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

How do you like our new/old FO so far?

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

  • #61
    Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    "No much to work with"? cap space? Picks? young players with some "value"? expiring contracts? is that nothing to you? stop it.
    So answer the question. What were your priorities and how would you have spent the money?
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

      And also anybody remember the Troy/DC trade? They send Murphy to NJ and got DC plus James Posey 7mil a year left for two years, the Pacers paid Posey 14mil so they could get DC and now they just turned around and gave DC away to save 1.5mil? it doesn't makes sence to me.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        "No much to work with"? cap space? Picks? young players with some "value"? expiring contracts? is that nothing to you? stop it.
        Your beef was that they didn't sign a top 20 free agent. I just showed you a list of the top twenty free agents and 17 were literally impossible to sign, the other three were role players at best. From that list, there's not much to work with. You disagree with that?

        Edit: "Role player at best" might be an underestimation because I like all three of those guys. But none of them would be game changers for the Pacers.
        Last edited by King Tuts Tomb; 07-21-2012, 10:28 AM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

          I gave a thumbs down. They did improve the bench and kept the starting five, but I think the long term costs is a bit too much for a small market team.

          1a. For all the talk from the front office about having salary to go after players, they simply blew it all resigning our starters. smh
          1b. Way overpaid for Hill. Should have let the market dictate his salary. Just think we signed him too quickly.
          2. Giving up DC for nothing. I still think the Pacers should have gotten a future pick for him. We can't get big FA, so the best thing to do is build through the draft. Another pick could have really helped. A small market team shouldn't be giving up good assets for nothing. Even if he's not a starter, he still makes a top backup point in this league.
          3. Signed Augustin. While I like that the Pacers got Augustin without having to give up anything, I seriously don't see how he is an improvement over DC. He can't shoot and he's smaller than DC. He'll still have the same issues as DC in feeding the post. His defense is suspect and he makes more money than DC.
          4. Should have held off signing Hibbs and Hill till after the amnesties. Pacers just moved way too quickly, and it was a complete shame. Would have been so awesome to pick up Scola, or even Brand on the cheap.

          Positives:
          1. Signed Augustin without giving up any assets
          2. Gerald Green signing. Could be a total steal if he continues to play like he did with the Nets. Hope he stays hungry.
          3. Ian Mahinmi signing. While I think 4 years is way too much, I do like the signing overall. $4M for a bench player isn't too much at all.

          I just want to add that I hope Lance is given a fair chance like Hans has. I don't expect Lance to get 20min a game, but hopefully 15min a game and let him get into the flow with the team. I could see Lance being the primary ball handler even if Agustin is in there in order to feed the post.
          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


          • #65
            Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

            The jury is still out. If Green, Mahinmi, and DJ produce consistently for us, then I say thumbs up. If these signings end up being lateral moves, then thumbs down
            Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

              I am sick and tired of the idea that FA's won't come to Indy. We have to pursue them first and we don't. We have to be just as willing to get out the checkbook for these FA's as we are for our own players. We have to be willing to deal for RFA's just like other teams are. If FA's wouldn't come here then we wouldn't be able to maintain our own players at the rates we do.

              Pacers fans need to get over this inferiority complex that Walsh and Simon 1.0 created about FA's. They didn't pursue FA's of stature then, and they won't be doing it now. And this willingness and preference to not get aggressive is why Bird left IMO. The team has gotten about as far as it can with the handcuffs ownership puts on things. No wonder Walsh is back and now we have another round of Walsh and Simon 2.0.

              Blah....
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                I am sick and tired of the idea that FA's won't come to Indy. We have to pursue them first and we don't. We have to be just as willing to get out the checkbook for these FA's as we are for our own players. We have to be willing to deal for RFA's just like other teams are. If FA's wouldn't come here then we wouldn't be able to maintain our own players at the rates we do.

                Pacers fans need to get over this inferiority complex that Walsh and Simon 1.0 created about FA's. They didn't pursue FA's of stature then, and they won't be doing it now. And this willingness and preference to not get aggressive is why Bird left IMO. The team has gotten about as far as it can with the handcuffs ownership puts on things. No wonder Walsh is back and now we have another round of Walsh and Simon 2.0.

                Blah....
                It won't matter what you offer them. They will take less to play where they want to play. This is a small market team and that is just the way it is and has always been. Orlando has had two world class centers but they couldn't keep them there no matter what they paid them. James left Cleveland. This is nothing new so you might as well get used to it....

