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

Kravits new article....

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

  • #31
    Re: Kravits new article....

    He would make a helluva OLB, in the Gregg Lloyd mold. Agree?


    Anyway, back to the subject at hand. I related to most of Btown's "why don't people understand me" rant above. Its not like I want Ron to prove my fears right all the time... I want to be wrong, really...

    I'm looking forward to the next stretch of games: can this team, with *any* legit starting SF, resemble a contender? Or do they really have to have that one knucklehead? If they've got to have *him*, I might give up, I don't know how many more ulcers I can take if I've got to keep worrying about *him* into the future.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Kravits new article....

      Originally posted by Unclebuck
      I don't now who you guys think is 85% as good as Artest. Let me make a list her and you tell me. I will only list players at the 2 and 3 positions

      Paul Pierce
      Peja
      Bonzi wells
      Sprewell
      Vince Carter
      Richard Jefferson
      Al Harington
      Eddie Jones
      Michael Redd
      Ray Allen
      Michael Finley
      Shaun Marion


      I know I missed a few, and yes I left the very top players out on purpose.

      As I look at the list, the name of the player who I think would help the pacers the most would be Richard Jefferson, is he 85% the player Ronnie is, probably, but no way can the pacers get him.
      I would say Shawn Marion and Paul Pierce. I know some of you hate Pierce, but I wouldn't mind trading for him (if the trade is "reasonable") or Marion. Maybe not the defensive player Ron is (though Marion is more than just decent at the defensive end), but they both do add another element to our team. Rebounding and creativity for Marion and lots of free throws and foul trouble for the opponent aswell as creativity (Pierce).

      Regards,

      Mourning
      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Kravits new article....

        Originally posted by Mourning
        I would say Shawn Marion and Paul Pierce.
        Marion has a god-awful jumpshot, he's an open court player and the pacers play a half-court game. He wouldn't do much on offense.

        Pierce has to be the #1 guy.(Never seen him as a second option.) He puts up quite a bit of shots, so inbetween him and JO there's not going to be enough ball left for Tins to do anything, let alone anyone else.

        Ron brings everything the pacers lack. Lockdown D and toughness. If the pacers were going to go out and get a SF it needs to be a quite offensive presence that rebounds, shares the ball, and is a prime defender.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Kravits new article....

          BTW, Kravitz is a total douche. Instead of writing about Jax coming back, which should be the topic, he's trying to get negative publicity on RA since everything coming out of the media about him right now is positive.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Kravits new article....

            Paul Pierce 110% as good as Artest
            Peja 90% as good
            Bonzi wells 70%
            Sprewell 75%
            Vince Carter 80%
            Richard Jefferson 85%
            Al Harington 75%
            Eddie Jones 75%
            Michael Redd 110%
            Ray Allen 120%
            Michael Finley 75%
            Shaun Marion 95%

            You guys tend to overrate Artest. At his very best he is an 18 ppg scorer who plays very good defense. But he is also a flailing mess of turnovers, poor decisions on offense, and holding the ball for 20 seconds before shooting (not to mention the other negatives he brings to the team which we know all too well of, and oh yeah that 73 game suspension thing too). A lot of these players are quality swingmen that are certainly on his level

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Kravits new article....

              Goin' along with Jan and Btown, I hope you realize that I too wanna be wrong about this. But I don't think I am. Except the part where I said we could make the finals without Ron, I wanna be right about that.
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Kravits new article....

                Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                Paul Pierce 110% as good as Artest
                Peja 90% as good
                Bonzi wells 70%
                Sprewell 75%
                Vince Carter 80%
                Richard Jefferson 85%
                Al Harington 75%
                Eddie Jones 75%
                Michael Redd 110%
                Ray Allen 120%
                Michael Finley 75%
                Shaun Marion 95%

                You guys tend to overrate Artest. At his very best he is an 18 ppg scorer who plays very good defense. But he is also a flailing mess of turnovers, poor decisions on offense, and holding the ball for 20 seconds before shooting (not to mention the other negatives he brings to the team which we know all too well of, and oh yeah that 73 game suspension thing too). A lot of these players are quality swingmen that are certainly on his level
                You're giving Artest negatives on tos, poor decisions on offense, and holding the ball for 20 seconds before shooting and then you have Al at 75% as good?

                You have Marion better than Finley.......Ray Allen 120%......REDD????

                There's no logical explanation of this......
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Kravits new article....

                  Paul Pierce at 110%.....

                  Spree and EJones at 75%......not in THEIR wildest dreams (well maybe Sprees)



                  I'll grant you Shawn Marion and Peja
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Kravits new article....

