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

Interesting tweet from Wells

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

  • #31
    Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

    With George Hill in the fold and with the expectation that Paul George and Lance will make improvements from their rookie season, the Pacers don't need Price, Jones, or Rush.

    If they decide to make a splash it will probably be upfront at Center or PF with maybe a long-range sniper like James Jones added for a low price.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      He'd still be the new guy who has to earn players respect. It's just not as simple as "he's good/was good/has a good work ethic = he's automatically team leader, regardless of status" There's a hierarchy to sports teams. New guys, almost regardless of how good they are, have to earn their place.

      There are a few guys who have leadership qualities on this team, but I think they are too young. And I think Granger doesn't. Even if you are right about Brandon, we don't have Brandon. We've got Dahntay, and my whole point was, it's silly to be LOOKING to trade someone (as in, we don't want him any longer) when we don't currently have a replacement for it. (Not that he's untouchable, but I just don't know that Wells is correct when saying the Pacers don't want Dahntay. They don't want Posey and they might not want Rush. I think they recognize Dahntay's value.) Which is all I'm saying. I wouldn't go looking to get rid of Dahntay, just to get rid of him, because he has value on this team.
      id cut Jones I like defenders I just don't like the way he plays on offense with the lack of skill. George Hill can replace him as a vocal leader he has the right personality for that job and the past playoff success to have the respect.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

        I want to trade Rush. Maybe ship him to Minnesota or Sacremento for a pick or something.
        Senior at the University of Louisville.
        Greenfield ---> The Ville

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

          I love DJones. I think he is a great guy to have when everyone is playing passive. Stick him out there and he will get the ball to the hoop. You need those kind of "when all else fails" type of players with a young team.

          Comment


          • #35
            I see either Rush or Jones + a 1st round pick as part of any offer we make to Utah for Millsap.

            Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

            - Salman Rushdie

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

              The thing that amuses me the most about our situations is most of us who have been here for the long haul looking forward to the position we have are now absolutely terrified to find out what we could possibly do with it. I'll be honest I'm pretty worried that we could just sign someone for the sake of signing someone and really overpay for that person. That's kind of the nature of free agency that sucks, you're going to most likely have to overpay to get who you want. I'm hoping for patience in what is going to be a short season.
              Last edited by TheDon; 11-29-2011, 06:24 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                I would much, much, MUCH rather wait and try to get Eric Gordon instead.
                I think everyone would much rather have Gordon. But, we will NOT be able to get Gordon just by throwing a big contract at him. The Clippers will match it and dump him off somewhere else if forced to.

                So, I think you only get Gordon in one of two ways. Entice Gordon to sign a gigantic ONE-year contract that indicates to the Clippers (or any team that they trade with) that if they match and re-sign him that Gordon is a one-year rental only. Maybe that will compel the Clippers to deal with us.

                The second way is to get the Clippers to deal with us directly with a sign and trade.

                If a sign-and-trade is involved, it is going to take assets. So adding another decent asset like Mayo or whomever to our back court this year might mean that we don't have to gut our back court next year to deal with the Clippers to get Gordon.

                At any rate, if we plan to go after Gordon next year, we better be able to add a few decent players this season that enable us to deal with the Clippers next year without destroying our roster.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  I think everyone would much rather have Gordon. But, we will NOT be able to get Gordon just by throwing a big contract at him. The Clippers will match it and dump him off somewhere else if forced to.

                  So, I think you only get Gordon in one of two ways. Entice Gordon to sign a gigantic ONE-year contract that indicates to the Clippers (or any team that they trade with) that if they match and re-sign him that Gordon is a one-year rental only. Maybe that will compel the Clippers to deal with us.

                  The second way is to get the Clippers to deal with us directly with a sign and trade.

                  If a sign-and-trade is involved, it is going to take assets. So adding another decent asset like Mayo or whomever to our back court this year might mean that we don't have to gut our back court next year to deal with the Clippers to get Gordon.

