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

Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

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

  • Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

    http://dimemag.com/2011/04/jeff-fost...-im-their-guy/

    JEFF FOSTER: “IF THEY NEED A VILLAIN, IT LOOKS LIKE I’M THEIR GUY”
    BY ARON PHILLIPS

    No one grows up wanting to be the next Jeff Foster. I’m sorry, but it’s true. Kids grow up wanting to play at Duke or North Carolina and become the next Kobe Bryant or LeBron James; not attend Southwest Texas State and average five points per game for their career. All-Star Games, MVP awards, endorsement deals, these are what kids aspire towards. You know, the good life. But at 34 years old, Foster lives that too. And 12 seasons and almost $50 million later, he’s leaving his mark on another playoff series.

    “It’d be kind of cool if I got booed,” Foster said, laughing. “If they need a villain, it looks like I’m their guy. The Bulls have great fans. It should be a great game.”

    But why boo Foster, a guy who’s averaging under 19 minutes per game in the Pacers’ first round series with the Bulls? In Game 1, he fouled Derrick Rose. Hard.

    Then in Game 3, he fouled Rose and Luol Deng – both of which were upgraded to flagrant 1 fouls by the NBA after the game.

    “I thought they were good, clean playoff fouls,” Pacers interim coach Frank Vogel said. “That’s all we talk about with our guys, is that we want to protect our basket. We don’t want flagrants. We’re trying to protect our basket and protect it in a physical manner.”

    And if the Pacers have any shot of winning this series, they’re going to need Foster to do just that. But luckily, he’s been here before – seven times to be exact. Beginning as a rookie on Indiana’s 1999-00 team that went to the NBA Finals, this postseason marks the seventh time that Foster has played in the playoffs with the Pacers. So you might as well call him Michael Myers, because he’s turned the role of the villain into a career.
    Man, if there was an identity that appealed to an apathetic Midwest region, this would be it. The leadership played this out almost perfectly, IMO.

    Blue collar, knock you on your butt, out scrap you team. I hope we can find a way to keep Foster around, healthy, and interested... as a marker for what our identity needs to continue to be.

    (smiling from ear to ear in glee)

  • #2
    Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

    If someone would have told Pacers fans back in 2001-2004 that someday Foster would be our enforcer, our physical force and the player that opposing fans love to boo, we would have laughed and laughed - yeah right.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-26-2011, 03:33 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      If someone would have told Pacers fans back in 2001-2004 that someday Foster would be our enforcer, or physical force and the player that opposing fans love to boo, we would have laughed and laughed - yeah right.
      I said that pretty much verbatim to a guy in my office today.
      Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

        Foster needs to bring back his mustache, its makes him look more evil.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

          Good article. The Pacers have been getting love from the press big time.

          Those fouls, other than the one on Deng weren't that rough. Nothing like the way the Pacers and Knicks used to go at it back in the 90's. Even the Pistons/Pacers series in the last decade were more physical.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

            I don't like the term "villain." Laimbeer was a villain. The "Enforcer" is much more appropriate for Jeff. If you met the guy in a Marsh during a food drive, a thug is the last image that would come to mind.

            And actually, you don't have to go any further than the local YMCA to hear coaches telling dads that their kid may not be a great shooter, but he reminds them of Jeff Foster, which is pretty good. It's the Fosters of the world that often make the LeBrons look so good.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

              I would love for us to turn the clock back and use Foster as the Backup Center ( his current role ) for the next 3 years....but the reality is that Foster is likely destined to fill the role as "Emergency Backup Center" ( the role that Solo fills now ).

              Other then Varajeo ( who won't be had without costing a pretty penny ), is there another Jeff Foster / Enforcer-Like Player that we can sign in FA?

              My first thought was to try to go after Ronny Turiaf on the Knicks since the Knicks will likely be trying to shed salary.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                If someone would have told Pacers fans back in 2001-2004 that someday Foster would be our enforcer, our physical force and the player that opposing fans love to boo, we would have laughed and laughed - yeah right.
                I get what you're saying, and I agree. But he's not even any of those things, well other than the receiver of boos. Chicago fans are just incredibly over sensitive.

