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

Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

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

  • #16
    Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

    Originally posted by Ryan View Post
    0% chance they trade him. 0. Is the ROY
    They might trade him for PG. That is exactly the type of trade the Pacers should be looking for if they can't retain Paul. Saric, a role player and a pick.


    Name-calling signature removed

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

      Joe Inglis - very versatile on offense with a great 3pt shot + a solid defender.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

        Originally posted by Banta View Post
        They might trade him for PG. That is exactly the type of trade the Pacers should be looking for if they can't retain Paul. Saric, a role player and a pick.
        Well. Ill bump the odds up significantly if you're going to include a top 10 player like PG

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

          Jonathan Simmons, Aaron Baynes, Jodie Meeks, Patrick Patterson, Jonas Jarenko, James Johnson, Ersan Illyasova, Thabo Sefelosha, Shelvin Mack, Adrian Payne, James Young, Tyler Ennis, Beno Udrih, Alan Anderson, Luke Babbit, Thomas Robison, Ian Clark, Jeff Withey, Mike Muscala, Derrick Williams.
          Last edited by I Love P; 05-05-2017, 11:49 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

            Ennis was legit when he got pt. I think he's the new Suns PG. Bledsoe is gone imo

            As far as Jerebko and James Young... they're yours.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

              Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
              Throughout the years, our best players have been almost exclusively drafted or acquired via trade, as we all know this isn't a major free agent destination for most young stars. We've pulled a few, like DWest, but the list is short. But the real cornerstones like Reggie, Danny, and Paul were drafted, and the guys like JO, Jalen, Artest, Hibbert were all via trades.

              We've all been talking about the "big fish" trades. Moving PG for draft picks, moving Monta+pick for guys like Melo or Dwight who are in bad situations, or even moving Myles for a guy like Butler. But I haven't seen much talk about the hidden gems. We got JO for Dale Davis. DD was coming off an All-Star appearance on the strength of his defense and rebounding, but scoring just 10ppg didn't exactly make him a complete two-way player. I still hear the echoes of his free throw attempts hitting the back of the rim.

              So, let's take a look around the league and see if there are any of those JO-type guys hiding behind veterans on contenders that we could pilfer for a similar deal. Maybe they don't ever become an MVP-candidate like JO did, but let's say guys who could potentially become All-Stars if they get the chance. Where are they hiding?

              Porzingis. Knicks might deal him. He seems unhappy there.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                Originally posted by Ryan View Post
                Ennis was legit when he got pt. I think he's the new Suns PG. Bledsoe is gone imo

                As far as Jerebko and James Young... they're yours.
                He put up numbers but nobody out here thinks he's the answer. Suns fans are dying for one of the top point guards in this draft.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                  I still like John Jenkins in a Seth Curry role although he's not in the NBA right now and I'm not sure where he ended up this season.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                    Its less realistic to get a few of these guys than others but:

                    Joe Ingles, Jaymichel Green, Jonathan Simmons, James Johnson, Ben McLemore, Ian Clark, Tony Snell, Darren Collison

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                      McGee, the guys has made himself some money.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                        The Heat might not be able to afford to keep Willie Reed. I think we need what he brings to the game.

                        I'm even higher on the potential of the Warriors Kevin Looney. My goodness is he going to be something special in a couple seasons.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                          Two guys that we could plug into the starting lineup right away, Derrick Favors and Allen Crabbe. Both of their teams are hurting capwise, Favors has fallen out of the starting lineup, if the price is right, that could be the whole offseason.

                          Front court Turner, Favors, Thad, Seriphim

                          SF PG, GR3

                          Backcourt Teague, Crabbe, Lance, Joe

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                            Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                            The Heat might not be able to afford to keep Willie Reed. I think we need what he brings to the game.

                            I'm even higher on the potential of the Warriors Kevin Looney. My goodness is he going to be something special in a couple seasons.
                            The question is whether KP recognizes that we need a bruiser next to Myles or not.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                              Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                              The Heat might not be able to afford to keep Willie Reed. I think we need what he brings to the game.
                              I was thinking the same originally... However, Willie Reed falls under the quite rare clause called "Gilbert Arenas provision".

                              And that means that offers to Reed are limited under following rules (from cbafaq.com) :

                              "Teams are now limited in the salary they can offer in an offer sheet to a restricted free agent with one or two years in the league. The first-year salary in the offer sheet cannot be greater than the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (see question number 25). Limiting the first-year salary in this way enables the player's original team to match the offer sheet by using the Early Bird exception (if applicable -- see question number 25), or Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception (provided they have it and haven't used it already)1.

                              The second-year salary in such an offer sheet is limited to the standard 4.5% raise. The third-year salary can jump considerably -- it is allowed to be as high as it would have been had the first-year salary not been limited by this rule to the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception2. The salary in the fourth season may increase (or decrease) by up to 4.1% of the salary in the third season. The offer sheet can only contain the large jump in the third season if it provides the highest salary allowed in the first two seasons, it is fully guaranteed, and it contains no bonuses of any kind.

                              If the raise in the third season exceeds the standard raise (4.5% of the salary in the first season of the contract), then an additional restriction exists. In order to determine how large the offer can be, the team doesn't just have to fit the first-year salary under the cap. Instead, they must fit the average salary in the entire contract under the cap. So a team $8 million under the cap is limited to offering a total of $24 million over three years, or $32 million over four years. If the offer sheet does not contain a third-season raise larger than 4.5% of the first-season salary, then they only have to fit the first season salary under the cap.

                              Putting this all together, if a team that is $9 million under the cap in 2011-12 wants to submit a four-year offer sheet, and wants to provide a large raise in the third season, they can offer a total of $36 million over four years. The first-year salary is limited to the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception, or $5 million. The second-year salary will be $5.225 million (4.5% raise). This leaves $25.775 million to be distributed over the final two seasons of the contract, with a 4.1% raise from year three to year four. So the entire contract looks like this:

                              Season Salary Notes
                              1 $5,000,000 Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level amount for 2011-12
                              2 $5,225,000 4.5% raise over season 1
                              3 $12,628,613 This is the amount that yields $25.775 million over the final two seasons with a 4.1% raise3
                              4 $13,146,387 Raise is 4.1% of season 3 salary
                              Total $36,000,000 Average is $9 million, which equals the team's cap room

                              For the team making this offer, this contract would count for $9.0 million (i.e., the average salary in the contract) of team salary in each of the four seasons if they sign the player. If the player's prior team matches the offer and keeps the player, then the actual salary in each season counts as team salary.4 The player's original team is allowed to use any available exception (e.g., the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level or the Early Bird) to match the offer.

                              Since a team must fit the average salary from the entire contract under the cap in order to offer the large third-season raise, it must have some amount of cap room above the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception amount in order to utilize this provision. For example, suppose the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception amount is $5 million, and a team wants to provide a four-year offer sheet. If they want to offer a third-year raise greater than 4.5%, their cap room will be determined by the contract's average salary, so the total contract must pay $20.4 million or less. However, since a four-year offer starting at $5 million with standard 4.5% raises would total $21.35 million, the Arenas provision would be ineffective unless it offered more than this amount. So the team in this example would need at least $5.3375 million in cap room in order to utilize the provision."


                              That rule makes it much easier for Miami to match and keep Reed...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Where are the hidden gems this off-season?

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                The question is whether KP recognizes that we need a bruiser next to Myles or not.
                                I would say, with all his talk about getting tougher and more physical, he knows the needs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X