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

Spurs Signed White

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

  • #16
    Re: Spurs Signed White

    really 30 points against us? that's a little unrealistic at best? Exactly whose minutes is he going to take over or are you implying he'll get that in the 5-8 minutes he may or may not get?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Spurs Signed White

      Originally posted by Moses View Post
      Great..just what we need..another guy we traded to blow up on us for 30 points every time we play his team.
      Huh?
      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Spurs Signed White

        I just don't get it. I really don't. Rawle could barely get off the bench in that first game. Marquis will play more and more as time goes on. Orien is going to be huge off the bench for pressuring purposes. These guys are all around White's age. They're all better than White right now. They've all got games that fit what we need more than White does. Where would he get minutes? I doubt that this is going to affect us at all this year or at any point in our future. I'm really not worried. And we kept Baston because it's foolish given our front court injuries in the past to give up a front-court guy that really does fit in with what we do here.

        Just my two cents on the whole situation.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Spurs Signed White

          Well I for one know James White is going to be a good NBA player. I don't look forward to the NBA analysts a few months from now saying "how did the Pacers let this guy go for nothing?"

          I'm glad he was signed, and glad he was signed by the Spurs. I hope he'll find his way into the rotation, because if he does he'll have a great chance at being a starter somewhere down the line.

          I was worried the Heat would take him, but they're more interested in dinosaurs than youth. Oh well, good for us.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Spurs Signed White

            It's disappointing we couldn't have at least gotten SA to give us a 2nd for him. Not that SA 2nds are worth much.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Spurs Signed White

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              If in three years White is a better player than Marshal - then I'll say the Pacers made a mistake, but not until then.
              The mistake was not in choosing Marshall over White -- if he's the better player, I'm fine with that.

              The mistake was in giving up 3 draft picks for a guy and then cutting him without getting anything in return.

              Management should've either:

              a) had a better assessment of his talent pre-draft; anyone deemed 4 months earlier as worth giving up 3 draft picks should certainly be able to make the team's roster -- if they had assessed his talent and value correctly.

              or

              b) traded him for a future draft pick when they realized that they'd rather have Marshall.

              Again, if he was worth 3 draft picks just 4 months earlier -- by management's own assessment -- then there's no good reason they shouldn't have been able to find a market for him in trade before it came down to the wire of pre-season cuts when teams aren't trading but waiting for a quality cut to fall in their laps (as happened in this case in the Spurs' favor).
              "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
              -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Spurs Signed White

                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                It's disappointing we couldn't have at least gotten SA to give us a 2nd for him. Not that SA 2nds are worth much.
                I was suprised too, especially considering the Spurs have two 2nd rounders this year. I guess the Spurs decided to gamble that no one would claim White off waivers, and that gamble has paid off.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Spurs Signed White

                  Originally posted by blanket View Post

                  b) traded him for a future draft pick when they realized that they'd rather have Marshall.
                  See above, where the point is made that other GMs knew we'd have to cut someone - why trade for someone they could get for cheap without a trade?

                  At the time they went for White they didn't know they'd get lucky in the trade department.

                  Having to cut someone with talent is a problem I'd like to have more often.

                  Bear in mind we did not just cut Michael Jordan...
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Spurs Signed White

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    See above, where the point is made that other GMs knew we'd have to cut someone - why trade for someone they could get for cheap without a trade?
                    There were months -- MONTHS! -- between when Powell and Marshall were acquired, during which time managment could've been anticipating this, rather than having their hands forced on the day cuts had to be made. By letting Marshall and Powell's contracts become guaranteed -- not to mention acquring more contracts in Greene and Baston -- they were setting themselves up for multiple cuts to be made, and rather than be strategic about it, they sat on their hands.

                    I'm convinced that they could've made a trade a month or more ago that would've sent one or more players out either for draft picks and to make roster space for the new guys, or to upgrade a position with better talent.

                    At the time they went for White they didn't know they'd get lucky in the trade department.

                    Having to cut someone with talent is a problem I'd like to have more often.

                    Bear in mind we did not just cut Michael Jordan...
                    I'm not suggesting White has any greater talent than that typical for the draft position at which he was picked. I'm saying that we overpaid for him (3 draft picks) if the best we could do was waive him 4 months later.
                    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Spurs Signed White

                      Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                      really 30 points against us? that's a little unrealistic at best? Exactly whose minutes is he going to take over or are you implying he'll get that in the 5-8 minutes he may or may not get?
                      I was joking...in part.

                      Ex-Pacers always have monster games against us. It's just the way it is. Brezec, Rose, etc...and soon to be Peja and James White.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Spurs Signed White

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Carlisle said he was going to be signed by the Spurs. I 'll repeat what I said a few days ago, I don't understand why anyone is upset about this whole episode because the Pacers truly believe the players they kept are better. I thought Rick explained it rather well last night on his show.
                        agreed.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Spurs Signed White

                          I'm not sure if I remember correctly. I thought the reason guys like Manu & Kukoc dropped out of the 1st round had less to do with talent and more to do with "How are we gonna get this guy on American soil and in a NBA uniform".

                          I'd also like to note that since the NBA dropped the draft to two rounds in 1989 there have been only 9 all star appearances from 2nd rounders. Cliff Robinson in 1994, Antonio Davis in 2001, Cedric Ceballos in 1995, Nick Van Exel in 1998, Rashard Lewis in 2005, Manu Ginobli in 2005, Michael Redd in 2004 and Gilbert Arenas in 2005 & 2006. For every exception to the rule there are 20 guys who never made a team or never saw the court. 9 All-Star appearances out of hundreds of players. I'll accept the fact that some quality players come from the second round , but seldom more than two or three a year even have lasting careers in the NBA.

                          You say Antonio Davis, I say Spencer Dunkley.
                          You say Cuttino Mobley, I say Rico Hill & Serge Zwikker & Abdul Shamsid-Deen
                          You say James Jones James White Eduardo Najera, I say DeeAndre Hulett,Jaquay Walls,Curtis Blair,Cenk Akyol






                          I'm in these bands
                          The Humans
                          Dr. Goldfoot
                          The Bar Brawlers
                          ME

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Spurs Signed White

                            I think some of these guys are pissed because they wanted to see White dunk. They wanted the slam dunk trophy... etc etc. I think a few may have already had him in the starting lineup.

                            I like our team. I agree with the decisions made and in a few years White may be a player and help a team but Marshall and Powell impressed me in the preseason.
                            "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                            Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Spurs Signed White

                              Wow. You'd think some of you guys just got your wallets lifted. Why get your panties in a wad? TPTB waived what they considered our 16th best player. It was THEIR draft pick, not yours. It's their money, not yours. It's their team, not yours. And they probably have more bball smarts than PD collectively. Hmmmmmm
                              There are bigger issues out there than this. Some of us were willing not that long ago to trade ron for a bag of doritos. This is not a huge loss. The sky isn't falling. Let's move on.
                              Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Spurs Signed White

                                Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                                Some of us were willing not that long ago to trade ron for a bag of doritos.


                                As I've said a million times and counting, I'm glad I don't run the team.
                                “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                                “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X