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

    Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    Hmm... you think they're looking to pick up Doc's son?
    very likely, or maybe it's more along the lines of "whichever is left of Rivers, Lamb and Terrence Ross". Ray Allen seems gone, they can keep Bass and Jeff Green, so a SG makes the most sense short term.

    I wouldn't give up both 21&22 though, if I was them. All those bigs at those spots are as talented, even if with some red flags.

    Comment


    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

      For those who think any player from tonight's draft is can't-miss, here's this on one of last year's "can't-miss" prospects:

      Originally posted by Twitter
      Jonathan Givony ‏@DraftExpress
      Sources say Minnesota offered Derrick Williams to Charlotte in exchange for the #2 pick. Bobcats quickly rejected.

      Jonathan Givony ‏@DraftExpress
      Derrick Williams has been shopped to different NBA teams dating back to the trade deadline. Asking price way too high according to teams.

      Jonathan Givony ‏@DraftExpress
      Their stance is he went #2 last year, so offering him for #2 this year is fair. RT @sorokman Why did Minnesota even bother to ask Charlotte?

      Jonathan Givony ‏@DraftExpress
      Derrick Williams is a good reminder of how fickle perceived value can be at times. One year ago, he was untouchable. Today, he's trade bait
      Let's not forget Evan Turner, either. Another can't-miss'er who's been a major disappointment.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Weren't people talking about how Williams could be a #1 pick last year?

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
          For those who think any player from tonight's draft is can't-miss, here's this on one of last year's "can't-miss" prospects:



          Let's not forget Evan Turner, either. Another can't-miss'er who's been a major disappointment.
          I'd like to have either Derrick or Evan. Pacers just don't have the assets though.
          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 Sparhawk View Post
            I'd like to have either Derrick or Evan. Pacers just don't have the assets though.
            Yeah me as well, thing about both of those guys, I feel they are can't miss if put in the right system, but put in the wrong system and they are doomed to not look great. I think Turner wherever he goes needs to be the primary ball handler, he can create and finish, but playing him at the 2 with his streaky shooting will never make him look good, he also excels on the defensive side of the ball something that you need if you really want to be a good player in this league.
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              Originally posted by Doddage View Post
              Weren't people talking about how Williams could be a #1 pick last year?
              yes, some. but i wouldn't make a big deal about it. Kyrie missed most of the year, so it's only natural.

              It's no so much that Williams busted, but Minnesota really needs someone like Beal, and would be silly not to try to get there.
              Williams is pretty good, a lot like young Antawn Jamison. I bet that in 5 years, he'll be considered a top 3-5 player from that draft, as long as he gets to a team that needs a PF.
              He looked very good when they had an actual point guard to play some pick and pop with him. When Rubio went down, their whole game plan collapsed. And Williams suffered the most.

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                Originally posted by Doddage View Post
                Weren't people talking about how Williams could be a #1 pick last year?
                some did I didn't like Williams for the NBA had a awful motor at AZ and is soft. When I watched him on tape I swear half the time he wouldn't get back on defense. I though there was no way his rebounding would translate. I though best case scenario was a bigger Danny Granger(w/o the defense) or Rashard Lewis. But I wanted Kyrie all the way even wanted to trade up to get him I think my offer was Danny plus #15 and DC for him.(I doubt the CAVS would of even took my call if I was a GM LOL) loved his skill set a pure pg but could score in the paint wasn't an amazing athlete in Duke's system but I though he was a better athlete than he was given credit for pre draft he has great body control takes contact so well.

                (I do like Damian Lillard more than Kyrie as a prospect. Kyrie may end up the better player but I just love Damian Lillard the prospect in almost every game I watched I said to myself I wish this kid was my pg.)

                Looking back Micheal Beasley would of maybe been a better comp same body and skill set is similar and weakness's are similar.


                Originally posted by ballism View Post
                yes. but wouldn't jump to conclusions.
                It's no so much that he busted, but Minnesota really needs someone like Beal, and would be silly not to try to get there.
                Williams is pretty good, a lot like young Antawn Jamison. I bet that in 5 years, he'll be considered a top 3-5 player from that draft, as long as he gets to a team that needs a PF.
                He looked very good when they had an actual point guard to play some pick and pop with him. When Rubio went down, their whole game plan collapsed. And Williams suffered the most.
                I agree with that Minney was a terrible fit. Antwan is another solid comp soft guy but so skilled he will be ok not a star but a fringe star.
                Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-28-2012, 01:24 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                  Originally posted by ballism View Post
                  yes, some. but i wouldn't make a big deal about it. Kyrie missed most of the year, so it's only natural.
                  I wasn't making a big deal about it. Just conveying that Williams had a case to be the #1 pick last year. I'm sure Minnesota would like to go back and pick Kanter or Valančiūnas, though.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                    Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA

                    Spurs are shopping forward DeJuan Blair, league sources tell Y! Spurs have Euro picks they could bring over next season, need roster space.
                    Would anyone give up the #26 for Blair?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                      Originally posted by Doddage View Post
                      I wasn't making a big deal about it. Just conveying that Williams had a case to be the #1 pick last year. I'm sure Minnesota would like to go back and pick Kanter or Valančiūnas, though.
                      Ya I didnt get Valanciunas dropping I think the Cavs are beyond stupid for not drafting him at #4. He and Kyrie could of been a dynamic duo in the PnR Tristian Thompson I just didnt get that pick at all.


                      Valanciunas could win ROY this year depending on what the Raps do at pg.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                        Would anyone give up the #26 for Blair?
                        Depends on who is left around that spot, but I do like Blair a lot.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                          Ya I didnt get Valanciunas dropping I think the Cavs are beyond stupid for not drafting him at #4. He and Kyrie could of been a dynamic duo in the PnR Tristian Thompson I just didnt get that pick at all.


                          Valanciunas could win ROY this year depending on what the Raps do at pg.
                          What makes it more puzzling is that if they grabbed Val last year, they could have gotten their PF this year. For example, T-Rob would be perfect in that scenario.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                            Would anyone give up the #26 for Blair?
                            Depends if we could get another pick by trading Tyler.

                            I imagine having Blair would help signing G.Hill.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                              Isnt EG restricted? cant eh trade him now for a draft pickon a 1 year qualifying offer?
                              Nope. They can't trade him until July 1st (actually July 11th, the day the moratorium ends).

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                                Originally posted by Doddage View Post
                                What makes it more puzzling is that if they grabbed Val last year, they could have gotten their PF this year. For example, T-Rob would be perfect in that scenario.
                                T-rob and Val that would be the hardest working front court in the NBA all motor and heart with a ton of skill I would love watching them play.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X