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

IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

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

  • #16
    Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

    Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
    Tanking meaning play young guys a lot to develop them - I'm good

    Tanking meaning guys are out there chucking and dogging it - I'm not
    I think tanking has more to do with the front office than the players. Everybody is playing to get paid. If guys are out there "chucking and dogging it", that's going to affect their ability to secure a future contract. No player is going to do that. The only way the Pacers tank is if they break up the core of G-Hill, West, and Hibbert. I would say trading any two of those three would put us in that category.

    It's going to be interesting to see how Larry handles this. Do you make a trade? Do you use the lost player exemption? If they stand pat and especially if they utilize the exemption to bring in another player, that would tell me they absolutely are not tanking. Just how good they will be is a whole other question.
    Last edited by Believe_in_blue; 08-03-2014, 07:26 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

      We won't tank...even when we were really bad and should have tanked we always fought for that last playoff spot. But it would be nice to have a player like Mudiay
      "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


      Comment


      • #18
        Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

        Well at least you are wasting no time about starting to panic about the attendance for next year.

        You know my answer, I'm right across from you for every game so there is that.

        But I want to address the attendance now before it gets here.

        Accept it now, attendance will drop. I don't know how much it will drop but it will drop, I think we sold out almost every game after the midway point of the season.

        Here is where you and I are going to disagree. The casual's & I'm talking about the real casuals here not the fans who stayed away, will come and support a winner. Well they also might come out if you have a superstar but now sans Paul we have no animal.

        So to me if there ever was a season where the management just told us, hey we were dealt a mighty blow and we knew that the age of some of our older players (west) was starting to be an issue so we need to take a step back for a year and get a little younger and develop some talent, this would be the year to do it.

        We have already seen the low. The O'Brien years was as low as you are going to get in this town, what you had on those nights were the die hards and that is about it.

        Look I am opposed to tanking in the traditional sense, I think it breeds a losing culture if you tank. However there is a difference between getting younger and more athletic and just not winning all that much.

        Granted its semantics but to me there is a difference. I would never ever advocate giving away players for nothing, I want young players in return unless we can get a high draft pick then you go with that. However none of our players are going to bring in a high draft pick.

        I think the fans are smart enough to know that this season is a lost cause and will buy tickets accordingly. I can't blame someone for not dropping big bucks to come to the fieldhouse this year. I already have so you know I'll be there.

        There really is no right or wrong answer here.


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

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          Well at least you are wasting no time about starting to panic about the attendance for next year.

          You know my answer, I'm right across from you for every game so there is that.

          But I want to address the attendance now before it gets here.

          Accept it now, attendance will drop. I don't know how much it will drop but it will drop, I think we sold out almost every game after the midway point of the season.

          Here is where you and I are going to disagree. The casual's & I'm talking about the real casuals here not the fans who stayed away, will come and support a winner. Well they also might come out if you have a superstar but now sans Paul we have no animal.

          So to me if there ever was a season where the management just told us, hey we were dealt a mighty blow and we knew that the age of some of our older players (west) was starting to be an issue so we need to take a step back for a year and get a little younger and develop some talent, this would be the year to do it.

          We have already seen the low. The O'Brien years was as low as you are going to get in this town, what you had on those nights were the die hards and that is about it.

          Look I am opposed to tanking in the traditional sense, I think it breeds a losing culture if you tank. However there is a difference between getting younger and more athletic and just not winning all that much.

          Granted its semantics but to me there is a difference. I would never ever advocate giving away players for nothing, I want young players in return unless we can get a high draft pick then you go with that. However none of our players are going to bring in a high draft pick.

          I think the fans are smart enough to know that this season is a lost cause and will buy tickets accordingly. I can't blame someone for not dropping big bucks to come to the fieldhouse this year. I already have so you know I'll be there.

          There really is no right or wrong answer here.
          Yeah it's tough for me this year even thinking about the 1 game they go to Phoenix if I want to go or not. I surely won't be getting it early and depends a lot on how the season is going. Depends on day of week and all that, much harder motivation this year sadly.
          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

          ----------------- Reggie Miller

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

            I ride til I die.

            I already found a PG wristband that was being given the season before last during the push before his first all-star bid. I plan on wearing it until PG returns. And yes, I fully expect a skinny tan line on my wrist.

            Last edited by Sandman21; 08-03-2014, 10:00 PM.
            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

              I would support them by calling in to Eddie White's post game shows
              and agreeing with everything he says.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                Cheap secondary market tickets. I'll be there. It's Pacers basketball. I'll always be there.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                  Originally posted by IAmHoosier View Post
                  Pacers should take that $5 million and use it to bring Brian Scalabrine out of retirement.
                  We need players who have soul, but he's a ginger!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                    I would still watch every single game... since this season is looking like a lost cause here is the things I will be looking for

                    1) see how Hill works without Lance and PG
                    2) Roy to get his offensive game going
                    3) see how solomon hilll does as a possible starter
                    4) See how Rudez plays as a backup 3
                    5) Hopefully see Lavoy get some decent playing time

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                      Anyone who is a Colts fan shouldn't have any problem with tanking. In 2011, the Colts tried at first to win games by bringing in the pitiful corpse of Kerry Collins in a desperate hope that he still had something left. But then we found out pretty quickly that he was washed up and we were forced to go to Painter. We stayed with Painter about three or so games too long and would have switched to Orvlosky much sooner if we were honesty trying to win games. It was only when we were all but assured the number 1 pick that we went to Dan O. He showed us why we waited so long, I.e. he actually made us a tiny bit competitive - played well in NE in his first start and actually won a couple games.

