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

Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

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

  • #61
    Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Two huge parts of the team are really old(basketball wise) the Pacers are a young team but let's not go crazy in thinking that we have an Oklahoma City 2.0 here.
    To be clear, the "teenager" I was referring to was the strategic plan, not the players themselves.

    The strategic plan can be cheered or jeered once there's been enough time to evaluate it.

    They front office has very, very clearly said repeatedly: we like the starting 5 from this year, and we want to build a better bench around them. We want team cohesion, good chemistry, and some god-honest time for the team to grow in experience playing with each other. There has been a ton of movement over the past 4-5 years, and now it's time to reach a steady state and see what we have.

    They didn't say that they weren't going to move some of the starting five to the bench, they didn't say they weren't going to go after a "star" if it was available to them. But they had a focus and an emphasis.

    There has not been enough time to see if this is a valid way of winning or not. The team's age is a side effect of their strategy. Now they're in a position to test their strategy, because they've locked a significant part of their core up for a number of years.

    Let's face it, most teams haven't won a championship, ever... so whining that it "won't work" or it "doesn't work" is simply playing the odds and the easy argument to make on a forum like this.

    Can't we do better than that? This is all I'm asking.

    As an aside, go read the interwebs and find out what Collison has been saying about his time with the Pacers. He has been nothing but laudatory in his prediction of where the team was headed: "I thought we were all going to build something special together". "I was surprised that I wasn't going to be part of that". That strikes me as a person who liked being a part of this team. That seems like a good direction to me... one that this franchise hasn't had in *years*.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      It's different if Vogel was the only one saying this but Pritchard and Walsh have said the same thing in other interviews, their goal was to upgrade the bench that was it.
      You can believe that all you want. But if you don't think they are willing and trying to upgrade the starters, I guess there is not anything I can say that will convince you otherwise.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        It was reported that Vogel told Walsh and Pritchard to bring the same starters back so the goal was never to upgrade or trade either one of the starters.
        You can't imagine a future where Hill is first off the bench? Vogel said he wanted the starting five back... he never said that they will always remain the starting 5.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

          I think if the Pacers announced that Deron Williams this offseason was a major priority, and they made a major offer,
          They did. They pitched 10m to Nash and Nash passed and took less money so he could play out west to stay close to his kids. That stupid, selfish jerk.


          Let's say you trade Danny+West for Howard or Melo or Amare. Does that team win a title? Because those guys have been on teams that had pretty darn good talent around them and they still didn't win. Steve Nash had a good Amare and good Marion on the team with him and they didn't win. Deron Williams hasn't won anything yet himself and neither has Rose for that matter, or Chris Paul.

          So just who is the "star" that would easily make the Pacers a title contender if "all you have to do" is trade away Danny + West (or some similar combo) to get them here? Yep, just put Deron with Tyler and that combo is going for 50 points every night and will give you shut down defense.


          To get some of these guys you are giving up huge holes. Once a team gets close it's very hard to add without taking a risk of going backward instead. The closer to the top you get the more luck you need and the craftier the moves must be.



          It sounds like I'm defending TPTB when in fact I didn't like this summer at all. But it's because I think they missed on the small moves or the smart moves. Scola coming in for example. But not willing the Deron deal or finding a way to chase Dwight doesn't bother me because the Nets sucked and the Pacers were competitive with the Dwight Magic.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

            Originally posted by mattie View Post
            I think what I'm really getting at is if the team has a vision towards truly competing, and makes a concerted effort to reach those particular goals, fans will be behind it. But what vision do they have? Besides continually counting on the same talent that already got beat, to somehow surpass their potential. That is illogical.
            "Continually counting on the same talent?" Seriously?

            - Less than 2 years ago we replaced our coach and made the playoffs.
            - We then went out and upgrade 2 of our starting spots (West and Hill), just ONE year ago.
            - next season we have the league's 5th best record and take the NBA champs to the longest series of their playoff run.
            - We spend this offseason keeping our starting 5 intact and upgrading our bench. The team is now like the 6th-youngest team in the league or something like that.

            How is that "continually" counting on the same talent? This lineup has had ONE shortened season together, and they far exceeded anyone's expectations.

            This team is getting better faster than anyone could have imagined 2 years ago. We all want a championship obviously, but you guys need to be a teeny bit more patient. We're not quite sure what we even have here just yet. If all our starters had peaked and had had a few years together as a lineup (such as the 2000 finals team) I could see the argument for reloading, but this isn't quite the time for that yet.
            Last edited by rabid; 07-24-2012, 03:47 PM.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

              I think you are right about this. The deals and the players of interest seem to point to it as well as the comments.
              Originally posted by fwpacerfan
              To the point of not having a clear vision, I think there is a clear vision - it's just not Walsh's. Bird is still running this team based on Walsh's comments. He took a year off for health reasons, but Bird's vision and plan is still what is guiding the decisions the FO is making. That explains the short term deal to Augustin. This explains re-signing Roy. This explains trading for Imanini. I think these were all moves Bird would have made.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                They did. They pitched 10m to Nash and Nash passed and took less money so he could play out west to stay close to his kids. That stupid, selfish jerk.


