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 PR07 View Post
    Would anyone give up the #26 for Blair?
    No, Why, what has he done to even show he is worth that pick, he ca barely get playing time on his own team.

    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.
    I like Thompson, and he showed a lot of promise his first year as far as having a all around game and having spurts where he could put up big numbers, but yeah I liked Val, if he would not have had buyout issues I think he would have been the seletion.
    Why so SERIOUS

    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.
      yes, i know, i just couldn't find the right expression, even though i tried hard. language barrier

      Valanciunas, certainly. I think he'd be the clear no.2 pick if that draft was done again.
      Back then though, Williams was so high because he seemed the safest pick, not necessarily the most talented.
      A bit like Robinson has been considered safe this year.
      Except last year it was more dramatic. Kyrie missed most of the year. Kanter missed full year. Valanciunas had buyout issues, but more importantly, he didn't seem nearly ready. He was someone who made huge improvements over the last few years, kind of like Anthony Davis, but he was still far away, and noone was 100% sure if he can keep up that improvement pace. As it turned out so far, he can.

      I think if the draft was redone, it would be 1. Kyrie. 2. Valanciunas. 3-5 would still be very contested between Kanter, Thompson and Williams IMO, I could see them in any order.
      I suppose someone like Faried or Kwahi Leonard could move in there too, but either way, Williams would be very high.
      Last edited by ballism; 06-28-2012, 01:51 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        No, Why, what has he done to even show he is worth that pick, he ca barely get playing time on his own team.
        He played a lot before they got Boris Diaw. He has size, something we need behind Hibbert. Put up around 9.5 ppg and 5.5 rpg off the bench in 21 mpg.

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          Originally posted by Really? View Post
          No, Why, what has he done to even show he is worth that pick, he ca barely get playing time on his own team.
          The guy only played 20 minutes a game, but started pretty much every game in the regular season.

          Comment


          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

            A big No to Blair, that guy is so overrated is not even funny, and yes the fat guy in Diaw that nobody wanted around here took his spot and put him on the bench, pass.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
              Would anyone give up the #26 for Blair?
              The downside is that the Spurs would use the #26 to find the next David West.

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                A big No to Blair, that guy is so overrated is not even funny, and yes the fat guy in Diaw that nobody wanted around here took his spot and put him on the bench, pass.
                Diaw better fit their system (with his passing) and actually tried (got in shape) in San Antonio since he wasn't on a terrible team. I don't know, I think we could do a lot worse than having DeJuan Blair off our bench considering the options. Maybe we could convince San Antonio to take Stanko in a straight swap seeing as how he may never come to Indiana, they like European players, and want to open a roster space.

                Comment


                • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                  Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                  He played a lot before they got Boris Diaw. He has size, something we need behind Hibbert. Put up around 9.5 ppg and 5.5 rpg off the bench in 21 mpg.
                  So he had to play backup to Boris Diaw?

                  And what Size are you referring to his 6'7" body, I am guessing his weight. I really would not like him as a backup center, I feel he is a career backup, I think we could get more than what he offers from Kyle O'Quinn in the 2nd.

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  The guy only played 20 minutes a game, but started pretty much every game in the regular season.
                  The only reason he was starting was due to Splitter not being ready, it was kind of more a default situation in my book.

                  Also he barely saw the court in the playoffs, if he were that valuable he would have atleast got more than 7mpg during that spand, and that number is mostly due to a couple games where he played increased minutes.

                  He also is a situation guy, one that you can only put in verse certain types of people.
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                    Diaw better fit their system (with his passing) and actually tried (got in shape) in San Antonio since he wasn't on a terrible team. I don't know, I think we could do a lot worse than having DeJuan Blair off our bench considering the options. Maybe we could convince San Antonio to take Stanko in a straight swap seeing as how he may never come to Indiana, they like European players, and want to open a roster space.
                    I don't get this we could do a lot worst part, are we just trying to do better than worst, I feel we could do a lot better than Blair, and I would rather be heading in that direction than the opposite.
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                      His D is also horrible, not only that but I don't want to read Seth's posts about how amazing the guy is
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                        Diaw better fit their system (with his passing) and actually tried (got in shape) in San Antonio since he wasn't on a terrible team. I don't know, I think we could do a lot worse than having DeJuan Blair off our bench considering the options. Maybe we could convince San Antonio to take Stanko in a straight swap seeing as how he may never come to Indiana, they like European players, and want to open a roster space.
                        For Stanko, sure.

