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

Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

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

  • #16
    Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

    Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
    Hot Damn!!!!! I'm ready!!!!! Son of a B!tch if someone would hand me a long sword I'd charge the Scottish fields and slay the English by the hundreds!!!!!
    Haha!
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

      The part that just hit me .... is what if this team is a 45 game or more win team? That cap space looks even better this offseason. We wouldn't just be a team with cap space (like New Jersey), we'd be a team with cap space that was on the rise, even without a big signing. Players would see that and this place would be a much bigger free agent destination.

      After what we've been through the last 5 years, this franchise, and in particular, the fan base deserves that.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

        Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
        The part that just hit me .... is what if this team is a 45 game or more win team? That cap space looks even better this offseason. We wouldn't just be a team with cap space (like New Jersey), we'd be a team with cap space that was on the rise, even without a big signing. Players would see that and this place would be a much bigger free agent destination.

        After what we've been through the last 5 years, this franchise, and in particular, the fan base deserves that.

        Our team is so young if we do become a 45 win team a lot of the money will need to be saved so we can sign Hibbert, and Collison in two years, and then Tyler the following year. Not to mention Josh is a free agent next summer if he keeps improving he could get a decent paycheck.

        We will still have money to sign someone we just have to make sure we are still under the cap to sign our young guys later.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

          The game at Philly on Wednesday will be a great telling point, as it will be the first game where a team sees us for the second time.

          We'll see how much of our success is surprise and how much is really from a strong new direction.
          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


          • #20
            Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

            I am trying really hard not to get too optimistic. I was optimistic that "this year was going to be different" after the Boston win last year, which turned out to be just a dreadful season. I was optimistic the year before that when we beat the **** out of Boston really early in the season, The fact that we even regressed last year from the previous really boring couple of years prior to that really said something to me.

            The miracle of trading Troy for a real PG helps more than one can imagine, and I think Paul George is looking like he's going to have the ability to really contribute in limited time for us this year, whereas in the past few years, I felt like we were playing rookies just to develop them, even though they looked woefully out of place and unproductive most of the time. I like Hibbert, Rush, and Hansbrough, but George could be really special and the first indicator of that has been his relative productivity in these first couple of games compared to that of the former 3 rookies.

            But for now, I'm totally keeping my guard up and assuming 36 or so wins is par for this team. I am tired of the false hope and can't lead myself to believe in these guys completely.

            However, I am more invested in rooting for the Pacers to win this season. I have read where Al Horford is having problems agreeing to an extension with the Hawks. If the Pacers make the playoffs this year and make a little noise, does he see Indiana as the possible OKC of the East? Either way, winning this year could net us a huge free agent. But like someone else said, we need to keep money in the bank to resign Hibbert, who is going to command a huge deal, resign probably McRoberts and Hansbrough, and maybe Rush.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

              Originally posted by idioteque View Post
              The fact that we even regressed last year from the previous really boring couple of years prior to that really said something to me.
              You were BORED two years ago? I hope you are just forgetting under the weight of last season, but playing most teams to within 3-5 points all year might have been frustrating but certainly not boring.
              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


              • #22
                Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                You were BORED two years ago? I hope you are just forgetting under the weight of last season, but playing most teams to within 3-5 points all year might have been frustrating but certainly not boring.
                Your both right here in a way.

                Yes indeed keeping games close and enteresting certainly was far better than the life sucking 20-30 point losses we suffered through last season.

                But I think what he is saying is the style of play is more entertaining than seeing mostly distance jumpers that sometimes fell and a far more physical play from the interior and an increased emphasis on deflections and steal from the wings and guards.

                So while you are correct that there were certainly some nail biters he is correct in that some of us prefer this style of play and the other style of play is just boring.

                Of course that is a matter of opinion of course because I do recognize that while I do not like the three point shot, others love it.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  You were BORED two years ago? I hope you are just forgetting under the weight of last season, but playing most teams to within 3-5 points all year might have been frustrating but certainly not boring.
                  I think it was boring because we didn't have a bright future, there was nothing to look forward too, the young guys were not getting playing time and the likes of Rasho, Marquis and F Murray were playing most of the minutes.