                      Also, the Colts never really added any FA's that year, nor did they utilize waivers despite being at the top all season. It was a complete organizational tank job that was executed with perfection and rewarded us with one of the best rookies in history. I supported it 100% because it secured our future for the next 13 years.

                      I don't expect the Pacers to tank and get an Andrew Luck equivalent. That being said, we need to focus on developing guys like Solo, and I really don't want to run guys like West, Hibbert, and Hill into the ground just so we can make the 8 seed and get destroyed by Cleveland. This year is completely lost. All that matters is trying to maximize PG's tenure when he gets back. I wouldn't trade West for pennies, but you absolutely have to explore trading him for any young prospect out there. West is in the "win now" stage of his career, but we are not a "win now" team at the moment.
                      Last edited by Sollozzo; 08-03-2014, 08:58 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                        The only question here is...do you want a competitive team or do you want the Pacers to win a ring? I am sure we will be competitive by standing pat or by retooling a bit. So, we will be fine. But do you *really* want the Pacers to win a title.

                        Now, everyone here will probably say they want the Pacers to win a ring. But take the emotion out of it and actually think about how that happens. Better yet, check out this chart. Everyone listed was one of their very best players at that time. Tell me what your odds are if your very best players are picked #10, #17 and #18:

                        2014 NBA San Antonio Spurs Duncan #1
                        2013 NBA Miami Heat LeBron #1, Dwade #5, Bosh #4
                        2012 NBA Miami Heat LeBron #1, Dwade #5, Bosh #4
                        2011 NBA Dallas Mavericks Chandler #2, Kidd #2, Dirk #9
                        2010 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Gasol #3, Odom #4, Kobe #13 (18 years old)
                        2009 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Gasol #3, Odom #4, Kobe #13 (18 years old)
                        2008 NBA Boston Celtics Garnett #5, Allen #5
                        2007 NBA San Antonio Spurs Duncan #1
                        2006 NBA Miami Heat Shaq #1, DWade #5
                        2005 NBA San Antonio Spurs Duncan #1
                        2004 NBA Detroit Pistons Billups #3, Sheed #4, Rip #7
                        2003 NBA San Antonio Spurs Duncan #1
                        2002 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Shaq #1, Kobe #13 (18 years old)
                        2001 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Shaq #1, Kobe #13 (18 years old)
                        2000 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Shaq #1, Rice #4, Kobe #13 (18 years old)
                        1999 NBA San Antonio Spurs Mr. Robinson #1, Duncan #1
                        1998 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Pippen #5
                        1997 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Pippen #5
                        1996 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Pippen #5
                        1995 NBA Houston Rockets Hakeem #1
                        1994 NBA Houston Rockets Hakeem #1
                        1993 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Pippen #5
                        1992 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Pippen #5
                        1991 NBA Chicago Bulls MJ #3, Cartwright #1, Pippen #5
                        1990 NBA Detroit Pistons Zeke #2, Aguirre #1
                        1989 NBA Detroit Pistons Zeke #2, Aguirre #1
                        1988 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Magic & Kareem - #1, Worthy #3, Scott #4
                        1987 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Magic & Kareem - #1, Worthy #3, Scott #4
                        1986 NBA Boston Celtics Bird #6, McHale #3, Parish #8
                        1985 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Magic & Kareem - #1, Worthy #3, Scott #4
                        1984 NBA Boston Celtics Bird #6, McHale #3, Parish #8
                        1983 NBA Philadelphia 76ers Moses #5
                        1982 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Magic & Kareem - #1
                        1981 NBA Boston Celtics Bird #6, McHale #3, Parish #8
                        1980 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Magic & Kareem - #1

                        Edit: Kobe is the big outlier, but he was drafted well before he had developed at 18 years of age. Obviously he would have been picked much higher if he'd stayed in school just one year.
                        Last edited by BlueNGold; 08-03-2014, 09:45 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                          I would do exactly the same as I did for the Colts. I would root for them to play well but ultimately lose enough to get into the lottery. Yes, I know, I am a "terrible" fan. However, I rooted against us so hard vs. Jacksonville in the last week of 2011. I didn't watch us lose so many games to draft Robert Griffin.
                          Last edited by Steagles; 08-03-2014, 09:42 PM.
                          Senior at the University of Louisville.
                          Greenfield ---> The Ville

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                            I would probably advocate for trading west for something decent. I think he deserves to go to a team with chance to go deep in the playoffs. I would prefer the Pacers to develop what young players they have and hope to have a really good shot at a very high lottery pick while having a superstar not even in their prime yet waiting in the wings.

                            I think that is the only way to turn this dumpster fire of a season into something positive for the future. If we got say Mudiay and finally had a legit big time PG seemingly for the first time since Mark Jackson I would happily sacrifice this season.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                              Originally posted by Steagles View Post
                              I would do exactly the same as I did for the Colts. I would root for them to play well but ultimately lose enough to get into the lottery. Yes, I know, I am a "terrible" fan. However, I rooted against us so hard vs. Jacksonville in the last week of 2011. I didn't watch us lose so many games to draft Robert Griffin.
                              That loss in Jacksonville was one of the best moments in Colts history.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: IF They Tanked - How Would You Support Them?

                                Originally posted by Believe_in_blue View Post
                                I think tanking has more to do with the front office than the players. Everybody is playing to get paid. If guys are out there "chucking and dogging it", that's going to affect their ability to secure a future contract. No player is going to do that. The only way the Pacers tank is if they break up the core of G-Hill, West, and Hibbert. I would say trading any two of those three would put us in that category.
                                Well a lot of guys think they're getting a good contract by "getting theirs" which is what'd I'd expect of a tanking team, and that's what I was getting at.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X