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

We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

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

  • #31
    Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

    Why are people worrying about losing draft picks in what has been described as a weak draft? So he is the steal of the draft in a weak draft. That probably means he'll be AT BEST a role player. George Hill is already more than that. If we didn't have a trade setup with the Spurs, we probably would not have taken Leonard.


    @Pacers24Colts12

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

      @DukeDynamite

      I just noticed that Bird is in the background of you avatar. Pretty spooky, yet awesomely cool at the same time. Larry knows what he's doing. Its not like he drafted Kwame Brown or Adam Morrison like that other guy.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

        Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
        I don't care if they get more than the qualifying offer, it's not like they are going to break the bank. And now you are re-nigging on your previous statement.

        What am I re-nigging on exactly? Those guys are going to get paid by somebody? Be it us or somebody else?

        Surely you aren't thinking that these guys plan on staying in Indy for league minimum money?

        Hibby is going to be looking for 5-50 to 5-65
        Hill is going to be looking for 5-30 to 5-45

        I like both players for the record. Still going to be some tough decisions to make going forward?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

          This move moved us forward but I think that the title is still correct. So we gave the #1 seed a lot of trouble, we almost didn't even have the chance to do that... we barely made the Playoffs we could have easily had been a team watching the playoffs from home.

          Winning is cool, and for our young group it would be a positive, but to really contend we are going to have to upgrade our talent, whether it be trough the draft, free agency, or through the progression of our players.

          I can't wait til 3 years from now... we should have the talent by then if we can keep people on our team to make real moves in the playoffs if our young guys continue to progress.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

            CALM DOWN JOHN JUST CALM DOWN!!!

            CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN just CALM DOWN!!!!!!!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

              sorry o.p. but BOO HOO




              I don't think we need 3 giant photos to repeat the above point.

              "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                Hoya2aPacerRoy Hibbert




                Just got off the phone with George Hill. He's ready to come home n get started
                .
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                  I would rather have George Hill to win now

                  and also to win two years from now

                  and also to win three years from now

                  and however far into the future you want to go. His skills fit in with with our core group (Granger/Hibbert/Paul George) moreso than an offensively-limited athlete who would never play a huge role unless Granger or Paul George were moved.

                  San Antonio might also do well by the deal, but I am very confident that we got the guy who helps us more, and not just "now"
                  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


                  • #39
                    Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                    i don't know what u are talking about, Our team defense is that much better. George Hill can play defense on the quick pgs around the league and is pretty good at the offensive end i'd have to say better than DC. Our team has gone to another level in my opinion. And one more big move can make us contenders IMO

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                      Since when did acknowledging the fact that we need another player at least as talented as Danny and acknowledging that we also needed some better 5th/6th/7th players become mutually exclusive?

                      All of the best teams in the East have elite wings. We are going to need guys like George, Hill, and Granger (when his defense is on) if we want to create match up problems. We also need one more really, really good player and I'm convinced that that will come.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                        This is why people shouldn't get hung up on the Draft, and watching the ESPN coverage of it.

                        The casual fans fall in love with these guys in between picks, when nothing but highlights and praise are heaped on them (usually). The media creates an impression that each pick is an impact guy....study the league...many aren't.

                        In a down draft the 40th pick has the same odds of being great as the 15th..(slim to none)

                        We KNOW what GH brings. He's a two way player. He can create his own shot and get to the hole (or the line). He is going to greatly improve our defense against D.Rose and similar players. Our inside-out game will be greatly improved, especially when GH is paired with DC...when was the last time the pacers had two players who could drive & dish? He loves Indiana, and he's young.

                        None of us know definitively how things will work out...but the fans who are not happy with this move won't be happy with anything the pacers FO does..they can't be pleased

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                          Originally posted by PacerFreak31 View Post
                          Last night he traded away what a lot of analyst say was the steal of the draft. We received at best the 6th man on our roster.
                          I want to throw out everything else you said and focus on this.

                          Honest question here, was Leonard in your mind good enough to start this season over Paul George or Danny Granger?

                          If not would he be better than either of them in the season after that?

                          If the answer to either question is no then exactly how is the trade better or worse in your mind. If you don't think he can start over either then he is at best going to be the 6th man right now and that assumes he passes other player in the rotation to get there.

                          You already admit Hill will become the 6th man right away.

                          So I guess I'm confused on what your real problem is here.


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

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                            This is from the Spurs live Chat on San Antonio Express (SA largest Newspaper)

                            apparently the Spurs turned DOWN the offer for #12 and probably the only reason they took our offer is they thought highly of Lenoard and didnt expect him to be there, so they wanted him enough that we got in the mix , but had to add our 2nd round pick as well

                            Bird actually beat the competition on this one my friend
                            Absolutely.. Plus , what some of you fail to realize , is if we didn't use the Troy Murphy trade exception , we would have lost it ...

                            Great move Bird.... Bravo
                            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                              Originally posted by aaronb View Post
                              What am I re-nigging on exactly? Those guys are going to get paid by somebody? Be it us or somebody else?

                              Surely you aren't thinking that these guys plan on staying in Indy for league minimum money?

                              Hibby is going to be looking for 5-50 to 5-65
                              Hill is going to be looking for 5-30 to 5-45

                              I like both players for the record. Still going to be some tough decisions to make going forward?
                              I agree that Hill will get around 5-30 and anything above 5-35 we should let him walk unless he turns out to be better than he has been.

                              Hibbert should not get anything above 5-50, but assuming he is roughly the same player as now with some improvement, we should get him for 5-40. $8 mil for a young and slightly above average center sounds about right.

                              That's about $14 mil plus Danny's $13 comes out to $27mil for the three of them. Throw in DC, PG, Jones, Hansbrough and we are up to $38 mil. Soon after will be extensions coming due to DC, PG, Hansbrough. That might put us around $50 mil going forward assuming we don't package them for anybody.

                              I might be the only one who thinks so, but I feel that we could get a legit star to come to Indy and complete this team. That core signed long-term can fit cap-wise if we sign Gordon, a PF or whoever next summer. I feel that we would have a deep and talented team.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                                Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                                And now you are re-nigging on your previous statement.


                                LOL sorry Dukie , but I have to correct ya here..

                                It's "renege"


                                LMAO@ re-nigg .. I'ma start callin you Randy Marsh .. "That re-nigg guy" hahaa



                                I am just pullin your chain man .. lol

                                But it's IS funny... I used to think it was spelled that way when i was young , till i was embarassed and corrected at school ..
                                "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X