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

Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

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

  • #31
    Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Paying West a lot of money is going to keep the Pacers from contending until his contract expires, this past month and playoffs games are the prove the Pacers need to think about re-signing a guy that is going to be 33 years old pretty soon.

    Keeping the same team is not going to take the Pacers anywhere either.
    On the one hand I don't disagree but given our location, money, team, etc. who can the Pacers bring in and immediately replace David West's production with. I'll leave leadership out of it since you don't really buy that & it's not something that can be proven or even really measured. But let's just look at who will do what you are saying to do?


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

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

      Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
      Hell, I'm still not sure we should be paying max money to Hill and Hibbert. Not that that's something that can ultimately be analyzed just one year in, but IMO what you CAN say is neither one of them is blazing out of the gate toward convincing me.
      Pretty sure Hill got close to half of the max.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        On the one hand I don't disagree but given our location, money, team, etc. who can the Pacers bring in and immediately replace David West's production with. I'll leave leadership out of it since you don't really buy that & it's not something that can be proven or even really measured. But let's just look at who will do what you are saying to do?
        The only Player that I can think of that remotely comes close to West's production would be Milsap.

        I'm looking at the PFs that are out there that are the best of the FA class and the only ones that I can see are Starting Quality on the same level as West is Al Jeff, Josh Smith and Milsap. Any other PF ( Landry, Earl Clark, Speights and AK47 ) would be a step down IMHO.

        Ignoring Josh Smith ( for various reason that we are seeing now ) that would leave only Al Jeff and Milsap. I think that Al Jeff is more of a Center but also the most expensive of the bunch. That would leave either West or Milsap. I don't think that Milsap is as tough as Milsap is....but he's younger and a solid scorer that has an all around game.

        My absolute guess is that he's not looking for a Championship but getting paid....which I think the FA Market will dictate. I have no idea how much he'd get paid...but if West is not an option, the Pacers can afford to pay a Player like Milsap whatever his FA market value is....then I am okay with going after Milsap as an alternative to West.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Paying West a lot of money is going to keep the Pacers from contending until his contract expires, this past month and playoffs games are the prove the Pacers need to think about re-signing a guy that is going to be 33 years old pretty soon.

          Keeping the same team is not going to take the Pacers anywhere either.
          Just to play Devil's Advocate....would you go for a 2nd Tier PF Free Agent like Carl Landry ( as the future Starting PF ) that would cost less than West if it meant that the Pacers could use whatever FA $$$ left to spend on improving the depth of the bench...specifically putting up a strong bid for a Top Tier rotational Guard like Jarrett Jack?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

            West has not been playing well for much longer than this series. It extends back into the regular season. Maybe its the back but does that make anyone feel better about the age and durability questions.

            The Pacers best option next year will be West but don't they still have to worry about the years that follow? 10 MIL a year for 2-years likely wont get it done for him on the FA market. Maybe 2-years & 24 MIL? 3 years or more needs to be at the team option IMO.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

              Originally posted by adamscb View Post
              David West is one of the main reasons for our culture change here in Indiana. Letting him walk would be foolish.
              I'm a West fan. But let's be clear. The culture changed completely and dramatically the day Frank Vogel took over. He is the reason.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                NBA is all about match ups, Atlanta is horrible for match ups for DWest, as others have said. Lets not overgeneralize about DWest based on these 4 games. If you don't keep him, you better get another player that other teams respect physically or you are going to go back to getting bullied and pushed around again. Not sure I can stomach that again. You have to think past this bad match up is all I'm saying.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                  Can someone name an area of the game where Landry is better than Tyler except midrange face up shots? Is he better than Tyler at anything else?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                    Offensive putbacks. But yes, that's about it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      I'm a West fan. But let's be clear. The culture changed completely and dramatically the day Frank Vogel took over. He is the reason.
                      It first changed under Vogel, then it changed again with West and Hill. There's no doubt that West's impact goes beyond the actual play, and losing him would be a huge loss to the team. He's had a bad series but he's still our best player and our leader.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                        David West's agent must be ruing the unfortunate fact that we made the playoffs. Apparently, missing out of them entirely like Al Jefferson and Paul Millsap really helps a free agent's value in the mind of fans. "The playoffs matter," but not making them does not matter.

                        Look at this comparison of West and the 3 guys (Jefferson, Millsap, Josh Smith) mentioned as being on the same tier.

                        http://www.basketball-reference.com/...thjo03&y4=2013

                        Not paying West, because he's struggled in 4 games against one of those same tier guys, is lunacy.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                          Where is everyone getting this "it's crazy to get rid of West based on the past 4 games". Nobody is claiming to get rid of West based off the playoff series.

                          We are not only the slowest frontline in the league, but we also lack activity with our bigs as well. We seriously lack in an area that other contending teams have an abundance of. I just do not think you can be a contender in today's NBA with a slow team.

                          This FO made it's bed when we re-signed George Hill and Roy Hibbert to long term deals. Those two guys are going to be fixtures on this team for the next few years. PF is the only area where we stand some realistic ability to inject some athleticism and activity into the team. That's not a knock on David West, but continuing to pair him with the equally slow-footed, Roy Hibbert is going to garner the same results.

                          Nobody is advocating to simply get rid of West, and not replace him with someone that fits our younger core/personnel. And nobody is claiming we should get rid of West because Al Horford and Josh Smith are making him look bad in this series. I am simply saying that the NBA is going in a certain direction, and it's no coincidence that all of the contending teams have quicker/more active and athletic teams. If we ever want to be a true contender, I don't think we'll be able to do so with a PF/C combo that isn't able to match up with those teams.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            Can someone name an area of the game where Landry is better than Tyler except midrange face up shots? Is he better than Tyler at anything else?
                            He'll be cheaper.

                            Like it or not, West is one of the top 10 PF's in the league. Resigning him is about as good as the Pacers can hope for. Having said that, I think I would prefer Millsap simply because he is younger and faster, but West will be good for the next 3-4 years.

                            Tyler won't stay a Pacer. He wants to start so if he gets a QO, he'll take it and play 1 year for the Pacers and then leave. If the Pacers don't make a QO, he'll leave this summer. I would prefer that the Pacers not make a QO to Tyler and sign Landry. The reason for this is that I think Landry will be cheaper. Having West/ Landry or Millsap/Landry as our PF's would be a pretty good combination.

                            The thing the Pacers need to look at, in my opinion, is getting in position where they could have a shot at resigning Granger (at a reduced cost) next year IF he regains his health and can play reasonably well. Even if he doesn't, they would still have the money to find someone else next summer.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Can someone name an area of the game where Landry is better than Tyler except midrange face up shots? Is he better than Tyler at anything else?
                              This season, Landry made 54% of his attempts. Hansbrough made 43%. Other than that, they're basically the same.

                              The problem is that while Landry is a better shooter and nothing else, Hansbrough isn't better than him at anything.

                              We need a guy off the bench who can play multiple positions in a pinch and offer us something besides a shittier version of David West. Neither Hansbrough or Landry is that guy.
                              Last edited by BRushWithDeath; 05-01-2013, 09:19 AM.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Interesting mention about Pacer PF's

                                Originally posted by sav View Post
                                He'll be cheaper.
                                Why would anybody pay more for Hansbrough than Landry? That makes no sense.
                                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                                -Lance Stephenson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X