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

The Former Player Thread

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

  • #31
    Re: The Former Player Thread

    Miles vs Kanter 6/11 13 pts 13 reb 3 blks and again, only 1 foul. Oh yeah, also the win to go 2-0.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The Former Player Thread

      Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
      Miles vs Kanter 6/11 13 pts 13 reb 3 blks and again, only 1 foul. Oh yeah, also the win to go 2-0.
      And he missed two easy ones as well. He should have 17 points.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: The Former Player Thread

        Well, at least now I don't feel so nuts for seeing potential in the guy. Good for him.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: The Former Player Thread

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Well, at least now I don't feel so nuts for seeing potential in the guy. Good for him.

          Absolutely agree with this.. People like to look at things in hindsight.
          Miles was never going to get PT here in Indiana, I'm so happy he's doing well!
          He's has put in massive work.. But Ian gives us what we need, a defensive Center whose
          A freak of an athlete. I don't know you about you guys, but he's been so damm impressive
          on the defensive end.. He's gotten down the verticality rule to a TEE..
          We don't need Ian to score, that's not what he's in there for.. He's there to protect the paint.
          For all we know Miles would have never been this good in IND.. Just be happy for him and besides
          he's going to look for a paycheck, money we don't have as we're trying to resign Lance.

          Glad the trade worked out for both teams.. But we needed a big to stretch the floor as West takes a
          Breather.. Scola has been a magnifent addiction for us.

          If anything this solidifies the notion that Bird is an elite talent evaluator.
          I won't be losing any sleep over Miles.. Trust Bird and he's guided this franchise in a
          magnificent direction..

          Both teams are 2-0 but in realty we know whose trying to tank lol.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: The Former Player Thread

            Originally posted by picasso View Post
            besides he's going to look for a paycheck, money we don't have as we're trying to resign Lance.
            We wouldn't need to worry about that paycheck until the 2016-2017 season.

            Originally posted by picasso View Post
            If anything this solidifies the notion that Bird is an elite talent evaluator.
            That's absolutely true. I want us to grab an extra 2nd round pick in the next draft because I know that Bird can find a good talent there.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: The Former Player Thread


              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: The Former Player Thread

                Last year, a lot of guys complained Plumlee is a bust and wasted 1st round pick of Bird.

                We can now almost conclude that Bird made a wise pick in Plumlee at end 1st round, although it doesn't work not out in Indy.

                He is right, again.

                He should have know that Plumlee can play.
                He knew it's the price to pay to get Scola.

                ANd, Scola better play well in the playoff.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The Former Player Thread

                  Plumlee could always rebound and block shots, and is an awesome physical specimen. It's not that surprising to me that he's looking good. If he keeps up this level of play, he's gonna run away with the Most Improved Player award.

                  Originally posted by grumpysaddle
                  I'm far more impressed with Plumlee again, than Bledsoe. 13pts and 13rbs tonight. He's averaging 15.5pts and 14rbs on the season now! I think he'll keep it up, and prove all the doubters wrong. Dude is legit.
                  Originally posted by Ryu
                  Yep, Plums is quietly becoming a cult hero. Another nice game.
                  Originally posted by Dragic13
                  Is it to early to say Plumlee is one of the best centers in the league?

                  This guy seriously has everything. EVERYTHING.
                  Originally posted by Dragic13
                  Plumlee is up another 8000 adds in fantasy basketball over at yahoo today. He is now owned by 53% of teams!

                  Originally posted by 1UPZ
                  now to Plumlee...
                  - The dude is a Jeff Foster on steroids!! A bigger Faried lol!
                  He would of been perfect for the SSOL suns! Very quick movement and motor is fantastic!!

                  I see a double double guy!!!!

                  His first rebound and dunk was BRILLIANT!!
                  Originally posted by mybloodisorange
                  Plumlee may look clean cut but his play is dirty..I love it! And the fact that he is producing immediately gives Len time to heal his ankle and get use to the speed of the pro game. We have a pretty tough road trip coming up which should be a good test of the kids merit. I'm just hoping that his play so far doesnt turn out to be some type of abberation.

                  I am going to eat a plum in his honor. And I hate plums.
                  Originally posted by Qwigglez
                  Plumlee is looking like a solid contributor with his hustle and motor. That being said, I don't really see an offensive game but who cares, we pretty much got him as a throw-in!
                  Originally posted by JMac1
                  Miles Plumlee is why we are 2-0......who'd of thunk it :-? Your goal is to get great players. It doesn't matter if they are drafted or late bloomers, just take them anyway you can get them and it looks like we have gotten lucky already this year and some people want to throw it away. I am not thinking about players we don't have.
                  Originally posted by SUN
                  based plumlee
                  By the way, Perry Jones, III, the player most Pacers fans seemed to want at #25, has looked awful so far.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: The Former Player Thread

                    Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                    By the way, Perry Jones, III, the player most Pacers fans seemed to want at #25, has looked awful so far.
                    Yep. Perry Jones III had a number of red flags. He has talent but he was always a risky pick. Miles was much more safe and that's one of the reasons that we got so much flak for him. It turns out that all this criticism was probably unfair.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: The Former Player Thread

                      Isn't Shawne Williams starting for the Lakers?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: The Former Player Thread

                        I miss Darrell Armstrong

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: The Former Player Thread

                          I'm not like pissed or anything that Bird let go of Plumlee in that Scola deal, but damn...thats the kind of guy that would be able to solidify us as a top rebounding team, and the type of guy you keep around for as long as you can afford him. 2 games, but he isn't showing any signs of slowing down. If anything Scola will show his true value in the playoffs when he makes the correct play in a pressure situation. But Plumlee is literally Foster 2.0
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: The Former Player Thread

                            My goodness. Just because a player comes into his own in an altogether different role on a different team and in a different dynamic does not mean that he would have done that here. It is the oppurtunity game. And he did not have it here. He also didn't have the luxury to play center. Should we have shipped Hibbert? Should we have not signed West?

                            Don't look at this players in a vacuum. There are so many variables at play here. Just wait. Miles will be good. But that doesn't mean that this was a bad trade. It is a long season.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: The Former Player Thread

                              Plumlee looks pretty good in a small sample size, but I feel like some people are acting like we gave up a young Dwight Howard.

                              He's in a better situation for him in Phoenix than he would've gotten here. They play in an uptempo system and can afford to give a lot of minutes to a young player on a rebuilding team, whereas we're looking to contend. However, was Plumlee going to help our bench scoring? Was he going to be a guy that when we sub West out, we lose only a half step?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: The Former Player Thread

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X