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 NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

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

  • #61
    Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

    I nominate the Pistons.

    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

      The wheel would lead to the big market teams getting the best players for TV Ad Revenue.

      Just look at who plays on Christmas. Big markets and the last two teams in the finals:
      Chicago
      Two New York teams (Nets & Knicks)
      Two LA teams (Clippers & Lakers)
      Miami (finals)
      OKC (finals)
      Golden State
      Two Texas (most populous state) teams (Spurs & Rockets)

      The NBA knows where its bread is buttered.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        I nominate the Pistons.

        I second the motion....no bankrupt city should have an NBA team....they should auction of all the team's assets and pay some of the outstanding bills
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

          The wheel means the nba can't control who gets what pick. That's ridiculous.

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

            Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
            This would kill the league. Tanking is really not that bad. If tanking was such a big deal then Brooklyn and New York would be in the playoffs and Boston and Toronto would have the worst records in the league.
            Is this sarcasm?

            Tanking makes for uncompetitive, unwatchable basketball. I don't care how successful it is. It needs to be stopped.

            How would this kill the league? That is the most insane, hyperbolic thing I've read all year.

            How many no-brainer #1 pick superstars have we had since the turn of the century? Lebron, rose, and....who? Howard wasn't a no-brainer franchise prospect by any means. Wall and Griffin were top picks but neither guy is a superstar. Would them sacrificing a year of nba salary and risking injury to play for the team of their choice "kill the league?" Please.

            Basically, we've had two guys over the last 14 drafts that might irk people by playing another year in college to go to another market. And you want to scrap this idea, which promotes good basketball, which holds GMs accountable for putting a quality product on the floor for the fans who pay money to watch their team play, because of the 1/7 odds that a truly franchise-changing #1 pick might be arrogant enough to snub some poor small market? Holy **** get a grip on reality!

            And how many prospects are that good, that they know with confidence that they are not only the best player in their HS class, but the next one as well?

            Would John wall stay another year at Kentucky to go to a different team, knowing kyrie Irving would be eligible the following season? Would he even go first? What if he got hurt? Why even take that risk?
            Last edited by Kstat; 12-24-2013, 08:38 AM.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

              Oh, and while we're on that subject, I'm glad some of you think so little of Paul George that you have to handcuff him to Indiana by any means, because if he had the choice, you think he'd sacrifice a year of NBA salary just to leave Indiana for New York or LA.

              Really talented NBA players are all alike, apparently. They all want to be Lakers or Knicks...god forbid they just want to have good NBA careers for a good franchise. Let's judge every future prospect for the rest of time.

              You know what REALLY "kills" the NBA? This:



              There is something seriously wrong with your product when your customer base is openly rooting for you to lose, while not buying tickets.
              Last edited by Kstat; 12-24-2013, 07:33 AM.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                I don't mind it as an idea, I mean yes you'd have to wait 30 years for a #1 pick but when you consider you'd also be getting a 2, 3, 4 at regular intervals, etc, I think it definitely evens out.

                I'll admit there's part of me that, on principal doesn't like the draft at all. If you're supremely talented at what you do you should get to decide where you work. Can you imagine a bright, young, promising lawyer being forced to work at an extremely poorly run firm?

                And I don't buy that tanking isn't a driving factor in why the east has only 3 teams over .500 at the moment. The NBA is supposed to be about putting the top players in the best teams in the world on the floor. We have teams that are bad by design, and that's practically criminal given the sort of money being invested in these teams.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                  The pacers haven't had the #1 pick since they entered the NBA in 1976. Nor have the pistons, for that matter (their last #1 was 1970).

                  You know what? I like a 30-year guarentee.

                  I think the league could also slot it so the teams with the longest top pick droughts get the #1 pick sooner.
                  Last edited by Kstat; 12-24-2013, 12:01 PM.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                    Yeah, I've grown on this idea. I like teams getting a chance at good picks every so often no matter how bad/good they are. It also simplifies trades where it says a 2014, or 2015 first rounder or something lottery protected and all that nonsense. I think the 2nd round you could do based on records for the current season, if someone really wants to justify tanking for slot 31 then go ahead.

                    I mean the Spurs haven't had a chance at drafting a really good player in quite a while early, and the newest piece they got, Kawhi, was because of the Pacers luck being where he was, and them having George Hill expendable. People always say how great the Spurs front office has been and I agree with that, but it would be interesting to see how they do with a higher pick.

