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

Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

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

  • #16
    Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

    Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
    1 year window? No.

    That being said, this is our best shot at it. If we can't get it done this year, I'm not sure I like our odds at it happening in the future.
    Agreed. I've been saying this for a while now... we should be in the mix (one of the elite NBA teams) for the next several years if we can keep PG/Roy/Lance together somehow, and possibly even if we lose Lance. But THIS season is probably our best shot for awhile - we have underpaid talent (Lance, Scola), starters playing as bench players (Granger, Scola), and youth (for now - West and Scola turn 34 this year).

    This year is the sweet spot.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

      If we do lose Lance we will replace him with something. It might not be a player quite like Lance and I don't know who else is a free agent after this season but I don't think it would be too difficult to find someone decent to come play with this team for 6-7 million a year. We have no idea who that player might be but we can find another piece to the puzzle with the money we'd have left.
      Can we get a new color commentator please?

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

        This is a no brainer to me: keep Stephenson and cut Granger. We didn't have Granger all of last year, and we almost made the NBA Finals. I would love to keep both of them, Granger is that spark we needed off the bench last year. But you can't let a talent like Stephenson walk away.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

          Originally posted by adamscb View Post
          This is a no brainer to me: keep Stephenson and cut Granger. We didn't have Granger all of last year, and we almost made the NBA Finals. I would love to keep both of them, Granger is that spark we needed off the bench last year. But you can't let a talent like Stephenson walk away.
          The problem is that letting Granger walk might not even be enough to re-sign Lance.

          And as long as we have PG and Roy, this team will have a shot at winning a title.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

            We need to resign Lance. Period. He is already better than Hill, and he and PG are both 23. They are a killer tandem on the wings. Lance and PG in their primes together is more important than Hill, and if he is the odd man out, I will be sad to see him go, but it's the least of the evils.
            Senior at the University of Louisville.
            Greenfield ---> The Ville

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

              Bird will just make another deal. I'm not sure what anyone is worried about. Give the man some props.

              Granger is helping some but if he's gone we are still a dominant team even better next year. Our guys are still getting better and are still not in their prime. If we only lose Danny, we will be even better next year although it will be nominally better. Paul George could very well become a LeBron James level if he packs on a little more muscle. I have zero worries about next year. If anything I wonder what excellent moves might surprise us.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                Can't we just go in luxury tax for one year :-( I don't wanna lose this core.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                  Like others have said, I would like to think that OJ and Solomon Hill can step up and fill voids. Can they? I have no clue, but if Bird had the faith to draft them that says a lot to me.

                  I do think Lance is a big time beneficary of the system though. With how he plays the game he puts himself at a huge injury risk and his style can sometimes be counterproductive. I like Lance and want to resign him, but any more than 8 million bucks makes me nervous. I am just not sure he is worth it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                    Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
                    Can't we just go in luxury tax for one year :-( I don't wanna lose this core.
                    The most stupid thing an owner or GM/President could do is say "We'll go into the luxury tax if we need to because this team is worth it". It doesn't exactly give you much leverage at the bargaining table. OTOH about the most stupid thing they could do is throw away a true championship contending team over what is relatively few dollars in the grand scheme of things. You have to consider what a championship would be worth let alone what the run up to one is worth as you're on the cusp.

                    You don't want to overpay for mediocre talent nor do you want to go into luxury tax land just to try and be an 8th seed but we're in an entirely different place right now. If we need to trim some fat it won't be at the expense of Lance IMO. Granger OTOH is gone IMO. That is a given. Granger is not going to be a factor in our salary situation at all nor will he be any kind of true backup plan for losing Stevenson. Maybe that idea gets tossed around as negotiating leverage but TPTB won't be actually going there when the rubber hits the road. I'm not even sure they'd be interested at the vet minimum right now. Hill might be part of some salary shedding deal if it gets down to it simply because he's probably the easiest replaced considering where everyone else in the starting lineup is right now. Then again Bird might still like his steady demeanor and Simon might like his Indy connection so he might rather just reach deeper in his pocket than make that kind of salary shedding deal.

                    I still say Bird didn't return to think finances were going to hamstring him from making a championship run.

                    Not only that but Herb is getting up there. He might like to be around to see a banner raised in the fieldhouse, let alone see another Finals or two played there. I just don't have these concerns that we're going to throw away the core of the team. OTOH, Granger fans might be disappointed if they think he's still a team priority.
                    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


                    • #25
                      Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      I will say that there are valid arguments that choosing Scola over GH ( or vice versa ) is going to impact the Team in a major way. The question is which will be the less bitter pill to swallow and which move would have the LEAST amount of impact to the lineup.
                      I'm not concerned because that's a pretty easy one to me. We all hope the squad can stick together as-is, but realistically speaking, the expendables with financial value are Copeland, Mahinmi, Scola, George Hill.

                      If the choice is trade George Hill or let Lance go to another team, happy trails GH. Much easier to find a caretaker than a productive, emergent playmaker.


                      It's far too early to worry about any of this, though. Winning a championship changes things, even for owners.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?




                        I choose to not worry about next season and enjoy this wonderful season. In Bird we trust.
                        "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          Granger OTOH is gone IMO. That is a given. Granger is not going to be a factor in our salary situation at all nor will he be any kind of true backup plan for losing Stevenson. Maybe that idea gets tossed around as negotiating leverage but TPTB won't be actually going there when the rubber hits the road. I'm not even sure they'd be interested at the vet minimum right now..
                          Why do you think the Pacers have no interest in Granger at all? If the team can't keep Lance why wouldn't they want to keep Granger? It is unlikely that you will find someone better than Granger. To add to that Granger wouldn't have to learn the system or how to play with the other players. It would be idiotic to not want to keep Granger no matter what happens with Lance.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                            If it were me I would trade Copeland for a future draft pick, we are not using him and his best position is the 3 where we have enough players. I would also send Solomon Hill and maybe even Donald Sloan that's 5,386,003 in room right there leaving us 13.6 million, Try and re sign Both Lance and Danny if we can get Danny for a low enough cost but no so low its insulting to him. Pay Lance a starting salary of 10 Million and Danny the rest.

                            Lance is in that sweet spot of potential, we can see his potential but he does not live up to it night after night, will he take the next leap next year??? Not sure but not sure I would be willing to spend 50 million to find out. Danny is a year younger than West, and remember West was out for a while before he came to the Pacers with an Injury as well. I think I would try and Keep Danny over paying Lance 13 million a year. Of course that could turn into a disaster if Lance takes that as motivation to turn into Michael Jordan, or the other we pay him that and he never develops.

                            I am glad I dont have Larry's job.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                              Is it true that for the luxury tax to be in effect they would have to finish next year above the tax? Like if lance is signed and that puts us over into the tax we would have the whole season to find a way to get under it?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Are Indiana Pacers Operating on 1-Year Championship Window?

                                Originally posted by ThA HoyA View Post
                                Is it true that for the luxury tax to be in effect they would have to finish next year above the tax? Like if lance is signed and that puts us over into the tax we would have the whole season to find a way to get under it?
                                Would have till trade deadline next season.

                                This was talked about when Grizz was getting under last year.
                                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X