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

Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

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

  • #91
    Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

    For those suggesting offering Granger in a deal for Paul, please explain what you're hoping to achieve.

    How will a gutted Pacer team be any better than the Hornets team he's on now? It doesn't make sense for us or Paul to do that. All we'd be getting is a 2-year rental on a team that wouldn't even make the playoffs. We'd be no better than we are now.

    Now if you feel George is capable of filling Granger's shoes then maybe you have a point. But that's far from known at this stage. And when/if he becomes a top SF, it'd probably be at the end of CP3's contract.

    Now if we can trade for him without including Granger, then I'm all for it because we'd have two all-star level players to build around.

    I see any trading for Paul involving Granger as a lateral move.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

      Originally posted by pacerDU View Post
      I see any trading for Paul involving Granger as a lateral move.
      Would it even be that? I doubt trying to trade him again would get you Granger-level back. And if he opts out and signs with another team via free agency, you just plain lose out.

      You would have to retain value by keeping him under contract and in Indy (which would be an upgrade talent wise, and maybe a bit of an increase in W's) or hope that you can negotiate a S&T.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

        Originally posted by DocHolliday View Post
        Looking at it from the perspective of the suits working in the NBA's ivory tower, it's not a bad thing to have all the good teams be in the 8 largest markets, while the rest of the league serves as fodder for their highlight reels.
        The question, of course, being what owner(s) want to have a team that only sells out a few times a year and can't afford to operate because it gets no airplay or hype except as the posterized?

        Do you just let your big-8 owners own a second team that serves as cannon-fodder?


        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
        The golden age of The Finals was also a 20-team race for fourth place, where those teams had no chance of cracking the top three.
        Doesn't mean it was a sustainable business model nor that something can't or shouldn't be done to change it.

        Is it possible at all that one of the reasons the NFL overtakes other sports in popularity is because fans can actually think their team will have a shot at winning every few years?
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Is it possible at all that one of the reasons the NFL overtakes other sports in popularity is because fans can actually think their team will have a shot at winning every few years?
          No, that's crazy talk.....

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
            Larry was the poster child for the unbalanced NBA in the 1980's that needed the salary cap to survive. Surely you've heard of the Larry Bird rule?

            The NBA had instituted a "hard" salary cap in the early 80's to try to bring some balance. The league was seriously at risk to contract from 22 teams down to about a dozen. (Who was losing money? Cavaliers, Bullets, Pacers, Hawks, Braves/Clippers, Nets, Nuggets, Spurs, KC Kings, Warriors, maybe more.)

            Then the Celtics started whining that they couldn't afford to resign Bird, and the Bird rule was created so that the Celtics could circumvent the salary cap (thus making it the soft cap that we have today) and the NBA continued down its trend during the 80s were every October you could successfully pick the Western Conference champion (Lakers) and had a pretty good chance of picking the Eastern Conference finalists (Celtcs and generally either Philly or Milwaukee until Zeke and Dumars led the Pistons to respectability.)

            The golden age of The Finals was also a 20-team race for fourth place, where those teams had no chance of cracking the top three.
            Good points.

            But just because Larry was the subject of all that doesn't mean he's not capable of organizing a revolution against it.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Is it possible at all that one of the reasons the NFL overtakes other sports in popularity is because fans can actually think their team will have a shot at winning every few years?
              Detroit fans call bull****.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                Detroit fans call bull****.
                Exceptions don't kill the rule.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  The question, of course, being what owner(s) want to have a team that only sells out a few times a year and can't afford to operate because it gets no airplay or hype except as the posterized?

                  Do you just let your big-8 owners own a second team that serves as cannon-fodder?




                  Doesn't mean it was a sustainable business model nor that something can't or shouldn't be done to change it.

                  Is it possible at all that one of the reasons the NFL overtakes other sports in popularity is because fans can actually think their team will have a shot at winning every few years?
                  Meh...maybe to some degree.

                  The NFL has a number of natural advantages, first and foremost being that it is tailor-made for television. It has the shortest season, in terms of number of games, and it's Sunday afternoon slot makes it event viewing with virtually no competition. It provides its action in short, bite-sized bursts that allow for both commercials and ample social interaction.

                  This allows the league to get incredibly lucrative television contracts, which then helps drive parity through Rozelle's brilliant revenue sharing program.

                  But, more than anything else, in my opinion, is that the NFL is one of the few professional sports that gets even casual fans to watch games that don't involve their teams on a regular basis. For several years now, I have gotten together with my long-time friend and my brother on Monday nights during the season to watch MNF - regardless of the matchup. In all of my life, I can only remember one time that I have gotten together with friends with the express purpose of watching a non-Pacer NBA game - (Game 1 of the 1998 NBA Finals between the Jazz and the Bulls - I had just bought a new house, and I had some friends over to watch the game.)

                  Don't laugh, but NFL Fantasy football is hands down the easiest Fantasy Sport. Nothing, and I mean nothing, changes your interest level in a random game than having one of your players playing.

                  The parity thing doesn't hurt, but most of it is just football. (There's a great essay by Chuck Klosterman in Eating the Dinosaur about the appeal of football.)
                  Last edited by count55; 07-22-2010, 02:48 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Exceptions don't kill the rule.
                    No, but it was funny!
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                      Originally posted by count55 View Post

                      The NFL has a number of natural advantages, first and foremost being that it is tailor-made for television. It has the shortest season, in terms of number of games, and it's Sunday afternoon slot makes it event viewing with virtually no competition. It provides it's action in short, bite-sized bursts that allow for both commercials and ample social interaction.

