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

George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

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

  • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    That is complete BS. Lakers haven't been relevant for almost a decade now, they still aren't even close to being great. They are banking on future talent coming there, they haven't been able to sign a top free agent since Dwight Howard and Steve Nash. They could have traded for one just last week and they messed that up too.
    I agree. The Lakers aren't "always on the cusp of being great." This isn't the 80's, 90's or even 2000's. The Lakers have struck out with big free agents for the past several years. Now that could change with Magic and Pelinka, but the Lakers aren't close to being great right now and haven't been for a while.
    "In 49 states it's just basketball ... but this is Indiana."

    Comment


    • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      Arguing that refusing to crash and burn for a decade on the prayer you get the #1 pick in the right year is a poor cultural decision on the part of bad ownership isn't going to get anywhere with me.

      We're sitting here acting like KP has been hamstrung by the parsimony of our owners when he not only hasn't even gotten TO free agency yet but also there aren't a crapload of great FAs available this year.

      I stick with my position vis-a-vis Bird - that he made poor player decisions with the money he had. I also believe that Herb is willing to spend more money if he gets any indication it will pay off - I don't think Bird put together a team that made anywhere close to that kind of argument for going over the tax.
      I never said crashing for a decade, I said when opportunities come to rebuild you should use them. Have to look at the bigger picture than short-term. Obviously the best example of this is Spurs with Duncan. Consider that year when PG went down. West was injured for 10 games, and Hill for ~25 games. Realistically were we going to be any good in that year?

      The following year we choose Turner with the tenth pick and West decides to leave, and we also trade Hibbert, and get Monta Ellis. Say we trade West for a future pick (lets say 20th pick). That means we have 2 available to get the best talent available and fill voids through free agency. That draft was loaded, even if we don't get the first pick, there was plenty of really good talent in that draft as we saw with Myles Turner who we got with #11. If he somehow still got #11th pick after trading West, we still would have had another pick, and we get Delon Wright. Not only now are we building up assets, but also get to save money, by not signing bad contracts (Stuckey's extension)

      I agree Bird never put the best team together to go over the luxary cap with his signings, but perhaps Simons could have pressed harder on the issue? Obviously you should trust in your general manager, but if you have a strict no-over cap rule it's hard. At the end we don't really know, it's all speculation what the Simons feelings are on going over the luxary tax.

      The thing I have against the Simons is two, they refuse to "tank" (when it is wise) and they refuse to go out of their comfort zone with front office hirings.

      Comment


      • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        CJ Miles was a great signing.

        Explain why Bird is always given "a small market budget."
        Because large markets don't care about the LT because they make enough money to cover it in sponsorships and local TV contracts.

        In spite of the fact some people here think that Herb is making money hand over fist and only showing everyone the carefully crafted second set of books that use accounting cheats to show a paper loss thus proving his unwillingness to give up $10-$20 Million every year in loss of LT sharing plus paying the LT is all because he is greedy and cares nothing for Indianapolis or the fans, I think this team really was losing money up to the time the new TV contract division got out to the teams. I think we could very well see higher budgets (and I'd use Bird and KPs own quotes about being very happy with what they've been given to spend this year as evidence of that if it wasn't for the fact it would be countered with "they would say that no matter what" - even though they never have before) going forward WHEN IT IS WORTH SPENDING THE MONEY. We aren't going to go into the LT just to prove we're willing to go into the LT by stockpiling bad contracts that we can't get rid of to take advantage of new situations. We've done that, remember? You can't play in the FA market unless you are under the cap - which is WAY below the LT.
        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


        • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Because large markets don't care about the LT because they make enough money to cover it in sponsorships and local TV contracts.

          In spite of the fact some people here think that Herb is making money hand over fist and only showing everyone the carefully crafted second set of books that use accounting cheats to show a paper loss thus proving his unwillingness to give up $10-$20 Million every year in loss of LT sharing plus paying the LT is all because he is greedy and cares nothing for Indianapolis or the fans, I think this team really was losing money up to the time the new TV contract division got out to the teams. I think we could very well see higher budgets (and I'd use Bird and KPs own quotes about being very happy with what they've been given to spend this year as evidence of that if it wasn't for the fact it would be countered with "they would say that no matter what" - even though they never have before) going forward WHEN IT IS WORTH SPENDING THE MONEY. We aren't going to go into the LT just to prove we're willing to go into the LT by stockpiling bad contracts that we can't get rid of to take advantage of new situations. We've done that, remember? You can't play in the FA market unless you are under the cap - which is WAY below the LT.
          LOL, what?

          Nobody is arguing why, reason or how. Just stating the facts. As a player all that stuff matters not.

