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

5 steps to fixing the Pacers

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

  • 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

    About a year ago, when the Indiana Pacers made the trade to acquire Darren Collison, the NBA world almost immediately felt as though they'd put together the foundations of a really good team. By the time the season started, however, most of us changed our minds. Indiana was very underwhelming, Jim O'Brien didn't seem to be using his point guard or his power forwards to their strengths, and they looked set for more lottery mediocrity.

    But then that first-round series with the Chicago Bulls happened, and everybody changed their minds. Again.

    With interim head coach Frank Vogel bringing the best out Collison, Paul George, and Tyler Hansbrough, the Pacers showed the Bulls more than anyone thought they would, and those players along with Danny Granger and Roy Hibbert are enough to make Indiana look more than a little promising again.

    They're not winning a championship as currently constructed, however, which means they've still got a lot of work to do…

    1 – Get a coach
    There's no questioning the Pacers were a different team as soon as they made the midseason coaching change, but the question now is whether Vogel is the right guy to move forward with, or whether or not there's a better man out there to take the Pacers to another level.

    With coaches like Chuck Person and Mike Brown—both very qualified and very familiar with the Indiana organization—it's not a sure thing Vogel is the guy who ends up helming the Pacers next season. But despite his relative lack of pedigree, he's probably the guy they go with, and that's not a bad thing. He's a confident young coach who clearly had a positive influence on this group, and they'll respond well to him should he be given the opportunity to coach the team without the interim tag.

    2 – Let the veterans walk
    Indiana has quite a few expiring contracts this summer, three of which are veteran players that don't carry quite the value that they once did. Mike Dunleavy, Jr., Jeff Foster, and definitely T.J. Ford all have run their course as Pacers, and considering Indiana's strength is their youth, there's little reason to keep those guys around.

    If they're going to keep any of the three, Foster has the best chance to be useful as an enforcer, but his better years are far, far behind him. For anything much more than the veteran's minimum, he's probably not worth keeping, either. This team is young, and it needs to stay young. Of course you'd like to see some veterans on the team to help bring the young guys along, but these three vets aren't game-changers.

    3 – Figure out how to spend your free agency money
    The Pacers will have the second-most cap space in the entire league this summer with all those expiring deals, and no matter what the new CBA ends up looking like, they're going to be in a good place to spend some money on guys who can help the team.

    While Indy has put together a reasonable starting lineup, they could still use a more natural shooting guard and definitely need an upgrade at the power forward position. Hansbrough has shown flashes of brilliance this past season, but still has issues with consistency, and there are players available that could help shore up that frontline, especially if they're going to lose Jeff Foster and possibly Josh McRoberts.

    Depending on how much money they want to spend, Jason Richardson and Jamal Crawford are the best unrestricted shooting guards on the market, with younger restricted free agents like Wilson Chandler and Shannon Brown also probably worth taking a look at. As for the power forward situation, the top guy in this class is David West (if he opts out), though he's not likely to end up a Pacer. Someone like Carly Landry, Glen Davis, or Luc Mbah a Moute could start for this team, though, and all are young enough to be part of the burgeoning core.

    Not that they need much help at the three with Paul George and Danny Granger, but if Granger gets moved (see #4), someone like Shane Battier would be a great fit, too. He'd be a perfect veteran for this team.

    Whatever they do, though, expect Indiana to hit free agency hard. There isn't much by way of superstars this year, but there are guys who can help, and that's what the Pacers need.

    4 – Trade Danny Granger
    It's a tough call because the man is and has been Indiana's franchise player. With George looking so good, however, and with Granger's contract and output not exactly lining up the way Pacers fans would like, it might be time to look into moving him.

    It should be noted the Pacers value Granger highly and would only move him for a player or package of players that included someone they felt had similar All-Star potential or pedigree. They aren't going to dump him for expiring contracts and draft picks; they've got to get real value in return. Knowing that, it's hard to imagine a lot of teams willing to give up All-Star quality talent to get him. The Clippers would happily surrender Chris Kaman to get him, but Indiana has little need for a starting center. That particular deal would need a third team, and goodness only knows who that might be.

    The bottom line, though, is that it would be nice to keep Paul George in the starting lineup alongside a more natural two guard. That means moving Granger, and if there's a cost-effective move out there that also makes basketball sense, they've got to pull the trigger.