                      This allows the league to get incredibly lucrative television contracts, which then helps drive parity through Rozelle's brilliant revenue sharing program.

                      But, more than anything else, in my opinion, is that the NFL is one of the few professional sports that gets even casual fans to watch games that don't involve their teams on a regular basis. For several years now, I have gotten together with my long-time friend and my brother on Monday nights during the season to watch MNF - regardless of the matchup. In all of my life, I can only remember one time that I have gotten together with friends with the express purpose of watching a non-Pacer NBA game - (Game 1 of the 1998 NBA Finals between the Jazz and the Bulls - I had just bought a new house, and I had some friends over to watch the game.)
                      I have posted similar thoughts in trying to explain the interest in football, mainly NFL football. College football is consistantly very popular, but nothing like the NFL. Game #7 of the NBA Finals a month ago was 28.3 million and the BCS championship game was 30.2 M. college football benefits from the feeling that every game is important during the regular season. Can't compare the Superbowl to other games because that is a national holiday, but the AFC and NFC champpinship games typically get $45 - $55 million viewers.

                      I think the NFL has many advantages as you mention count besides the actual game (which I don't like myself) But the media coverage of the NFL is excellent, much better than any other sport. The time of year the playoffs takes place helps too, January and early February - what else is there to do. Plus the scheduling is huge, every Sunday, so it is easy to watch every game and if you never miss a game, you are a lot less likely to choose to miss a game. Compare to the pacers when there is a game Tuesday night, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday. Difficult to tell your wife, i am going to watch 4 games this week. So you pick and choose and the more games you miss the more likely you are to miss future games.

                      Count as you mention football is much easier to watch with a group of people because of the dead time between plays, plus there are about 10 exciting plays during a game and that makes great highlights. football also has a much wider selection of different play scenerios, basketball it is pretty much similar plays over and over again.
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-22-2010, 02:57 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Exceptions don't kill the rule.
                        What about the Browns?

                        Jaguars?

                        I guess what counts as every few years. I'd say there are plenty of teams in the NFL that haven't been relevant since 2005 (last year of true relevance for the Pacers), that still have solid fanbases or are part of the NFL's machine. The NFL has been dominated for the most part over the past decade by the Steelers, Pats, and Colts.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                          Interesting analysis from Henry Abbott (as always)

                          http://espn.go.com/blog/TrueHoop/pos...l-the-pressure

                          Businesses make or lose money based on percentage points here on there. A dispirited superstar won't shut the place down or anything, but it saps everybody's ability to believe in the big picture plan, which is more than enough to drag a team from a good business position to a bad one.

                          And that's why the Hornets are in a very different position than the Lakers were. The Lakers are The Lakers! One of the more revered team brands in sports. They make money come rain or shine, and it almost never rains in L.A. anyway. They can play chicken with a player like Kobe Bryant and make a credible case that he is not their only route to success.

                          In New Orleans, the power imbalance tips in favor of the player. The Hornets have a rookie coach, a rookie GM, a small market and an owner with one foot out the door. Paul is far and away the best thing the Hornets have going for them, which gives him leverage other players in his position wouldn't have.

                          That's why league sources with knowledge of the situation say they think the most likely situation is that at some point Paul will be traded. And in that case, the team would be expected to ask for the pieces to fuel a money-saving rebuild: Expiring contracts, draft picks, and affordable young players. That way, the team could sell fans on the future, cut expenses all while keeping hope alive for the long-term.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                            I think Paul might be dissappointed at first, if he were traded here, but I also feel that he would end up loving the organization. Don't underestimate Larry Bird's pull with young players. Same with Michael Jordan. I would think that we would want to keep Granger just based on the "All-Star" stigma that is out there right now. If we include Granger in the deal, then we lose the star power it would take to help keep Paul here and bring in more talent based around he and Granger.

                            That said, I would offer them any and all players we have not named Granger or Hibbert to build around. If it came down to it that we were forced to trade them, at least we would have solid wings still, although rather young still. It might be a lot harder to keep Paul around if we trade Granger and Hibbert. Plus, the likelihood of him bolting would leave us exponentially screwed for giving up our two best players.

                            Looking at it from New Orleans standpoint, you would want as much salary reduction as possible, because your already bad attendance would fall off the face of the earth. They could still be profitable if they weren't paying anybody but rookies for the next couple of years. They do have a solid young core of players, and would look to rebuild similar to what OKC did. They would clearly be a top 5 lottery team IMO if they dealt Paul. They are only a borderline playoff team with him anyway. If we send a bunch of young pieces to fill out their long-term rotation, I would think they would have to take it.

                            Pul George would be able to come in and play SF. Quicy Pondexter would backup up he and Thornton on the wings. They have Collison. If we threw in Hansborough, that is a marketable name at PF who would be solid for them, assuming he is healthy. Also, at center they would need to focus their attention on the center position. This is probably where they would want Hibbert in any deal we do with them. At that point our front court would probably become more of a weakness than it is now.


                            They
                            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                            Comment


                            • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                              I say pull the trigger and do whatever we can besides giving up granger or hibbert.
                              2012: Pacers return to glory

                              Paul George All Day

                              Comment


                              • Re: Not to beat out the RSS feed, but some news on Chris Paul

                                Originally posted by Pacers2012 View Post
                                I say pull the trigger and do whatever we can besides giving up granger or hibbert.
                                It's probably been said here already ................. but why ??

                                After a year, he's a FA and he's outta here and on to NY or wherever. The Pacers are NOT on his 'list'.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X