                    Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                    Paul Pierce 110% as good as Artest
                    Peja 90% as good
                    Bonzi wells 70%
                    Sprewell 75%
                    Vince Carter 80%
                    Richard Jefferson 85%
                    Al Harington 75%
                    Eddie Jones 75%
                    Michael Redd 110%
                    Ray Allen 120%
                    Michael Finley 75%
                    Shaun Marion 95%

                    You guys tend to overrate Artest. At his very best he is an 18 ppg scorer who plays very good defense. But he is also a flailing mess of turnovers, poor decisions on offense, and holding the ball for 20 seconds before shooting (not to mention the other negatives he brings to the team which we know all too well of, and oh yeah that 73 game suspension thing too). A lot of these players are quality swingmen that are certainly on his level

                    lmfao. Thats all I have say.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Kravits new article....

                      Originally posted by Since86
                      Ron brings everything the pacers lack. Lockdown D and toughness. If the pacers were going to go out and get a SF it needs to be a quite offensive presence that rebounds, shares the ball, and is a prime defender.
                      Which is no other SF in the league.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Kravits new article....

                        Originally posted by timid
                        Which is no other SF in the league.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Kravits new article....

                          I always think James Posey would be a great trade. It works salary wise and IIRC Memphis likes Artest (wasn't there talk about a RA/Bonzi trade). I'm surprised his name isn't mentioned more often.

                          You'd be getting less talent on defense and in scoring, but you're also getting a great passer and well-above-average defender.

                          Is this worth Larry's consideration, and is it realistic?
                          "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Kravits new article....

                            Originally posted by Vicious Tyrant
                            Is this worth Larry's consideration, and is it realistic?
                            No and no.

                            Artest stays. He better.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Kravits new article....

                              Canyoufeelit, the only players on that list that are between 85% - 100% the player Ron Artest is are as follows (don't know what NBA games you've been watchin'):

                              Marion 100% - I agree with you here. Marion is a better shot-blocker and rebounder, is more athletic, and equal to Artest in scoring ability. He's also a top 10 defender IMO. I would've traded both JB and Artest for him last summer to be honest.

                              Pierce 85% - If you surround this guy with the type of talent the Pacers have, with a true point guard, I think the Pacers would win it all.

                              Ray Allen 90% - If Ray was a better defender I'd move him up to 95%. However, if you plugged him into the Pacers lineup... you could start taking ring measurements today.

                              Manu Ginobilli 95% - Manu has the athletic ability, toughness, and defense to make him a good selection. If he was just more consistent offensively... but he could help us to a title.

                              Richard Jefferson 85% - He's a good player on both sides of the ball and he has great intensity, athleticism, and versatility on the floor.

                              Peja 90% - Sure he can shoot and pass but can he do anything else? He's also disappeared in several big games in his career.


                              I could list guys like Lebron, Kobe, or Dirk but they would never be traded for Artest because they mean everything to their teams (and they are better than Artest for that matter). Just for the heck of it I'll list this guy:

                              Stephen Jackson 85% - I definitely think that the Pacers have a very good player in Jack. I think that they will be greatly improved with him in the lineup. This is the guy that helped the Spurs win a title, in fact he and Kerr were their only consistent scorers in that series other than Duncan. The good news is, he's a much better scorer now an a slightly above average defender. I can't wait to see how far we go with him at SF.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Kravits new article....

                                Originally posted by naptownmenace
                                Marion 100% - I agree with you here. Marion is a better shot-blocker and rebounder, is more athletic, and equal to Artest in scoring ability. He's also a top 10 defender IMO. I would've traded both JB and Artest for him last summer to be honest.

                                Pierce 85% - If you surround this guy with the type of talent the Pacers have, with a true point guard, I think the Pacers would win it all.

                                Ray Allen 90% - If Ray was a better defender I'd move him up to 95%. However, if you plugged him into the Pacers lineup... you could start taking ring measurements today.

                                Manu Ginobilli 95% - Manu has the athletic ability, toughness, and defense to make him a good selection. If he was just more consistent offensively... but he could help us to a title.

                                Richard Jefferson 85% - He's a good player on both sides of the ball and he has great intensity, athleticism, and versatility on the floor.

                                Peja 90% - Sure he can shoot and pass but can he do anything else? He's also disappeared in several big games in his career.
                                Marion? Did you not follow any of the suns after Nash went down? He can't do anything in a halfcourt set. Nothing. Watch the olympics? Nothing. Pacers play halfcourt sets. They don't outrun people, and the Suns(Marion) do. He would not fit the team.

                                Pierce=ball in hands. JO=ball in hands. You can't have two players that need a touch every trip. There is a shot clock, and other big components on the team that need the ball to be effective as well.

                                Allen? Please. He's a stinking SG. Lewis is their SF. It just goes to show that you have him at 90% and say he needs better D........Defense is what's needed.

                                Ginobilli? There's not a lot of negatives with him, but theres no way in hell he's being traded from the Spurs. How tall is he btw?

                                Peja can't live with CWeb, and there's only one of him. What's he gonna do with JO and Tins? He's absolutely awful on rebounding and D. Both is needed.

                                Jefferson is alright, but I'm not anywhere close to wanting him on the pacers. Besides, he's in the same boat as Manu and that is there is zero percent chance of him being traded.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X