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

Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

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

  • #76
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    Yes, I think we could have landed Kaman with a 4/32 contract or maybe a 3/24 and he's well worth double what Ian is getting. Kaman would have had as many or more minutes playing for the Pacers as the Mavs and money talks. Figuring out the rotation really isn't that hard with Kaman being able to play either the 4 or the 5 it's easy to keep a combination of 2 of the 3 on the floor at almost all times you just always have either West or Hibbert on the floor and sometimes both. It's almost like the rotation we played with Smits and the Davises. I wouldn't suggest completely eliminating Hans but I would suggest just giving him spot minutes.

    Why did we have to even schedule the signings of Hibbert and Hill so early? Good time management which falls under the job radar of the people managing our F.O. would have opened many many doors, and every year there are bargain players available after the big overspending rush. Bird knew this and that's how he landed West.
    No offense but it honestly sounds like you're making excuses for incompetent management.
    I believe that they could have got Kaman for like 7mil a year if that was the plan, sign Kaman, resign Barbosa, keep DC/DJ or if you dont get Kaman go after OJ or Crawford, again has there ever been a better off season full of possibilities for the Pacers? ever? I don't think so.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

      "We should try to acquire some guys from the D-League and Bobcats," said Daryl Morey, never. (DJ and Green)

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

        Originally posted by Dece View Post
        This isn't how an argument works, you haven't made an argument you've just said, "no you are wrong." In order for me to take you seriously you need to say you are wrong BECAUSE and then provide some examples. Where are these good moves? Which ones were good?

        Top 5 record... how'd that end up for us? Fool's gold right, I mean, 6 playoff wins feels nice, but when you remember they were all against teams missing a player better than any player on our roster is kind of sobers it up a bit, doesn't it?
        No, I didn't say "you are wrong." I said Vnlza always trashs things, which he does. Let's stick to the things I said.

        I'm merely pointing out that when you trash every decision, you're bound to be right a few times. It's like a broken clock, it's right twice a day.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          No, I didn't say "you are wrong." I said Vnlza always trashs things, which he does. Let's stick to the things I said.

          I'm merely pointing out that when you trash every decision, you're bound to be right a few times. It's like a broken clock, it's right twice a day.
          Once again you are wrong, I'm not trashing the resigning of Hill and Roy you should know that, I have been saying it forever but of course once again you omit something so you can fool people into believing your side, good try though.

          And you hate to admit it but you know I'm right more times than not, there is a reason why you expend so much time trying to prove me wrong, keep trying.
          Last edited by vnzla81; 12-09-2012, 02:44 PM.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            No, I didn't say "you are wrong." I said Vnlza always trashs things, which he does. Let's stick to the things I said.

            I'm merely pointing out that when you trash every decision, you're bound to be right a few times. It's like a broken clock, it's right twice a day.
            Ok, so still no examples of good moves then? You say he trashes everything -- I know for a fact V has said he was wrong and now considers DWest a good move. In order for your argument to make any sense it is, "V trashes every move, even good ones." If V trashes every move because they are all trash that just means he's right a lot. Without examples of other good moves you are just saying, "V is right a lot." If that's your argument so be it. Either bring on the good move examples, or you have nothing.
            Last edited by Dece; 12-09-2012, 02:54 PM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

              I think Mahinmi in the end will be a good backup for us. I don't know how to judge the value of his contract so I'll just leave that for all of you cap experts out there.

              But the way we obtained Ian is what I have a problem with. While I am no Vnzla81 (I'm not nearly as good looking) I was complaining this off season about our moves as well. I think this summer was one of the biggest missed opportunities that we have had in years if not in forever.

              We had the juice to be a real player in the trade market and we could have dramatically improved our team by actually bringing in another B level talent (I consider West, Granger B level talent) or by bringing in some proven veteran experience to shore up the bench.

              I to this day still believe that is why Larry Bird is not here, I believe he was ready to make this move & wanted to do it right now but instead our owner didn't want to make this type of a move so Larry is off playing golf now. I could be wrong btw, I have no real knowledge of any of this but my belief is Larry was ready to go from upstart team to legitimate contender.

              Someone is going to say "well Mr. Smarty pants what moves are out there and be specific because Dwight Howard wasn't coming here". That's fair btw; it’s easy to say that moves could have been made without giving any real ideas about what those trades are.
              First and foremost I don’t care what we promised George Hill or Roy Hibbert agent we missed Louis Scola by two days. George Hill was a restricted free agent who frankly was not going to get the type of money anywhere else and even if he did we could have matched it with no problem. Sure it may not have felt as good as the press conference with him and Roy but guess what he would have gotten over it the first time he got a deposit in his bank account.

              This wasn’t just a mistake, this was a huge colossal blunder IMO. Louis Scola is almost a B level talent himself (you could even make the argument he is) and you could have signed him without giving up a single asset. He easily could play the backup four or even backup five spot and give you far more than what you are getting right now.

              They could have just signed Mahinmi and thus leaving Collison as what I think he should have been all along, trade sweetener to get rid of Tyler Hansbrough. Tyler played well at the beginning of the season but overall I just don’t see his long term use. I’d much rather have a backup of Mahinmi & Scola than Mahinmi & Hansbrough. I would have looked to Utah as a trade partner there as they have an abundant supply of big men that you might have been able to work out some deal for.

