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

Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

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

  • #31
    Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

    i want us to be a solid playoff team not we'll make the playoffs this season and then blow it next season like some teams from the east did this season

    this is a nice start but this team needs more

    we have some good young guys on this team but we'll need to bring in more talent
    In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

      [QUOTE=Justin Tyme;1209360]
      Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post

      So what happens when Hibbert Collison Hansbrough McRoberts and Rush are all veterans/QUOTE]


      What happens when Rush is traded this off season and McBob isn't re-signed?
      We become less talented? Maybe we can sign some scrubs like Solo and Posey to replace them and play over them?

      I think Rush may not be safe, because of his pot issues, but he seems to be the type of guy you want coming off the bench on a championship contender. Why let him go if he has decided to only smoke on the offseason? Plays great perimeter defense and can hit the three in crunch time. He can be had for cheap.

      I also think letting McRoberts go would be a mistake because he is the best passer on the team, or at least in the conversation with Collison and Stephenson. He just gets the hustle plays that matter. I see him as a Jeff Foster with a more polished all around game. Why let him walk if he can be had for 3-4 mil a year for 3 years? Hasn't he only improved with time and is only 23 years old? He would only be 26 when his deal is up.
      Last edited by Midcoasted; 04-07-2011, 03:27 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

        Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
        I've been watching the Pacers since you were born and I'm only 27. You are one of the most pessimistic posters on the board. You know nothing about Indiana basketball or how high our players potentials are and you proved it with like 10 words. I really think the quality of posts here at PD have went down since you've spewed out 8000 posts in a year with some of the worse garbage I've ever seen come out of a diehards mouth.
        ....because he's trying to be realistic? You're crossing the line here.

        spewing venom is not the same thing as pointing out reality. Don't attack posters because they aren't kool-aid addicts.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

          Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
          i want us to be a solid playoff team not we'll make the playoffs this season and then blow it next season like some teams from the east did this season

          this is a nice start but this team needs more

          we have some good young guys on this team but we'll need to bring in more talent
          I'd still like to see these guys get a full summer under this coach that won't smash their confidence into the ground with a 10 lb sledge hammer after a decent start to the season. I could see us taking the 4-6 spot in the East next year with this group.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            ....because he's trying to be realistic? You're crossing the line here.

            spewing venom is not the same thing as pointing out reality. Don't attack posters because they aren't kool-aid addicts.
            Well there has to be a balance with everything in life. He attacked me first and made a mockery of my whole argument by saying most of it should be green, when only a small portion should be considered a candidate for green in my mind.

            Don't attack posters because they aren't negativity addicts. This is the only reputable Pacers board on the net. We don't have enough homers here. We have way to many pessimists and doubters. If this is the only way I can help to balance that then so be it. I'll take the most extreme stand and stand alone. Many other posters can congregate on the other side of the spectrum and think we have no shot and our talent just isn't good enough. They can also think there's all this talent running around out there that we will have to acquire before we compete. It isn't easy to come by.

            Talent isn't everything. Chemisty, cohesion, and team play all define a team. Not just this notion that we have to become more talented with big moves that could backfire and tie our hands for years to come this offseason.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
              Well there has to be a balance with everything in life. He attacked me first and made a mockery of my whole argument by saying most of it should be green, when only a small portion should be considered a candidate for green in my mind.
              I said the same thing....others have implied the same thing.

              Don't attack posters because they aren't negativity addicts. This is the only reputable Pacers board on the net. We don't have enough homers here.
              ...you ever consider that might be why this is the only reputable Pacers board on the net? Nobody wants to step into a rah-rah fest that lives outside of reality.

              We have way to many pessimists and doubters. If this is the only way I can help to balance that then so be it. I'll take the most extreme stand and stand alone.
              ....that isn't balancing anything out. It's making it worse.

              Talent isn't everything. Chemisty, cohesion, and team play all define a team. Not just this notion that we have to become more talented with big moves that could backfire and tie our hands for years to come this offseason.
              ....all of which have nothign to do with everything that preceded it.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                I read the first post and thought, "This is a really good parody."

                Then I read all the subsequent posts...
                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                When I think of a team making the playoffs, I don't think of it being 36-43. Those 36 wins can turn into another 1 or 2 wins, but still an under .500 team. Basically, this team will finish with the same record of Jimmy's 1st 2 seasons. Bird's 1st 3 years as PBO is 102-144 with this year so far as 36-43. That's not exactly something to hang one's hat on. The ONLY reason this team is in the playoffs is b/c the EC has terrible teams. To me it's a consolation prize of being the better of the worst, and that doesn't say much to me.

                I won't go into Bird's assets or liabilities, as I'm on record as to what they are, BUT I will give credit when credit is due in that Bird has changed the culture of the team he took over as PBO. That in itself has been a wonderful achievement when others on this board would trade for non-milk drinkers and their baggage all for winning no matter what the cost.

                As far as the thread, it is homerism at it's finest no matter how misconstrude, BUT I can understand the over zealous optimism with making the playoffs. I can see where Bird has laid a foundation for another to build the future, and I can say thanks Mr. Bird for all your effort you put into it.
                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                I laid out a well thought out homer post, and noone can even dispute it with facts. Am I dellusional? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell. There's a chance I'm right. I still don't think anyone can show me a GM that has done more with less.