          Thanks for highlighting the reasons why Simon doesn't spend, maybe you understand frustration when we see owners that do now?

          Comment


          • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

            "When its worth spending the money" is hilarious.

            When will it be more worth spending the money? Extending PG seems like a great reason to stretch Monta and Al, then do whatever you can to get max guys here. Like Houston just did.

            Comment


            • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              You can't play in the FA market unless you are under the cap - which is WAY below the LT.
              this is what I don't get, what money do you want Simon to spend when there's literally no way to actually spend it? they coulda upped the offer for Lance, that's about the only legitimate gripe I can think of

              Comment


              • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                Originally posted by I Love P View Post
                If Bird had more $ to spend maybe he could just overspend for 2 years rather than giving out 4-5 year deals.
                He could have done that with the budgets he had in the years we were under the cap. He just chose to go for more and cheaper players because he thought they were valuable rather than one prize plus role players.

                I don't think we've ever seen an FA say they didn't choose Indiana because the offer was too low - except MAYBE for Lance, but that takes some jiggering with the overall reasons why he decided to take less overall money for a shorter deal.
                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


                • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  "When its worth spending the money" is hilarious.

                  When will it be more worth spending the money? Extending PG seems like a great reason to stretch Monta and Al, then do whatever you can to get max guys here. Like Houston just did.
                  if KP wants to stretch whoever Simon would be fine with it, the guy's getting paid literally the exact same either way.

                  Comment


                  • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                    Originally posted by immortality View Post
                    And Utah delivered, so I'll feel super sorry for Jazz fans if Hayward leaves Utah, when the team is just getting to be really good. (Of course if Hayward somehow magically joins Pacers, I'll be less sorry, but still sorry)
                    They delivered in his contract year. They delivered too late.

                    Comment


                    • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      "When its worth spending the money" is hilarious.

                      When will it be more worth spending the money? Extending PG seems like a great reason to stretch Monta and Al, then do whatever you can to get max guys here. Like Houston just did.
                      And extending PG wasn't something the Pacers rejected doing. The chances were if he'd gotten the DPE the extension would have happened. No one anywhere is hinting that Simon would have forced us to let PG go because he was too expensive. Without the DPE, the choice to extend was all Paul's and even if he was staying he'd have been stupid to do so when he could qualify for the DPE in his next contract.
                      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


                      • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        if KP wants to stretch whoever Simon would be fine with it, the guy's getting paid literally the exact same either way.
                        Not so, the point of stretching would be to go into LT and changing what hits the cap. While the cap number would be the same, Simon would literally pay millions more.

                        Comment


                        • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                          “Being from Indiana and having a great opportunity to work for a franchise like the Pacers, it was an honor, but I knew it was going to be tough and it’s still tough,’’ Bird said. “We don’t drive revenues like the big-market teams. We can’t go after $17 million-$18 million players.

                          “If we try to patchwork it, it don’t work that way. When we got under the cap, we had to make the most of it.”
                          “It’s always a challenge here,’’ Bird said. “If I was somewhere else and we had the revenues, I’d [go after a big-name free agent]. That’s just what you do. It’s nice to have that go-to guy every night to go to.
                          https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2...X1M/story.html

                          Should I put this in large font or sticky this so everyone knows why we don't get **** for players?

                          Comment


                          • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                            LOL, what?

                            Nobody is arguing why, reason or how. Just stating the facts. As a player all that stuff matters not.

                            Thanks for highlighting the reasons why Simon doesn't spend, maybe you understand frustration when we see owners that do now?
                            What is Houston spending that is above a Simon budget? They can't be doing what they are doing without being below the cap, which is below any budget Simon would have set. It's like people think Houston is spending way over the LT to do all these things, thus proving it's all about Simon being cheap.
                            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


                            • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                              Not so, the point of stretching would be to go into LT and changing what hits the cap. While the cap number would be the same, Simon would literally pay millions more.
                              dude, go into the luxury tax how? who the hell are we re-signing that's gonna put us in the tax? we're gonna be UNDER the cap, let alone anywhere near the tax. you wanna max Teague and then max Myles ASAP or something?

                              Comment


                              • Re: George informs Pacers of intent to Leave: Woj

                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                "When its worth spending the money" is hilarious.

                                When will it be more worth spending the money? Extending PG seems like a great reason to stretch Monta and Al, then do whatever you can to get max guys here. Like Houston just did.
                                I think the best time to spend the money was during the West/PG/Hibbert years, and the Pacers couldn't create a decent bench. I still remember, when our big signing was Chris Copeland, and then we had a bench of Rasul Butler and Lavoy Allen :/ . Yes we had Luis Scola, but only after trading for him, besides him, our bench was horrible.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X