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

Keeping David West

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

  • #46
    Re: Keeping David West

    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
    What are you even talking about with the JOB thing? What does JOB or Murphy have anything to do with David West?

    David West is not "at the bottom" in scoring at PF by any measure. He's 23rd in points scored by "forwards". That's SF, and PF on NBA.com. He's 25th in minutes on that same list. He's still well respected as a scorer. Teams know he can go off on any night if given the chance. Nobody feels that way about Tyler, just because he scored 9 PPG. They'll leave him to help elsewhere before they will West. West's minutes and touches were down, not his efficiency. His usage rating was the lowest it had been since his 2nd year in the NBA. If he gets the minutes and touches he can still score 15-18 PPG. I doubt anyone else questions that, but you.
    I'm bringing up Troy Murphy because I remember that JOB used to think the same thing, "just put TroyMurphy up there and he is goin to keep the defense honest and he can go for 30 at anytime", 12ppg is 12ppg per game, it doesn't matter how you slice it, 12ppg is pretty bad if his only job is to score because as we all know he can't play D or rebound.

    By the way I wouldn't mind re-signing him, but as the backup, I think he could be a good option off the bench, but as the starter of a possible championship team in the future? I don't think so.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Keeping David West

      xBulletproof David West is not "at the bottom" in scoring at PF by any measure. He's 23rd in points scored by "forwards". That's SF, and PF on NBA.com.
      33 out of 50 in forwards

      http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...xp=-1&splitDD=

      Here is a list of power forwards and their average per game so we can have a better picture:

      Love 26 points

      Aldridge 21.7

      Dirk 21.6

      Blake 20.7

      Lee 20.1

      Andrea B 19.5

      Josh Smith 18.8

      Bosh 18

      Amare 17.5

      Gasol 17.4

      Jamison 17.2

      Milsap 16.6

      Anderson 16.1

      Scola 15.5

      Boozer 15

      Al Harrington 14.2

      Humpries 13.8

      Ersan 13

      Young 12.8

      Dwest 12.8

      Bass 12.5

      Landry 12.5

      Zbo 11.6

      Beasley 11.5

      Brand 11

      Faried 10.2


      Yep he is on the bottom.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Keeping David West

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        33 out of 50 in forwards

        Yep he is on the bottom.


        That's hilarious. 33 out of 50? You're kidding, right?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Keeping David West

          Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
          I proposed 2 years in which case he'd be 35 at the end of the contract and I think he'll be at about the same level then which is solid but not an all star level. KG would be another PF playing at a high level in his late 30's but of course West has never been on that level.
          I'd love for us to sign a big name PF but I have no confidence in Walsh doing so after seeing how he spent 10 mil in cap space this summer. If Bird is back we might stand a chance of going after a better player.
          I seriously doubt that West....at his current age...is going to settle for a 2 year contract. My guess is that he will want AT THE VERY LEAST...just like Nash...a 3 year guaranteed contract.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Keeping David West

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post


            That's hilarious. 33 out of 50? You're kidding, right?
            gosh I hope so

            The ESPN 500 has DWest as the 16th, 17th or 18th best PF. Depending on where you put Chris Bosh, Pau Gasol or Nene. DWest is behind Love, Nowitzki, Griffin, Gasol, Bosh, Aldridge, Garnett, Horford, Josh Smith, Randolph, Ibaka, Stoudemire, Jefferson, Monroe, Ryan Anderson, Nene and Milsap. I'd have him slightly higher, but middle of the pack of the starting PF's in the league seems about right. Putting him at the bottom of the league seems more about hating on a player than an actual analysis of his playing ability.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Keeping David West

              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post


              That's hilarious. 33 out of 50? You're kidding, right?
              You said he was 23nd that is a lie, NBA has him at 33 between forwards and power forwards and as I pointed out by his numbers alone he is on the bottom of power forwards.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Keeping David West

                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                gosh I hope so

