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

Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

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

  • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

    I'm all for going over the cap but I believe there is options before thinking about doing that, for example trade Copeland and Mahinmi for expirings, Cope is not playing and Ian is making 4mil a year, replace those two for an expiring contract(Kaman?, Hawes?) and the Pacers can save some money.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

      Originally posted by owl View Post
      If Danny shows he can stay healthy I believe this is maybe the one time to go over the cap. Keep this team together. Danny as the 6th man is the perfect position for him.
      Although I really despise the anti-George Hill sentiment going around, I do wonder if dumping his contract to keep Danny might be something to consider.

      If you believe that CJ Watson is 85% of the player that George Hill is at half the cost, and thats the cost of keeping Granger (assuming he embraces the 6th man role). I think it would be worth considering. I could live with a Watson/Sloan PG rotation if you can keep bringing Danny off the bench long term.

      Watson/Sloan
      Lance/Danny
      Paul/Danny
      West/Scola
      Hibbert/Ian

      I think the idea of going into the tax is a non-starter, it just wont happen. I think this could be a possibility though.
      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

      - ilive4sports

      Comment


      • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        I'm all for going over the cap but I believe there is options before thinking about doing that, for example trade Copeland and Mahinmi for expirings, Cope is not playing and Ian is making 4mil a year, replace those two for an expiring contract(Kaman?, Hawes?) and the Pacers can save some money.
        I actually think the final move Larry would like to make, if possible, is to acquire Kaman from the Lakers. If Danny is able to remain healthy I look for him to aggressively pursue the Copeland for Kaman deal....Kaman hasnt been particularly happy and we know Larry has shown some interest in Kaman before...sooo...I think thats who he has in mind when hes mentioned theres maybe one more move he might like to make...
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

          Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
          I actually think the final move Larry would like to make, if possible, is to acquire Kaman from the Lakers. If Danny is able to remain healthy I look for him to aggressively pursue the Copeland for Kaman deal....Kaman hasnt been particularly happy and we know Larry has shown some interest in Kaman before...sooo...I think thats who he has in mind when hes mentioned theres maybe one more move he might like to make...
          This would be a great trade.
          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

          - ilive4sports

          Comment


          • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Brett Poirier NBA ‏@BrettNBA 59m
            Rumor: Rondo to the Pacers for Granger, Hill and a 2014 first-rounder. This is not true. Pacers don't even have its 2014 first-rounder.



            Lol the Celtics would have to be doing drugs.
            If the Pacers had Rondo, the Pacers would corner the NBA market for triple doubles with Rondo and Lance.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

              Originally posted by IndySDExport View Post
              I tend to like your comments, but this one is a little off base in terms of context, especially since you leave out Seth's quotes and the background of his comment.

              Paying Danny 8/9 mil is pretty silly, yes. But you ignore the context of the conversation which include Sandman and Seth dreaming about Simon opening his pocket book considering the fact that we are now selling out games left and right. In that sense, perhaps we could start paying both Lance and Danny. In the end probably not, but that does not detract from their statement that perhaps Simon could open up a little.

              But you ignore that point and just say "Is this real life? OMG, smh, I'm glad you're not GM" just to be condescending. (Do you not see how this is condescending???)

              This is my whole problem with these threads. We don't read context or really even argue facts. We just pick and choose one liners to make fun of or be snobbish against.

              edit: Oh yeah, and the Pacers are 22 - 5. Sigh...
              I don't think sandman and seth are dreaming they are serious about it, this is "lets give Jeff Foster another contract because he is the heart and soul of the team" all over again.

              And I'm sorry for not quoting seth post but they are really really long so there is not point in doing that if I'm only commenting on one thing.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                Danny looked good tonight. Anyone with a gif of his block?

                Interesting to me how well Danny and Lance are gelling on the court together after all the hand wringing about which one would start. They have great chemistry already
                I believe that all this hand wringing was something that only the fans cared about. This team doesn't worry about such things. Their chemistry is amazing and they love each other.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Brett Poirier NBA ‏@BrettNBA 59m
                  Rumor: Rondo to the Pacers for Granger, Hill and a 2014 first-rounder. This is not true. Pacers don't even have its 2014 first-rounder.



                  Lol the Celtics would have to be doing drugs.
                  Yeah, that doesn't make any sense at all for either team.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Yeah, that doesn't make any sense at all for either team.
                    Lance and Rondo in the same backcourt? Vogels hair would look like Dan Burkes by the end of the season and Larry would likely look like Neil Young.

                    EDIT: And besides, that would break the one knucklehead rule....
                    The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                    Comment


                    • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                      Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                      I actually think the final move Larry would like to make, if possible, is to acquire Kaman from the Lakers. If Danny is able to remain healthy I look for him to aggressively pursue the Copeland for Kaman deal....Kaman hasnt been particularly happy and we know Larry has shown some interest in Kaman before...sooo...I think thats who he has in mind when hes mentioned theres maybe one more move he might like to make...
                      I like Kaman. I really do. He had an excellent game against the Warriors this Saturday. But I don't know. He is rarely used on the Lakers and Robert Sacre has taken his place in the rotation. I just don't know if he can still play. Maybe he could help a contender, though.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        I like Kaman. I really do. He had an excellent game against the Warriors this Saturday. But I don't know. He is rarely used on the Lakers and Robert Sacre has taken his place in the rotation. I just don't know if he can still play. Maybe he could help a contender, though.
                        I watched him play the other nite against Minnesota and thought he looked suprisingly good considering I wasnt expecting much...I could actually see him playing ahead of Mahinmi -primarily because of his abilities on the offensive end....not the least being he seems to have little problems catching the ball...
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment


                        • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                          If the Pacers win the championship with Granger playing a big role, then all this Luxury Tax thing goes out the window. Herb would be a fool to let either Lance or Danny get away in FA. Herb Simon is an old man now, he isn't going to break up a championship roster. If they fail to make the finals, then Bird has to think long and hard about what he is going to do to put this team over the edge. This is a champiopnship or bust season. If they fail there will be drastic changes to the team.
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            If the Pacers win the championship with Granger playing a big role, then all this Luxury Tax thing goes out the window. Herb would be a fool to let either Lance or Danny get away in FA. Herb Simon is an old man now, he isn't going to break up a championship roster. If they fail to make the finals, then Bird has to think long and hard about what he is going to do to put this team over the edge. This is a champiopnship or bust season. If they fail there will be drastic changes to the team.

                            I do agree that if there is one move to do this season its trade one of those wings for a legit 3rd Big.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                              Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                              I watched him play the other nite against Minnesota and thought he looked suprisingly good considering I wasnt expecting much...I could actually see him playing ahead of Mahinmi -primarily because of his abilities on the offensive end....not the least being he seems to have little problems catching the ball...
                              Kaman has great hands, obviously. One of the requirements to be a starting Center in this league is to have good hands and that's also why Ian is a back--up (and why Asik was a back-up for several years despite his absolutely amazing defense). Kaman is also a good offensive player. He has offensive skills. I just don't know if he can hold up defensively. He can certainly block shots but can he give us the verticality that Ian does?
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                                Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                                I do agree that if there is one move to do this season its trade one of those wings for a legit 3rd Big.
                                I just don't know if there is such a big need for a 3rd big. Will they see a lot of PT in order to make this move meaningful?

                                I mean, there are some bigs in Europe that could be had easily and fill that 3rd big spot if this is so important.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X