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

2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

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

  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    People with no interest at all in being in college shouldn't be there, at IU. Go to Chicken John the sideshow barker.

    KY has a good new crop coming in next year too! Those that want a great chance to go to the NBA choose to go to schools that get them there. Education isn't what every undergrade BB wants whether you like it or not. The NBA pretty much dictates they have to go to college for 1 year before they can go pro. AND yes, there are many athlete student players using college as a stepping stone to the NBA who could care less about getting an education. They are interested in making millions not reading the classics, and going to college is the path to their dream. Like it or not.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
      They'll lose tomorrow. Trey Burke and the Michigan guards won't be phased by Havoc, at least not late in the game. VCU's entire game is based on forcing turnovers. They're playing the team that gives up the least amount of turnovers per possession. Michigan wins going away.
      Great post!

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by lolwuttermelons View Post
        To change the subject from the whole "student-athlete" debate, does anyone else think Matthew Dellavedova is worth a secound round look for us? He has good size, and might be the best guard in the nation at running the pick and roll. Reminds me a lot of Grievis Vasquez, but with a better shot, though a bit smaller.
        no he isnt a NBA player IMO

        Like I said VCU isn't a talented team(they play hard to help counterbalance that) and they got expose by a team with just 100X more talent.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
          no he isnt a NBA player IMO

          Like I said VCU isn't a talented team(they play hard to help counterbalance that) and they got expose by a team with just 100X more talent.
          what do you think of Troy Daniels?
          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


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by BornReady View Post
            what do you think of Troy Daniels?
            Not a NBA player. JMO. I said the same thing about JLin so it is not as it means much. Not many said Lin was a NBA player. There are so many good wings in the Dleague who could be ok in the league if given a chance. Guys may never get a chance who could play at a Sam Young type level. Just not enough spots for everyone. Btw I don't think he is one of these guys I highly doubt he ever play a second of NBA ball. But hey Ben Hans is clearly not an NBA caliber player but got a year so who knows.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
              I'd like that, but I think we're trading up in the draft to pick the Kansas center Withey.
              I wouldn't be mad if we drafted him he is going to be a solid pro. Much more of a player than Plumlee, Whithey has great feel for the game. I was hoping he came out last year I really liked his game for us. Now a Jeff Foster comp would of made sense for Whithey.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                p4e, what do you think about Nate Wolters and Arsalan Kazemi?
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  I wouldn't be mad if we drafted him he is going to be a solid pro. Much more of a player than Plumlee, Whithey has great feel for the game. I was hoping he came out last year I really liked his game for us. Now a Jeff Foster comp would of made sense for Whithey.

                  I have spent 3 solid days watching the tournament. Withery probably stands out more to me than any other player. I like him better than Gonzoga's Olynyk.

                  Miles' brother Mason had a good game of 23/8 in their 1st game. I'll be interested in seeing how he does today against Creighton.

                  I really like Louisville. They are who I'm cheering to win the tournament. I've watched them play many times this season... probably only 2nd to watching KY play. It will be interesting to see how they play against Oregon next weekend.

                  My cheering for Wichita State over Gonzaga panned out, but the same can't be said about Butler. I REALLY hope Butler has a good recruiting class for next season. I love watching them play!

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                    I have spent 3 solid days watching the tournament. Withery probably stands out more to me than any other player. I like him better than Gonzoga's Olynyk.

                    Miles' brother Mason had a good game of 23/8 in their 1st game. I'll be interested in seeing how he does today against Creighton.

                    I really like Louisville. They are who I'm cheering to win the tournament. I've watched them play many times this season... probably only 2nd to watching KY play. It will be interesting to see how they play against Oregon next weekend.

                    My cheering for Wichita State over Gonzaga panned out, but the same can't be said about Butler. I REALLY hope Butler has a good recruiting class for next season. I love watching them play!
                    Butler has their best recruiting class ever in terms of star ratings, but I am never convinced that freshmen can come in and lead the team. Dunham, Woods, and Marshall will need to step up big next year.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      p4e, what do you think about Nate Wolters and Arsalan Kazemi?
                      Wolters isnt an NBA player IMO. He will struggle facing better players who can defend. Almost every NBA team has a quick guard who would eat him up on both ends of the floor. Should be a great player for a Euroleague club though. I am still looking at game tape for him though. I just am not a fan of what I have seen so far. I don't see it transferring.



                      Kazemi I am not sure he does enough to be a good NBA player. I see him in Europe as well. He boards well but his size and frame I don't like and he doesn't have much skill, not my type of big really.


                      If We could get Tim Hardaway or Crabbe in the 1st and then pickup a pick and get Deshaun Thomas to be a situation 4 or 3 for us that would be a perfect draft IMO. I really love Thomas as a bench threat at the next level. He will really help fill a need from day one with us. He is limited in ways, but what he can do well is exactly what we need. I also wouldn't mind taking a high risk guy in this draft like a Tony Mitchell with our player development staff I would be hard pressed to pass him up and let him spend a year in the Dleague. He would be a Lance type project I loved Lances potential but I feel Mitchell has potential that is even greater, the risk is probably the same, huge gamble.
                      Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-24-2013, 12:20 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        I see. Thanks for the info. Do you feel that Willie Cauley-Stein is worth the risk? Not that we need a Center, I'm just asking
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          I see. Thanks for the info. Do you feel that Willie Cauley-Stein is worth the risk? Not that we need a Center, I'm just asking
                          He wont be on the board in the late 20s. I think he needs a few more years under Cal though. He needs to understand he is 7ft not 6 ft. He needs a lot of work but his raw tools are insane. I wish he was tough but I think he can become a much better player learning from Cal a few more years. But he needs a ton of work. He has more feel for the game currently in the RM game for example he made tons of just no-no plays. He would be a foot from the basket and would dribble it instead of going up. Hell even one time in that game he was under the basket he passed it out when he had a dunk. I now know why he played WR in HS not TE. He needs to play more like a TE I wish he understood how dominate he could be. I hope he stays but if he comes out I would still take him late lottery mid first if his background checks out. He has stuff you can't teach;however, so did guys like Hilton Armstrong, need to do homework on project guys before taking him. In the 20s though he would be a no brainier I wouldnt even need a solid report on his work ethic.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Wow, I never thought I would see Aaron Craft getting exposed like this in college. He has been a liability all game and is now costing his team in the final minutes. Thad has to think about benching him to win this game.(never thought I would say that)

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              and then he goes and makes the game winner makes me look stupid lol

                              as bad as he was for most of the game, he was so good right after I called him out lol. That sums up his college career kid never gives up.



                              I stilll dont like that charge call though, I though it was a foul on Deshaun Thomas before the charge should of been an and 1 not a charge IMO. I think the refs this game have been highly questionable
                              Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-24-2013, 01:48 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                                and then he goes and makes the game winner makes me look stupid lol
                                That was exactly what I thought
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X