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

I have a theory... and some won't like it...

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

  • I have a theory... and some won't like it...

    I think JO signed his ticket out of here with his vociferous 'discussion' with TPTB immediately following the 8th game of the season. Also, his comments here and there about maybe him and team being better off apart isn't going to help his longevity here either.

    I know some of you think he's having one of his best seasons. I think that is because TPTB made a decision to appease JO in order to showcase JO. It's all about JO. So at the end of the year, JO individually will look pretty good. But, as always, it's at the sacrifice of the team (and the coach). That's why our record with JO and without JO is remarkably similar.

    If JO could blend into a team concept he's a very good player and could make the others around him better and make the team more formidable. But he can't... and won't... He made that perfectly clear 8 games into the season. He will not sacrifice any of his game for the betterment of the team. Whether this is ego or a lack of basketball IQ I don't know. He talks a good game off the court. It's a shame he can't bring that same diplomacy to his game on the court.

    This is similar to what I think is happening with Tinsley... except things aren't all about Tinsley. It's just that he's being given a lot of lattitude as a vaccine against sinupoutinitis.

    Carlisle showed he was willing to try something else with this team. JO showed he was not willing to give it a chance. And that's not what this team needs now.

    The more I think about it, Murphy, Dunleavy and Iogu(sp?) weren't brought in to compliment JO as much as they were brought in to have players already in the system that could play the style of basketball we'll see without JO here. And a style we've seen under Carlisle when JO hasn't played.

    We're not going to start from scratch but by the 07-08 season I think the brawl performers will be elsewhere.

    We know what the fans want.... we know what at least Bird wants... and we know JO has already balked. The 'lightbulb game' where JO 'gets it' that I was waiting on isn't coming. He can never take a backseat here. Maybe somewhere else he could, but here his ego won't allow it. He clearly showed that 8 games into the season. That was a slap in the face to the franchise and a wakeup call. IMHO

    Whether this could happen before the deadline is anybody's guess. I'm not saying TPTB will have a firesale for JO. They know he has value.... but IMHO we're watching his last season here. And Tinsley shouldn't be too far behind him if he doesn't go first. But I wonder if a package deal is in play (JO & Tinsley). In any case... this is something that might be discussed now, just too big to pull together mid season and so not finalized until summer. Once the back channels start buzzing maybe more offers will come in than can be analyzed and negotiated. Or maybe everything will come together this week and the trigger will be pulled (figuring the best offer at the deadline might be better than gambling on Tins and JO staying healthy for the rest of the season).

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  • #2
    Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

    I'm going to add-

    When JO balked at what Carlisle was looking to do he also balked at what TPTB had decided was better for the franchise. ...For the ticket buying public...

    He threw a lot of people under the bus in an argument that reportedly was more about what the team could and should do for him... not what he could do for the team. And when I say 'team' I mean the whole organization in this case.

    -Bball
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

      How many times have you said this already? You made this same thread at least 3 times.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

        Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
        How many times have you said this already? You made this same thread at least 3 times.
        I think today is the first time I've ever predicted JO will be traded. Not that he might, or should be.... but that he will be.

        -Bball
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

          Bball, with all due respect, stick to your Bender theory. You're really grasping here...

          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

            Originally posted by Bball View Post
            I think today is the first time I've ever predicted JO will be traded. Not that he might, or should be.... but that he will be.

            -Bball
            You just posted the same damn thing in 2 other threads. Today. Not to mention the other 2,000 times you have said a whole bunch of stuff about how Jermaine represents everything that is horrible in this world.

            All you do is talk about how much Jermaine and JT suck.

            Okay be truthful when I ask you this, do you get mad when JO and Tinsley play a good game. Please dont lie. There is no need to lie about this.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

              Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
              How many times have you said this already? You made this same thread at least 3 times.
              This is not an attack on your thought, or your post, Bball... but similar to the Mike Wells article the other day, did something noteworthy happen recently to bring this similar post of yours back up, yet again?

              Honestly, I could see them taking a deal on Jermaine, but as you also mentioned... It won't be a "fire sale". Where I feel differently, I believe it is J.O.'s decision whether he stays, or goes and what happened on game 8 wont amount to anything in the grand scheme of if he stays or goes.
              ...Still "flying casual"
              @roaminggnome74

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                You just posted the same damn thing in 2 other threads. Today.
                I just decided to elaborate here on that little snippet I said in the other thread because that thread was about whether we'd make a move at the deadline or not. So I didn't think that was the place to go into a detail even tho I planned on elaborating because it dovetailed with what I posted above (and had already planned to write).

                All you do is talk about how much Jermaine and JT suck.
                Jermaine doesn't suck... but he needs to allow someone to ascend to the leadership mantle and he needs to take a lesser role in the offense. We're never going to have good guard play (at least not what many fans are expecting) as long as the offense is ran like it is now.

