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

The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    No. They are both comparable legends at the end of their careers. You either make an exception or you don't. Magic being a sad story doesn't make his addition any more legit. At least Kobe is still an NBA player.

    Btw they also let defending 3 point champ Craig hodges compete that year despite also not being on an NBA roster.
    Yes because exceptions don't exist or anything......

    And Craig Hodges shouldn't have been. A history of making it a mockery doesn't excuse presently making it a mockery.

    The bigger issue is allowing contracts to be tied to all star appearances and then treating them this way.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      Wow, that's pretty surprising. I don't think Blatt is a very good coach, mind you, but it's not often the #1 team in a conference fires their coach midseason.
      Saw a tweet earlier saying its never happened.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

        I have been waiting for Lue to become HC and for some reason I think he will be a good one. Probably his BBIQ as a player and the way he was positioning himself as the assistant. Dude seems to breath basketball.

        Comment


        • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post

          The bigger issue is allowing contracts to be tied to all star appearances and then treating them this way.
          And this is a good point. Contracts can be tied to all star appearances, and more importantly, all star starts. If that's the case, then there needs to be a better way to decide that. Or else change the criteria.

          It's important to note with Davis that he can still get his raise if he's named to an All-NBA team. So can Damian Lillard.

          Comment


          • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

            Oladipo banked in a ridiculous 3 to force overtime against Charlotte.

            Comment


            • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

              Originally posted by shags View Post
              Tristan Thompson didn't get a max contract.
              80 million is the max he could have gotten
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                80 million is the max he could have gotten
                Nope.

                $94.3 million.

                Comment


                • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                  Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                  I would wonder if Paul George and Kevin Love would work as a 1/2 combo...not that the Pacers have the pieces to get him really, but I think he'd be really good once he's gone from LeBron. I'm still not a huge fan of Kevin Love, but if Larry insists on this "small ball stretch 4" I'd much rather have Love than CJ Miles doing it.


                  As much as I am for making this team better through trades K. Love is NOT the PF we need.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    Yes because exceptions don't exist or anything......

                    And Craig Hodges shouldn't have been. A history of making it a mockery doesn't excuse presently making it a mockery.

                    The bigger issue is allowing contracts to be tied to all star appearances and then treating them this way.
                    I used to have issues with the fan voting way back, but it really doesn't bother me any more. It's not about getting the 10 best players in the league out there as starters, it's just about getting the fan favorites out there. And since fans make the league work, I don't have a problem with that. All-NBA teams are where the best players are supposed to be recognized, and players have that opportunity to have that reflected in their contracts. Having all star appearances as another avenue just means the most popular players get another chance at a raise, and again, why shouldn't the popular players have that opportunity in a league where fans pay their salaries?

                    Comment


                    • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                      I don't care about who starts the All Star game. it's an exhibition for the fans so let the fans see who they want. I do wish people'd stop taking them so seriously when they talk about accolades though.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                        In-depth Woj article on the Blatt firing. Spoiler: he pins it all on LBJ. Not that anyone's surprised. Lue comes off pretty clean.

                        http://sports.yahoo.com/news/how-dav...035612484.html

                        Before David Blatt ever conducted his first training camp practice in September 2014, Cleveland Cavaliers star LeBron James and his agent, Rich Paul, had the coach's succession plan in place: Mark Jackson.

                        To become the preferred candidate of the most powerful player in the NBA – and de facto Cavaliers general manager – Jackson understood what he needed to do: Bring on James' and Paul's Klutch Sports agency as his representation, and prepare to deliver those commission fees into the King's coffers. Blatt never had a chance. He never knew what hit him.

                        From the beginning, the Klutch Sports campaign to puncture Blatt's standing as head coach had been as relentless as it was ruthless. James is one of the great leaders in pro sports, and he directed the Cavaliers how he wanted them: in complete defiance of Blatt.

                        Finally, James' camp had its way on Friday, the Cavaliers firing the coach of the defending Eastern Conference champions and runaway No. 1 seed. Over a season and a half on the job, associate head coach Tyronn Lue fought hard to stay loyal to Blatt, balancing that line of hearing out James' and Paul's barrages on Blatt and yet still urging them to give the coach a chance.

                        In the end, here was the problem for Klutch Sports' original plan: Cleveland refused to hire Jackson. General manager David Griffin is too well-connected in the NBA, too knowledgeable of the truths inside Jackson's Warriors regime to let that happen. So much of Griffin's job has been to manage the constant demands of James' camp and the volatility of owner Dan Gilbert. As much as anything, his job has been to bridge the chaos above and below him.

                        Once James' camp realized that Jackson would never be considered as coach – nor would Lue leave his representation to join Klutch Sports agency, despite overtures – Lue became a compromise choice for James' group, sources said. They started pushing for Lue to replace Blatt last season, and grew louder in those calls in recent days and weeks.

                        Gilbert made Lue the league's highest-paid assistant coach at $2 million-plus a year, forever considering him the head-coach-in-waiting should Blatt need to go. Ultimately, Blatt had little staying power with the Cavaliers, because James had turned Blatt's removal into an inevitability. As the games wore on, opposing players on the floor weren't only watching James constantly wave off plays from the coach – but role players feeling emboldened to disregard the head coach's instructions, too.

                        James had the Cavaliers existing in open rebellion for more than a season now, with no Pat Riley in the organizational shadows to scare everyone into compliance.

                        Despite winning 11 of 13 games – losing only to the Golden State Warriors and San Antonio Spurs – James had become increasingly vocal in his opposition of Blatt in recent practice sessions and game environments. Within the franchise, it was hard to hear anything else. LeBron James and Rich Paul never had to walk into the GM's office and demand the firing of the coach. All together, they had the capability of making everyone's life hell until the deed was done.

                        Blatt made mistakes in his transition to the NBA, struggled sometimes to gather the nuances of a complex game of matchups and situations. He had coached in the Euroleague for two decades, and had to sell himself on a new coaching staff, a new roster and the generation's best player.
                        ...

                        Comment


                        • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          In-depth Woj article on the Blatt firing. Spoiler: he pins it all on LBJ. Not that anyone's surprised. Lue comes off pretty clean.

                          http://sports.yahoo.com/news/how-dav...035612484.html
                          One thing to remember about Woj's columns.

                          He has agendas.

                          So I take this with a grain of salt. He doesn't have the insight into LeBron's camp that he does with most other NBA news, and he uses that to take slams on LeBron (and his representation) whenever he can.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                            on that, Blatt did have an agreement to be Kerr's top assistant before he got the Cavs job...
                            GS has this Luke Walton fella. Rumor has it that he's done OK . . .
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment


                            • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                              Originally posted by shags View Post
                              One thing to remember about Woj's columns.

                              He has agendas.

                              So I take this with a grain of salt. He doesn't have the insight into LeBron's camp that he does with most other NBA news, and he uses that to take slams on LeBron (and his representation) whenever he can.
                              Yeah, I understand that. But, what columnist doesn't have some agenda? Always keep your BS detectors up is a good rule.

                              Actually, one of my takeaways is that maybe Lue comes off too well, considering the situation. So maybe he's one of those feeding Woj info.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The 12th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2015-2016: These are Attack Eyebrows

                                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                                As much as I am for making this team better through trades K. Love is NOT the PF we need.
                                This is just silly, man. Really? You have an issue with Love, but want to get Morris or Teletovic?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X