                  At any rate, if we plan to go after Gordon next year, we better be able to add a few decent players this season that enable us to deal with the Clippers next year without destroying our roster.
                  No way do you offer EJ only a one year contract... And even if we did, I believe that the Clips could offer more years... They simply have to match the amount... And I am of the belief that EJ is potentially to be had next year if you max him out, which I would...
                  Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                    Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                    No way do you offer EJ only a one year contract... And even if we did, I believe that the Clips could offer more years... They simply have to match the amount... And I am of the belief that EJ is potentially to be had next year if you max him out, which I would...
                    My scenario assumes that Gordon actually would want to play in Indy.

                    If you offer Gordon a max contract, then you've just effed yourself. It would be matched. Then, you've lost Gordon for 4-5 years.

                    My way, Gordon cooperates to send a message to the Clips. He is restricted and chooses to take a one year contract that the Clippers might choose to match. If they do, THEY get a one-year rental, after which he becomes an UNRESTRICTED free agent. He can then sign anywhere he chooses without the Clippers being able to match it. So, after ONE additional year, not 4 or 5, he could become a Pacer.

                    Assuming of course, that he prefers to come home to Indy. My belief is that if Gordon did this, the Clippers would be willing to deal with the Pacers to arrange a sign-and-trade.

                    The way I look at it, it's the Pacers turn to find a way to circumvent the spirit of the rules for a change.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                      Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                      No way do you offer EJ only a one year contract... And even if we did, I believe that the Clips could offer more years... They simply have to match the amount... And I am of the belief that EJ is potentially to be had next year if you max him out, which I would...
                      that is the only way you can get him is if he will accept the one year deal the Clippers match and he would be a URFA the next year so he can go where ever he wants. He only accepts if he wants to leave LA. He could accept what ever offer he wants.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                        I adore the thought of EJ coming home, but it's pretty funny to me how we're basically looking for ways to just completely screw the Clippers after most of us were pretty upset with the way Melo and Lebron handled leaving.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                          that is the only way you can get him is if he will accept the one year deal the Clippers match and he would be a URFA the next year so he can go where ever he wants. He only accepts if he wants to leave LA. He could accept what ever offer he wants.
                          But then he loses his Bird rights, and a team cannot go over the cap to resign him... Further, you (the Pacers in this case) cannot offer him the full 5 years... Would be a HUGE gamble on his part...
                          Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                            I adore the thought of EJ coming home, but it's pretty funny to me how we're basically looking for ways to just completely screw the Clippers after most of us were pretty upset with the way Melo and Lebron handled leaving.
                            Melo forced his way out...
                            Bron held his stupid "Decision" show... I am not upset with him leaving via free agency... It was the slap on the face of Cleveland as he walked out the door...

                            Not similar to EJ, if he were to simply sign with another team...
                            Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                              EJ isn't from LA. Lebron was from (near) Cleveland. Him leaving via "The Decision" was a slap in the face to Cleveland, his HOME TOWN. EJ is from Indy. Can anyone blame him for wanting to come home if that is the case? No. Besides, he's not that stupid to host a TV special. No one can possibly be that stupid except Lebron.
                              Senior at the University of Louisville.
                              Greenfield ---> The Ville

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Interesting tweet from Wells

                                Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                                Melo forced his way out...
                                Bron held his stupid "Decision" show... I am not upset with him leaving via free agency... It was the slap on the face of Cleveland as he walked out the door...

                                Not similar to EJ, if he were to simply sign with another team...
                                And I wouldn't call the Clippers completely screwed without EJ. They still have Blake Griffin, cap room, and Minnesota's unprotected 1st this year. That could be a top 3 pick, easily. We could also give them Granger in a sign and trade, because if Paul pans out like we think he will -- EJ, Paul, and Danny won't be able to co-exist (financially) a couple years from now. Danny would be the odd-man out.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X