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  I am sick and tired of the idea that FA's won't come to Indy. We have to pursue them first and we don't. We have to be just as willing to get out the checkbook for these FA's as we are for our own players. We have to be willing to deal for RFA's just like other teams are. If FA's wouldn't come here then we wouldn't be able to maintain our own players at the rates we do.

                  Pacers fans need to get over this inferiority complex that Walsh and Simon 1.0 created about FA's. They didn't pursue FA's of stature then, and they won't be doing it now. And this willingness and preference to not get aggressive is why Bird left IMO. The team has gotten about as far as it can with the handcuffs ownership puts on things. No wonder Walsh is back and now we have another round of Walsh and Simon 2.0.

                  Blah....
                  Please just tell me the name of the free agent you wanted us to pursue but didn't.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                    Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                    Please just tell me the name of the free agent you wanted us to pursue but didn't.
                    I have been trying to think about when was the last time a small market team added a big name free agent? Has there ever been one?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                      Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                      Please just tell me the name of the free agent you wanted us to pursue but didn't.
                      Your list looks good to me... Which ones did we go hot and heavy after?

                      I refuse to believe if we go all in for a FA that it wouldn't matter and we'd still have to put an X by their name. I don't buy this inferiority crap that is being sold. If you're a 2nd round playoff team then you have some clout if you're willing to be aggressive.

                      I don't like the idea in general that we refuse to utilize FA except at the fringes. Especially since we also refuse to utilize rebuilding years as true rebuilding years and try and optimize draft position, instead trying to milk out every last win and squeak into the playoffs if at all possible.
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        Your list looks good to me... Which ones did we go hot and heavy after?

                        I refuse to believe if we go all in for a FA that it wouldn't matter and we'd still have to put an X by their name. I don't buy this inferiority crap that is being sold. If you're a 2nd round playoff team then you have some clout if you're willing to be aggressive.

                        I don't like the idea in general that we refuse to utilize FA except at the fringes. Especially since we also refuse to utilize rebuilding years as true rebuilding years and try and optimize draft position, instead trying to milk out every last win and squeak into the playoffs if at all possible.
                        Wow!! I repeat a former post to you. What small market team has EVER signed a big name free agent?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                          Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                          I have been trying to think about when was the last time a small market team added a big name free agent? Has there ever been one?
                          Does Orlando count? They signed T Mac and Grant Hill.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                            Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                            Does Orlando count? They signed T Mac and Grant Hill.
                            I think it would be very close. It is a bigger market than Indy because of the surrounding area but I guess it might be considered small..... Are there any others?

                            Perhaps we need to list the small market teams:

                            Pacers
                            Thunder
                            Magic
                            Grizzlies
                            Wolves
                            Bucks
                            Jazz
                            Kings
                            Bobcats
                            Hornets

                            I do not consider Cleveland or San Antonio small markets because of the strength of their surrounding area......

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              The team has rehired Donnie Do Nothing Walsh and all but confirmed ownership is onboard with staying out of FA as a way to aggressively take the team to the next level. I'd say this offseason could not have thrown anymore cold water on my hopes for the team and the upcoming season. I've went from anxiously wanting to see what happens next to "meh"....

                              The Pacers off season has done a great job of getting me to care more about the Colts upcoming season.

                              Donnie Do Nothing Walsh back? Really? Blah!

                              In local newspaper this morning, there was an article about Donnie Walsh. I looked at his picture and didn't even recognize him! No slick back hair anymore but a softer hair style. Dadgum, he had 5 kids in 6 years! I guess he believed in the old saying of keeping his wife barefoot and pregnant. I've had conversations with some of his family members in the past, but didn't realize his family is as big as it is.

                              For those interested in the article, you can read it in todays Daily Journal.


                              I never wanted Walsh back with the Pacers, and I'm not impressed with what he's accomplished since the 1st of the month. My hope is he makes a trade or 2 that will put the Pacers in a better position to be in the Championship game. I'm not counting on it so, as you, Bball, the excitement just isn't oozing out of me for this coming season. As a matter of fact, I will go on record predicting the Pacers WILL NOT finish with a 63% win percentage, have the 3rd best record in the EC, or be the 5th best overall team in the NBA next year. People who think this will happen had better be prepared unhappiness and discontent.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: How do you like our new/old FO so far?

                                I'm not saying we have to go get Lebron James... I'm saying we need to be able to utilize the tools available to us to improve the team and that includes all aspects of FA. It's clear ownership isn't interested in that.
                                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                                ------

                                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                                -John Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X