exception" for teams to use if they were under the cap and then went over, like the Pacers did this year. It's worth $2.575 million. They could use that to re-sign Barbosa, because I'd think he could get more than the minimum.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                                Originally posted by shags View Post
                                The new CBA created a "Room Exception" for teams to use if they were under the cap and then went over, like the Pacers did this year. It's worth $2.575 million. They could use that to re-sign Barbosa, because I'd think he could get more than the minimum.
                                Although I would prefer to not get any Wing Players, if the FO is determined to add MORE depth to the Wing Positions.....I am very sure that we can get a better FA than Barbosa for that much.

                                I am pretty confident that there will be a quality FA that can be had at a "below Market" contract. Some Player is going to fall through the cracks and will be desperate enough to sign at a very reasonable price.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X