                    Every 30 years you'd have the most interesting day in NBA for a while determining the order for the drafts ahead. A crappy team atm may decide to take a more rounded set of picks to build, while a team one piece short decides to go for the highest pick possible for one year and drop off after that. I really do like the idea even now typing and thinking more about it. I'd almost prefer it if teams couldn't trade their picks until after they made them but sweetener is needed sometimes to make the right deal.
                    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                    ----------------- Reggie Miller

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                      Yep. I can't think of one good reason not to do this. This is a completely fair and structured process. No lottery balls, no tanking, no luck involved.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                        Originally posted by shags View Post
                        The exception that proves the rule.
                        I've never understood this saying. Doesn't every instance that is NOT the exception actually prove the rule?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                          I had a thought on an alternative to the lottery.

                          It's a little bit like how the non-starter all-stars are selected by the coaches.

                          For all 30 teams, their franchise's powers that be (Owner/President/GM/etc. collaboratively) rank the other 29 NBA teams, from most in need of a top pick down to the least in need. Each franchise sends their ranking to league head quarters, where the NBA averages the results from all 30 rankings to determine THE final ranking from 1 through 30, and there's your draft order for that June. No lottery, no tanking, no luck, accounts for flukes where one team was only bad because the superstar broke his foot in December or something, identifies teams that truly need it the most. The only concern would be conspiracy, but if that's the first or only thing to counter argue it... on the surface, I think this could be pretty solid, actually.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                            Some great debate in this thread. I'm a fan of the wheel, but I think that is biased by the Pacers being a well-run franchise. I also like it because I'm a fan of not rewarding incompetence. Having said that, if everything else is equal, it does provide an advantage to the more desirable free agent destinations, such as Texas, Florida, New York, LA, and Chicago, because if the draft is a level playing field, and trades are a level playing field, the ability to avoid paying state income tax or dramatically increasing your non-basketball income are a draw. This system puts more of a value on your GM, so we might see the GM salaries skyrocket, which would also be an advantage for NY and LA, as they could just offer a guy like Daryl Morey or Ujiri $10m per year or more.

                            As has been stated, this would also be a problem in that the college prospects would have more control over their own destiny. However, that could be fixed as well. My initial thought is to make all players draft eligible when they hit 19, the same way the current system does, but get rid of the "declaring" portion. This way, an Anthony Davis could elect to stay another year in school, but New Orleans could still select him and have his draft rights. That does present some goofy, old-school Larry Bird shenanigans where teams use their second round pick to draft guys after their freshman year with plans on stashing them until they're ready, and the player's union would have a fit, but I do think there's some way to avoid players playing an extra year of school to get to a big market. Then again, that may be a non-issue, when you factor the risk of injury and the time value of money.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              I had a thought on an alternative to the lottery.

                              It's a little bit like how the non-starter all-stars are selected by the coaches.

                              For all 30 teams, their franchise's powers that be (Owner/President/GM/etc. collaboratively) rank the other 29 NBA teams, from most in need of a top pick down to the least in need. Each franchise sends their ranking to league head quarters, where the NBA averages the results from all 30 rankings to determine THE final raking from 1 through 30, and there's your draft order for that June. No lottery, no tanking, no luck, accounts for flukes where one team was only bad because the superstar broke his foot in December or something, identifies teams that truly need it the most. The only concern would be conspiracy, but if that's the first or only thing to counter argue it... on the surface, I think this could be pretty solid, actually.
                              The problem would be that as a Pacer fan the obvious thing would be to put Miami, and other rivals, dead last. Or there could be personal vendettas that owners/gms hold against other individuals. I think that would only fuel the conspiracy theories.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: The NBA's Possible Solution for Tanking: Good-bye to the Lottery, Hello to the Wheel

                                Originally posted by MUpaceSIC View Post
                                The problem would be that as a Pacer fan the obvious thing would be to put Miami, and other rivals, dead last. Or there could be personal vendettas that owners/gms hold against other individuals. I think that would only fuel the conspiracy theories.
                                But each team has equal say, and there's only going to be so many teams doing that, if you even believe they're so petty as to do so. Plus the league can always call BS on someone who is doing that and say "call us back with your real list".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X