                  This is what I been trying to explaing to you in the last two years, young players bring hope even if they lose, the games are more excited because you are happy to see them grow instead of watching a bunch of old players that everybody knew they were just prolonging failure keeping the Pacers in limbo.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    I think it was boring because we didn't have a bright future, there was nothing to look forward too, the young guys were not getting playing time and the likes of Rasho, Marquis and F Murray were playing most of the minutes.

                    This is what I been trying to explaing to you in the last two years, young players bring hope even if they lose, the games are more excited because you are happy to see them grow instead of watching a bunch of old players that everybody knew they were just prolonging failure keeping the Pacers in limbo.
                    Ok, this as well.

                    I know Bills is going to come on here and disagree but I think you make a good point here and I think more than a few people agree with your thoughts on this.

                    Bill will have his points as well but again it is all a matter of personnal opinion on this.


                    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                      im sticking with my original estimation that this is a 40 win team potentially, give or take a few wins.. in a weird way i dont want to see us win more than 45 yet i really do. i think this is the last season where we will not make the playoffs, thus the last opportunity at a top 10 draft pick. however, who knows what will be available so i'd rather have the wins. just like last season so many were pi$$ed we put together that win streak at the end of the season.. but hell what if paul george turns out to be a better player than evan turner?? it could happen folks.

                      all im sayin here is.. i would like to see us acquire one more young player, before we go back on the rise for several seasons. i dont think a stud FA is an option, and as many have eluded to.. were gonna have to have space available to resign guys like Hibbert, DC, George, Hansbro, McBob, even Danny down the road.. its gonna be real interesting to see how Bird handles the cap space next offseason.

                      im still hoping this team wins 45 and gets in the playoffs.. but ending up in the lottery and a top 12 pick and another young player might not be so bad either. not real sure.. because with rush/george and hansbro/mcbob im cautiously optimistic.. ideally we do not make the playoffs and end up with a top 3 pick, then were really set with a young nucleus.. but realistically i think we have a playoff team.

                      of course the new CBA next year will impact our decision making as well going forward. for right now i think im just gonna enjoy the journey and watching the developmnt of this young team. pacers are in great shape going forward i believe in comparison to other teams who are going to be way over the cap next year with the new cba set to take place.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        You were BORED two years ago? I hope you are just forgetting under the weight of last season, but playing most teams to within 3-5 points all year might have been frustrating but certainly not boring.
                        I think what I mean is that when someone takes a broader look at Pacer history from say, 2000-2020, no one is going to view the past few years as particularly significant. Yes, the (then) rookies got some time and showed a few strides, but our main contributors turned out to be insignificant pieces that led the Pacers to nothing but the lottery. And I'm not blasting your point of view of playing our best players at all, I'm just saying at that time, our best players weren't very good.

                        This year may be a year will people think, well, 2010-2011 was a real turning point for the Pacers when they once again started to become a relevant franchise. Maybe.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          The game at Philly on Wednesday will be a great telling point, as it will be the first game where a team sees us for the second time.

                          We'll see how much of our success is surprise and how much is really from a strong new direction.


                          QFT!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                            Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                            There were some great wins in that 5 game win streak, like beating Boston and the 3 games before that were blowouts where the Pacers were playing great defense and dominating. I was a believer after that... then Troy came back from injury and it all went to hell...
                            He ain't coming back this year.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              He ain't coming back this year.
                              I may have underestimated Collison somewhat, but my initial reaction to the Murphy trade remains intact.

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              I love the trade and I'm not nearly as high on Collison as you. I just love it that Murphy is gone. There's no way that it can be a negative. If Collison turns out to suck and be TJ Ford 2.0 it's still a good trade because of what he got rid of. Addition by subraction.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Kravitz: This is what hope looks like

                                Great great feeling out there. I know they will have time to prepare for us now because they've seen us such a short time ago, but the same as us, we've seen them and no doubt will be preparing for them as well. Area 55 is just wonderful.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X