                The ESPN 500 has DWest as the 16th, 17th or 18th best PF. Depending on where you put Chris Bosh, Pau Gasol or Nene. DWest is behind Love, Nowitzki, Griffin, Gasol, Bosh, Aldridge, Garnett, Horford, Josh Smith, Randolph, Ibaka, Stoudemire, Jefferson, Monroe, Ryan Anderson, Nene and Milsap. I'd have him slightly higher, but middle of the pack of the starting PF's in the league seems about right. Putting him at the bottom of the league seems more about hating on a player than an actual analysis of his playing ability.
                Yeah ESPN 500 is such a great tool.......
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Keeping David West

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  I wouldn't be surprised if West or Danny is gone after next summer due to these budget issues. But maybe they'll make it work.
                  If it comes down to that, I think we're more equipped to deal with the loss of Danny.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Keeping David West

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    You said he was 23nd that is a lie, NBA has him at 33 between forwards and power forwards and as I pointed out by his numbers alone he is on the bottom of power forwards.
                    Actually he IS 23rd, in points scored. There's no need to lie, the facts state the opposite of what you're saying well enough. You're using averages, I'm going by the points he actually scored.

                    Also your 33 out of 50 is silly anyway. There aren't 50 forwards in the NBA. That's 33 out of 50 on PAGE 1 OF 4. There are 3 more pages of players.

                    Either way, if you want to go by average, go back through your link and count out how many SF's are on that list ahead of West. I counted at least 13. That's certainly nowhere near 'the bottom'. Especially when there are actually 195 players on that list, not 50.

                    Here's what I was looking at.
                    http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...DD=All%20Teams

                    He's 23rd on that list and I see Lebron, Durant, Pierce, Carmelo, Granger, and Rudy Gay on there as SF's.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Keeping David West

                      Not sure how important these stats are. Shane Battier whipped West's butt in the playoffs. I don't see him on the list at all.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Keeping David West

                        Actually he IS 23rd, in points scored. There's no need to lie, the facts state the opposite of what you're saying well enough. You're using averages, I'm going by the points he actually scored.
                        So screw the average and let's go for points scored? not wonder why you think he is so great

                        It's also looks like West scored more points than Bosh, Howard and Rose on the playoffs last year so West > Howard,Rose and Bosh
                        Last edited by vnzla81; 10-07-2012, 06:22 PM.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Keeping David West

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          So screw the average and let's go for points scored? not wonder why you think he is so great

                          It's also looks like West scored more points than Bosh, Howard and Rose on the playoffs last year so West > Howard,Rose and Bosh
                          ...... you're so ridiculous. You're the one who starts with the rankings list comparison and then it's ridiculous. You're the absolute king of making an argument, and when it's thrown back in your face in a similar manner you just giggle like the other person is stupid for using YOUR argument.

                          If there were NBA2K13 style ratings for a Message Board game, you'd get a 0 for the common sense rating.

                          I bet Andrew Bynum is the greatest center evar! He has great averages. Who cares he only shows up half the time. "LOL", indeed.
                          Last edited by xBulletproof; 10-07-2012, 06:44 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Keeping David West

                            Let's not degrade the site folks.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Keeping David West

                              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                              ...... you're so ridiculous. You're the one who starts with the rankings list comparison and then it's ridiculous. You're the absolute king of making an argument, and when it's thrown back in your face in a similar manner you just giggle like the other person is stupid for using YOUR argument.

                              If there were NBA2K13 style ratings for a Message Board game, you'd get a 0 for the common sense rating.

                              I bet Andrew Bynum is the greatest center evar! He has great averages. Who cares he only shows up half the time. "LOL", indeed.
                              Bynum is not the best ever but he is pretty damn good, I don't know what are you laughing about? his average is good, yes he has health issues but he is still great and also there is not a reason for you to call me names
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Keeping David West

                                So after watching the back and forth, how about a declining contract with player/team options for 3 years? If 25 mil over 4 years with the first 2 years being the biggest hit to the cap, then if Hans, Ian or Plumlee step up to be the starter, we still have the leadership of West coming off the bench and in the locker room?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X