                Okay be truthful when I ask you this, do you get mad when JO and Tinsley play a good game. Please dont lie. There is no need to lie about this.
                I do get mad when Tinsley plays a good game because it shows what he's capable of game in and game out but that he just doesn't do.

                But it's a tease because Bad Jamaal always returns.

                I don't have a problem with JO's talent but he and Carlisle are not a good fit and (thanks to game 8) I think it's more JO than Carlisle's fault.

                -Bball
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                  Originally posted by Bball


                  Jermaine doesn't suck... but he needs to allow someone to ascend to the leadership mantle and he needs to take a lesser role in the offense. We're never going to have good guard play (at least not what many fans are expecting) as long as the offense is ran like it is now.

                  -Bball
                  If Jermaine takes a lesser role on offense who is going to take the shots? You have a problem with Jamaal shooting too much so Jamaal cant shoot. Dunleavy actually takes way too many shots. Danny is not aggressive enough to get more shots, he stands at the 3 and when he is open he shots, but since he cant get to the hoop he has to pass up most of his shots because he isnt open.

                  Jermaine is the only consistent offensive player on our team, he needs to be a big part of the offense because the players around him are not suited to be big time options in the offense. Take Jermaine off this team and put Ike or Troy at the PF and this team has the worst record in the NBA. These guys needs Jermaine because Jermaine takes all the pressure of them, could you imagine this team with Jamaal being the #1 option or Danny, I can and its ugly.

                  You talk about our record being the same with JO and with out him. Well this year we are

                  2-4 without him and 26-20 with him.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                    If they're not building around Jermaine, then I can't even begin to imagine why the most recent trade was made.

                    I'm not adverse to trading JO, if the deal is right. There are several players I'd trade JO for in a heartbeat. But you're right, I don't like this theory. Not because it offends me (I'm certainly not against the team getting better!), but because it's not a very good theory.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                      Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                      If Jermaine takes a lesser role on offense who is going to take the shots?
                      Don't play that game with him, it's crap that he's trying to sell as diamonds. Early-season Jermaine didn't have a lesser role on offense than current Jermaine. Count the shot attempts... Jermaine's touches went DOWN after the magical mythical eighth game. I've pointed this out on multiple occasions, but BBall is wedded to his fantasy.

                      One of my biggest problems with Jermaine in years past is he believed that if he wasn't scoring, he couldn't help the team win. That may even have been true, in the past. But it's not any longer. Jermaine's rebounding well, passing well, and playing the best defense of his life. I've never been more appreciative of him as a player. But the better he gets, the less BBall likes him. Don't ask me why, I can't explain it. But it's increasingly obvious that some people first choose who they're going to hate, then figure out why they hate them. Once those reasons no longer apply, they simply find new reasons.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        Don't play that game with him, it's crap that he's trying to sell as diamonds. Early-season Jermaine didn't have a lesser role on offense than current Jermaine. Count the shot attempts... Jermaine's touches went DOWN after the magical mythical eighth game. I've pointed this out on multiple occasions, but BBall is wedded to his fantasy.

                        One of my biggest problems with Jermaine in years past is he believed that if he wasn't scoring, he couldn't help the team win. That may even have been true, in the past. But it's not any longer. Jermaine's rebounding well, passing well, and playing the best defense of his life. I've never been more appreciative of him as a player. But the better he gets, the less BBall likes him. Don't ask me why, I can't explain it. But it's increasingly obvious that some people first choose who they're going to hate, then figure out why they hate them. Once those reasons no longer apply, they simply find new reasons.
                        Thats what it is. If the Boston game thing never happend, you think BBall wouldnt be trying to pull this crap again anyway. Just like you said, if the Boston thing didnt happen BBall would have found something else, so it doesnt really matter.

                        He felt like this for like 2-3 years, this is not something that just came to him, he is just using the Boston thing as a excuse.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                          Fans either like a player or they don't.

                          If you like a player you tend to stick with them through the good and the bad.

                          This back forth, I'm right and your wrong is going no where.

                          If you look at his game this year, I don't think you can complain too much.
                          Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                            Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                            If Jermaine takes a lesser role on offense who is going to take the shots?
                            Lesser role doesn't mean he won't be taking shots but it could mean everything doesn't run thru him. It might mean he doesn't always get the ball when or where he wants it.

                            Heck, he might even be screening for a guard to get an open shot...

                            ---

                            Anyway... I was just going on record with my prediction and WHY I think it will happen. I didn't necessarily want to debate the same stuff over again. And I wanted to go on record before the trade deadline for the outside chance it would happen then.

                            I think game 8 of the season has and will have more ramnifications than some of you obviously want to believe.

                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: I have a theory... and some won't like it...

                              How can people love a player who was paid twice his worth, and hate another player for being paid, at most, 1/4 more then he is worth? Don't give me the classy thing either, JO I'm willing to bet money is "classier" then 3/4 of the league's stars.


                              Personally I think highly of both Jermaine and Croshere. Also yes I know I'm highly simplifying things, but it's really bugging me.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X