              Now your going to say that this is all fine and good but none of this dramatically improves the club. I’ll disagree btw I think Scola would have dramatically improved the club. But if your looking for players that could have been brought in well nobody knows for sure but I have always had a sneaking suspicion that there was a trade to be made for John Wall. What would it have taken? I don’t know but honestly I think the Wizards are going to say no they are building around him but in truth would entertain the right deal for him.

              Would he be a difference maker on our team? I think so. It wouldn’t come cheap because they would want real assets for him but I believe we had the assets to do it or something like it.

              I never got the Green signing and frankly I never liked Augustin. But at the end of the day they are Pacers now, management decided that this was the way to go so while I don’t have to like it I either have to accept it or move on.

              I don’t like the off season moves but I will say that I think they probably did think that these players would be better than they are and honestly if Granger were here and healthy we would probably be 14-6 and one of the top teams in the East.

              But those were just some of my ideas about this past off season. The only thing that concerns me long term though is if Herb really truly is not willing to make dramatic moves and that is why Bird is gone. Now notice I didn’t say Herb was willing to spend, he is willing to spend.


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                Originally posted by Dece View Post
                Ok, so still no examples of good moves then? You say he trashes everything -- I know for a fact V has said he was wrong and now considers DWest a good move. In order for your argument to make any sense it is, "V trashes every move, even good ones." If V trashes every move because they are all trash that just means he's right a lot. Without examples of other good moves you are just saying, "V is right a lot." If that's your argument so be it. Either bring on the good move examples, or you have nothing.
                I say Vnzla trashes everything, and you bring up a player he's spent the entire tenure with the Pacers *****ing about as evidence that he doesn't?

                I'll stop disrupting the thread now.

                DJ sucks, he's horrible, he needs to sit. Everyone else will benefit from it.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                  I gave you one example, and noted V admitted he was wrong on it. If this is an ongoing thing, all 3 of us have been on this board for years, surely you must have other examples you could cite to prove your point? Or are you just *****ing about V for the sake of *****ing? Cite examples or you're just crying for the sake of crying, period. I find you're not worth my time. I'm going to put you on ignore because you have not been able to contribute beyond crying about V. I'll take you off in a month, maybe you'll learn how to post constructively sometime between now and then.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                    Originally posted by Dece View Post
                    I gave you one example, and noted V admitted he was wrong on it. If this is an ongoing thing, all 3 of us have been on this board for years, surely you must have other examples you could cite to prove your point? Or are you just *****ing about V for the sake of *****ing? Cite examples or you're just crying for the sake of crying, period. I find you're not worth my time. I'm going to put you on ignore because you have not been able to contribute beyond crying about V. I'll take you off in a month, maybe you'll learn how to post constructively sometime between now and then.
                    Yep he likes to cry and argue for no reason, he keeps saying that I cry about West but is not as much about West as it is about the "West followers" thinking that he is sacred and yes I was wrong about West and I was wrong about Augustine been better than DC, but is still in wait and see because I expect DJ to look better in another system.
                    Last edited by vnzla81; 12-09-2012, 05:01 PM.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                      That's not even a good example, though, that's a counterexample. I mean sure, you were wrong, but you were wrong because you were HAPPY and thought it was a good move, not because you trashed it. The argument is you trash everything. (referencing DJ)

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                        Originally posted by Dece View Post
                        That's not even a good example, though, that's a counterexample. I mean sure, you were wrong, but you were wrong because you were HAPPY and thought it was a good move, not because you trashed it. The argument is you trash everything. (referencing DJ)
                        Yeah the argument is that I trash everything but they know is bs, I was pretty much one of the few happy people here when the Pacers traded for Hill and I was the only person together with somebody else (I can't remember who) happy when they drafted Tyler, I'm also positive about Paul George but yeah "I trash everything"
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          You don't need a cristal ball to know that Green, Young, Ian and DJ were going to fail, it wasn't that hard to predict and yes we have an idea what they didn't try to get done BECAUSE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO GET AMNESTY PLAYERS BUT THEY DECIDED NOT TO EVEN TRY.
                          And you know this for a fact how? You and Scola best friends? You and Brand play golf together? Not everything is reported! We don't even know half of what goes on behind the scenes!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                            I never understood the point of tearing down the 2nd unit to make it bettter. DC and DJones were usable rotation players with chemstry with the group. Mahinmi or some one better could have been signed out right. Just adding IM would have gone a long way toward solving the problems with the unit and given us one personality to blend in instead of 4. DC or even AJ would have been a better leader on the 2nd unit than DJA has turned out to be. I guess I was just very susprised that we didn't try to shore up the PF position in the offseason instead of replacing the other 4 positions.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              I could be wrong btw, I have no real knowledge of any of this but my belief is Larry was ready to go from upstart team to legitimate contender.
                              This is all I'm wanting to hear. Whether your opinion is that the FO has done a good job or not, it's just that. Your opinion! No one knows for a fact what moves were attempted or not.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I've used up enough energy on this subject. I usually don't get into any back and forth on here, but I enjoy it every now and then. I respect everyone's opinions and the fact that each of us have the same goal.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X