                Pacer4Ever, shouldn't you be watching the promising Clippers finish with a worse record than us? I read your posts and you really think Eric Gordon is better than everyone on our team and I lol. People really think the Clippers have more talent than we do? Damn that talent has them all of 31 wins right now, and I'd bet our team and starting 5 is younger. How long have they been in lottery land and went nowhere? Since they were in existence? Sure they play in the Western Conference, but all the more reason they will be in lottery land no matter how good Griffin and Gordon become.

                It doesn't surprise me at all that some of the posters calling this a paradox, or saying my whole post should be green font, are the posters on this board who would use things like "least talented team in NBA" to describe our boys. We didn't go 19-16 by only beating up on the bad. We made it by beating the Knicks twice, Charlotte handily, the Bucks, the Bulls, and the Celtics. Imagine if we would have beat all the teams worse than us what our record would be.

                I'm sick and tired of posters here saying Hibbert is the worst starting center in the NBA, Collison is no good, Bird only drafted Hans because he is white, McRoberts doesn't belong in the NBA, George will take three years to even play. It goes on and on. What, I'm just supposed to the believe all this negative hype and live in "reality" when alot of posters here use their negative "realities" like everyone one is supposed to believe it as fact?

                Well I might not be totally right, but I'm closer to being right than the posters who look down on our Pacers. At least bandwagon fans believe in their team and players, or they wouldn't hop on the bandwagon. What's the point of even being a fan if you think so lowly of everything that Pacers have done the past few years?

                pessimistic? I guess all the posters in this thread are pessimistic also and they are all mocking you also? Why people take stuff personal i will never know it is pretty sad that you do. Im just being real. Saying the Pacers have a better Core than Clippers is so laughable. Most experts consider the Clippers young core 2nd only to OKC. I have never said EJ is better than any Pacer however the Clippers value EJ very very very higly that is why i say they are not trading him for the players on the Pacers. They refused to trade him for Melo who is better than anyone on the Pacers and Melo has more trade Value than anyone on the Pacers. It is how the Pacers viewed DG a few years ago when they made himn untradeable. Im sorry i am not a homer in the way most on PD are and if you are gonna attack me for not being a homer just keep bashing.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  ....because he's trying to be realistic? You're crossing the line here.

                  spewing venom is not the same thing as pointing out reality. Don't attack posters because they aren't kool-aid addicts.
                  Very true if we had the Lakers roster or OKC or Chicago you know i would be the first one to pat Larry Bird on the back

                  for buliding a great team and would proably be a homer going about it.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    I have never said EJ is better than any Pacer however the Clippers value EJ very very very higly that is why i say they are not trading him for the players on the Pacers.
                    I'll say he's better than any Pacer.
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                      Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                      I've been watching the Pacers since you were born and I'm only 27. You are one of the most pessimistic posters on the board. You know nothing about Indiana basketball or how high our players potentials are and you proved it with like 10 words. I really think the quality of posts here at PD have went down since you've spewed out 8000 posts in a year with some of the worse garbage I've ever seen come out of a diehards mouth.
                      What no get off my lawn? Seriously get off your high horse. Pessimistic? The poor kids been riding Paul George's jock since we drafted him. I'd say he's had a healthy mix of pessimism and optimism.

                      And you wanna talk about a post that brings down the quality of discussion on PD we might as well just frame this one as the prime example.
                      Last edited by Trader Joe; 04-07-2011, 04:13 PM.


                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                        I'll say he's better than any Pacer.
                        Yeah, I'd probably agree with this.


                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                          Whatever this dude is smoking has got to be awesome.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                            I don't think this was really Bird's true goal.

                            Yeah it was to make the playoffs, but I didn't think he wanted to do it with us a still being a sub .500 team.

                            This team still needs a lot of work and bring in some key players via trade or free agency.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              I'll say he's better than any Pacer.
                              He'd be the best player here since Reggie.

                              I'd love to add EJ. He'd make us a hell of a playoff team for years.

                              He plays like a star SG.

                              I'd live with not settling and signing anyone this offseason and make a strong push to get EJ in 2012 most likely by S&T.
                              Last edited by Trophy; 04-07-2011, 04:19 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Larry Bird = Winning, 3 Year Plan a Success

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                If Larry trades for anyone this summer it will not be veterans. He has proven time and time again that his goal is to build through the development of the young players. Sure we got Collison through a trade, but Vogel has really started developing him into a real threat...

                                If anything this is a plea for Larry to hang around a couple of more years and allow Vogel to do the same and see this thing out...
                                Are you absolutely certain you would want Bird to stay?

                                I'm asking because Bird is the highest ranking member of the TPTB and he has stated throughout the year that this team is lacking a veteran presence.

                                So, Bird's goal is not to build THROUGH the development of young players, but rather because of the increase in value of his tradeable assets by developing these young players.

                                If Bird is not able to trade for a starting veteran or two this summer, or sign a couple as free agents, it will NOT be because of a lack of trying. If you continue to believe otherwise, it is only because you have not been listening and reading.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X