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

Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

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

  • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

    Originally posted by PR07 View Post
    The thing is though, we don't even know if Simon is willing to spend right now to get us to the salary cap threshold, let alone pay any sort of luxury tax.
    Well we have ZERO evidence of Herb EVER failing to hit the cap. The Pacers spent 20 straight years OVER THE CAP to the point that they were never able to sign big FAs because they DIDN'T HAVE CAP SPACE.

    (not yelling at you, emphasizing for everyone)

    This whole "we don't sign FAs" thing is 100% BULLS***. The RULES always stated that the Pacers were not allowed to sign FAs other than MLEs (they did) or Min Exceptions (they did). They spent tons keeping guys like Reggie, Dale, Rik, etc around. They went max on JO's new deal.


    This doesn't mean that Herb is not currently willing to go over the cap, I can't argue that. I'm just saying that if we look at evidence the only non-rumor evidence we have is past behavior. Simon was willing to spend for David West and was willing to let Bird "sign" Barbosa in a pick for salary trade.

    When have the Pacers EVER had a legal (by CBA) shot at a big time FA that they went cheap and passed instead? They didn't resign Peja (great choice) and they didn't resign Brad Miller.

    But in Peja's case he became a TE and Simon did allow it to be used to "sign" Harrington in a non-salary for salary trade. And in Brad's case the Pacers took back Ron Mercer and Scot Pollard's salary in the end, so they didn't cut costs they just avoided a risky investment.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-26-2012, 01:30 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      I'm not convinced they've finalized exactly what's going to happen, hence the cat isn't really out of the bag completely just yet.
      Then why not just say that?


      Comment


      • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

        Roy Hibbert
        I'm not commenting on LB until I hear it from his mouth.

        Comment


        • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

          Roy says on twitter he's not commenting on any of this til he hears it straight from Bird himself. What a cluster ****.


          Comment


          • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            If you read Kravitz column, he makes it sound as though Pritchard is clearly in charge now and not Walsh. (although he doesn't address the Walsh issue directly.

            so maybe Pritchard is in chrage and Walsh is being brought in as a security blanket and consultant of sorts.
            Walsh isn't coming here to be a security blanket....he's only coming here is he is the guy making the final call on all decisions ( before, of course...presenting the decision to the Simons ).
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

              He is willing to spend but in the same light. If we spend just on our own guys we are proablly up to the tax. Face it in this day in age to win a championship you have to spend over the tax.
              But as Wintermute points out, and what I'm getting at too, is that you must have a LEGAL METHOD for acquiring this salary. It's not MLB where you just cut check after check. The CBA restricts how and when you can acquire salary. So even if the Pacers wanted Nash, it's possible that they would have to TRADE AWAY SALARY to get him, meaning a guy like Nash isn't a "only if you break the tax limit" guy because as far as I can tell the Pacers can't break that limit this season anyway.

              Perhaps with the right combo of deals and then resigns of their own players? Even then there are caps on salaries based on years of service. You 100% can't give Roy Hibbert $20m per year for example. So getting to the tax is a difficult trick even if you are trying to do it on purpose.

              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
              Actually, they can't due to the new rules. Teams that are $4m above the tax level can only offer the mini MLE (max of $9m over 3 years) which is significantly smaller than the full MLE (max of $20m over 4 years). That's why there's talk that the Heat may amnesty Mike Miller so that they can add a full MLE guy. But the point is that the Heat (or other taxpaying team) can't keep adding full MLE players without limit any more as they did in the past.



              Oh yeah. The smart decision would be to recycle DC and Hans into cheap rookie scale deals.

              Comment


              • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                I have to say I'm surprised at the vehement dislike here for Donnie Walsh, same thing for Draymond Green, maybe I'm taking the Hyperbole too literal. I can get being tepid or disliking guys, but some of its 'sky is falling' stuff. I guess its just that time of year.
                Despite what Bird would suggest on who to draft....the only positive outcome that I can see in all of this is that if Walsh is the guy making the call in the draft...Green won't be the guy that the Pacers draft. Walsh doesn't play it safe....or at the very least....he's going to go with a guy with a higher ceiling than go with a guy that is "good at doing everything, but isn't really great at doing something".
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                  I guessing, but I think Pritchard's in charge of Basketball decisions with Donnie Walsh's input. Donnie is in charge of helping with 'cap rules' and 'cap space' which is code for money. So, Donnie is in charge of watching Simon's money. I really have no idea, but I could see this as the set up. Good news is you have a control in place if Pritchard tries to go crazy and overpay. You, also, have something in place for Donnie being too conservative with KP pushing him to get stuff done. Bad news, Im not sure how conducive this is for a long term relationship.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                    TJ Ford
                    Congrats to HOF LARRY BIRD for getting Indiana Pacers basketball back to a good place. My time wasn't great BUT he kept it 100. will always remember our private conversation over my 3 yr span with HOF Larry Bird "just go out and play like you know how"
                    Class act through and through.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      Despite what Bird would suggest on who to draft....the only positive outcome that I can see in all of this is that if Walsh is the guy making the call in the draft...Green won't be the guy that the Pacers draft. Walsh doesn't play it safe....or at the very least....he's going to go with a guy with a higher ceiling than go with a guy that is "good at doing everything, but isn't really great at doing something".
                      Agreed, I could see both not wanting to settle for a low ceiling/conservative player.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        Roy says on twitter he's not commenting on any of this til he hears it straight from Bird himself. What a cluster ****.
                        Now this is a conclusion we don't have to jump to. The method of all this news and rumors coming out has been a disaster full of contradictions and speculation...running right up to days before the draft.



                        BTW, I kinda like Walsh and I still think he's competent. The age thing is way overplayed. You can be 55 and dimwitted, 35 and naive, or 70 and wizened and polished. Who's to say, it falls to the type and health of each individual.

                        What I most want is a flipping PLAN in place and some sense that the TPTB have a clear, focused vision. This team can stay in Indy and win. I think Herb has Donnie coming in because he knows and trusts him.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          Pendergraph is Pritchard's guy from Portland.

                          In fact, I won't be surprised if a few more ex-Blazers show up here, like Armon Johnson. Or Brandon Roy
                          I seriously think that this would have happened regardless of whether Bird or Walsh was running the show.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                            TJ Ford


                            Class act through and through.
                            Yeah, that's really impressive. For all his on court "personality of his game", he's been pretty quality off the court. He should get lots of credit for this behavior and attitude.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                              Is there a time set for a press conference or anything?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Larry Bird LEAVING the Pacers

                                I think it will be a very smooth transition. We pretty much know that Bird wasn't the person doing most of the leg work, the prep work in making trades. Bird would usually finalize the deals, but Morway did most of the prep work. So I am sure Pirtchard has been doing the prep work for weeks now when it was obvious that Morway was out. So Pritchard will continue doing what he's been doing for weeks.

                                One area where I am confident that Walsh is better than Bird is in having dicsussions with other GM's around the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X