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                Other then Varajeo ( who won't be had without costing a pretty penny ), is there another Jeff Foster / Enforcer-Like Player that we can sign in FA?
                Vareajo's not an FA, wrapped up for I think another 3 years. I disagree he'd cost a ton though. With Cleveland where they are, is it THAT unfeasible that something a first and Rush and the immediate monetary savings that come with a deal like that could happen? I'd just really like to add Andy.
                Last edited by Heisenberg; 04-26-2011, 04:24 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                  Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                  Vareajo's not an FA, wrapped up for I think another 3 years. I disagree he'd cost a ton though. With Cleveland where they are, is it THAT unfeasible that something a first and Rush and the immediate monetary savings that come with a deal like that could happen? I'd just really like to add Andy.
                  Sorry, I should have clarified on my comments on SideShow Bob....I meant that I do not think that the Cavs would be willing to move him to save $$$ ( they will have roughly $56 mil in guaranteed $$$ owed in 2011-2012 ). Even if they did intend to move him......unless they are desperate and ask only for BRush+1st Round Pick....my guess is that they will be asking for more than what we are willing to pay.

                  I'd REALLY like to get SideShow Bob...but the reality is that he's fairly CHEAP for a fairly solid and young Starting Quality Center ( he's owed $8-9 mil a year for the next 3 seasons...which is incredibly cheap for what he brings to the table ) and a solid piece for the Team to include as their future core of Players.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                    Just hard to figure out where they are with him, hell where they are period (Baron Davis?!). They need rebuilt so bad you'd think money savings + picks would be something they'd be interested in, he'll be 29 by the start of next season. Figure he'd be well into his 30s by the time they get something going.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                      Just hard to figure out where they are with him, hell where they are period (Baron Davis?!). They need rebuilt so bad you'd think money savings + picks would be something they'd be interested in, he'll be 29 by the start of next season. Figure he'd be well into his 30s by the time they get something going.
                      It's not hard to figure out where they will go with him and BDiddy.

                      The Cavs have essentially hitched their trailer onto BDiddy...which means that they have to start building a decent supporting cast around him for the next couple of seasons. By committing to BDiddy and his huge contract....it only makes more sense to keep a good $$$ valuewise Center like SideShowBob rather then trade him for $$$ savings. They essentially have their Starting Center position locked up for the next 3 years at a good price at a fairly reasonable price. If SideShow was paid something along the lines of $10-12 mil a year...then I'd agree...but for $8-9 mil a year for the next 3 seasons...that's good value for a solid and young Starting Center.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 04-26-2011, 05:01 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                        Pretty sure the common thinking was they moved for Davis because it got them the Clips lotto pick to add to their own and that Davis has an early termination option after next season that they assume he'll hate Cleveland so much he'll exercise to pursue his movie pursuits or whatever he has going in LA.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          Pretty sure the common thinking was they moved for Davis because it got them the Clips lotto pick to add to their own and that Davis has an early termination option after next season that they assume he'll hate Cleveland so much he'll exercise to pursue his movie pursuits or whatever he has going in LA.
                          He may have LA interests that he wants to pursue, but I doubt that BDiddy will leave $14+ mil on the Table unless he is absolutely sure that he can get something comprable in a long term dea somewhere else.

                          With the new CBA in place and expected wages to be lower....especially for an aging Injury Prone Starting Quality PG....no one is going to offer him something for the long-term that will make up for $14 mil in lost wages.

                          Also, the reason that the Clips moved BDiddy ( at least based off of what I read ) is that they want to clear 2012-2013 Salary Cap space to pursue DWill, CP3 and/or Dwight by dangling Blake Griffin in Sunny LaLaLand...or use 2011-2012 Expiring + Draft Picks to try and trade for one of them.
                          Last edited by CableKC; 04-26-2011, 05:46 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Our growing new identity: Starring Jeff Foster...

                            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                            http://dimemag.com/2011/04/jeff-fost...-im-their-guy/



                            Man, if there was an identity that appealed to an apathetic Midwest region, this would be it. The leadership played this out almost perfectly, IMO.

                            Blue collar, knock you on your butt, out scrap you team. I hope we can find a way to keep Foster around, healthy, and interested... as a marker for what our identity needs to continue to be.

                            (smiling from ear to ear in glee)
                            I've seen the dude's wife, and he's living the good life there too.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X