                        I'd be fine with Blair, I think he fits a need. But I just don't think that he fits it well enough, and he's about to ask for a raise, so I wouldn't want to give up the pick.

                        He can't guard the PnR, miserable tbh. And he has trouble defending bigger, real back to the basket big men. So our bench would have a lot of trouble, unless we add one more guy who can do some of those things. That's why I'd love to keep the pick. If it was e.g. Tyler for Blair, it's a no-brainer for me.

                        Anyway, if the Spurs want to clear a roster spot, they probably don't want the #26. Maybe they are looking to do a 2-for-1 trade. Or more likely, a future pick.
                        Last edited by ballism; 06-28-2012, 02:13 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          No Blair!!!! if we want a role playing big I would much rather take festus ezeli at #26 if there much better than Blair IMO because he is at least a big body.

                          IF WE TRADE FOR ANOTHER GUY WHO IS ABOUT TO COME OFF A ROOKIE CONTRACT AND WILL BE OVERPAID I WILL BE MAD.


                          I hate doing trades like that just financial suicide


                          If not on the board trade back and take O'Quinn and Machado. Bench gets a ton better upgrade 2 spots and get a big who IMO has a better game than Blair in O'Quinn.


                          I dont like fat big men they dont translate very well in the NBA. Barkley is the only exception but the NBA was a different game when he played it was about toughness and not as much about athleticism and size.
                          Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-28-2012, 02:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            Originally posted by Really? View Post
                            The only reason he was starting was due to Splitter not being ready, it was kind of more a default situation in my book.
                            Default what? You mean Splitter wasn't good enough during the regular season to start?

                            They split minutes, I don't think it suggests much, but you said Blair barely played. That was incorrect.

                            Also he barely saw the court in the playoffs, if he were that valuable he would have atleast got more than 7mpg during that spand, and that number is mostly due to a couple games where he played increased minutes.
                            I agree. I'm not saying he is "that valuable." I'm saying if we can get Blair and flip Tyler for a pick, I think I would do it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              Originally posted by Really? View Post
                              So he had to play backup to Boris Diaw?

                              And what Size are you referring to his 6'7" body, I am guessing his weight. I really would not like him as a backup center, I feel he is a career backup, I think we could get more than what he offers from Kyle O'Quinn in the 2nd.



                              The only reason he was starting was due to Splitter not being ready, it was kind of more a default situation in my book.

                              Also he barely saw the court in the playoffs, if he were that valuable he would have atleast got more than 7mpg during that spand, and that number is mostly due to a couple games where he played increased minutes.

                              He also is a situation guy, one that you can only put in verse certain types of people.
                              There's nothing wrong with being a career backup, if you're a good one. Anyone playing behind Hibbert is likely to be a career backup for a while.

                              As for the postseason, the Spurs were playing some great basketball with Diaw as the primary big next to Duncan. You don't want to mess up a good thing, it's the same thing that happened with us in Collison. Does that mean Collison is a bad player? No. Going into further why he didn't play, it's because the Spurs were playing a more uptempo game with Diaw, as well as playing against an uptempo team in the Thunder. He just wasn't a fit in that series. I don't see that being the case with us, as we'll be playing predominantly a half-court game as long as one of West and Hibbert are on the floor.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                                Jazz in on Lamar Odom deal?
                                The Utah Jazz have emerged as the potential third team in the Los Angeles Clippers' ongoing trade discussions to acquire Lamar Odom from the Dallas Mavericks, according to sources close to the process.

                                Sources told ESPN.com that the Jazz are willing to take on Mo Williams in a three-team trade scenario that would send Odom to the Clippers and enable the Mavericks to shed Odom's salary without taking back any salary.

                                The ball now is now in Williams' court. The trade cannot be completed unless Williams agrees to invoke his $8.5 million player option for next season by Saturday's deadline, which means that the 29-year-old is essentially deciding if he wants to return to the Jazz  where he began his career in 2003-04 -- or test free agency this summer.

                                The Jazz can absorb Williams' salary without sending a player to the Mavericks by using a trade exception created by last season's trade of Mehmet Okur to New Jersey.

                                The deadline for the trade to be completed, though, is realistically Friday, because that's the deadline in Odom's contract by which point Dallas must either pay $2.4 million to buy out Odom's $8.2 million salary for next season or have him on the books for 2012-13.
                                http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/81...-clippers-deal

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X