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

If this had been a SINGLE trade...

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

  • #16
    Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

    Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
    You guys are kind of proving my point in that you're refusing to consider these moves as pieces of a whole strategy. Instead you're analyzing each one as if they're not related. Even as a pretty naive observer these moves look somewhat coordinated to me... and doesn't Pritchard have a big reputation for these "domino"-type moves?

    Like I said, forest... trees...
    Just because you can see the forest for the trees doesn't mean you have to cut down a few perfectly good trees in the process.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

      Anyway, this team is most certainly different, and maybe better. Only time will tell, you can like or dislike the moves but I fail to see how anyone can know one way or the other.

      Everyone we gave up had question marks, but the guys we got back all have some too. Can Mahinmi play PF? Which I think would be huge. Is Gerald Green a half season wonder? Will being much further down on the offensive totem pole increase Augustin's efficiency?

      We really don't know, but we can guess.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

        In
        PG Augustin
        SG Johnson
        SF Green
        PF/C Mahinmi
        PF/C Plumlee

        (Likely) Out
        PG Collison
        SG Barbosa
        SF Jones
        PF/C Amundson
        C Fesenko
        PG Price

        This isn't much of an answer but, overall I think we pretty much have the same level of talent coming in as going out. My feeling is the front office expects us to develop with age and experience, so the need to make major upgrades in talent isn't really necessary. Odviously this isn't what most fans are gonna be happy with (we don't want to be the Hawks), but at least (in my eyes) we didn't get worse...
        Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

          Originally posted by Shade View Post
          It's just common sense. It wasn't long ago that DC was being touted as a possible replacement for CP3.

          Players have "value memory," especially in the NBA. Hell, the Lakers are trying to get JO, who has been just terrible for at least two years now.
          We'll see when Collison is a free agent. I would bet he gets near what DJ Augustin just got, except maybe more years. He had several holes in his game, and they were clearly exposed here. Media is making it sound like we traded Magic Johnson or something, but the media are generally not so smart. GM's know Collison has a bunch of holes. They've seen the same film I have. Nobody was going to offer much for him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            We know that nothing was worked out with Augustin prior to the trade.
            well we know we were trying to trade for Augustin at the same time (multiple writers said this). Also the charlotte beat writer soon came out saying how they would most likely be withdrawing their offer to Augustin. And Pritchard said no more than 5 mins went past in him becoming a UFA to being contacted by our FO. If the beat writer knows they will withdraw their offer, so does the Pacers FO, especially when they were trying to trade him. thats why we were first to talk to him and talked to him immediately.

            The chances of us not getting Augustin were slim to none after the DC trade. The Pacers were all over Augustin, whether it be via trade our free agency.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              Just because you can see the forest for the trees doesn't mean you have to cut down a few perfectly good trees in the process.
              You can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                You guys are kind of proving my point in that you're refusing to consider these moves as pieces of a whole strategy. Instead you're analyzing each one as if they're not related. Even as a pretty naive observer these moves look somewhat coordinated to me... and doesn't Pritchard have a big reputation for these "domino"-type moves?

                Like I said, forest... trees...
                Actually the more I think about the whole picture the more it sucks, I was happy about the trade yesterday because I thought something else was coming next, now we used the whole cap space and are pretty close to what we had before, now we don't even have cap space to make anything else happen so for the mean time we are set until next year.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                  Originally posted by Shade View Post
                  It's just common sense. It wasn't long ago that DC was being touted as a possible replacement for CP3.

                  Players have "value memory," especially in the NBA. Hell, the Lakers are trying to get JO, who has been just terrible for at least two years now.
                  It wasn't long ago that Adam Morrison was the third pick in the NBA Draft. People are often wrong when evaluating talent.

                  And JO hasn't been terrible the last two years. He's been a solid big man. Thats why he was the starting C for the Celtics. His problem wasn't his play, it was his knees.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                    I think the guys we received have more upside and room for growth then the guys we gave up. Whether that comes to fruition, remains to be seen, but I could easily see any one of Mahinmi, Augustin, and Green improving as players with us. I don't really see that as much with Collison, Jones, and Amundson who have more than likely capped out as players.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                      The Mavs trade should be looked at in a vacuum. It wasn't part of a larger trade it the moves and salary dump weren't necessary to complete the other trades. In a vacuum this was a bad trade and just bad business to give up assets that we didn't have to for nothing. NY was interested in Jones for a second and I really think we could have landed a 1st. for DC. He'll be the starting pg in Dallas, that's worth something.

                      Overall I think we became marginally better but not as much as we should have considering the opportunities that were there. I can fully understand not getting Williams and Nash, but Kaman was there if we wanted him. Since we didn't even use the cap space we had, I'd much rather have Kaman at 8 mil playing 30 min. between the 4/5 and giving us a double double then the combination of Ian and Hans. playing those minutes.
                      We could have still afforded all the other moves and been under the LT while moving Jones and DC for assets.
                      In the end we spent a lot of money on a bunch of mediocre players which is the last thing I wanted for this team. We're a little better and could have easily been a lot better for the same money or at least had some future picks coming our way. We didn't even make a minor change in signing Hibbert and Hill to make a run at Scola. I'm very disappointed in our new front office.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                        I know a little size might help us on the second team. I'm also fine with the trade and I don't think we lost much with Collison gone considering we got Augustin and Green now. But in no uncertain terms, we didn't get that much better. It was negligible. We will need to see some jump in performance from guys like Lance and Paul and our 58M dollar man to see much improvement.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                          what gets me is Mahinmi's contract, when we could have just signed him for cheap. i know many people are saying that talent wise, DC/DJ is equal to Augustin/Green, so would it have been better to sign Mahinmi for cheap, and kept the players we already had?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                            The point is....we didnt have to make a trade to get Mahinmi....we had 20 million in capspace....those chances only come along every blue moon. We had a real chance at making significant upgrades to the roster. A great young core with lots of pieces available for different purposes, etc. And in the end, we did very little that will make any signficant change. And it appears it was all because of having the purse strings held in check. This after a year of a fairly low payroll. Ive been following the Pacers for 40 plus years. Theyve never had this kinda opportunity. Ive never been as disappointed as I am now. Shame on your Herbie...youre a smart businessman. You know there are times you need to invest in the business to get the return youre looking for. You have just made it abundantly clear what sort of return youre looking for.
                            The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                              What kind of a cheap owner only spends 120 million in a week?!! Cheap *******.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                                what i dont get is if we have cap room left over and were not going to bid on brand or schola than why not keep collison for a trade later. we should have been able to get a first rounder. i think 90% of this board would be okay with the manimhi trade if we got a first rounder back. i think there are arguments both way.. but at the end of the day the OP summarizes how i view it..

                                dc dj for green augustin ian

                                dissapointed we did not go after brand though. could be other reason many of us are not aware of.. much like most of prob what goes down. if i were an owner and knew the true logistics of things i would not be able to read these boards simply due to the lack of knowledge exhibited..

                                neither here nor there. pacers will win some games.. but the nba is becoming the new mlb ... only a few select teams can win the championship.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X