                Let's say you trade Danny+West for Howard or Melo or Amare. Does that team win a title? Because those guys have been on teams that had pretty darn good talent around them and they still didn't win. Steve Nash had a good Amare and good Marion on the team with him and they didn't win. Deron Williams hasn't won anything yet himself and neither has Rose for that matter, or Chris Paul.

                So just who is the "star" that would easily make the Pacers a title contender if "all you have to do" is trade away Danny + West (or some similar combo) to get them here? Yep, just put Deron with Tyler and that combo is going for 50 points every night and will give you shut down defense.


                To get some of these guys you are giving up huge holes. Once a team gets close it's very hard to add without taking a risk of going backward instead. The closer to the top you get the more luck you need and the craftier the moves must be.



                It sounds like I'm defending TPTB when in fact I didn't like this summer at all. But it's because I think they missed on the small moves or the smart moves. Scola coming in for example. But not willing the Deron deal or finding a way to chase Dwight doesn't bother me because the Nets sucked and the Pacers were competitive with the Dwight Magic.
                That is not true Nash confirmed this in his article he did with ESPN pretty much showing how his free agency went never mention Pacers calling him. Agree on Scola not waiting to pay Scola that is by far a move that shows you wont do whatever it takes to win. You cant normally get a top 10 PF for 4.5m dollars not offering that much was beyond stupid. Keeps financial flexablity and makes us so much better FO really dropped the ball on that one.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                  I truly do think the Pacers could deal both West and Granger together to bring in a core piece they could help build around. A top five player? No. But someone with very good to great scoring ability? Yes.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    I truly do think the Pacers could deal both West and Granger together to bring in a core piece they could help build around. A top five player? No. But someone with very good to great scoring ability? Yes.
                    Who would that player be? Who is available that is such a lethal scorer, that they would be worth losing both West and Granger?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      I truly do think the Pacers could deal both West and Granger together to bring in a core piece they could help build around. A top five player? No. But someone with very good to great scoring ability? Yes.

                      Give us a name or this statement means nothing.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                        Blanket Statement:

                        I honestly think the front office could trade our starting 5 for better players, but they just don't want to win.

                        That is a useless negative comment that I have seen 47 times over the last couple of days.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                          Originally posted by mattie View Post
                          I truly do think the Pacers could deal both West and Granger together to bring in a core piece they could help build around. A top five player? No. But someone with very good to great scoring ability? Yes.

                          OK, so you seem to be suggesting that a potential deal is there for the taking and yet the Pacers are refusing it. A deal that you believe will make the Pacers better and yet the Pacers are just refusing to make the deal.

                          let me just ask are you saying the Pacers know of a deal or know they could make a deal for those two players, a deal that will make the team better and yet they refuse to do so? Why would they refuse to do so.

                          See this goes to motivation. (in this scenerio it doesn't matter whether the deal is good or bad - you are suggesting it seems to me that they are refusing to make a deal in which they believe will make the pacers better.

                          You are questioning the motive of the pacers franchise and I guess that is what has me a little worked up.

                          I can understand disagreeing with certain trades and draft picks, but to question the motivation seems over-the-top to me.
                          Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-24-2012, 04:19 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            Who would that player be? Who is available that is such a lethal scorer, that they would be worth losing both West and Granger?
                            I would not say an scorer but a better all around player that is young like Josh Smith maybe and if you want an scorer you already know who I want
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              They did. They pitched 10m to Nash and Nash passed and took less money so he could play out west to stay close to his kids. That stupid, selfish jerk.


                              Let's say you trade Danny+West for Howard or Melo or Amare. Does that team win a title? Because those guys have been on teams that had pretty darn good talent around them and they still didn't win. Steve Nash had a good Amare and good Marion on the team with him and they didn't win. Deron Williams hasn't won anything yet himself and neither has Rose for that matter, or Chris Paul.

                              So just who is the "star" that would easily make the Pacers a title contender if "all you have to do" is trade away Danny + West (or some similar combo) to get them here? Yep, just put Deron with Tyler and that combo is going for 50 points every night and will give you shut down defense.


                              To get some of these guys you are giving up huge holes. Once a team gets close it's very hard to add without taking a risk of going backward instead. The closer to the top you get the more luck you need and the craftier the moves must be.



                              It sounds like I'm defending TPTB when in fact I didn't like this summer at all. But it's because I think they missed on the small moves or the smart moves. Scola coming in for example. But not willing the Deron deal or finding a way to chase Dwight doesn't bother me because the Nets sucked and the Pacers were competitive with the Dwight Magic.
                              David West didn't win s*** in his prime when he played with CP3 and Tyson Chandler, what makes you think this time around he is going to help the pacers win a title?

                              Give me Dwill, Howard or Melo any day.
                              Last edited by vnzla81; 07-24-2012, 04:28 PM.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                                Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                                You can't imagine a future where Hill is first off the bench? Vogel said he wanted the starting five back... he never said that they will always remain the starting 5.
                                With the way the cap is setup and the money players are making I expect this starting five to be the starting five in a long time, I expect them to re-sign West and Danny and keep going the way it is.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X