    5 – Let the kids play
    It's a young group, and what they need more than anything is time to grow together and get a full year with a new head coach's system. Get a coach that can hang around for a while, and then set a starting lineup that's maintainable for a few seasons, and turn them loose. Let 'em marinate, and hope that in two or three years you've got a group that's grown into itself, ready to compete for real in the Eastern Conference.

    It's not all that crazy, really. They showed the world quite a bit in the 2011 postseason, and with the money they've got to spend to add some new pieces, they should be even better next season. This franchise is in a good place, and Larry Bird and David Morway get to continue their vision, see it through to the end. Let's keep our fingers crossed that what they've worked so hard for comes together the way they hoped. They've got the potential to be very good, but a few pieces are missing. In a year's time, we might feel a little differently. The Indiana Pacers have certainly showed us how easily they can change our minds.


    Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?...#ixzz1Mj345Lv0
    Last edited by 90'sNBARocked; 05-18-2011, 01:33 PM.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

    Here's my idea.

    1. Get the best coach available.

    2. Get some/resign some veterans (ie Foster) for leadership and experience.

    3. BPAs in draft.

    4. Let team grow together.

    5. Try for Mayo again.

    6. Try to get a top FA or trade for a top talent using our cap space and/or draft picks and/or our non-core players.
    Last edited by MyFavMartin; 05-18-2011, 01:51 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

      David West is the top FA PF? Didn't he blow out his knee? I'd think that would drop him quite a ways in the rankings.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

        Originally posted by Strummer View Post
        David West is the top FA PF? Didn't he blow out his knee? I'd think that would drop him quite a ways in the rankings.
        That's how bad the FA are this summer. Figures!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

          Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
          Here's my idea.

          1. Get the best coach available.

          2. Get some/resign some veterans (ie Foster) for leadership and experience.

          3. BPAs in draft.

          4. Let team grow together.

          5. Try for Mayo again.

          6. Try to get a top FA or trade for a top talent using our cap space and/or draft picks and/or our non-core players.
          Great plan! Now if it was only that easy
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

            Originally posted by Strummer View Post
            David West is the top FA PF? Didn't he blow out his knee? I'd think that would drop him quite a ways in the rankings.
            I think thats more based on past production and a weaker PF FA class
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

              Here is an interesting twist

              Who would you rather have right NOW

              David West or Serge Ibaka?

              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                "With George looking so good, however, and with Granger's contract and output not exactly lining up the way Pacers fans would like, it might be time to look into moving him.
                "

                WTF! Granger probably has the most desirable contract of any SF averaging 20+ a game.

                I do like the idea of getting Wilson Chandler at the SG though. That would be a nice pick up.
                You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                  This is from someone not quite paying attention, I think.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                    Someone like Carly Landry
                    I didn't know Carl Landry's sister played PF.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                      I don't know about trading Danny.
                      Of course we need to trade him if the deal is right. But what is the right deal? Is it available?
                      Should we try to get young talent like DeRozan/Favors? We won't make the playoffs, but we should have a good team in a few years.
                      Should we try to trade him for someone around his level, like Josh Smith/Monta, and allow George to slide in the SF spot?
                      Should we just do nothing?

                      If we're gonna get Granger some help this summer, like a better starting PF or SG, we should probably keep him and not "lets get young" trade.
                      If we do not, well... I hope we make the playoffs, because if we don't (which is possible), then we've wasted it
                      Originally posted by Piston Prince
                      Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                      "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                        I don't agree with trading Granger. He really played well in the playoffs and I would LOVE to keep him. He also has a very reasonable contract.
                        Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          Here is an interesting twist

                          Who would you rather have right NOW

                          David West or Serge Ibaka?

                          Ibaka by far

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                            Here is an interesting twist

                            Who would you rather have right NOW

                            David West or Serge Ibaka?

                            A year ago? Ibaka.
                            6 months ago? Ibaka
                            Yesterday? Ibaka.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 5 steps to fixing the Pacers

                              I think trading Granger could be a move to consider for next year, but right now, George still needs some seasoning to see what we have. Hate to throw a lot of eggs in the basket and come out worse

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X